DiGiulio, Robert C. (2001). Educate, Medicate, or Litigate? What Teachers, Parents, and Administrators Must Do about Student Behavior. Reviewed by Nelda R. Cockman, University of North Carolina at Charlotte

DiGiulio, Robert C. (2001). Educate, Medicate, or Litigate? What Teachers, Parents, and Administrators Must Do about Student Behavior. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc. Pp. 131 $49.95 (Cloth)     ISBN 0-7619-7823-2 $21.95 (Paper)     ISBN 0-7619-7824-0 Reviewed by Nelda R. Cockman University of North Carolina at Charlotte August 1, 2001         Concern over violence in our country and violence in the nation's schools in particular makes the priority list in nearly every survey of the populace. With every tragic news headline we ask ourselves “why?” and “what can be done?” DiGiulio makes these more than rhetorical questions and sets out to describe the current climate that breeds a broad range of antisocial behaviors and to suggest adjustments in practice that might alleviate what is seen by many as a crisis situation in schools today.         The book's preface includes the author's observation that the strong institutions that impacted young people in the past such as parents, extended family, religious organizations, and community groups, have become less influential in the socialization process. DiGiulio makes the claim that, in fact, a “public disdain for socialization has arisen.” The object of his own disdain is that in spite of the fact that we know, to some degree, means of responding and preventing antisocial and violent behavior in young people, schools are not widely utilizing recognized best practices. His stance, then, is that rather than educating and teaching skills of socialization, schools have primarily adopted a focus on medicating children and youth or on taking legal measures by which the student offender receives a sentence of suspension or expulsion from the school setting.         With the diminished impact of family and religion in much of our culture, society looks to schools as the best opportunity for socializing youngsters, that is, preparing them to live in a social context. This book urges schools and their supporting communities to take advantage of measures that have “great socializing power” and to take a proactive stand in establishing preventive strength in school places.         The book's goals are several: a) to describe the current culture of violence that characterizes our land, b) to examine several myths that disempower schools to deal with antisocial and violent behavior, c) to provide an overview of ways young people learn social behaviors, d) to consider factors contributing to the development of antisocial and violent behavior, and e) to offer reframed views for preventing and responding to antisocial behaviors in school and community.         Citing national and international statistics, as well as anecdotes and familiar news reports, in Chapter one DiGiulio explains what he sees as a culture of violence in our time. This culture of violence is a shared account of current happenings and holds the premise that the world is a dangerous place and that to survive, one must be watchful (or armed) and prepared to react to the ever-present dangers. Such an attitude promotes a sense of constant defensiveness, suspicion, the need for standing one's ground, and inclination to offer reprisal for the slightest offense. An example of antisocial behaviors prompted by quick trigger responses prevalent in such a touchy climate would be the display of road rage we observe and note in news reports. The author uses the term antisocial behavior to refer to any interpersonal violence from rudeness to murder and suggests that traditional inhibitors of antisocial behavior are less powerful. “What were once unwritten, shared agreements and understandings of what is acceptable public behavior,” he claims, “seem today to have evaporated” (p. 6). Within the framework of increasing tolerance of various forms of antisocial behavior, the author suggests that schools have surrendered their moral mandate for fostering prosocial behaviors, and have, in many cases, adopted policies that foster antisocial behaviors. One example would be the readiness with which schools encourage medicating students. If behavior is bad and the offender can be diagnosed with an illness or specific neurological deficiency, the individual receives medication. DiGiulio cites the irony of the number of children in the United States receiving antidepressants when their school sites boast the sign “Drug-Free School Zone.” Another example of policy fostering antisocial behaviors is the growing reliance on litigation, or criminal-justice procedures, to deal with youthful offenders. The author acknowledges consistently that not all violent acts can be anticipated or prevented, but he offers the opinion that establishment of proactive measures for building community, or collectivity, for encouraging respect, and for developing problem-solving and conflict-resolving strategies can go a long way in solving many of the behavioral problems school communities face. He cautions that it is a sad commentary when the social narrative depicts childhood as a period of deviant, threatening behavior. “When a society's children and youths are considered to be among the most dangerous of its citizens,” DiGiulio warns, “an ominous state of affairs exists” (p. 10). In a challenge to schools to assume a proactive role in addressing behavioral issues, the author reaffirms schools as a vital element in resolving the current crisis. One reason the responsibility falls heavily on schools is that within schools and within individual classrooms miniature societies are created where relationships and cooperation can be learned and practiced. Research indicates that the context of the classroom is a crucial variable that influences levels of violence—or crimes—within schools. Schools that reduce the big-school scale and form smaller class structures, or clusters called houses, recognize the advantage of the increased feeling of closeness, decreased alienation, and a growing sense of community in smaller units. Another justification for the important role schools play in orienting children toward prosocial behavior is the potential in the teacher-to-student relationship. Teacher care, concern, and intervention are extremely powerful in reducing and preventing antisocial behaviors in children and adolescents. When teachers carefully construct a classroom environment that models and requires shared trust and respect, students have a laboratory for learning ways to interact and for agreeing together to share a mutually safe place.         In Chapter two the author explores ten widely accepted myths about violence and schools and evaluates those beliefs in terms of statistical realities. For example, DiGiulio rejects the myth that “the only effective way to stop violence is through punitive measures” by claiming it a “persistent and dangerous myth that breeds much violence in itself” (p. 28). He contends that such action only relocates the problem—to the streets, to the mall, to the community and, for this reason, police agencies are not supportive of zero-tolerance positions that make no allowance for management of antisocial behaviors other than punitive, criminal justice measures. DiGiulio notes that political policy makers promote this myth in assuming a tough-on-crime attitude which they believe is the popular, vote-getting approach. The writer hastens his assurance that students with behavior disorders or violent tendencies should not be allowed to disrupt learning, but contends that administrators rely too consistently on removing students from the very place where they could learn more positive ways to live and be. The lack of sufficient time (and facilities and know-how) is a detriment to a less reactionary approach, and schools feel the need to protect their image with the get-tough policy. DiGiulio urges reconsideration of dismissive, punitive policies arguing that aggressiveness requires intervention rather than relocation.         An explanation of how young people develop social behaviors is accompanied in Chapter three with a theoretical examination of the ways school structures and practices are incompatible with significant social development. This incompatibility is based on the author's perspective that schools rely on after-the-fact remedies rather than developing means of educating to foster prosocial behavior and to prevent antisocial behavior. In this chapter, the author cites four views of schooling from a 1998 study including functionalist theory, conflict theory, interpretivist, and complex theories. The functionalist theory views each individual in terms of contribution to the whole, the individual's function and purpose within the system. DiGiulio cites the recent standards movement in education as an indication of the American tendency toward the functionalist view of schooling which is translated into preparation for participation in the economic system. The conflict theory assumes an existing tension in society based on competing interests of the individuals involved. Such tension would be characteristic of capitalistic societies where the wealth is inequitably distributed and much of life is segregated accordingly. The interpretivist point of view emphasizes a scientific approach which examines the context of social behavior and the implications of rules and meanings in a specific group. The complex perspective acknowledges the dynamic aspect of schooling, recognizes the ambiguities involved in schooling, and steadfastly questions the status quo. The author identifies current schooling practices as characteristic of the functionalist perspective, managed largely by legalistic traditions.         Chapter four offers commentary on factors contributing to the development of antisocial and violent behaviors. Because schools are concerned with antisocial behavior that is directed toward others rather than depression, anxiety, and isolation that is self-directed, the internal disorders may go unnoticed and erupt into external hostilities. Another problem area, which the writer alleges contributes to the development of antisocial behavior, is that most often disruptive behavior is considered a problem of the individual rather than examining the social environment or context of the conflict. The external indicators, or overt behaviors, determine the management when often an examination of the context could inform more appropriate and effective intervention.         In his discussion of media's part in the development of antisocial and violent behavior, DiGiulio avoids the temptation to overplay the effect of media violence, but he emphasizes the effect of desensitizing viewers to real life brutality and suffering. A further factor contributing to disturbing behaviors in schools, according to the author, is the model which schools themselves project with security systems, uniformed safety officers, and policies such as canine patrols and strip searches. This model presupposes a dangerous climate and serves the self-fulfilling prophecy in many cases.         Having defined his perspectives (such as culture of violence), challenged many current myths, examined the development of antisocial behaviors and the contributing factors, the writer, in the book's last chapter, suggests several changes in practices that could be more effective in making school a safe and supportive setting. Here DiGiulio restates the crucial role of schools: “In the ongoing national concern about antisocial behavior and violence, schools can help in a serious and effective way, perhaps more than any other social institution we have” (p. 74). He reiterates, too, a redirection for management of antisocial behavior and declares, …schools must be allowed to do what they do best and not be forced to turn into quasi-prisons or rehabilitation centers. For example, emphasis on zero-tolerance responses to rule infractions has moved attention away from what prosocial behaviors students should learn and toward what punishments will be brought to bear. Suspension, detention, and expulsion are unproductive, exacerbating responses to a serious social problem (p. 74).         The author details stages of antisocial behaviors with the premise that understanding these stages will help school personnel address the signs before the emotions evolve into full-blown violence. This understanding should be accompanied by clarity of general policies, and specific rules and expectations in the school and in the individual classrooms. Such clarity should, then, translate into administrative support for faculty in carrying out the policies and rules. A further reminder is to give attention to making allowances for student differences with individualized plans for learning. Because students with poor academic skills and poor achievement are the ones more likely to engage in antisocial behavior, it is effective pedagogy and behavior management to make success possible for those who struggle.         In terms of physical adjustments, DiGiulio recommends smaller schools because the anonymity of huge schools breeds alienation and isolation, and he recommends revising school design in order to arrange space that can be owned instead of a great expanses of public space which are hard-to-own areas. For responses in educational program areas, DiGiulio supports instituting violence-prevention curricular that have research evidence of positive results, establishing after-school and summer programs, sponsoring school-based parent education, and increasing early intervention into aggressive behavior which may be implemented with personal-behavior coaches. Improvements in personnel responses would be to emphasize caring interventions, to re-empower teachers so that they have the knowledge and authority to practice positive interventions, and to promote student-centered teaching in which teachers believe that they can impact student learning by their teaching methods and classroom environment. The administrative role should be a collaborative and supportive one, and one further personnel response would be to restructure teacher preparation so that novice teachers understand the public school milieu, needs of the students, and specific strategies for addressing the circumstances.         In Educate, Medicate, or Litigate?, the author premises that policy makers and school personnel have addressed individuals in managing antisocial behavior and have not sufficiently examined the context, or bigger picture, which produces such conduct. This view of dealing with the specific infraction has involved medicating, or in even more cases, suspension and expulsion. DiGiulio urges a proactive perspective that answers the question “What can we do?” with a plan for creating learning environments where children and adolescents feel worthy, experience success, and sense that their needs are being met in the physical place and in the program offered.         DiGiulio shares a passion and inspires rethinking ways to confront this alarming condition of prevalent violence in our society and in our learning places. He directs his message to everyone with any vested interest in school programs: parents, policymakers, administrators, teachers, and community citizens. His book is a valid assessment and commentary of a pressing social issue. Acknowledgement of the difficulties and paradoxes faced by school officials could have served the plausibility of the book for those administrators who will read with the “yes, but…” frame of mind. Although he refers to our national concern, many of his references and statistics are from Africa and Europe. They serve the purpose of his discussion, but the sources raise the question whether reports from research carried out in other countries substantiate his picture of the current national scene in the United States. Educate, Medicate, or Litigate? outlines credible, research-based explanations for the situation as it currently exists, and offers constructive ideas for rethinking school structures and practices to promote responsible student behaviors. About the Reviewer Dr. Nelda R. Cockman Assistant Clinical Professor College of Education University of North Carolina at Charlotte Charlotte, NC The reviewer's interests include cultural foundations of education, classroom climate, moral dimensions of teaching, and teacher education.