Root Cause Interventions
In “Nobody Left to Hate: Teaching Compassion After Columbine”, Elliot Aronson (2000) was able to easily allow readers to understand the isolation experienced by students who commit violent attacks at school campus. The author also provided understanding around how quick-fix solutions can cause deeper isolation within students who are already marginal to the school’s social structure and root-cause interventions can assist with building empathy amongst students on a school campus.
Type of Blaming
Aronson (2000) explains two types of blaming that occur after mass violence has occurred. The first type of blaming includes the blaming that is” aimed at finding the cause of the disaster so that we might come up with a workable intervention” (p. …show more content…
6). The second type of blaming is the condemnation that seeks to place the blame on a culprit to vilify (2000). It is described as a knee-jerk response. When using blame to vilify and condemn, Aronson states that this occurs because the public needs to identify the bad guy or the culprit in a violent and tragic situation. Once the culprit has been identified, then, as Aronson discusses, they can be held accountable in some way. This allows for people to fix the problem, albeit an ineffective and knee-jerk reaction, so that their feelings of helplessness and hopelessness can be soothed. The second type of blaming, where society tries to find interventions to bring forth people’s need to feel physically and psychologically safe about their children being in a school environment, as well as the students themselves, they risk putting in place interventions that cause more harm than good. Aronson (2000) states that this is why it is important for those making decisions to understand the root causes of these problems in order to avoid acting on “emotion, wishful thinking, bias, and political expediency” (p. 10).
Classes of Interventions
As the author progresses in describing they ways in which interventions are applied in schools, he discusses two classes of interventions; root cause interventions and peripheral interventions (Aronson, 2000, p.10). Peripheral interventions, also described by Aronson as “pump-handle interventions” where an intervention may address immediate concerns and solve the problem at a superficial level; however, the issues underlying the problem does not get addressed. The author states how these types of interventions may work well in some situations and cause harm in others. Aronson provides many different examples of peripheral interventions. For example, the inclusion of metal detectors and security guards in the school will assist some students with feeling emotionally and physically safe while in school (p. 45). The challenge with this type of intervention, as Aronson describes, is that young people continue to have access to guns even if there are ways to prevent them from bringing them into the school. Also, the presence of metal detectors and security guards do not prevent the aggression that students may occur when various factors in the school cause a student to feel isolated. Furthermore, Aronson states that context is important. Not all schools, and the neighborhood of schools, are the same, and the presence of these items can assist with helping some families feel safe while other families feel unsafe; therefore, peripheral interventions partially address school violence at the superficial level but are blind toward elements of context, for example urban versus rural; low crime versus high crime rates, and do not address the ways students deal with being in schools that cause them stress and feelings of isolation.
The second class of interventions includes root cause interventions.
Root cause interventions are intended to find, understand and directly address the problems that cause school violence (Aronson, 2000, p. 10, 70). Much of what Aronson describes around root-cause interventions include school-wide activities that increase students’ emotional intelligence, accepting the consequences of one’s behavior, and creating empathy through cooperative activities while in school. Interventions that include these three concepts can assist with helping students deal with decreasing school violence. Aronson discusses the importance of an individual being able to understand, regulate their emotions. In turn, being able to accept the consequences of one’s behavior. Aronson (p. 109) describes how schools can better assist students with further understanding and self-regulating their feelings when students can co-create agreements around acceptable behaviors and the consequences that exist if the agreements are broken. This process can assist with students’ learning that conflict resolution is an important process of developing emotional intelligence and empathy toward their peers. Finally, the cooperative classroom structure, the jigsaw method, was the intervention strategy Aronson discussed at length. The jigsaw activity is a process where research is done by way of group work. There is a heterogeneous group, which serves as the initial group, and there is the homogeneous group of experts. …show more content…
The expert groups work together to bring quality work back to the heterogeneous group; and this group works together in order to produce a quality final product. The author states that students are formed and re-formed into groups in order to encourage active listening, barrier breaking, and academic learning across the various student groupings over time. Aronson also suggests that jigsaw groups may work best when instituted at the lower grades; however, these activities must be well designed with monitoring by the teacher. Also, it addresses particular types of student needs by allowing dominant students to lead discussions; academically challenged students to become modify their work based on group discussions; and for academically advanced students to encourage and provide assistance to others in the group. Essentially, root cause interventions allow for the prevention of future harm being done to students in the academic social setting.
Topics that Resonate
There were many aspects of the book that resonated with me. Aronson’s discussion about the fallacy of pump handle interventions was of most interest to me and because I believe it is very necessary for staff and administrators to fully understand the full impact of interventions on all students. For example, Aronson highlights metal detectors; armed guards or police presence on the school’s campus; posting the ten commandments around a school campus; having students identify school peers who are different; and, as Aronson states, having identified students take personality tests in order to prevent violence in the schools. Aronson states these types of actions “exacerbate the root problem by increasing their level of exclusion” (Aronson, 2000, p.87). The most interesting aspect of Aronson highlighting this fallacy is the false assumption that students who carry out attacks on their peers, and at schools, are separate from their school. The author dismisses this false assumption and states that these types of students are often targets of the very students that would identify them as strange or separate; however, students that commit attacks at the school wish to belong and be a part of the social fabric of the school. I believe these students deserve to feel physically and emotional safe in educational environments and that these environments should be “humane places for all students” (p. 88). An additional aspect that resonated with me includes Aronson’s discussion about emotional intelligence. Aronson discusses the importance of emotional intelligence as the ability to understand and control one’s emotions. I believe this was an excellent concept to discuss because so many teenagers would benefit from understanding the difference between a reaction they are having to someone else’s challenges and triumphs without taking it personally. Albeit a short aspect of the overall discussion, it was important to include when discussing developing empathy.
Key Questions and Learnings from the Book
The key question Aronson puts forth in the book is ask “what is the root problem” (2000) that has caused school violence or students to act out?
What I have learned is to review the social climate of the school and context of which the school exists. The goal is to create academic environments where students do not feel alone and lash out due to depression or anger. The goal is to create a social climate where all students in the school feel included.
Description of Initial Evaluative Steps to Address Preventative Measures of School
Climate
When evaluating a school in order to establish preventative measures, I would look to interview several key staff in order to receive relevant data. For example, I would interview school psychologist, counselors, the school nurse, and any other relevant staff and administrator to get the frequency of aggressive acts, injuries done to self or others, and counseling sessions around students that are depressed and/or expressed suicidal ideation across the grade levels and gender in the school. I would administer a very brief survey that asks students to identify the popular, or power, groups of students around the school. I would then perform my own observation of the school environment, which would include observing teachers, staff, and students, as well as the visible and subtle messages that are communicated to the students while they are in school. According to Donoghue and Raia-Hawrylak (2016), this will allow for a more inclusive understanding of the context in which the school’s initiatives and systems are situated. Based on the findings from the data, this can assist school personnel adjust or change any school initiatives already established to assist students with feeling more included in their school environment. This data will also allow personnel to institute school-wide systems that could assist in the process of student inclusion as well.
Type of Blaming
Aronson (2000) explains two types of blaming that occur after mass violence has occurred. The first type of blaming includes the blaming that is” aimed at finding the cause of the disaster so that we might come up with a workable intervention” (p. …show more content…
6). The second type of blaming is the condemnation that seeks to place the blame on a culprit to vilify (2000). It is described as a knee-jerk response. When using blame to vilify and condemn, Aronson states that this occurs because the public needs to identify the bad guy or the culprit in a violent and tragic situation. Once the culprit has been identified, then, as Aronson discusses, they can be held accountable in some way. This allows for people to fix the problem, albeit an ineffective and knee-jerk reaction, so that their feelings of helplessness and hopelessness can be soothed. The second type of blaming, where society tries to find interventions to bring forth people’s need to feel physically and psychologically safe about their children being in a school environment, as well as the students themselves, they risk putting in place interventions that cause more harm than good. Aronson (2000) states that this is why it is important for those making decisions to understand the root causes of these problems in order to avoid acting on “emotion, wishful thinking, bias, and political expediency” (p. 10).
Classes of Interventions
As the author progresses in describing they ways in which interventions are applied in schools, he discusses two classes of interventions; root cause interventions and peripheral interventions (Aronson, 2000, p.10). Peripheral interventions, also described by Aronson as “pump-handle interventions” where an intervention may address immediate concerns and solve the problem at a superficial level; however, the issues underlying the problem does not get addressed. The author states how these types of interventions may work well in some situations and cause harm in others. Aronson provides many different examples of peripheral interventions. For example, the inclusion of metal detectors and security guards in the school will assist some students with feeling emotionally and physically safe while in school (p. 45). The challenge with this type of intervention, as Aronson describes, is that young people continue to have access to guns even if there are ways to prevent them from bringing them into the school. Also, the presence of metal detectors and security guards do not prevent the aggression that students may occur when various factors in the school cause a student to feel isolated. Furthermore, Aronson states that context is important. Not all schools, and the neighborhood of schools, are the same, and the presence of these items can assist with helping some families feel safe while other families feel unsafe; therefore, peripheral interventions partially address school violence at the superficial level but are blind toward elements of context, for example urban versus rural; low crime versus high crime rates, and do not address the ways students deal with being in schools that cause them stress and feelings of isolation.
The second class of interventions includes root cause interventions.
Root cause interventions are intended to find, understand and directly address the problems that cause school violence (Aronson, 2000, p. 10, 70). Much of what Aronson describes around root-cause interventions include school-wide activities that increase students’ emotional intelligence, accepting the consequences of one’s behavior, and creating empathy through cooperative activities while in school. Interventions that include these three concepts can assist with helping students deal with decreasing school violence. Aronson discusses the importance of an individual being able to understand, regulate their emotions. In turn, being able to accept the consequences of one’s behavior. Aronson (p. 109) describes how schools can better assist students with further understanding and self-regulating their feelings when students can co-create agreements around acceptable behaviors and the consequences that exist if the agreements are broken. This process can assist with students’ learning that conflict resolution is an important process of developing emotional intelligence and empathy toward their peers. Finally, the cooperative classroom structure, the jigsaw method, was the intervention strategy Aronson discussed at length. The jigsaw activity is a process where research is done by way of group work. There is a heterogeneous group, which serves as the initial group, and there is the homogeneous group of experts. …show more content…
The expert groups work together to bring quality work back to the heterogeneous group; and this group works together in order to produce a quality final product. The author states that students are formed and re-formed into groups in order to encourage active listening, barrier breaking, and academic learning across the various student groupings over time. Aronson also suggests that jigsaw groups may work best when instituted at the lower grades; however, these activities must be well designed with monitoring by the teacher. Also, it addresses particular types of student needs by allowing dominant students to lead discussions; academically challenged students to become modify their work based on group discussions; and for academically advanced students to encourage and provide assistance to others in the group. Essentially, root cause interventions allow for the prevention of future harm being done to students in the academic social setting.
Topics that Resonate
There were many aspects of the book that resonated with me. Aronson’s discussion about the fallacy of pump handle interventions was of most interest to me and because I believe it is very necessary for staff and administrators to fully understand the full impact of interventions on all students. For example, Aronson highlights metal detectors; armed guards or police presence on the school’s campus; posting the ten commandments around a school campus; having students identify school peers who are different; and, as Aronson states, having identified students take personality tests in order to prevent violence in the schools. Aronson states these types of actions “exacerbate the root problem by increasing their level of exclusion” (Aronson, 2000, p.87). The most interesting aspect of Aronson highlighting this fallacy is the false assumption that students who carry out attacks on their peers, and at schools, are separate from their school. The author dismisses this false assumption and states that these types of students are often targets of the very students that would identify them as strange or separate; however, students that commit attacks at the school wish to belong and be a part of the social fabric of the school. I believe these students deserve to feel physically and emotional safe in educational environments and that these environments should be “humane places for all students” (p. 88). An additional aspect that resonated with me includes Aronson’s discussion about emotional intelligence. Aronson discusses the importance of emotional intelligence as the ability to understand and control one’s emotions. I believe this was an excellent concept to discuss because so many teenagers would benefit from understanding the difference between a reaction they are having to someone else’s challenges and triumphs without taking it personally. Albeit a short aspect of the overall discussion, it was important to include when discussing developing empathy.
Key Questions and Learnings from the Book
The key question Aronson puts forth in the book is ask “what is the root problem” (2000) that has caused school violence or students to act out?
What I have learned is to review the social climate of the school and context of which the school exists. The goal is to create academic environments where students do not feel alone and lash out due to depression or anger. The goal is to create a social climate where all students in the school feel included.
Description of Initial Evaluative Steps to Address Preventative Measures of School
Climate
When evaluating a school in order to establish preventative measures, I would look to interview several key staff in order to receive relevant data. For example, I would interview school psychologist, counselors, the school nurse, and any other relevant staff and administrator to get the frequency of aggressive acts, injuries done to self or others, and counseling sessions around students that are depressed and/or expressed suicidal ideation across the grade levels and gender in the school. I would administer a very brief survey that asks students to identify the popular, or power, groups of students around the school. I would then perform my own observation of the school environment, which would include observing teachers, staff, and students, as well as the visible and subtle messages that are communicated to the students while they are in school. According to Donoghue and Raia-Hawrylak (2016), this will allow for a more inclusive understanding of the context in which the school’s initiatives and systems are situated. Based on the findings from the data, this can assist school personnel adjust or change any school initiatives already established to assist students with feeling more included in their school environment. This data will also allow personnel to institute school-wide systems that could assist in the process of student inclusion as well.