Teaching Tolerance in the Music Classroom

Students With Disabilities as Targets of Bullying and Hate Crimes

Groups based on race or ethnicity, sexual orientation, and disability are frequently the targets of bullying and hate crimes. Rose, Monda-Amaya, and Espelage (2011) reviewed current research to examine the risk factors and the degree and nature of bullying experienced by students with disabilities. They found that students with disabilities were at greater risk of being victimized than their nondisabled peers. Forms of bullying included name-calling, teasing, physical attacks, verbal abuse, threats, taking belongings, imitating, and making fun of students with disabilities. In addition, other researchers have found that bullying often led students with disabilities to fight or victimize other kids. Because these students often lack age-appropriate social and communication skills, they may act out aggressively as a response to being bullied (Rose, Simpson, & Preast, 2016).

Bullying behaviors and hate crimes have several similarities: The targets are generally individuals who are considered “different” in some way, and there is unequal power between the perpetrator and the victim (Englander, 2007). The Federal Bureau of Investigation (2015) recently released a report on hate crimes committed in the United States during 2014 and showed a rise in hate crimes against persons with disabilities, a category of crime that largely goes unnoticed. Numerous studies over many years have indicated a high crime rate against people with disabilities (Jones, 2012); however, many more crimes go unreported. Like other vulnerable victims, persons with disabilities may be ashamed, afraid of retaliation, or afraid of not being believed. They may be reliant on caregivers, who are often the perpetrators of the crimes. The majority of these crimes are committed against persons with intellectual or multiple disabilities, some of our most vulnerable citizens. Young children with disabilities and persons with intellectual or multiple disabilities often do not have the communication skills necessary to report violent crimes. Finally, The Leadership Conference (2016), a civil and human rights coalition, has reported that

perhaps the biggest reason for underreporting of disability-based hate crimes is that disability-based bias crimes are all too frequently mislabeled as “abuse” and never directed from the social service or education systems to the criminal justice system. Even very serious crimes—including rape, assault, and vandalism—are too-frequently labeled abuse. (p. 1)

Difficulties often associated with investigating and prosecuting crime against persons with disabilities, as well as other groups, make the role of schools in identifying acts against its most vulnerable students all the more important. “Recent research suggests a causal association between prolonged periods of victimization and overt acts of school violence” (Rose et al., 2011, p. 114). Schools have historically served as an effective catalyst for social change, as evidenced by Brown v. Board of Education (1954), and they can play an important role in combating intolerance by creating programs that address and celebrate diversity in all its forms. Along with promoting diversity, combating aggressive behaviors and bullying are also the responsibility of schools and educators.

What Schools and Music Educators Can Do

Schoolwide bullying programs have been shown to reduce peer victimization and bullying. Incidences of bullying have also been notably reduced when students convey disapproval of bullying (O’Brennan, Waasdorp, & Bradshaw, 2014). Dealing with and understanding perpetrators is important to any prevention program. A significant number of students who abuse or bully others have been abused or bullied themselves (Solberg & Olweus, 2003). Nevertheless, educators need to hold perpetrators accountable. Other strategies include the following:

Because perpetrators have often been victims of bullying, the role of a positive adult or mentor is particularly powerful in modifying the behaviors of perpetrators. As a consequence for bullying behaviors, a school athlete was assigned to community service on Saturdays with his football coach who volunteered with Special Olympics. After watching an adult model whom he admired work with individuals who had physical and cognitive disabilities, he was moved to continue his work with Special Olympics after his obligatory service time was completed. Music educators who volunteer with groups that are frequent targets of bullying can also serve as positive models to perpetrators. The importance of a positive teacher model cannot be overstated. Nearly all school programs that promote tolerance cite the teacher’s role as critical to the program’s success (Southern Poverty Law Center, 2016b). Evidence suggests that teachers who bully exacerbate the problem of aggressive student behaviors (Kelmon, 2016). Because students are particularly vulnerable when teachers engage in bullying behaviors, parents, and other teachers must intervene by documenting complaints and reporting them to administrators. In nearly all instances of school bullying, it is the responsibility of teachers to promote tolerance and to intervene when needed.

Teachers who wish to promote tolerance strive to counter influences that lead to fear and exclusion of others, and help students develop skills in critical thinking, ethical reasoning, and independent judgment (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 1995). Although all school curricula can include content to teach tolerance for and acceptance of diversity, the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Teaching Tolerance curriculum was designed specifically for such purposes (Southern Poverty Law Center, 2016a). The Center provides professional development, classroom resources, film kits, class activities, publications, and webinars all related to teaching tolerance. The Teaching Tolerance Project also provides a literacy-based curriculum that connects antibias social justice content with the Common Core State Standards. The curriculum is titled Perspectives for a Diverse America and can be found at http://perspectives.tolerance.org. This curriculum is free and available to any educator or interested party.

Beyond using or adapting this valuable curriculum, or designing another one, music educators can address diversity by engaging students in intergroup contact. Music classes and ensembles that include both marginalized and dominant groups increases the likelihood of cross-group friendships and unity. Music educators can also revisit contact theory and the research on this theory. There is a considerable body of research on contact theory that documents “ . . . the conditions under which high- and low-status groups can be brought together respectfully so that new relationships, knowledge, and identities can be formed” (American Psychological Association, 2012, p. 67). A seminal study by Gordon Allport (1954) articulated four conditions necessary for positive intergroup relations:

Sharing and making music with others is one of the most potent examples of cooperative activities directed toward a shared goal. Likewise, music educators have the capability to be the relevant authorities that favor and endorse such intergroup contact.

Other instructional strategies that music educators can use to address prejudice are incorporating cooperative learning groups, facilitating cross-group friendships through extracurricular music activities outside the school day, increasing awareness of acts of prejudice, creating a task force of music professionals to produce materials and training on diversity, arranging for speakers who address discrimination and diversity, and collecting videos that provide model examples of diverse musical group. At the minimum, teachers can serve as a role model for their students and vocalize opposition to racist, ableist, sexist, classist, or heterosexist views and practices. By seeing their leader interact comfortably and appropriately with members of all groups, students will witness respectful interactions and have a paradigm for behaviors that typify respect and high regard.

Conclusion

No classroom function as well and no ensemble performs as well as it does when all students feel safe, supported, accepted, and valued. Historically, music has been a powerful instrument for peace and unity. As music educators, we would be remiss not to use this influential tool, and our personal agency, whenever and wherever we face prejudice and hate. Our job is to teach music, but also to teach our students to be just citizens in a diverse society. As a part of that mission, we can teach students how to use music to improve the quality of their lives and their communities by bringing people together in peace. We know the role music played during the civil rights movement, and during our own lives in times of turmoil and pain. We can teach our students that music is not only an academic, enjoyable, and rewarding activity but also has the strength to make our communities stronger, richer, and more peaceful. Teaching vocal music with lyrics that address unity, or instrumental compositions written for the purpose of promoting unity, are ways of highlighting social justice in the music classroom. The music we teach must be accompanied by a common and personal commitment to accept all people, embrace our differences, and celebrate the diversity that makes our communities great. Perhaps we—as music educators, can commit to this mission; and thus, lay a handprint on a peaceful future for our students.