Advertisement

School Violence as a Complex Social Problem: Trends in Managing Discipline in Finnish Educational Policy

  • Sari Vesikansa
  • Päivi Honkatukia
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter we will set the historical scene for school violence and behaviour management discourses in Finland, starting from the time of the basic education reforms between 1960 and 1980 to this day. Moreover, we will develop our critical social scientific approach to school violence as a research topic and social problem and apply this methodology to the school context, in order to vision what kind of critical questions one should ask when trying to understand different forms of violence in the school institution. We argue that instead of demonizing aggression and conflicts, there should be pedagogic ways of working with these issues.

References

  1. Advancement Project, Padres and Jovenes Unidos & Southwest Youth Collaborative Children & Family Justice Center of Northwestern University School of Law. (2005). Education on lockdown: The schoolhouse to jailhouse track. Washington: Advancement Project.Google Scholar
  2. Antikainen, A, Rinne, R., & Koski, L. (2003). Kasvatussosiologia [Educational sociology]. Helsinki: WSOY.Google Scholar
  3. Ayers, W., Dohrn, B. & Ayers, R. (eds.). (2001). Zero tolerance. Resisting the drive for punishment in our schools. A handbook for parents,students, educators, and citizens. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  4. Basic Education Act 21.8.1998/628Google Scholar
  5. Bill LA 81/2016 vp.Google Scholar
  6. Bjorklund, D. F. (2007). Why youth is not wasted on the young. Immaturity human development. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Bourdieu, P. (2001). On masculine domination. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. (published in 1970). London/Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  9. Bourdieu, P. & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bufucchi, V. (Ed.). (2009). Violence. A philosophical anthology. New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  11. Burchell, G., Gordon, C., & Miller, P. (Eds.). (1991). The foucault effect. studies in governmentality with two lectures by and an interview with Michel Foucault. Hemel Hampstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  12. Children’s Defense Fund. (2007). America’s cradle-to-prison pipeline. www.childrensdefense.org.
  13. Christie, N., & Bruun, K. (1986). Hyvä vihollinen. Huumausainepolitiikka Pohjolassa [Good enemy. Drugs policy in the Nordic countries]. Espoo: Weilin + Göös.Google Scholar
  14. Coleman, J.C.. et al. 1966. Equality and opportunity in education. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.Google Scholar
  15. Collins, R. (2008). Violence. A micro-sociological theory. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Coulby, D., & Harper, T. (1985). Preventing classroom disruption. Policy, practice and evaluation in urban schools. London/Sydney/Dover: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  17. Fabelo, T., Thompson, M. D., Plotkin, M., Carmichael D., Marchbanks, M. P., III., & Booth, E. A. (2011). Breaking school rules: A statewide study of how school discipline relates to students’ success and juvenile justice involvement. New York: The Council of State Governments, Public Policy Research Institute.Google Scholar
  18. Fagerström, V., Länsikallio, R., & Sipponen, J. (2015). Stop väkivallalle kouluissa ja päiväkodeissa. Väkivaltatilanteiden ilmoitus- ja käsittelylomakkeiden kehittäminen [Stop violence in schools and kindergartens. Developing formulas or documenting and managing violent episodes]. Helsinki: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health.Google Scholar
  19. Foucault, M. (1984). The history of sexuality. Vol. 1. An introduction. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  20. Fowler, D., Lightsey R., Monger, J., & Aseltine, E. (2010). Texas’ school-to-prison pipeline. Ticketing, arrest & use of force in schools. how the myth of the “blackboard jungle” reshaped school disciplinary policy. Austin: Texas Appleseed. www.texasappleseed.net.
  21. Galtung, J. (1971). Väkivallan määritelmästä ja ulottuvuuksista [On the definition and dimensions of violence].Google Scholar
  22. Goodlad, J. I. (1984). A Place called school. Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
  23. Gordon, T., Holland, J., & Lahelma, E. (2000). Making spaces. Citizenship and difference in schools. Chippenham: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harrikari, T. (2008). Riskillä merkityt: lapset ja nuoret huolen ja puuttumisen politiikassa [Labelled as a risk. Children and teenagers within a policy of worries and interventions] Nuorisotutkimusverkoston julkaisuja 87. Helsinki: Finnish Youth Research Society.Google Scholar
  25. Hayden, C., & Martin, D. (Eds.). (2011). Crime, anti-social behaviour and schools. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  26. Himmelweit, H. T. (1990). Societal psychology: Implications and scope. In H. T. Himmelweit & G. Gaskell (Eds.), Societal Psychology (pp. 17–45). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Himmelweit, H. T. & Gaskell, G. (eds.). (1990). Societal psychology. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  28. Holland, P. (2009). We don’t play with guns here. War, weapon and superhero play in the early years. The debating play series. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Honkatukia, P., & Suurpää, L. (2014). Armoured toughness? Multicultural group relationships and crime among young men. In I. Lander & S. Ravn (Eds.), Men, Masculinities and the Criminological Field (pp. 131–148). Farnham & Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  30. Jimerson, S. H., Swearer, S. M., & Espelage, D. L. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of bullying in schools. An international perspective. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Julkunen, R. (2006). Kuka vastaa? Hyvinvointivaltion rajat ja julkinen vastuu? [Who is responsible? Limits of the welfare state and public responsibility]. Helsinki: Stakes National Research and Development Centre for Health and Welfare.Google Scholar
  32. Komiteanmietintö. (1970). Peruskoulun opetussuunnitelmakomitean mietintö I. Helsinki: Komiteanmietintö. A 5.Google Scholar
  33. Korander, T. (2014). Rikottujen ikkunoiden nollatoleranssi. Tutkimus New Yorkin rikoksentorjunnan uuskonservatiivi-mallista Suomessa [The broken window theory and the neo-conservative zero tolerance policy in Finland]. Turun yliopiston julkaisuja, Sarja – ser, C osa tom.390.Google Scholar
  34. Korkeakivi, R. (2014). Lomautusten vähättely saa jo riittää. [Stop downplaying the laying off of teachers]. Opettaja magazine 34/2014: 6–7.Google Scholar
  35. Kuula, R. (2000). Syrjäytymisvaarassa oleva nuori koulun paineessa. Koulu ja nuorten syrjäytyminen [The teenager in danger of marginalization. Schools and the marginalization of the youth]. Joensuun yliopiston kasvatustieteellisiä julkaisuja N:o 61, Joensuu: School of Educational Sciences and Psychology, University of Eastern Finland.Google Scholar
  36. Lappi-Seppälä, T. (2008). Trust, welfare, and political culture: Explaining differences in national penal policies. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (pp. 313–387). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. Mäntylä, N. (2012). Koulukiusaaminen kiusaajan rikoksena. [Bullying as the crime of the bully] Oikeus 3/2012, pp. 357–380.Google Scholar
  38. Metz, M. H. (1979). Classrooms and corridors. The crisis in authority in desegregated secondary schools. Berkeley/London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  39. Mills, C. Wright. (1990, orig. 1959). Sosiologinen mielikuvitus [The sociological imagination]. Helsinki: University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Paju, P. (2011). Koulua on käytävä [School is an obligation]. Helsinki: Nuorisotutkimusverkosto/Nuorisotutkimusseura Julkaisuja 115.Google Scholar
  41. Rimpelä, M., Rigoff, A-M., Kuusela, J., & Peltonen, H. (eds.) (2007). Hyvinvoinnin ja terveyden edistäminen peruskoulussa. – perusraportti kyselystä 7.-9- vuosiluokkien kouluille [Promoting Welfare and Health in the Comprehensive School. Report from a Survey in Schools for Classes 7-9]. Helsinki: Finnish National Agency for Education & Stakes National Research and Development Centre for Health and Welfare.Google Scholar
  42. Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? New York: Teacher’s College Press.Google Scholar
  43. Salmivalli, C., Kärnä, A., & Poskiparta, E. (2010). From peer putdowns to peer support: A theoretical model and how it translated into a national anti-bullying campaign. In S. R. Jimerson et al. (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 441–454). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  44. Seppänen, P., Kalalahti, M., Rinne, R., & Simola, H. (Eds.). (2015). Lohkoutuva peruskoulu. – Perheiden kouluvalinnat, yhteiskuntaluokat ja koulutuspolitiikka [Comprehensive school in the process of social segregation. Parental choice, social classes and educational policy]. FERA, the Finnish Educational Research Association, Kasvatusalan tutkimuksia 68. Jyväskylä.Google Scholar
  45. Simola, H., Kangasvuori, A., Kinnunen, K., Kolbe, L., & Pitkälä, A. (2013, June 1). Peruskoulu on vaarassa [Comprehensive School in Danger]. Puheenaihe. Aamulehti Newspaper.Google Scholar
  46. Simola, H., Kauko, J., Varjo, J., Kalalahti, M., & Sahlström, F. (2017). Dynamics in education politics. Understanding and explaining the Finnish case. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Sivistysvaliokunnan mietintö SivM (3/1998). Report on the Parliament of Finland’s Education and Culture Committee’s Preparation of the Renewal of the Basic Education Act in the Nineties. https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/vaski/Mietinto/Documents/sivm_3+1998.pdf.
  48. Smith, D. E. (1988). The everyday world as problematic. A feminist sociology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Smith, P. K., Morita, Y., Juger-Tas, D., Olweus, D., Catalano, R., & Slee, P. (Eds.). (1999). The nature of school bullying. A cross-national perspective. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Stanko, E. A. (Ed.). (2002a). Violence. Aldershot: Ashgate/Dartmouth.Google Scholar
  51. Stanko, E. A. (2002b). Introduction. Searching for the meaning of violence: Limitations of theory and data in our understanding of violence. In E. A. Stanko (Ed.), Violence (pp. xiii–xxiv). Aldershot: Ashgate/Dartmouth.Google Scholar
  52. Tervo, J. (1993). Hapuilua vai hallintaa? Syrjäseudun nuorten käsitykset koulunkäynnistä sekä odotukset ammatista ja työelämään sijoittumisesta lähisosialisaation kehyksessä [Fumbling or in control of one’s life? Youth in rural areas and their conceptions of school and hopes of finding their place in the job market]. Tampere: University of Tampere.Google Scholar
  53. Turvallisuuden edistäminen oppilaitoksissa. (2013). Seurantaryhmän loppuraportti [Promoting safety in educational institutions. Final report of follow-up group] Helsinki: Reports of the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture 2013, p. 8.Google Scholar
  54. Turvallisuus perusopetuksessa. Loppuraportti. (2012). Safety in basic education. Final report of task group. Publications of the Ministry of the Interior 6/2012. Helsinki: Ministry of the Interior. www.intermin.julkaisut
  55. Twemlow, S. W., Vernberg, E., Fonagy, P., Biggs, B. K., Nelson, J. M., Nelson, T. D., & Sacco, F. C. (2010). A school climate intervention that reduces bullying by a focus on the bystander audience rather than the bully and the victim. The peaceful schools project of the Menninger Clinic and Baylor College of Medicine. In S. R. Jimerson et al. (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 365–375). New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. U.S. Department of Education. (2014). U.S. Department of Education Guiding Principles. A resource guide for improving school climate and discipline. http://strategiesforyouth.org/sfysite/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/SROguidelines2014.pdf.
  57. Vesikansa, S. (2009). Kuka kasvattaa, kuka opettaa? Genealoginen tutkimus perheen ja koulun välisen kasvatusvastuun politiikasta [Who teaches, who is the caretaker? A genealogical study on the politics of the division of responsibility between the school and the family]. University of Helsinki, research from the Faculty of Social Sciences 261.Google Scholar
  58. Wacquant, L. (2009). Punishing the poor. The neoliberal government of social insecurity. Durham/London: The Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2010). The spirit level: Why equality is better for everyone. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  60. Willis, P. (2014, orig. 1978). Learning to labour. How working class kids get working class jobs. Farnham: Asghate.Google Scholar
  61. Young, J. (2011). The criminological imagination. Cambridge/Malden: Policy.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sari Vesikansa
    • 1
  • Päivi Honkatukia
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TampereTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations