Shields against violence in schools

In memory of Dominique Bernard

Voices, more and more numerous, it seems to me, assure that cases of violence at school are on the rise in Quebec.

To agree on this, we would of course have to, beyond the sometimes spectacular and disturbing anecdote, agree on what we call school violence: the definition of the word will in fact weigh heavily on the number of cases that we will take a census.

At the start of the year, it was reported that the number of cases of school violence had almost doubled compared to 2018-2019. But school service centers immediately wanted to qualify this data, recalling the delicate questions of the definition of the word and what follows for the census of cases.

That said, the fact remains that we do hear from teachers that many students are increasingly difficult to manage and exhibit disruptive behavior in class and at school.

I will not comment on the extent of the phenomenon, but the fact remains that intimidation and violence – verbal, written, physical, psychological, sexual – are present and sometimes make it difficult for the school to accomplish its mission.

Protect the sanctuary within

It is of course with its own weapons that schools can and must fight against violence within them, first and foremost knowledge, its transmission and the free discussion of ideas. It is through them that it trains the citizens of tomorrow, who will nourish a rich democratic life, a democratic life where we can discuss everything, debate and live with our disagreements.

But to achieve this, we need a context where all of this is possible and where violence – physical, verbal, psychological – is excluded. The sanctuary that the school must be can only fully exist under this condition.

To achieve this, schools promote, publicize and enforce regulations.

Some go further and implement a specific program called Positive Behavior Support. This program is increasingly known and adopted, not without reason: it has proven itself, both in terms of improving behavior and in terms of the benefits which, without too many surprises, ensue in terms of school.

Another program worth knowing about (and seriously testing) comes from Denmark and is called “Fri For Mobberi” — Free yourself from harassment. It has been established in this country for almost twenty years and is adopted, or in the process of being adopted, in several countries, including France.

But none of this is possible or fully effective without collectively helping to protect the sanctuary.

This is where I wanted to come, with in mind this tragic story of the assassination of Dominique Bernard, literature teacher at the Gambetta-Carnot high school (Arras), killed on October 13 by an Islamist, Mohammed Mogouchkov. It was almost three years to the day after the assassination of another professor in France, Samuel Paty, also killed by an Islamist. These tragedies are terrible.

It turns out that Mr. Bernard’s murderer, a former high school student, was on S file (for state security), in addition to being in an irregular situation. Many voices, worried and angry, say that if the community had done its job, the professor would still be alive.

Let the experts debate it.

But it is clear that for the sanctuary to play its role, it must be protected against threats coming from what exists outside it.

Three shields

Three shields must be deployed for this purpose and I think this is a good time to collectively remind us of this.

The shield society must ensure that the violence found there does not have access to the sanctuary. The Mogushkov case could well be a case where this shield was not deployed.

But there are also many subjects and questions in society that give rise to debates, which are sometimes conducted with virulence and even with justified violence. From all this, we must also protect the sanctuary. Only let in what can be, in the forms that are appropriate and only at the times when this is possible. Secularism and values, such as free expression, the art of conducting debates in a courteous manner and the art of seeking compromises where they are possible and necessary, are essential components of this second shield. By the way: one of the traits that defines a terrorist is precisely the refusal to compromise.

A third shield is the strong, powerful collective affirmation of the importance of all this: the affirmation of the value we give to education, to the knowledge transmitted and to those who transmit it, to whom we must therefore recognition, respect and protection.

I would like our collective attachment to this shield, to knowledge, to be manifested more often, with force, for its own sake and without concern for profitability or employment, for its power to transform us, to make us better, as well as the importance we attach to their transmission, and our respect for the teachers who dedicate themselves to it.

The ongoing negotiations for the renewal of the teaching staff collective agreement are a good time to reaffirm all of this.

Doctor of philosophy, doctor of education and columnist, Normand Baillargeon has written, directed or translated and edited more than seventy works.

To watch on video


source site-48