One of the jobs of a provost is to meet with the university ombudsperson periodically as a way to keep current with any trends in concerns among faculty. Over the past couple of years, the number of reports of interpersonal conflict has increased.
Much of the growth concerns what might be labeled as “bullying.” There are many different definitions of bullying, but they all include some notion of a target person being portrayed as inferior to others, generally through the speech or actions of others. The target is harassed, excluded, or subjected to negative acts repeatedly over time. Bullying is a “type of interpersonal aggression that is frequent, intense, and occurs over a specific time period.” (Lester, 2013). The research in the area consistently finds that workplace bullying affects too many persons. It also tends to find that much higher percentages of workers witness what they believe is bullying of a co-worker.
It is often the case that those who are bullied have a position in the organizations of lower stature than that of those who are bullying — e.g., full professors bullying assistants, faculty bullying staff, or supervisors bullying subordinates. But there are also common correlates involving gender, race, religious, and ethnicity differences. When protected classes of employees are involved, university offices are generally set up to handle such incidents (in Georgetown’s case, IDEAA). However, other types of bullying are not covered by such compliance offices.
Bullying in an academic environment poses special complications. One of the tools of knowledge advancement is criticism of the research of others. For example, when a manuscript is submitted and subjected to anonymous peer review, the reviews often contain pointed criticism identifying every weakness of the work. Critical thinking is, thus, central to the operation of the academy. Hence, universities must have ways to both identify what is appropriate criticism and what is bullying. Bullying is something quite different from the normal academic debate that fuels intellectual discourse. Bullying often involves misinformation; it is ad hominem in nature; it is not conflict seeking truth, but an attempt to belittle or insult a person.
The harm of bullying is an internalized state of the victim; it is emotionally and cognitive processed by that person. It is understandable, therefore, that individual variation in sensitivity exists. There are several universities that have established anti-bullying policies. Acknowledging inter-person variation, these codes of behavior often use the notion of the “reasonable person,” a legal term describing a hypothetical person “who exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct and who serves as a comparative standard for determining liability.”
The insidious problem of bullying in an organization is that it has widespread effect. The target of the bullying is the most harmed, of course. But the effect on the culture within the academic unit experiencing bullying can be severe. Healthy environments support bystanders when they intervene and object to the behavior of the person who is bullying. When bystanders do not intervene, the bullying behavior can more easily continue and weaken the entire culture of the unit.
A couple of years ago a committee of the Georgetown Main Campus Executive Faculty (MCEF) began working on a new anti-bullying policy that would apply to faculty. This would be intended to reinforce the community’s desires to treat each other with civility and respect. There are now efforts to move this policy forward for adoption.
This is an effort that should be supported.
Lester, J. (ed.), Workplace Bullying in Higher Education, Routledge, 2013.
The article effectively highlights the growing issue of bullying in academia, stressing the importance of distinguishing between constructive criticism and harmful bullying. The efforts to implement a new anti-bullying policy at Georgetown are commendable and necessary for fostering a respectful academic environment.
This article delves deep into the issue of bullying in academic environments, playing a significant role in raising awareness on the matter. Bullying doesn’t just affect its direct targets; it can also have a negative impact on the broader organizational culture, underscoring the importance of societal responsibility in combating bullying. As the author examines the definition and effects of bullying, they highlight the importance of proposed policies for resolution. Particularly emphasizing the need to foster respect, kindness, and collaboration in academic settings, this article serves as a crucial guide toward creating healthier and more supportive learning and working environments. Therefore, it could serve as an inspiring resource for other institutions grappling with similar issues.
A very good article. There are very important points. Thank you!
I confess to no longer having taken the time to actually examine it before. It’s not so long as I thought it would be, and it’s well worth studying.
I think Hubbard’s analysis of the origin of age of consent legal guidelines is spot on, however there’s something tricky about his proposed answer. He correctly factors out that age of consent legal guidelines had been basically sexist, seeking to manipulate girl our bodies and to repress younger lady sexuality. He additionally effectively notes that enforcement of age of consent legal guidelines used to be implemented in a greater sexist manner than nowadays, strictly enforced in opposition to younger females however regularly overlooked for young adult males. This is consistent with our society’s double fashionable regarding younger human beings’s sexual behavior, a double popular that also exists today, although as Hubbard notes age of consent laws are extra universally enforced these days out of concerns approximately sex equality.
One of the jobs of a provost is to meet with the university ombudsperson periodically as a way to keep current with any trends in concerns among faculty. Over the past couple of years, the number of reports of interpersonal conflict has increased.