Search

To examine the mathematics classroom experiences of students considered to be "at-risk," we conducted case studies of four students in grades 7, 8, and 9 in North-western Ontario. The case studies revealed that their mathematics classes offered few opportunities for active, engaging learning or activities that students experienced as being relevant. Their teachers, who generally used traditional practices, seemed reluctant or unable to adopt reform-based teaching methodologies. Based on the diversity of the observed students' characteristics and learning needs, and the challenges these impose on classroom dynamics, we suggest earlier intervention for at-risk students as well as more substantial professional development for teachers. (Contains 4 figures and 2 notes.)

James Scheurich argues that practices of policy--normalized over time through repetition--serve three purposes. They structure social problems for which policy is designed to address; construct certain people, implicitly or explicitly, as problem individuals; and shape policy solutions. Following Foucault, he offers what he calls Policy Archaeology Methodology as an approach to policy analysis that emphasizes how particular social problems (but not others) are socially constructed in certain ways within certain political and social contexts. The purpose of policy archaeology as a mode of analysis is "to investigate...the grid of conditions, assumptions, forces which make the emergence of a social problem...possible". Drawing from his method of inquiry, I identify, through examination of policy documents, how the problem of bullying in schools has come to be understood in certain ways (the dominant narrative) and how policy solutions are constrained and limited accordingly, thereby confounding their purpose. I suggest that Scheurich's perspective provides a way of addressing bullying that accounts for complexity in ways that current approaches mostly do not even consider. (Contains 1 note.)

The province of British Columbia has a dubious history where support for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) issues in education is concerned. Most notable is the Surrey School Board's decision in 1997 to ban three picture books for children that depict families with two moms or two dads. The North Vancouver School Board has also generated public controversy. In 2004, a brief kiss between two women in a student drama production raised the ire of some parents and staff, resulting in its removal from the play. In a separate case, the BC Supreme Court quashed a 2002 ruling of the BC Human Rights Tribunal that awarded $4,000 to Azmi Jubran, a former student, who sued the Board for not providing adequate protection against years of homophobic bullying and harassment by his peers ("Jubran v. Board of Trustees," 2002). The message from these cases is clear: LGBT students, and those targeted with homophobic violence, need support and resources from their schools. The school districts of Victoria and Vancouver, however, have not shied away from taking steps to address homophobia in their schools. Drawing from a 1999 study conducted by the McCreary Centre Society in Vancouver, BC, the Greater Victoria School Board (GVSB) developed and implemented educational opportunities for administrators, provisions of increased safety for LGBT students, and support of student-led initiatives such as Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs). Meanwhile, the Vancouver School Board (VSB) engaged in the process of adopting similar regulations. In 2004, the Board passed a policy and action plan that outlines steps for improving safety and inclusion for LGBT students, staff, and their families. Although it is probable that such recommendations may not find similar levels of support in rural areas in North America as they have in Victoria and Vancouver, it is still incumbent upon all school trustees and administrators, who seek to foster safety for all students, to initiate discussion on LGBT issues in education. The trustees and administrators of the GVSB and VSB have demonstrated such leadership on a politically potent issue. Other rural and urban school boards can use their policies and initiatives as templates from which to address LGBT issues in their particular regions.

As scholars in the early stage of academic careers, the authors appreciate the opportunity to reflect on the state of the field, as D'Augelli and Grossman so cogently summarized. In this paper, they took up what they see as significant implications from their conceptual, practical, and ethical navigation that may compel one to shape their current and future research projects. Specifically, the authors reflect upon their statement: "As more research is conducted, researchers will surely develop other strategies to address the problems one face or confront new challenges, e.g., "youth living in rural areas or geographic areas that are more socially conservative."

The issue of bullying features prominently in educational administration, academic research, journalism, and public discourse. In this paper, I present a critical examination of research on bullying by addressing dominant themes and preoccupations in the literature. I argue that the proliferation of policies and programs purported to reduce bullying in schools are anchored by what appears to be a common, but problematic, understanding of the notion of bullying. Such policies and programs are utilitarian but misguided. Here, I problematize the very notion of bullying and contextualize it within broader frameworks of educational administration and social oppression. By contrast, I highlight educational theorists who conceptualize school violence in social and political terms rather than psychological, behavioral, and individualistic ones. (Contains 3 notes.)

During the past ten years, attention on bullying has intensified among educators, parents, journalists, and educational researchers in the wake of high-profile incidents of bullying in some Canadian schools. Safe schools policies and programs have proliferated as a result. However, the issue of homophobia-a pervasive form of bullying-tends to be absent from public discussion, anti-bullying programs, and so-called safe schools policies. This essay explores the politics of bullying and of related policies and programs. The author challenges educational leaders to initiate and support measures to confront homophobic bullying, even against certain opposition, in order to promote safety for all students.

The article focuses on homophobic bullying and comments on the need for anti-bullying programs and safe-school policies in Canada. Strategies to prevent violence are needed to increase safety for GLBT students in schools, stop harassment and bullying, and reduce homophobia. Individual accountability has its limitations in a society where violence is supported through nationalism and male privilege. Educational policy should foster respect for sexual diversity and ensure a zero-tolerance for school-based physical violence. The Canadian court system has shown itself to be a source of redress against administrators who resist establishing anti-homophobia policies in schools.