3 - Deviance and Violence in education environments and their development in the Czech Republic
by Kohout-Diaz Magdalena, Université Bordeaux 2 & 4, ERCEF, EA4140, LACES

Theme : International Journal on Violence and School, n°9, September 2009

Having established the framework covering the application of the šikana [harassment] concept which predominates in the approach to deviance and violence in Czech Republic schools, this article defines the epistemological field within which this concept is located. The results provided by four touchstone surveys are then described and analysed together with their spin-offs in terms of fighting violence in schools. Findings recommend undertaking specific inquiries into teaching practices and the effects of school choices within a given context.

Keywords : Czech Republic, violence, harassment, insolence, choice of school, République tchèque, violence, harcèlement, impolitesse, sélection scolaire.
PDF file here.
Click on the title to see the text.

From the media viewpoint and in public opinion, violence in Czech Republic schools mainly takes the form of šikana i.e. harassment (bullying, intimidation, Vlasák, 2002). Media coverage of the phenomenon mainly refers to four inquiries which form the basis of this report (?í?an, 1994; Havlínová, Kolá?, 2001; Kraus, Vacek, Jurá?ková, 2003; Kohout-Diaz, 2006).
The word šikana (from the French chicane) illustrates a particularly massive import of foreign (conceptual, ideological) terms into the Czech technical and specialist language since 1989. This provides us with the opportunity of carrying out a detailed examination of a phenomenon’s social structure and of the ideological tensions it represents. Accordingly, the language has (im)ported totalitarian dogma between 1948 and 1989 (Fidelius, 1989, Seriot, 1991). When a foreign word is adopted, this causes it to be regarded by public opinion as a technical term (specialist language) and it will then refer to a precise ideological connotation (in the case in point, termed «from the West», « neo-liberal»).
Šikana was used for the first time by a Prague psychiatrist, P. P?íhoda (1939-) in connection with the harassment suffered by the Czech socialist army’s new recruits during the Normalisation period («the reinstatement of true socialism» [reálný socialismus]) which followed the «Prague springtime» soviet repression of revolutionary movements of the 21st August 1968. The start of the decade of the 70s was marked by the strengthened social and political repression implemented by a reborn Czech Communist Party [KS?] which became the centralized, bureaucratic organization that followed the dictates of Moscow, under its president, G. Husák. The Party then underwent massive cleansing (half a million members were excluded) and the 1968 reformers were muzzled and even persecuted. Any mass opposition movement was inhibited by the fear of reprisals and a true regime of terror emerged combined with popular disinterest (politically encouraged) in social and political life and citizens focusing on their private lives. However, this repression also marked the birth of an opposition group (mainly intellectuals) whose illegal activities (in particular, the publication of samizdat) would lead to the «Charter 77» movement in support of Human Rights, especially promoted by V. Havel and which played a major role in the 1989 Velvet Revolution.
When defining šikana, Czech authors regularly quote its French etymology [chicaner] (?í?an, 1995, p.25). However, in French, the term is mainly used in the legal sense («suing» and «raising obstacles designed to create confusion in a legal case»). It has become common currency with pejorative overtones as in «squabbling over nothing» and «bickering» with the concept of a «devious plot» linked to a «confusing case» (Rey, 1992). Therefore, paradoxically, if we stay close to its French meaning, a certain underestimation of the facts seems to be implicit in the very term that was originally selected to designate these facts.
However, in most Czech scientific publications, this etymology has undergone ad hoc development: in French and «chicaner» would appear to mean «spiteful disturbance, torture, hounding as well as a bureaucratic compliance to the letter with instructions such as when, for example, employees make citizens wait unnecessarily, demand pointless stamps [on documents] etc.» (?í?an, 1995, p.25, Walterová, 2004, T2, p.342). Násilí [violence] then translates into «aggression» [agrese] (another imported term, mainly used in psychology) of which šikana [harassment] is a type. Violence becomes aggression and harassment a sort of bureaucratic persecution and/or torture in contrast with the common use made of the term in the French language.
Násilí [violence] is very rarely applied, including in scientific literature, in the school context. In our survey, students only reported a very precise situation: the unfair down marking by the Head teacher of their behaviour on the grounds of inappropriate behaviour [nevhodné chování] to adults (Kohout-Diaz, 2006). In most cases, this refers to non-conformist behaviour: peer harassment does enter into this but inappropriate behaviour mainly consists in offence perpetrated against the institution and its representatives. While adults highlight violent behaviour between students (harassment), the latter tend to point to an inappropriate educational response (which would mainly appear to be generated by a repressive logic, exogenous ethics, restraint, stigmatization and conformism).
While the issue of education standards that have been changing since 1989 appears to be central to problems typical of the Czech elementary school especially regarding student insolence [neslušnost] to the school’s adult population (Kohout-Diaz, 2006), the study of deviancy [úchylnost, odchylnost] in the school context is not examined in its own right.
Additionally, even if, since the Velvet Revolution, educational inequalities [vzd?lanostní nerovnosti] created by the very early segmentation applied to compulsory schooling have been regularly raised by international assessments (OECD, 1996 and 1999) and national research (Walterová, 2004, T2, Greger, 2005, Mat?j?, Straková, 2006), they do not make the media or praxeology headlines. However, this is one of the prevalent forms of violence in schools occurring in the Czech Republic (Mat?j?, Straková, 2006).

Regarding the Czech Republic, it would seem particularly inappropriate to separate the study of deviancy and violence in schools from that of the changes affecting the educational system following the events of 1989. A sequence of three reforms (1991, 2001, 2004) has mainly addressed not only the removal of Marxism references from the curricula, granting establishments their independence and the development of a more participative governance but also the restoration of an early and positive school segmentation.
Czech elementary schools take in 6 to 15 year old pupils for a 9-year period. Therefore, in the same establishment, the system has first level pupils (6 to 11 year olds, years 1 to 5) and second level pupils (7 to 16 year olds, years 6 to 9). The pupils regarded as «the most talented» are selected at the age of 8 years and attend more intensive classes (at the elementary school) and at the age of 11 years for the prestigious gymnasium (Greger, 2005).
The Czech gymnasium represents the survival of an elitist and hyper selective educational system inherited from the Austro-Hungarian educational system (Walterová, 2004). The communist regime endeavoured to limit the influence of these establishments without, however, being able to close them down. Until 1991, a child could not apply to the gymnasium until he had completed his elementary schooling (and, therefore, there was no competition). Since then, partially privatized, the gymnasium offers 8 years of education (starting in the 5th year, 6 years (starting in the 7th year) or 4 years (starting in the 9th year). Therefore, children can apply three times and can do so not on completion of but during their elementary schooling. Faced with these changes, the image of elementary schools deteriorated («rejects», z?stávající) and establishments have put strategies in place designed to keep the best pupils within their walls by calling themselves «specialist establishments », (languages, mathematics or technology) or by at least offering specialist classes or systems. These new approaches have made elementary schools a step in the educational system that is particularly propitious to socio-economic and/or ethnic selection (segregation of the Romany). Violence then becomes a violence of exclusion (Debarbieux, 2006).
In the Czech Republic, dealing with the šikana phenomenon mainly relies on three disciplines: psychopathology and mental health (psychiatry, psychology, psychotherapy), raising moral standards on non-conformity across all disciplines (with, if necessary, a spiritual connotation), specialist teaching and education. The sociological approach is beginning to emerge.
As previously stated, šikana was initially used in adult psychiatry. However, in that context, the term was redolent with ideological and political connotations. A vehicle for protests against the totalitarian regime, accused of encouraging anti-democratic violence (Dvo?ák, 2005), it was used by a Normalised regime to criticize relations formed in the army, the Party’s key organization. The repression exercised by true socialism (that claims to be a popular democracy) has led to this harassment which, to a certain extend reveals its true nature. A foreign term supports this dispute.
At present, within the scholastic environment, this term continues to be associated with changes affecting the socio-economic and political context and is poised over the meeting point of the different concepts applicable to changes in the Czech educational system, condensing the tensions linking the conservative trend to the radical change trend (Walterová, 2004, T1, p.68 and foll.). Accordingly, it is found in a number of presentations where its main function consists in:
? inserting it into the context of European education problems (reinstating continuity with Western countries) by highlighting shared issues. In this instance, the aim consists in obtaining funds to combat peer harassment (devoting the funds to reinstating the educational link would appear to be, as we shall demonstrate further on, the most urgent requirement).
? highlighting the so-called «catastrophic» results of communism (deterioration of ethical and civil values, of social relations, Prokop, 2003) and the need for a quick and radical break with the past. This break is impossible unless we analyse the processes involved in this transition. However, this task is frequently sidestepped. In the field of research, this sidestepping can also be found in European scientific projects/programmes.
? paradoxically: highlighting the deleterious repercussions of neo liberalism and of the socio-economical and political transformation (emphasising how new values have become warped following the entry into a breakneck consumer logic, Prokop, 2003) and translating the desire to return to either the values of the pre-communist era school (First Republic, 1918-1948) or to the communist directivity (1948-1989) supported by the conservative movement.
? focusing attention on pupils and sidestepping the issue of the educational responsibility of adults in the school or that of the segregating effect of education policies.

Sikana was applied for the first time to relations between school children as part of a comparative study into the psychology of type (?í?an, 1995) which relates šikana to aggression during infancy and, based on a fairly vague scientific methodology, mixes psychological description with educational advice and the raising of moral standards. Nevertheless, these early works claiming to be based on Northern European works on school bullying (Olweus,1993) are recognized as constituting a fundamental scientific reference on šikana which they consider as a psychological problem affecting the individual child (?í?an, 1993).
In parallel, following on from the Velvet Revolution, the transformation of the Czech education system is gradually being linked to a rebirth of research into education which is, in turn, progressively opening up to international comparatism (Walterová, 2004, T1). International assessments were carried out during the 90s with the purpose of typifying both the real environment reigning in education establishments as well as the initial effects of the transformations implemented. As part of these surveys into the school environment, analyses of šikana confirmed that the concept is founded in special teaching (Havlínová, Kolá?, 2001), where there is a mixture of ethical, literary, medical, psychological, sociological and educational references. Metaphors (medical, political and ethical) abound in the interpretation: for example, the group is termed «sick», «contaminated», requiring «care», compared to a cell where the healthy parts are fighting against the diseased parts. Sikana is an «epidemic», a «virus» and, reaching an extreme stage, «totalitarianism» [totalita] (Kolá?, 2001).
In the Czech Republic, dealing with bullying in the school forms part of a specialist educational discipline designated «etopaedia» (the Greek letter h from the Greek word ethos having disappeared, defined as « an aspect of the special teaching method that addresses the development, education and teaching of pupils and young people who display social disorders» (Sovák, 1986) . These social disorders are wide and varied. They range from disobedience, disturbed behaviour or lying called «defensive» to aggression, attempted suicide or addictions. By turns, this discipline qualifies as «difficult to teach», «morally disturbed», showing signs of «behavioural disorders», «a problem child», «difficult to control» or «undisciplined» any child showing signs of «inappropriate behaviour patterns» or «bad habits», «who is disobedient or provoking up to the point of being negative» or even «who lies» (Procházková, 1998). These characteristics are given as the prelude to future delinquency. This list includes a diagnosis of bullying: it is caused by poor education or inadequate manners. Therefore, rapidly gave rise to national educational action programmes and still appears to refer rather to the field of psycho educational (and even therapeutic) praxis than to that of research into education.
A critical sociological identification of the environment in schools and of victimisation is emerging (Kraus, Vacek, Jurá?ková, 2001, Mat?j?, Straková, 2006, Kohout-Diaz, 2006) which rends rather towards a moderate extension of the bullying phenomenon and to querying the quality of relations between the pupils and the adults in the school as well as the significant segregation effect found in elementary schooling.

Four surveys appear to be decisive with regard to the study of violence in schools in the Czech Republic. The first of these surveys, the founding survey, was undertaken in Prague in 1994 with a sample of 2,000 elementary school pupils (5th and 6th years ). This research was undertaken by the Institute of Psychology of the Czech Republic Academy of Sciences and addressed aggression [agrese] in the school. It was funded by the Gender Studies world organisation and by the Czech Ministry for education [MSMT]. It was organized with the participation of the White Circle of Safety [Bílý kruh bezpe?í] .
Using a modified form of the D. Olweus (1993) questionnaire, the survey attempted to compare the numbers of male and female victims and aggressors (?í?an, 1994). The survey explicitly did not deal with bullying. The aim of the project consisted in correlating three dimensions: behaviour in the school, education in the family, the child’s personality. The methodology can be described succinctly: observation of the «behaviour» [behaviorální] of 13 year old boys and girls in elementary schools, a «systematic» [systématický] study of family relations, aggression «diagnosed» using representative methods [reprezentativní metody].
Critically opposing the recommendations delivered by the ?í?an survey (see chapter 4 following), the second survey (Havlínová, Kolá?, 2001) remains rooted in psychology but links the study to an assessment of the environment in elementary schools and tends towards specialist education systems. This nationwide research led to a Ministry [MŠMT] initiative designed to check the effectiveness of the Czech «Healthy school» [Zdravá Škola] programme derived from the British project, The Healthy School (designed by I. Young and T. Williams between 1989 and 1991) which inspired the European Health Promoting School project. Its purpose consists in finding out if the programme prevents the development of social diseases, including šikana. Accordingly, the survey compared the environment in 33 elementary schools that deploy this programme with 33 control schools. The sample comprises 4,088 pupils, exclusively from the second level, without any mention of the vertical segmentation effect (Ringer, 2003, p.9) that is particularly prevalent in the Czech education system. The perception of the environment in schools is appraised using the Trickkett, Moos (1973) and Fraser (1982) CES [Classroom Environment Scale] questionnaires translated and modified by Lašek and Mareš (1988) on the one hand and, on the other, a specific questionnaire dealing with šikana (Kolá?, 2001).
More specifically, the combination of questions on the environment in schools and pupil wellbeing helped to typify bullying. In fact, the term «šikana» was not used in the questionnaires (because it was regarded as «foreign, specialist and in danger of being misconstrued»). The assessment of bullying starts with the following question: «Has anybody hurt you in school? How? » (multiple choice closed question, 9 possible answers).
The third survey (Kraus, Vacek, Jurá?ková, 2003) was undertaken in 2001 by the Institute of Social Studies from the teaching faculty of the Hradec Králové University whose work focuses on the «social analysis of young people in the Eastern region of the country». As part of a survey into the prevention of social deviancy, this research set itself the purpose of describing the main signs of šikana in elementary and secondary schools, both urban and rural, in the Hradec Králové region. Researches stressed that very few of the many questionnaires, adapted from English versions (Smith Sharp, 1995), sent to schools for distribution to pupils, were returned. This fact was not analysed. Ultimately, the sample would consist of 1,935 pupils from the 5th to the 9th years (CM2 to 3ème [4th year of secondary schooling] in the French system) and 992 pupils from other secondary schooling sectors. There were as many boys as there were girls. This survey directly studied bullying, explicitly using «šikana» in the questionnaire: «Have you been the victim of bullying during the past six months? How often? » or «Have you bullied during the past six months? How often? By whom? About what? How? »
The fourth survey carried out (Kohout-Diaz, 2006), comparatively and on an international scale, consisted in the completion of School Environment Index and victimization questionnaires (Debarbieux, 1996) by 1,638 first and second level pupils from 15 Czech elementary schools in Prague, Olomouc (Moravia) and their suburbs. These data were then compared with French data (sample of 6,268 pupils aged 8 to 16 years from primary and secondary schools, Debarbieux, 2003) as part of the European Observatory on Violence in Schools. The survey was also enriched by 63 semi-probing interviews carried out on site with teachers or other of the school’s adult staff (mainly head teachers) and by ethnological observations. This is the first survey of this type carried out in the ex Eastern block.
The Czech questionnaire comprised 32 items designed to assess 3 types of variables: the social environment (quality of relations, quality of learning, justice, nature and frequency of punishments meted out), the perception of violence and victimization as well as the perception of delinquency. Accordingly, the School Environment Index (Debarbieux, 1996, p.125) was calculated using the following variables: an overall assessment of the school, of the quality of relations between pupils, between pupils and teaching staff, between pupils and other adults in the school, pupil aggression towards teachers, the quality of the teaching. The school environment is also typified using a comparison of the French and Czech pupils’ attitude to school. An automatic classification system was used to calculate this variable based on parameters typifying the school environment (general environment, quality of relations between pupils, between pupils and teaching staff, between pupils and other adults in the school, pupil aggression towards teachers, the quality of the teaching, the School Environment Index) which involve four responses representing pupil views («everything’s bad», «everything’s OK», «average», «aggression towards teachers»).
Therefore, bullying is linked to work addressing the environment, victimization and violence. « Sikana » is not raised in the questionnaire even though questions are posed concerning violence («Is there any violence [násilí] in your school? »), racketeering, theft, insults. The Havlínová, Kolá?, 2001 question is included for comparison purposes («Has anybody at school hurt you? How?»), the survey’s primary objective consisting in checking that statement according to which the environment in secondary schools is first and foremost typified by the so called «epidemic» prevalence of šikana, (Havlínová, Kolá?, 2001), based on an exclusively psychopathological and psycho-educational interpretation of this problem. On the contrary, the contextual dimension of the environment and violence in schools as linked to social exclusion has now been confirmed by research carried out in France (Debarbieux, 2006) or in the USA (Gottfredson, 2001 or Benbenishty & Astor, 2006) for example.

The original survey produced a victimization rate of 18% for boys and 15% for girls which was deemed «alarming» (?í?an, 1994). The origins of šikana is linked to weakened teacher authority caused by the greater number of women teachers entering the profession, by the recruitment of personnel designated «significantly incapable» (financial motivation not being an issue), by the poor quality of teacher training and by the post totalitarian liberalisation of the school (?í?an, 1995, p.75 and foll.). This diagnosis has no scientific basis as the author admitted to being more concerned with submitting solutions to the problem rather than with research.
Based on a «revival of Christian moral values», the concept of «teaching about violence» has been put forward in order to teach children to hit and be hit (« for instance, by hitting their father in the chest: hit me here, as hard as you can! ») so that «they are neither afraid of hitting or being hit. One of the aims of physical education is to ensure that the child can win a physical contest in the same way as fencing had once been a fundamental part of the education of young aristocrats» (?í?an, 1995, p.91). What is paradoxically termed the «democratisation of violence» should first be practiced in the family circle even if the child’s body is a little «shaken by surprise». «Treating it as a game» but in the knowledge that, one day, the child will be involved in a real fight. At the same time, it is still a good thing to teach about compassion, concludes the author, for instance, by teaching the child to care for «fledglings that have fallen out of their nest».
This type of approach to violence at least queries the level of scientific requirement in Czech social sciences. Surprisingly, it is not questioned on a local level whether with regard to its scientific quality or on a moral plane. It is only discussed by Havlínová, Kolá?, (2001) and then only insofar as it follows the Olweus suggestions for discussions with aggressors (1993). Quite the opposite, these works constitute a fundamental reference that is systematically raised whenever bullying and violence in the Czech Republic school are discussed.
The main result of the national enquiry into the school environment (Havlínová, Kolá?, 2001), indicates that 41% of school children answer «yes» to the question has «anybody» already «hurt you at school». According to the authors, this result finds in favour of a dramatic bullying «epidemic» between peers in elementary schools. However, other information provided by the survey has shown that pupils in «healthy» schools feel less bullied than those from control schools. As far as the researchers are concerned, the apparent paradox lies in the fact that pupils from «healthy» schools have been made aware of injustice: therefore, they would find it easier to admit to being bullied, eagerly qualifying in this way relations that «are considered normal elsewhere». What is not clear is that the survey revealed that pupils displayed significant persistence of conformism and inhibition of verbal expression.
Still objecting to scientific rigour, the authors then extrapolated the number of victims to the entire elementary school and gymnasium population constituting an «armada of 1.5 million tortured children» (please refer to the contrast with the definition of violence as «causing hurt» or as «normal»). And this leads us to the ad hoc conclusion that « bullying is the most frequent cause of trauma in our children. Generally speaking, it can be said that relations between peer pupils in schools tend to be destructive and warlike. Efforts made to deploy the «Healthy School» programme in our schools are very relevant today» (Havlínová, Kolá?, 2001).
Another of the main results of this work has been the identification of a specific five-stage bullying typology which is a national reference on this issue and which progresses from ostracism through physical aggression and manipulation (2nd stage), «training the core aggressors » (3rd stage), «aggressor standards adopted by a majority» (4th stage) to the 5th stage which is «totalitarianism or comprehensive bullying [which] strongly reminds us of fascist totalitarianism» (Kolá?, 2001, p.35). No mention is made of the potential dangers inherent to this type of comparison.
It should be added that one of the authors, a current national specialist in šikana, a psychotherapist, education specialist and etopaedia (Kolá?, 2001) has himself designed and disseminated a programme for fighting bullying (Kolá?, 2003) which was developed both publically and privately as a result of the survey (see chapter 5 following).
The figures published in respect of the third major survey into the prevalence of šikana (Kraus, Vacek, Jurá?ková, 2003) strongly disputes the 41% level of victims reported by Havlínová and Kolá? in 2001. Thus, 80.9% of elementary school pupils state that they had not been bullied during the previous six months while 67.6% of second level pupils reported that they had never been bullied during their school days. The survey shows that the extent is not epidemic, that it is mainly proximity violence that is involved, exercised as a group and linked to a «particularly low level of trust in educators». However, the conclusion may seem surprising: «we believe that we need to demythologize šikana. More precisely, the “refinement” of the aggressors. Our findings have also revealed that there are not many who are truly «unremitting bullies» or «corrupt» who spontaneously and deliberately attack others (approximately 5% at most). There is no need to go in heavy-handed, even when dealing with these focal points of «evil» (...) » (Kraus, Vacek and Jurá?ková, 2003, p.264). The argument upholds, even if per negation, the idea of using physical force against the aggressor, «focal points of evil» that cannot be educated, while finally aiming for a trivialization of violence.
Our own survey (Kohout-Diaz, 2006) confirmed above all that school bullying is a complex and multi-factor phenomenon (Debarbieux, 2006). The environment in the Czech elementary school cannot be typified by peer bullying in the situation in point. All the results obtained tend to lead towards the hypothesis of a difficult change in the behavioural standards of adults and of pupils against a background of tension between, on the one hand, reproduction mechanisms, at/by the school, of totalitarian conformist habitus (Bourdieu, 1970) and, on the other, ultra liberalization, segmentation (Mat?j?, Straková, 2006) and the corruption of the education system (Prokop, 2003) after 1989.
Compared with French results, the relational environment between Czech elementary pupils seems to be very good. When calculating the School Environment Index, this is in fact the only criterion that did not appear to be negative in any of the 15 establishments visited. On the contrary, several questions (quality of relations, changes sought, teaching quality, amending relations with teachers) revealed a quality of relations with teachers and other adults in the deprived school that typify the deterioration of the overall school environment. Compared with France, the relations with the school are typified by Czech pupil aggression/insolence to their teachers, especially at the second level.
The only situation explicitly described as «violent» is when the Head Teacher downgrades the mark given for behaviour. This practice, designed to achieve compliance with a poorly defined school label, [etiketa] is in fact one of the main indicators of school segregation of these so-called «deviants». By cross-referencing the variables studied, it has been possible to demonstrate that the relations with teachers deteriorate in direct proportion to the impact made by selecting pupils who tend to be serious and to conform, who appear to adjust easily to adult behaviour standards (politeness, exogenous morals) and who believe that they are succeeding in their studies but who are not selected to attend prestigious establishments (high profile schools or classes) when they could aspire to these. Losing out in the socio-economic and cultural selection procedure applicable to the new education market, the proportion of these pupils has been on the increase over the years whereas their chances of joining the so-called education elite at the gymnasium are dwindling. Insolence towards teaching staff is on the increase and the assessment of learning qualities is worsening.
Each of the four approaches includes relevant and valuable descriptive elements whereas even viewed from other scientific and ethical standpoints, they remain debatable. The elements we need to remember are above all the excessive pointing up of peer bullying, the emerging freedom of pupils to criticise and also their conformism, their serious loss of trust in the adults in the school, the ambiguous role of teaching staff faced with socio-economic, cultural and ethnic selection, their ongoing problems with regard to changing the teacher-pupil relation, to understand how democratic laws work and to encourage the development of a critical mind, the keystone to an active citizenship.

The main positive spin-offs concern the national survey on elementary education (which is, in fact, a survey into the «Healthy school» programme, Havlínová, Kolá?, 2001). There are five spin-offs.
The first is the Methodology recommended by the minister for education, youth and sports for preventing and dealing with bullying between pupils in schools and education establishments, of the 8th December 2000 .This directive which came into effect on the 1st January 2001, can be accessed on the Ministry [MŠMT] site. Its main purpose is the institutional recognition of the existence of šikana. It defines the phenomenon and its manifestations, the preventive steps taken in schools (by the teaching team, the head teachers and the specialist centres), the methods used to deal with the phenomenon, the educational means used and finally, frameworks for school collaboration with parents and/or other institutions which could even be specialised.
This directive constitutes a first step towards action for preventing and resolving bullying related problems. It does not constitute, in the strict sense, a programme. It stresses the different forms of bullying (broadly speaking that range from ostracism to physical violence) and their danger levels. The text details the forms used to express bullying on the basis of the following categories: verbal/physical, direct/indirect, active/passive. The active role played by the school (teachers, management, education centres) in prevention is highlighted. For instances, emphasis is placed on the need for each establishment to recruit a specially trained teacher who specializes in the prevention of bullying or on the need to deploy true communication between the various partners involved in the children or yet again, the need to maintain contact with the police departments on the hardest cases of violence (especially via the specialist intermediary). It details the methods used to identify bullying (interviews, witnesses, checks), the initial steps to be taken in the event of lynching (interviews, reports, protecting the victim) as well as longer term education measures (downgraded mark for behaviour and other formal sanctions, relocating the offender into another class or school, treatment follow-up options). The key role played by collaboration between parents and professionals in the fields of education and health and in other institutions (paediatricians, police, social services) is stressed. The directive is accompanied by appended reports on direct and indirect bullying that are specially intended for parents; two specimens of information/prevention leaflets intended for pupils and a bibliography. This material can be found on line on the ministry’s [MŠMT] site and directly targets everybody involved whether pupils, professionals or parents.
Following on from the national survey quoted above (Havlínová, Kolá?, 2001), one of the authors devised a Specific programme for dealing with bullying and violence in schools and education establishments. This programme is also accessible on the Ministry’s [MŠMT] site and repeats information taken from the aforementioned directive (2000), detailing the information and supporting it with the results of the survey carried out in 2001 on «Healthy schools» which demonstrate its effectiveness. The document ends with a recommendation in favour of deploying an « intensive » inter-professional training policy applicable to each establishment’s team and an « extensive » training policy for teams grouped by profession at a national level.
More specifically, the programme contains 13 moments/elements, referring to the works of both Olweus (1993) and of Smith and Sharp (1995), including a major preventive component:
? Training and supervision common to an establishment’s entire team (national level)
? A team comprising a limited number of specialists travels to different establishments (teachers, head teachers coordinated by a supervisor)
? Assessment of the local situation and of education staff motivation levels with regard to implementing changes
? Preparation of a specific joint policy for fighting bullying in the establishment (tailored to meet local requirements)
? Prevention during lessons, during school hours
? Prevention during school life outside lessons
? Definition of a pupil protection regime
? Collaboration with parents
? Role played by school advisory services
? Collaboration with specialist establishments
? Collaboration with neighbouring schools
? Programme assessment

The above give rise to a further two mechanisms: on the one hand, specific course modules on bullying available at the Université Charles (initial teacher training in the education faculty) provided each year since 2003 by Mr. Kolá? ;
on the other, specific training for teams (for each establishment requesting this facility) designated MIŠ has been developed nationally since 2005 . This project will be carried out over a total of 3 years and consists in deploying the 2003 programme in 20 establishments: its purpose consists in paving the way to the systematic implementation of the 2003 programme. This programme has been deployed by the O2 foundation and by the private company, AISIS, who have agreed to list requests when information seminars are held in establishments, to group together training requests from each region and then to apply to the European Social Fund for finance for each regional project. Mr. Kolá? vouches for the scientific nature of the programme.
A new text has recently superseded the 2000 Methodology directive . Like the previous version, the main purpose of this document consists in stressing the severity of the phenomenon and, accordingly, quotes its three main lines. However, it does include significant characteristics. For instance, it refers to bullying that makes use of new technologies [kyberšikana] as an emerging aspect.
Additionally, the text heavily stresses the responsibility of establishments. That of head teachers and teaching staff is specifically mentioned. They have a duty of prevention and of training. It should be remembered that they are liable to criminal sanctions if they fail to report the phenomenon (failure to assist a person in danger, the approval or incitement to cause harm are also mentioned). Starting from the principle that the phenomenon exists «in virtually every establishment», each is invited to devise a specific programme for preventing and overcoming bullying. The main component of this programme must be a «crisis plan» [krizový plán] centering on two types of scenario: situations where a school resolves the problems «using its own resources» and those which require the intervention of external assistance (psycho-education advisory centre, education centre, organization responsible for providing children with social assistance, the police).
Among the «educational measures» [výchovná opat?ení], those recommended with regard to aggressors make up the essential part of the remarks and may surprise: these are either formal sanctions (warnings, marks allocated for behaviour) or exclusions from the class or school or the perpetrator even being banned from continuing with secondary studies [st?ední škola] and, finally, child fostering. The text finishes with a reminder of the role played by the Czech school inspectorate [?eská Školní Inspekce] should an establishment fail to resolve bullying problems (the head teacher's failure to take action [ne?innost] is explicitly quoted) .

Over recent years, the survey and action taken to prevent or overcome school bullying has undergone relative stagnation at Czech Republic public policy levels (Kolá?, 2004). Other aspects of violence in schools have yet to be explored.
A more accurate state of play could be produced, primarily addressing changes in relation to the behaviour and education standard as part of the post-communist transformation of the Czech education system (Pr?cha, 2007) involving both adults in a school and its pupils. The insolence to teachers and administration staff reported by pupils can in fact be construed as the persistence of formal, conformist and exogenous education criteria [etiketa] but also as the emergence of a new freedom of expression available to pupils even when it occurs against the background of old behaviour categorization, whose relevance should, in fact, be questioned by research. There is no sociological and critical description of education and teaching practices (Pr?cha, 2002), whether as part of direct studies or as fundamental components of the school environment (Grecmanová, 2003). This area of study is burdened by a taboo. The conditions applicable to the deployment of true pupil training in the use of critical approaches and in freedom of expression, the founding elements of democratic civil practices, are struggling to find a definition and if this does not occur, then the various programmes deployed will strengthen conformist habitus. On a teaching and a didactic level, after having surveyed the practices, critical and constructive professional training could be provided to teaching staff, especially with regard to the teaching methods used and to team work, which is virtually non-existent according to our survey (Kohout-Diaz, 2006).
On a systemic level, an exploration of the impact made by early vertical segmentation in classes/establishments where options are available, could affect Romany children and because it works through the raising of medical and/or moral awareness of education and behavioural standards.
On a more fundamental note, at the epistemological level, the critical and qualitative rebirth of social sciences is demanding support and the maintenance of increased vigilance with regard to the impact made by behavioural and quantitative concepts and methodologies that are taking over from the positivist methodologies and pseudo-scientific processes deployed by the «official science » during the totalitarian era (Spalová, 2006).


BENBENISTHY, R. & ASTOR, R.A. (2006), School Violence in Context : Culture, Neighborhood, Family, School and Gender. New York : Oxford University Press.
BOURDIEU P., PASSERON J.C., 1970. La reproduction. Eléments pour une théorie du système d’enseignement. Paris : Les Editions de Minuit.
DEBARBIEUX, E., 1996. La violence en milieu scolaire. T1, Etat des lieux. Paris : E.S.F.
DEBARBIEUX, E., 2002. (Ed.) L’oppression quotidienne. Recherches sur la délinquance des mineurs. La Documentation française, Paris.
DEBARBIEUX, E. 2006. Violence à l'école : un défi mondial ? Paris : Armand Colin.
DVORAK, D., 2005 Podoby nezávislých vzd?lávacích aktivit v letech 1948–1989. [Les formes des activités éducatives indépendantes dans les années 1948-1989.] In U?itelské Listy, 31/01/2005, revue en ligne : (10/08/2008)
FIDELIUS, P., 1989. Zrcadlo komunistické ?e?i [Le miroir de la langue totalitaire.] In ?e? komunistické moci [La langue du pouvoir communiste.] Praha, Triáda, 1998, p.165-198.
GOTTFREDSON, (D.C.), (2001). Schools and delinquency, Cambridge : University Press.
GRECMANOVA, H. 2003. Klíma sou?asné ?eské školy. [Le climat de l’école actuelle.] in Klíma sou?asné ?eské školy. Sborník p?ísp?vk? z 11 Konference CPdS. 14-15 ledna 2003. Olomouc. [Le climat de l'école tchèque actuelle, Actes de la onzième conférence de la Société Pédagogique Tchèque.] Brno : Konvoj, 2003, p. 14-28.
GREGER D., 2005, Développement et débat autour du modèle de collège unique en République tchèque et dans d'autres pays d'Europe centrale et orientale. Communication présentée au colloque « Construction/déconstruction du collège unique », Université de Paris VIII (Saint-Denis), 28 octobre 2005. (26/07 2008).
HAVLINOVA, M., KOLAR, M. 2001. Sociální klima v prost?edí základních škol ?eské republiky. [Climat social dans les écoles primaires de la République tchèque]. Rapport de recherche dactylographié au Ministère de l’Education, de la Jeunesse et des Sports tchèque. Praha : MŠMT ?R.
KOHOUT-DIAZ, M. (2006) Violence scolaire en République tchèque : šikana ? Thèse de doctorat n°1360, mention Sciences de l’éducation, Bordeaux, l’Université V.Segalen, Bordeaux 2, 446p.
KOLAR, M., 2004. Otev?ení problému školního šikanování v ?R a ve sv?t?. [Ouverture du problème du harcèlement scolaire en République tchèque et dans le monde.] In Školní šikanování. Sborník p?ísp?vk? první celostátní konference. [Le harcèlement scolaire, Actes de la Première Conférence nationale sur le harcèlement scolaire en République tchèque, Olomouc, 2004.] Praha : Spole?enství proti šikan?. [Association nationale de lutte contre le harcèlement scolaire].
KRAUS, B., VACEK, P., JURACKOVA, I., 2001. K problematice šikany v sou?asné škole. [À propos de la problématique du harcèlement dans l'école actuelle], in Chráska, M., Tomanová, D., Holoušová, D. (Eds.) Klima sou?asné ?eské školy.[Le climat de l'école tchèque actuelle, Actes de la onzième conférence de la Société Pédagogique Tchèque.] Brno : Konvoj, 2003, p. 259- 265.
MATEJU, P., STRAKOVA, J. (Eds.), 2006. Nerovné šance na vzd?lání. Vzd?lanostní nerovnosti v ?eské republice. [Des chances inégales pour l’éducation. Les inégalités éducatives en République tchèque.]. Prague, Academia.
OCDE, 1996. Zprávy o národní politice ve vzd?lávání : ?eská republika [Examens de la politique nationale d’éducation : République tchèque.]. Paris.
OCDE, 1999. Priority pro ?eskou vzd?lávací politiku [Priorités pour la politique éducative tchèque.] Praha : ÚIV.
OLWEUS, D., (1993), Bullying at school: what we know and what we can do, Oxford : Blackwell.
PROCHAZKOVA, M., 1998. Uvedení do etopedie. [Introduction à l’etopedie.]. In Pipeková J. et alii : Kapitoly ze speciální pedagogiky. [Chapitres de pédagogie spéciale]. Brno : Paido.
PROKOP, J., (2003). Kritika a mýty sou?asné školy. [Critique et mythes de l’école actuelle.] In Chráska M., Tomanová D., Holoušová D. (Ed.) Klima sou?asné ?eské školy.[Le climat de l'école tchèque actuelle, Actes de la onzième conférence de la Société Pédagogique Tchèque.] Brno : Konvoj, 2003, p. 64 -63.
PRUCHA, J., (2007) Czech Republic. In Hörner W. et al. (Eds.). The Education Systems of Europe. Dortrecht : Springer. p. 166-183.
PRUCHA, J., (2002). U?itel. Sou?asné poznatky o profesi. [L’enseignant : connaissances actuelles sur la profession.] Prague : Portál.
RAZOVA, J., CSEMY, L.,PROVAZNIKOVA, H., SOVINOVA, H., 1999. Mladí lidé a zdraví. [Les jeunes gens et la santé.] Sborník XXVII. Ostravské dny d?tí a dorostu. [Journées des enfants et du développement à Ostrava] Rožnov p.R., 12.-14.5. 1999. SZU Praha, p. 99-114.
REY, A. (Ed.), 1992. Le Robert, dictionnaire historique de la langue française. Paris, Ed. Dictionnaires LE ROBERT, 2000.
RINGER, F., 2003. La segmentation des systèmes d’enseignement. In Actes de la recherche en Sciences sociales, n°149, Sept.2003 : Les Contradictions de la démocratisation scolaire. Paris, Seuil. p. 6-20.
?ICAN, P., 1993. Šikanování jako psychologický problém. [Le harcèlement comme problème psychologique.] ?eskoslovenská psychologie.[La psychologie tchécoslovaque.] 37, N° 3, p. 208-217.
?ICAN, P., 1994. Šikanování na pražských školách. P?edb?žné výsledky výzkumu o možnostech intervence.[Le harcèlement dans les écoles pragoises. Résultats préliminaires de l'enquête sur les possibilités d'intervention.] Alfa Revue 4, p. 29-34.
?ICAN, P.,1995. Agresivita a šikana mezi d?tmi. Jak dát d?tem ve škole pocit bezpe?í. [L'agressivité et le harcèlement entre les enfants. Comment donner aux enfants à l’école le sentiment de sécurité.] Praha : Portál.
SERIOT, P., 1991. Y a-t-il un sujet dans les phrases sans sujet ? In Maillard M. (Ed.) : L’impersonnel. Mécanismes linguistiques et fonctionnements littéraires. Grenoble, CEDITEL, p. 93-99.
SOVAK, M., 1986. Nárys speciální pedagogiky. [Esquisse de la pédagogie spéciale.] Praha : S.P.N.
SMITH, P.K., SHARP, S. 1995. School bulliyng. Insight and perspectives. London : Routlege.
SPALOVA, B. 2006. « La révolution de velours » dans les sciences sociales tchèques. In Critiques internationales, 2006/3, n°32, p.107-131.
VLASAK, V., 2002. Francouzsko - ?eský, ?esko francouzský - slovník. [Dictionnaire français-tchèque, tchèque français.]. Praha : Leda, 2004.
WALTEROVA, E. (Ed.), 2004. Úloha školy v rozvoji vzd?lanosti. [Le rôle de l’école dans le développement de la culture.], 2 Tomes, Brno, Paido.

Read also

> Summary
> 1 - Introduction
> 2 - Deviance and Violence in Schools
> 4 - Violence in Portuguese schools
> 5 - Violence at German Schools

<< Back