See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/233456362

Students' Reports of Violence Against Teachers in Taiwanese Schools

Article  in  Journal of School Violence · January 2009

DOI: 10.1080/15388220802067680

CITATIONS READS

60 2,287

2 authors:

Ji-Kang Chen Ron Avi Astor

The Chinese University of Hong Kong University of Southern California
27 PUBLICATIONS   517 CITATIONS    226 PUBLICATIONS   3,594 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Adolescents Reasoning about Violence View project

Building Capacity Project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ji-Kang Chen on 20 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by:
On: 5 January 2009
Access details: Access Details: Free Access
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of School Violence

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t792306918

Students' Reports of Violence Against Teachers in Taiwanese Schools

Ji-Kang Chen a; Ron Avi Astor b
a
Department of Social Work, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China b Schools of Education
and Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA

Online Publication Date: 01 January 2009

To cite this Article Chen, Ji-Kang and Astor, Ron Avi(2009)'Students' Reports of Violence Against Teachers in Taiwanese
Schools',Journal of School Violence,8:1,2 — 17
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/15388220802067680
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15388220802067680

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 Journal of School Violence, 8:2–17, 2009
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1538-8220 print/1538-8239 online
DOI: 10.1080/15388220802067680

Students’ Reports of Violence Against

1538-8239
1538-8220
WJSV
Journal of School Violence,
Violence Vol. 8, No. 1, November 2008: pp. 1–25

Teachers in Taiwanese Schools

JI-KANG CHEN
Student
J.-K. Chen
Violence
and R. Against
A. AstorTeachers

Department of Social Work, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

RON AVI ASTOR

Schools of Education and Social Work, University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, California, USA

This study reports preliminary findings of a national survey on

student violence against teachers in Taiwanese schools; 14,022
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

students from elementary to high school (grades 4 to 12) partici-

pate in this study. Students were given a structured and anony-
mous questionnaire including a scale for reporting their violent
behavior against teachers. Findings suggest the prevalence of
violence against teachers varies by gender, grade level, and
school type. A majority of perpetrators reported engaging in vio-
lence because of a teacher’s unreasonable expectations. Findings
indicate that intervention programs need to focus on promoting
the quality of teacher-student interactions as a major prevention
variable.

KEYWORDS aggression, school violence, Taiwan, violence against

teachers

Received September 18, 2007; accepted December 12, 2007.

The authors would like to recognize the generous funds from Chiang Ching-Kuo Founda-
tion for International Scholarly Exchange (USA) for this research. Data analyzed in this study
were collected by the research project “Prevention and Control of School Violence in
Taiwan” sponsored by the National Science Council: NSC 89-2420-H-006-001-QBS. This
research project was carried out by National Cheng Kung University, and directed by Dr. Jin Wu.
The Center for Survey Research of Academia Sinica is responsible for the data distribution.
The author appreciates the assistance in providing data by the institutes and individuals
aforementioned. The views expressed herein are the authors’ own.
Address correspondence to Ji-Kang Chen, Department of Social Work, Chinese University
of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. E-mail: jkchen@swk.cuhk.edu.hk

2
 Student Violence Against Teachers 3

INTRODUCTION

To date, research on issues surrounding school violence against teachers

have focused on teachers’ reports on victimization (Dinkes, Cataldi, Kena, &
Baum, 2006; Lyon & Douglas, 1999). There have been relatively few studies
on students’ reports on perpetration of violence against school teachers
(Khoury-Kassabri, Astor, & Benbenishty, in press). In addition, no prior studies
have been published on violence against teachers using nationally represen-
tative samples in Asian cultures.
In order to expand the research on violence against teachers, the present
study reports on the first nationally representative inquiry on violence against
teachers from the perspective of school students in an Asian culture context.
The main goal of this study is to describe the prevalence of violence against
teachers in Taiwan, and to examine how students’ gender, grade level and
school type relate to violence against teachers. The prevalence of specific
acts of student violence against teachers will be examined. In addition, this
study provides quantitative information on why student perpetrators partici-
pate in these violent acts against teachers. This information should be valuable
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

for developing sound programs aimed at preventing and managing violence

against teachers.
Teachers are the significant adults providing students with knowledge
and a safe environment for social and psychological development. They are
expected to be role models for school children and responsible for protecting
students from harm as well as promoting student well-being. Inexplicably,
sometimes teachers are targets of violence committed by their students
during school hours (Lyon & Douglas, 1999).
According to a national school crime survey, 7 percent of U.S. primary
and secondary school teachers were threatened with injury, while 3 percent
were physically attacked by a student from their own school between 2003
and 2004 (Dinkes et al., 2006). Other members of the school staff are also
potential victims. For example, another U.S. national study also showed
over three quarters of physical assaults or threats against school social
workers were perpetrated by students (Astor, Behre, Fravil & Wallace, 1997;
Astor, Behre, Wallace & Fravil, 1998; Astor, Meyer, Benbenishty, Marachi &
Rosemond, 2005).
Traditionally, in Chinese culture teachers are highly revered professionals.
Even now, teachers in Taiwan enjoy a relatively higher prestige with job
satisfaction than international counterparts (Fwu & Wang, 2002). Students in
Taiwan are also expected to bow to teachers to show respect. Nevertheless,
one study reported that 65.5 percent of surveyed junior high school teachers
had been verbally assaulted by their school students (Chen, 1999).
Studies in Western cultures have shown that violence negatively
impacted teachers’ mental health and their quality of teaching (Lyon &
Douglas, 1999). Furthermore, teachers’ victimization may influence students’
 4 J.-K. Chen and R. A. Astor

psychosocial well-beings and academic performance. Violence against teachers

increases teachers’ fears of personal safety and often causes them to leave the
profession of teaching altogether (Astor et al., 2005; Lyon & Douglas, 1999).
However, only few school violence intervention programs are designed to
educate or protect teachers from violence (Astor et al., 2005).
Studies on teacher victimization in Western studies showed the vast
majority of perpetrators were students (Dinkes et al., 2006; Lyon & Douglas,
1999). Unfortunately, there is no empirical evidence concerning the demo-
graphic, contextual, and situational characteristics associated with specific
forms of student violence against teachers. There is limited knowledge
about how students’ gender, age, and school type relate to teacher victim-
ization. There is even less information about the reasons why students take
aggressive acts against teachers. How student perpetrator characteristics, in
addition to contextual, and situational characteristics relate to teacher
victimization in school is important because without a clear understanding
of these variables it is difficult to formulate effective prevention strategies.

Gender, Grade Level, School Type, and Violence

Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

Against Teachers
GENDER
Literature consistently indicated that male students were involved in more vio-
lent acts against peers in schools than females (Baldry, 2003; Bosworth,
Espelage, & Simon, 1999; Kumpulainen et al., 1998; Nansel et al., 2001; Rigby,
2005). Prior studies in the Middle East and Western societies also indicate that
male students involved in more violent acts against teachers in schools than
females (Khoury-Kassabri, Astor & Benbenishty, in press; Lyon & Douglas, 1999).

GRADE LEVEL/AGE

Recent studies have shown that prevalence of school violence among

students increase and peak during early adolescence then decrease during
high school (Espelage & Swearer, 2003; Nansel et al., 2001; Pellegrini &
Long, 2002; Pepler et al., 2006). It is unclear whether this age trend of
violence against students holds true for student violence against teachers,
but teachers’ reports have shown that the distribution of perpetrators’ ages
are mostly concentrated at the age of 15, with the second highest proportion
centered on age 10 (Lyon & Douglas, 1999).

SCHOOL TYPE

Every school context (e.g., primary school, middle school, and high school)
has its own dynamics, mission, and structure, and these differences may
 Student Violence Against Teachers 5

impact on the prevalence of school violence (Astor et al., 2002; Astor,

Benbenishty, Zeira, & Vinokur, 2002; Benbenishity & Astor, 2005; Benbenishty,
Astor, Zeira, & Vinokur, 2002). Studies on school violence among students
have shown that violence was higher in junior high school than elementary
and high schools (Zeira, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2003). Consistently, studies
indicate the prevalence of violence against teachers is associated with
school type. For example, studies show that junior high school teachers are
more likely to be victims of violent crimes in school than elementary and
senior high school (Lyon & Douglas, 1999). In addition, students threatening
teachers with injury is more prevalent in secondary school than elementary
school but physical attacks are more prevalent in elementary schools
(Dinkes et al., 2006).

Background of Taiwanese Educational Systems

The findings reported in this paper were from study conducted in Taiwan.
Thus, it is important to describe the Taiwanese education system. Generally,
the educational purpose, school structure, and teachers’ roles differ
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

between elementary school (grades 1 to 6), junior high school (grades 7 to

9), academic high school (grades 10 to 12) and vocational high school
(grades 10 to 12) in Taiwan (Taiwan Ministry of Education, 2006).
The paramount aims of elementary school are literacy and basic science
(Taiwan Ministry of Education, 2006). In contrast to other school types, ele-
mentary school students have the least competitive learning environment,
because they can enter into junior high school without any entrance exam.
Each classroom has a homeroom teacher who is responsible for taking care
of students and teaching most of the classes during the day.
Academic achievement is highly emphasized in junior high school. In
this respect, junior high schools in Taiwan function more similarly to private
preparatory schools in the West. In general, the goal is to prepare the
student for the best high school and, subsequently, college (Taiwan Ministry
of Education, 2006). In contrast to Western students, Taiwanese students
remain in the same class with the same cohort of students for three years,
and a homeroom teacher is assigned to each class. The main responsibility
of homeroom teachers is to help students achieve higher academic perfor-
mance. Teachers are perceived as intellectual experts, and each subject is
taught by one specialized teacher in that field. Thus, the teachers in academic
fields rotate from class to class. Outstanding teachers are recognized pub-
licly if their class has a high admissions rate for academic high schools.
Students are assigned to academic or vocational high schools based on
their join high school entrance exam results (Taiwan Ministry of Education,
2006). Generally, students with higher scores are encouraged to attend
academic high schools, while those with lower scores attend vocational or
less rigorous high schools. Thus, vocational high school students are more
 6 J.-K. Chen and R. A. Astor

likely to be recognized as failure in academic performance or even life.

Three-year academic high school programs aim to prepare students for
specialized learning as well as for college study, focusing on training for the
joint university entrance examination. The goal of vocational high schools,
however, is to provide students with professional competencies and technical
skills to help vocational high school students enter the workforce (Taiwan
Ministry of Education, 2006).
It remains unclear how the rates of student perpetration of violence
against teachers differ in each of these settings. On one hand, the school
goals, student populations, role of teachers are entirely different for these
types of schools; on the other hand, class structure, peer group influence,
and other major variables appear to be similar. Hence, an exploration of
these settings will be helpful in understanding how the school dynamic
affects the prevalence of student perpetration of violence against teachers.

METHODOLOGY
Dataset and Sample
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

The data used in this study was part of a large-scale project of “Prevention
and Control of School Violence in Taiwan” (Wu, Lee, Yin & Hu, 2000). The
survey was conducted throughout Taiwan among over 14,000 students from
elementary schools (grades 4 to 6), junior high schools (grades 7 to 9), voca-
tional high schools and academic high schools (grades 10 to 12). Students
were given a structured questionnaire in classrooms under the guidance of
professionally trained survey monitors. Respondents were assured of
anonymity and were encouraged to respond truthfully. Participants were free
to withdraw from the study at any time and for any reasons. This study was
supported by Taiwan’s National Science Council (NSC). The questionnaires,
procedures, informed consent forms and ethical issues were reviewed and
supervised by NSC.
This sample was designed to represent all students from 4th to 12th
grades in Taiwan. Table 1 showed the distribution of students in Taiwanese
schools participating in this study. The students’ response rate was over 98
percent. The probability sampling method was a two-stage stratified cluster
sample. The strata were northern/central/southern/eastern, urban/rural,
and elementary/junior/vocational/academic. In first stage, schools were
randomly selected from the sampling frame according to those appropriate
strata. In the next stage, two classes were randomly selected according to
each grade in selected schools. All students in that class were included in
sample.
The questionnaire was developed on the basis of current school
violence studies and theories from both Taiwan and Western countries, and
validated by Wu et al. (2000). It included over 150 items in eight domains
 Student Violence Against Teachers 7

TABLE 1 Distribution of Students Participating in the Study

Overall Male Female

Elementary
Grade 4 907 477 426
Grade 5 1,114 589 516
Grade 6 1,099 547 548
Total 3,123 1,613 1,492
Junior High
Grade 7 943 489 437
Grade 8 1,038 510 500
Grade 9 1,070 473 577
Total 3,058 1,475 1,514
Academic high
Grade 10 1,345 574 769
Grade 11 1,210 550 654
Grade 12 1,211 534 674
Total 3,769 1,659 2,098
Vocational high
Grade 10 1,428 708 719
Grade 11 1,287 693 589
Grade 12 1,351 731 617
Total 4,072 2,135 1,928
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

Total 14,022 6,882 7,032

regarding students’ basic demographic background and students’ self-reported

violent behavior in schools. Each of the student questionnaires took approxi-
mately 30 minutes to complete. Before this survey was conducted, the
Mandarin Chinese questionnaire was adjusted and adapted based on two
pilot studies conducted in the Tainan metropolitan areas in Taiwan.

Measurement
STUDENT VIOLENCE AGAINST TEACHERS (α = .60)
This domain involved asking students to indicate how many times they
exhibited violent behavior in school toward teachers during the last year.
The variables in this domain were coded into “never” and “at least once”.
These items were:
Have you

• Beaten or kicked a teacher(s)?

• Used dangerous objects or instruments to harm teachers?
• Cursed or insulted teacher(s) in front of him/her/them?
• Threatened or humiliated teacher(s)?
• Extorted or Blackmailed teacher(s)?
• Teased, mocked, or played physically harmful tricks on teacher(s)?
• Purposely opposed teacher(s) in order to cause psychological harm?
 8 J.-K. Chen and R. A. Astor

REASONS STUDENTS GAVE FOR VIOLENT PERPETRATION AGAINST TEACHERS

For each violent behavior, nine reasons for school violence were provided.
After they indicated that they had been involved in a violent behavior,
students were asked to indicate one or more reasons why they engaged in
the violent act. These nine items were the major reasons for violence based on
the previous qualitative analysis in Taiwan (Wu et al., 2000). These items were
I had engaged in this violent behavior because (of):

• Being punished by teacher(s);

• Fighting for my friends and express my support on friends;
• Teacher’s unfair treatment;
• Disagreement with teacher’s opinions;
• Being provoked by teacher(s);
• The teacher(s) was/were easy to bully;
• The teacher(s) made unreasonable academic requirements or requests;
• Being upset at teachers or dislike(s) teacher(s);
• Other reasons.
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

RESULTS

Overall, 30.1% of Taiwanese students reported involving in at least one

aggressive act against their school teachers during the year preceding the
survey. Table 2 shows the percentage of perpetration against teachers by
gender and school type. Purposely opposing teachers in order to causing
psychological harm is the most common aggressive act against teachers
(28.0%). Other common types of aggressive acts are cursing or verbally
insulting (6.5%) and teasing, mocking, or playing harmful tricks (5.7%).
Beating or kicking (1.2%), hurting with instruments (1.2%), threatening or
humiliating (1.0%), and blackmailing (0.6%) are the least common types of
student violence against teachers.
Overall, the highest rate of perpetration is in vocational high schools
(35.8%) and the lowest in elementary schools (16.1%). The rates of perpe-
tration are almost the same in junior high (33.0%) and academic high
(33.3%) schools. Similar rates of beating or kicking teachers are found
between different school types (range from 0.9% in academic high school to
1.4% in elementary and junior high schools). The rates of using dangerous
instruments to harm teachers are higher in junior high schools (1.9%) than
elementary schools (0.9%), academic high schools (1.0%), and vocational
high schools (1.2%). In addition, there were low rates between different
school types in threatening or humiliating teachers (range from 0.5% in
elementary schools to 1.2% in junior and vocational high schools) and in
the act of extorting or blackmailing teachers (range from 0.4% in elementary
 Student Violence Against Teachers 9

TABLE 2 Percentage of Students’ Violence Against Teachers by Genders and School Type

Overall Elementary Junior Academic Vocational

Overall violence
Total 30.1 16.1 33.0 33.3 35.8
Boys 33.5 18.2 35.1 40.8 38.2
Girls 26.8 14.0 31.0 27.2 33.1
Psychologically harm by opposing
Total 28.0 13.5 30.3 31.3 34.4
Boys 31.0 15.1 32.1 38.4 36.6
Girls 25.1 11.8 28.6 25.5 32.0
Curse or verbally insult
Total 6.5 3.0 9.6 5.7 7.5
Boys 7.9 3.8 12.7 7.3 8.0
Girls 5.1 2.2 6.5 4.3 7.1
Teasing or mocking
Total 5.7 3.0 6.4 6.4 6.6
Boys 6.4 3.1 7.4 8.0 6.9
Girls 5.0 2.8 5.3 5.1 6.3
Beating or kicking
Total 1.2 1.4 1.4 0.9 1.3
Boys 1.7 1.7 2.0 1.4 1.9
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

Girls 0.7 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.6

Use objects/instruments to hurt
Total 1.2 0.9 1.9 1.0 1.2
Boys 1.7 1.1 2.8 1.3 1.7
Girls 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.6
Threaten or humiliate
Total 1.0 0.5 1.2 0.9 1.2
Boys 1.4 0.5 2.1 1.4 1.7
Girls 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.6
Extort or blackmail
Total 0.6 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.5
Boys 0.9 0.5 1.5 0.7 0.8
Girls 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2

schools to 0.9% in junior high schools). Junior high school students reported
three times higher rates of cursing or insulting teachers (9.6%) than elementary
school (3.0%). Academic (5.7%) and vocational high school students (7.5%)
reported lower rates than junior high school. Vocational high school
students reported the highest rates of mocking, teasing, or playing harmful
tricks on teachers (6.6%), and psychologically harming teachers by oppos-
ing (34.4%) than other school types.
Table 3 represents the distribution of reasons students cited for violence
against teachers. A majority of perpetrators reported they involved in
violence against teachers because of a teacher’s unreasonable requirements
(55.7%), teacher’s unfair treatment (48.6%), and disagreements with teachers
(41.6%). Some perpetrators took aggressive action because of being pun-
ished (23.2%), being provoked by teachers (11.5%), fighting for friends
 Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

TABLE 3 The Percentage of Students’ Reasons for Violence Against Teachers

Overall Beat/kick Use objects to harm Curse/insult Threaten/humiliate Extort/blackmail Tease/mock Oppose/rebel

Punishment 23.2 27.9 28.8 26.6 23.7 30.4 19.2 20.3

For friends 13.2 23.8 20.6 16.7 18.5 22.8 16.4 10.9
Unfairness 48.6 37.8 34.7 50.9 33.3 26.6 36.5 46.5

10
Disagreement 41.6 25.6 30.0 32.8 29.6 21.5 21.1 37.2
Provocation 11.5 22.7 21.8 17.5 25.2 22.8 10.2 9.8
Easily bullied 5.9 14.0 12.9 5.6 16.3 27.8 12.0 4.5
Unreasonable 55.7 36.6 39.4 56.3 36.3 26.6 37.6 54.9
Upset or dislike 16.1 32.6 24.7 20.4 35.6 25.3 21.1 13.7
Others 13.2 18.6 16.5 9.3 14.1 16.5 29.2 8.4
 Student Violence Against Teachers 11

(13.2%) and being upset (16.1%). A small number of perpetrators involved in

violence because the teachers on their target were easily bullied (5.9%).
Figure 1 shows the percentage of perpetrating of at least one aggressive
act against teachers by gender, grade and school type. Rates of perpetration
are higher for male students (range from 13.2% at 4th grade to 46.9% at
10th grade in vocational high school) than females (range from 7.7% at
4th grade to 37.7% at 10th grade in vocational high school). For both
genders, the rates of perpetration increase from 4th grade to 9th grade
(46.1% for males and 34.5% for females). Male students at 10th grade in
vocational high school reported slightly higher rate of perpetration than
those in academic high schools (44.4% for academic high schools and 46.9%
for vocational high schools). The rates of perpetration for male students in
both high schools decreased from 10th to 11th grades (37.0% for 11th grade
in academic high schools and 32.9% for 11th grade in vocational high
school), however, male vocational school students at 11th grade have a
sharper drop in rates than academic schools resulting in lower rates of per-
petration for vocational students in both 11th and 12th grades (40.6% for
12th grade in academic high schools and 34.7% for 12th grade in vocational
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

high schools). By contrast, female students have similar patterns of rates

between both types of high schools, showing decreases from 10th grade
(30.9% for academic high schools and 37.7% for vocational high schools) to
11th grade (23.5% for academic high schools and 29.7% for vocational high
schools) and increases from 11th grade to 12th grade (34.7% for 12th grade
academic high schools and 31.0% for 12th grade vocational high schools).

50

40

30

20

10

0
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Elementary and Junior Male Elementary and Junior Female

Academic Male Academic Female
Vocational Male Vocational Female

FIGURE 1 Percentage of perpetration in at least one act of violence against teachers by

gender, grade level, and school type.
 12 J.-K. Chen and R. A. Astor

DISCUSSION

This study is the first nationally representative sample to provide empirical

evidence related to the prevalence and scope of student violence against
teachers in Asian culture. The sample is representative of the entire student
population from 4th through 12th grades in Taiwanese schools. Students’
reports were compared by gender, school type, and grade level, and
provided quantitative information about students’ reasons for violence
against teachers. Overall, 30.1 percent of students in the sample reported
being involved in at least one aggressive behavior against teachers during
the preceding twelve months.
This study indicates that opposition in order to cause psychological
harm is the most common type of aggression against teachers. Some
students reported cursing or verbally insulting and teasing, mocking, or
playing harmful tricks on teachers. Beating, kicking, using instruments to
physically hurt, threatening, humiliating, and blackmailing are the least
common of violence against teachers. These findings suggest that students
tend to be involved in more non-physical violence toward teachers than
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

physical. In addition, this study shows that most perpetrators involved in

violence against teachers because they perceived unfair treatment from
teachers, teachers’ unreasonable requirements or requests, and differing
opinions from teachers. Some perpetrators reported they took aggressive
acts toward teachers because they were punished or provoked by teachers.
These findings suggest the majority of student violence against teachers
tend to be impulsive or emotional reactions to some perceived provocation,
frustration, and unfair treatments (Astor, 1994; Astor & Behre, 1997; Lyon &
Douglas, 1999; Pitner, Astor, Benbenishty, Haj-Yahia, & Zeira, 2003a, 2003b;
Turiel, 2002).
Consistent with previous studies on violence against teachers (Dinkes
et al., 2006; Khoury-Kassabri, Astor & Benbenishty, in press; Lyon &
Douglas, 1999), Taiwanese male students are more likely than females to
perpetrate violence against teachers. However, both boys and girls reported
low and similar rates of perpetration in physical violence (beating, kicking,
or instrumentally hurting) and threats (threatening, humiliating, extorting or
blackmailing). By contrast, boys reported higher rates of than girls in cursing
or insulting, teasing or mocking, and opposition. These findings suggest
that boys and girls are more similar in physical violence and threats than
other forms of violence in this study. In addition, the differences of the per-
petration rates between male and female students are smaller in elementary
schools than both types of high schools. This may imply that preadolescent
boys and girls are more similar in student violence against teachers com-
pared to adolescent boys and girls.
This study indicates that the prevalence of student violence against
teachers increases from 4th grade to 9th grade and continually increases to
 Student Violence Against Teachers 13

10th grade in vocational high schools; but declines to 10th grade in

academic high schools. After this, the perpetration declines to 11th grade
and then increases to 12th grade in both high schools. This finding may
suggest the important roles of development in violence against teachers.
This developmental pattern is similar to the findings of Western reports
(Lyon & Douglas, 1999), which suggest that perpetrators of student violence
against teachers increased from the age of 5, peaking at age 15.
Overall, vocational high school students reported the highest rate of
violence against teachers while elementary school students reported the
lowest among all school types in this study. Although the prevalence of
student violence against teachers is almost the same between academic high
school and junior high school, junior high school students reported higher
rates in cursing, physically attack, and threat, and less in opposing teachers
than academic high school. These findings provide the evidence that how
different school types or school structures influence the prevalence of
student violence against teachers. In addition, notwithstanding the same
rates of beating or kicking, this study indicates that the rates of each type of
violent behavior in elementary school are lower than half of the rates in junior
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

high school. This finding is somewhat different from the results of teachers’
reports on violence against teachers in the United States (Dinkes et al.,
2006), which showed that threatening with injury is more prevalent in sec-
ondary school than elementary school while physical attack is more preva-
lent in elementary school than secondary school. However, the inconsistent
results may be due to different methodologies between these studies.
Results in this study show that male students at 10th grade in voca-
tional high schools reported slightly higher rate of perpetration than those
in academic high schools. For males, the rates decline from 10th to
11th grade in both types of schools, however, male students at 11th grade
in vocational schools have a sharper drop in rates than those in academic
high schools resulting in lower rates of perpetration for vocational students
at both 11th and 12th grades. By contrast, female students in vocational
high schools reported consistently higher rates than those in academic high
schools. In addition, the results show that boys and girls reported more
similar rates in vocational high schools than those in academic high schools.
These findings suggest that male and female students have different patterns
of rates between vocational and academic settings. Moreover, academic set-
tings produce boys with higher rates of perpetration and girls with lower
rates. Vocational settings have similar outcomes for male and female students.
Although the rates of all types of violence against teachers in this paper
differ from those in previous reports, the overall patterns of age, gender,
and school type are similar (Dinkes et al., 2006; Khoury-Kassabri, Astor &
Benbenishty, in press; Lyon & Douglas, 1999). This finding suggests that the
prevalence of violence may vary from setting to setting but the influences of
age, gender, and school type on violence against teachers tend to be similar
 14 J.-K. Chen and R. A. Astor

in the Asian, Western, and Middle East cultures. This may be useful informa-
tion for school policy makers or clinicians interested in developing
new international school violence prevention and intervention strategies.
However, caution is required when interpreting these cross-cultural findings,
since most of the cited studies mainly focused on teachers’ reports on vic-
timization (Dinkes et al., 2006; Lyon & Douglas, 1999) and current study
addresses students’ reports on perpetration with more comprehensive infor-
mation about types of violence. For clarifying the cross-culture similarities
or differences on violence against teachers, future researchers must carefully
consider their use of expanded methodologies to accurately reflect differ-
ences across multiple cultures. Future studies are also needed to provide
more evidence on the prevalence and patterns of student violence against
teachers in other cultures.
Several study limitations should be considered. First, this study was
based on cross-sectional data, so the results cannot be used to establish a
developmental progression of violent behavior, which requires a longitudinal
study. Second, sexual harassment (Zeira, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2002) and
relational aggression (Crick & Grotpeter, 1995) were not involved in this
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

study. In order to fully understand the scope of student violence against

teachers in Taiwan, future research needs to address these additional types
of violent behavior. Third, the self-reporting characteristics of the data and
the twelve-month reporting window may have resulted in students under-
reporting events due to poor memory or over-reporting violent behavior
they assume to be commonplace (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005). Future
researchers will benefit from collecting information from additional sources,
such as school social worker reports (Astor et al., 1997; Astor et al., 1998;
Astor et al., 2005).

IMPLICATIONS

This study shows that student violence against teachers in Taiwan is a

serious problem requiring the immediate attention of school administrators.
Yet there is no clear intervention program regarding student violence
against teachers in Taiwan. These findings based on the representative data
with all students from 4th to 12th grade in Taiwan provide important evi-
dence that can be used to establish policy on prevention of student violence
against teachers. Potential intervention programs in Taiwan may need to target
male and junior high school and high school students. Intervention pro-
grams should give more attention to decreasing social and emotional oppo-
sition to teachers in order to psychologically harm (i.e., cursing or insulting
teachers and mocking, teasing, or playing harmful tricks). These intervention
programs should be designed to address specific needs in different school
types, because the current study has shown that the prevalence and patterns
 Student Violence Against Teachers 15

of student violence against teachers differs by age, gender, and school type.
In addition, interventions should focus on promoting the quality of teacher-
student interaction. Many perpetrators reported that they involved in violence
against teachers due to perception of teachers’ unfairness, unreasonable
requirements or requests, and punishments.
Findings in this study suggests that the prevalence of violence may vary
from setting to setting but the influences of age, gender, and school type on
violence against teachers tend to be similar in the Asian, Western, and Middle
East cultures (Dinkes et al., 2006; Khoury-Kassabri, Astor & Benbenishty, in
press; Lyon & Douglas, 1999). More studies are needed to fully understand
how academic vs. vocational school settings produce different gender rates.
This may be useful information for school policy makers or clinicians
interested in developing new international school violence prevention and
intervention strategies.

REFERENCES
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

Astor, R. A. (1994). Children's reasoning about family violence and peer violence:
The role of provocation and retribution. Child Development, 65, 1054–1067.
Astor, R. A., & Behre, W. J. (1997). Violent and nonviolent children’s’ and parents'
reasoning about family and peer violence. Behavioral Disorders, 22, 231–245.
Astor, R. A., Behre, W. J., Fravil, K. A., & Wallace, J. M. (1997). Perceptions of
school violence as a problem and reports of violent events: A national survey
of school social workers. Social Work, 42, 55–68.
Astor, R. A., Behre, W. J., Wallace, J., & Fravil, K. (1998). School social workers and
school violence: Personal safety, training, and violence programs. Social Work,
43, 223–232.
Astor, R. A., Benbenishty, R., Haj-Yahia, M. M., Zeira, A., Perkins-Hart, S., Marachi, R., &
Pitner, R. O. (2002). The awareness of risky peer group behaviors on school
grounds as a predictor of students’ victimization on school grounds: Part II:
Junior high schools. Journal of School Violence, 1(3), 57–66.
Astor, R. A., Benbenishty, R., Zeira, A., & Vinokur, A. (2002). School climate,
observed risky behaviors, and victimization as predictors of high school stu-
dents’ fear and judgments of school violence as a problem. Health Education
and Behavior, 29(6), 716–736.
Astor, R. A., Meyer, H. A., Benbenishty, R., Marachi, R., & Rosemond, M. (2005).
School safety interventions: Best practices and programs. Children & Schools,
24(1), 17–32.
Baldry, A. C. (2003). Bullying in schools and exposure to domestic violence. Child
Abuse and Neglect, 27, 713–732.
Benbenishty, R., & Astor, R. (2005). School violence in context: Cultural, neighborhood,
family, school, and gender. New York: Oxford University Press.
Benbenishty, R., Astor, R. A., Zeira, A., & Vinokur, A. (2002). Perceptions of
violence and fear of school attendance among junior high school students’ in
Israel. Social Work Research, 26 (2), 71–88.
 16 J.-K. Chen and R. A. Astor

Bosworth, K., Espelage, D. L., & Simon, T. R. (1999). Factors associated with
bullying behavior in middle school students. Journal of Early Adolescence,
19, 341–362.
Chen, L. H. (1999). Guo zhong xiao yuan bao xing jiao shi bei hai zhi yan jiu
[Teacher victimization in Taiwanese junior high schools]. Proceedings of
Taiwanese Symposium on Social Problems, Taiwan National Science Council,
1, 493–526.
Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-
psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722.
Dinkes, R., Cataldi, E. F., Kena, G., & Baum, K. (2006). Indicators of school crime
and safety: 2006 (NCES 2007–003/NCJ 214262). U.S. Departments of Education
and Justice. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S. M. (2003). Research on school bullying and victimization:
What have we learned and where do we go from here. School Psychology Review,
32, 365–383.
Fwu, B. J., & Wang, H. H. (2002). The social status of teachers in Taiwan. Comparative
Education, 38(2), 211–224.
Khoury-Kassabri, M., Astor, R. A., & Benbenishty, R. (In press). Middle Eastern
adolescents’ perpetration of school violence against peers and teachers: A
cross cultural and ecological analysis. Journal of Interpersonal Violence.
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

Kumpulainen, K., Räsänen, E., Henttonen, I., Almqvist, F., Kresanov, K., Linna, S. L.,
Moilanen, I., Piha, J., Puura, K., & Tamminen, T. (1998). Bullying and psychiat-
ric symptoms among elementary school-age children. Child Abuse & Neglect,
22, 705–717.
Lyon, D. R., & Douglas, K. S. (1999). Violence against British Columbia teachers.
Vancouver, Canada: Simon Fraser University, Mental Health, Law, and Policy
Institute.
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P.
(2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: prevalence and association with
psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285,
2094–2100.
Pellegrini, A. D., & Long, J. D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance,
and victimization during the transition from primary school through secondary
school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 259–280.
Pepler, D. J., Craig, W. M., Conolly, J. A., Yuile, A., McMaster, L., & Jiang, D. (2006).
A developmental perspective on bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 376–384.
Pitner, R., Astor, R. A., Benbenishty, R., Haj-Yahia, M. M., & Zeira, A. (2003a).
Adolescents' approval of peer and spousal retribution in their culture versus
other cultures: The role of group stereotypes. British Journal of Developmental
Psychology, 21(2), 221–242.
Pitner, R., Astor, R. A., Benbenishty, R., Haj-Yahia, M. M., & Zeira, A. (2003b).
The effects of group stereotypes on adolescents' reasoning about peer retribution.
Child Development, 74 (2), 413–425.
Rigby, K. (2005). Why do some children bully at school? The contributions of
negative attitudes towards victims and the perceived expectations of friends,
parents and teachers. School Psychology International, 26, 147–161.
Taiwan Minister of Education (2006). Education in Taiwan, 2006. Taipei: Author.
 Student Violence Against Teachers 17

Turiel, E. (2002). The culture of morality: Social development, context, and conflict.
Cambridge: University Press.
Wu, J., Lee, K. C., Hu, S. Z., & Yin, M. J. (2000). Taiwan di qu qing shao nian xiao
yuan bao li fang zhi ji hua [School violence prevention project in Taiwan].
Taipei, Taiwan: National Science Council. (NSC 89–2420–H–006–001–QBS)
Zeira, A., Astor, R., & Benbenishty, R. (2002). Sexual harassment in Jewish and Arab
public schools in Israel. Child Abuse & Neglect, 26(2), 149–166.
Zeira, A., Astor, R. A., & Benbenishty, R. (2003). School Violence in Israel: Findings
of national survey. Social Work, 48(4), 471–483.
Downloaded At: 07:00 5 January 2009

View publication stats