STRESS AND VIOLENCE ON CAMPUSCOMPREHENSION, PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION

Aaron W. Hughey, EdDMonica G. Burke, PhD

Department of Counseling & Student AffairsWestern Kentucky University

2012

Both employees and students put a premium on deriving satisfaction and enhanced quality of life through their work or educational pursuits, but the reality is that the modern workplace and college campus are both sources of tension, anxiety, and frustration.

Cost-cutting measures including hiring and salary freezes, furloughs, and layoffs, instituted due to the recent recession,have tended to acerbate the stress levels at companies and on campuses worldwide

Downsizing, firings, drug abuse, pay reductions, extended working hours, automation, interpersonal conflict, budgetary reductions, family problems, sense of vulnerability pertaining to job security, low job satisfaction, cultural conflicts, and domestic violence have all been linked to violence in the workplace and at institutions of higher education.

Men and women who work in government building experience higher rates of potential violence than do private sector employees. Additionally, murder and physical attacks to workers most frequently occur in health care, social service, retail and public sector occupations.

Stress Prevention: A Critical Responsibility

Most individuals perceive they are under more stress today than a decade or two ago. Stress is inherently cost prohibitive for organizations and a significant source of health problems for both employees and students.

Getting in is stressful.

Keeping your grades up is stressful.

Planning your schedule is stressful.

Graduating within four years is stressful.

Dealing with friends and relationships is stressful.

Putting up with your weird roommate is stressful.

Paying for everything is stressful.

Trying to find a job or internship is stressful.

A constant state of stress can affect all aspects of students’ bodies: physical, mental, emotional, cognitive, and behavioral functions can go haywire under duress.

On Our Campuses

• In the survey, “The American Freshman: National Norms Fall 2010,” involving more than 200,000 incoming full-time students at four-year colleges, the percentage of students rating themselves as “below average” in emotional health rose.

• Campus counselors say the survey results are the latest evidence of what they see every day in their offices — students who are depressed, under stress and using psychiatric medication, prescribed even before they came to college.

• Corporate and institutional responses to stress have ranged from ignoring the problem to offering various kinds of stress management assistance.

• Some organizations still view stress as a personal problem and suggest it is up to the employee or the student to deal with the issue.

• Increasingly, however, ignoring stress and/or pretending it is the individual’s problem is not a viable option.

Preparing Students for Workplace Stress

Stress is a pervasive feature of academia just as it is in the more generic world of work. It is also important to recognize that students face many challenges as they transition from the lecture hall to the office or factory floor (i.e., this can be a very anxiety producing time in the life of a recent college graduate).

Starting a career often means moving to a new community, making new friends, and managing living expenses while simultaneously establishing oneself as a productive employee within an organization.

Moreover, this process often precipitates additional difficulties for recent graduates due to the inherent disparity that often exists between the skill sets acquired in college and those actually needed in the workplace.

Business and industry as well as academia share a growing responsibility for preparing the next generation of workers, and this obligation extends to the need to prepare students for the stressors they will inevitably encounter in their new jobs.

Violence Prevention: A Moral Imperative

• Organizational leaders, working in conjunction with mental health professionals, have an inherent ethical obligation to be prepared for violence at any time and in any environment.

• If managers, administrators, faculty, support staff and helping professionals do not appropriately deal with the underlying causes and overt manifestations of violence, the outcome can be very adverse on a number of levels.

Violent Acts Committed on a College Campus

Northern Illinois University shooting: Former NIU student Steven Kazmierczak opened fire on a professor and students, killing five and wounding 21 before taking his own life on February 14, 2008.

Xin Yang murder (January 21, 2009): At Virginia Tech, graduate student Haiyang Zhu, while having coffee in a campus restaurant, suddenly attacked Yang, stabbing her multiple times and then decapitating her in front of horrified students.

Oikos University shooting (April 2, 2012): Former nursing student One Goh returned to a nursing class and told his former classmates, “get in line … I’m going to kill you all.” He then fired indiscriminately around the room, killing seven people and injuring three.

Marissa Pagli (February 22, 2011): Stacy Pagli strangled to death her daughter Marissa, an 18-year-old student at Manhattanville College, in her on-campus apartment.

Virginia Tech massacre: One of the most violent crimes in American history took place on the quiet campus of Virginia Tech one April morning in 2007. By the time VT senior Seung-Hui Cho turned the gun on himself, he had killed 32 people, 28 of whom he shot in the head, and injured 25 more.

Violence on the College CampusIn the study Campus Attacks, a joint effort of the Secret Service, the FBI and the U.S. Department of Education,

researchers looked at public records of 272 incidents of "targeted violence" at colleges since 1900.

The analysis found that:

• Three-fifths of campus attacks in a 108-year span occurred in the past two

decades: 79 in the 1990s, and 83 in the 2000s through 2008.

• Attacks most often happen in April and October.

• Attackers are overwhelmingly male, and they have ranged in age from 16 to

62. The eldest was a part-time librarian who shot a fellow librarian in 2008

after a dispute over work ethics.

• Relatively few perpetrators, 75 of 260, were students of traditional college

age.

• One-third of attacks were related to intimate relationships. "Retaliation" was

the second leading cause, followed by romantic rejection and obsession. • In 73 percent of the incidents, the subject targeted specific victims, and in 79 percent of those cases, the targeted victims

were the only ones harmed.

• In 29 percent of the violent incidents, the attackers had, prior to the attack, directed verbal and written threats, stalking or

harassing behaviors, or physically aggressive acts toward their targets.http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/campus-attacks/campus-attacks-pdf/

Violence on the College Campus• One-quarter of attacks involved weapons other than guns and knives, so

investigators must "look beyond" those traditional weapons, the report says.

• Students represented 45 percent of perpetrators. Many attackers were

former students, current or former employees, or people indirectly affiliated

with the college, if at all. • More than 90 percent of the attackers were men, and the age of attackers ranged from

16 to 62.

• 15 percent were former students

• 11 percent were current or former employees

• 20 percent were indirectly affiliated with the targeted school

• 9 percent had no known affiliation with the school.

• Of those incidents that occurred at on-campus or non-campus sites (n =

217), 36 percent took place in administrative/academic/services buildings,

28 percent took place in residential buildings, and 27 percent took place in

parking lots or campus grounds.

• In most cases, the warning signs that a stressed-out individual may be capable of engaging in violent behavior are clearly present.

• The research indicates that these include someone who • exhibits irregular hours• shows signs of depression• exhibits hostility toward criticism• is financially burdened• has marital difficulties• and demonstrates inferior

performance either on the job or in the classroom.

• There are three major types of perpetrators of violence: current employees or students, former employees or students, and non students or employees.

• In a majority of cases, particularly in the West, the person responsible for engaging in a violent act is typically a Caucasian male, 35 years or older who has a history of violence, is a loner, blames others for mistakes, has low self-esteem and a perpetual list of complaints, owns an arsenal of weapons, has a history of aggression, and is paranoid.

Policies, Procedures and Guidelines

• It is essential for public and private sector organizations to be prepared to deal with potential violence by establishing policies and procedures, creating a crisis management team/threat assessment team, and developing an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) and a Student Assistance Program (SAP) for their employees and students.

• Organizations simply must devise a realistic response plan to violence and practice that plan on a consistent basis .

• Policies and procedures should focus on facilitating the identification and careful handling of either employees or students who make threats or show potential for violence.

• After guidelines have been put in place, it is imperative that they be communicated effectively and readily visible throughout the organization so that everyone in the environment knows exactly what they should do in the event that a violent act occurs.

The Importance of Being Prepared

• The time for an organization to organize its response to hostility should be before a threat materializes, not after an act occurs. An active focus on prevention allows problems to be avoided and the potential liability to be reduced when violent behavior occurs.

StrategiesThe National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health and the Department of

Health and Human Services provide strategies for reducing the risk of violence.

These include:

1. making high-risk areas visible to more people,

2. install high-quality exterior lighting,

3. use drop safe boxes to minimize cash on hand,

4. carry very small amounts of cash,

5. install cameras throughout the organization,

6. if possible, increase the number of staff on duty,

7. provide training in nonviolent response,

8. avoid resistance during a robbery,

9. provide bullet-proof walls and barriers,

10. have police or security guards monitor organization frequently, and

11. if possible, close organization late at night or very early in the morning

• It is imperative that leaders create and actively enforce a zero-tolerance policy toward violence and formally condemn any demonstration of verbal threatening or physical abuse.

• A zero-tolerance policy is the foundation for an organizational culture that rejects violence and encourages everyone to report all meaningful threats and violent acts.

• Leaders should strive to create a climate of open communication, so that victims of violence feel safe, secure and confident enough to report these incidences when they occur.

• Employees and students who are uncomfortable talking with managers, administrators, or a faculty members should be encouraged to speak with a counselor or human resources professional; this can be facilitated either through the EAP or SAP.

• Mechanisms must be in place that ensure that the victims of violence have an opportunity to report and process their experience, with the confidence that something will be done as a result of their coming forward.

• It is vital to listen to anyone who conveys any information about violent behavior, even if it is only alleged.

Training should also focus on how to maintain a safe distance from someone who is being violent and familiarity with exit routes in the event of a hostile episode. Progressive discipline is also important ― i.e., when lesser measures fail, measures that are more stringent must be taken.

NEEDED SKILLS IN STUDENT AFFAIRS & HIGHER EDUCATIONWhat do we need to know?

THREE SKILLS ALL FACULTY/ADMINISTRATORS/STAFF NEED

1. How to recognize symptomology

2. How to make referrals

3. How to consult

How to recognize symptomology

“Warning Signs”

Remember…

it is always a

judgment call.

Some Signs of a Person in Crisis

Chronic Depression or

mood swings

Perception of injustice

Isolating behavior, hostility

Low self-esteem, excuses,

blaming

Strained relationships

Reduced motivation

Changes in health or

hygiene

Substance abuse

Frequent allusions to

violence

Being a victim of violence

Feelings of being picked

on and persecuted.

Uncontrolled anger

Poor or deteriorating

performance.

Expressions of violence in

writings and drawings.

How to make referrals

Referrals are most successful when:• You go with the student to the clinic (90 percent compliance).

• You call and make the appointment (80 percent compliance).

• You refer the student to a specific staff member (70 percent compliance).

• If you only say “you need to go to Counseling Services,” compliance is much less likely.

How to consult

• Make sure you are consulting with the appropriate mental health professional or administrator

• Be knowledgeable about basic symptomology• Be specific in describing behaviors• Respect the expertise of the individual with whom you are consulting

• Follow-through on the agreed upon plan

ConclusionUnfortunately, violence will probably continue to be a fact of life for the foreseeable future in business and industry and on college campuses. Rather than resigning themselves to an attitude of helplessness and impotence, however, it is incumbent on managers, administrators, human resources professionals, faculty, counselors and students to do whatever it takes to minimize the probability that instances of violence will occur ― and that their impact will be minimal when they do transpire.

Just be a human being!

Industry and Higher Education, 26 (1), 43-51.