Hill Publishing Group | contact@hillpublisher.com

Hill Publishing Group

Location:Home / Journals / The Educational Review, USA /

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2021.04.003

Hate Speech: A Linguistic Analysis of Student Messages in Schools

Date: April 26,2021 |Hits: 1012 Download PDF How to cite this paper

Sofia Tsagdi*, Kostas Theologou

National Technical University of Athens, Greece.

*Corresponding author: Sofia Tsagdi

Abstract

Analysis of student messages is often marginalized in educational research and has not been employed to collect information about the messages in a school and their effect on students. The aim of this paper is to use visual methods to collect student messages around the school premises and then analyze them, in order to understand how these images/messages are perceived and processed by high school students in Greece. It reports on a participative research project in 9 secondary schools in Greece from distinctively different cultural and economic backgrounds. This paper draws on content analysis as a systematic, rigorous approach to analyzing documents obtained or generated in the course of research. The paper will highlight, how student messages can reveal the social and cultural influences within a school. Also, the paper seeks to confront the problem of identifying and censoring hateful messages around the school while weighting the right to freedom of speech.

References

Allen, L. (2009). Caught in the act: Ethics committee review and researching the sexual culture of schools. Qualitative Research, 9/4: 1-16.

Argyris, C. (1958). Personality and Organisation: The Conflict Between the System and the Individual. New York: Harper and Row.

Banks, J. (2010). Regulating hate speech online. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 24: 3, 233-239. DOI: 10.1080/13600869.2010.522323.

Bragg, S. (2007). Student Voice and Governmentality: The production of enterprising subjects? Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 28/3: 343-358. DOI: 10.1080/01596300701458905.

Burke, C. and I. Grosvenor. (2003). The School I’d Like: Children and Young People’s Reflections on an Education for the 21st Cen-tury. Routledge.

Cook-Sather, A. (2014). The trajectory of student voice in educational research. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies 49/2: 131-148.

Cremin, H. and B. Slatter. (2004). Is it possible to access the voice of pre-schoolchildren? Results of a research project in a pre-school setting. Educational Studies, 30/4: 457-470. DOI: 10.1080/0305569042000310363.

Denis, M. and S. M. Kosslyn. (1999). Visual mental imagery and visual perception: Structural equivalence revealed by scanning processes. Memory and Cognition, 36/4: 849-862.

Education Act. (2002). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/32/contents.

Emmison, M. and P. Smith. (2000). Researching the Visual: Images, Objects, Contexts and Interactions in Social and Cultural Inquiry. London: Sage.

Fielding, M. (2004). New wave student voice and renewal of civic society. London Review of Education, 2/3: 197-217. DOI: 10.1080/1474846042000302834.

Flutter, J. and J. Rudduck. (2004). Consulting Pupils: What’s in It for Schools. Routledge.

Halliday, M. A. K. (2006). Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse. Continuum. 

Harris, C., J. Rowbotham, and K. Stevenson. (2009). Truth, Law and Hate in the Virtual Marketplace of Ideas: Perspectives on the Regulation of Internet Content. Information and Communications Technology and Law, 18/2: 155-184. 

Hill, M. (2006). Children’s voices on ways of having a voice: children and young people’s perspectives on methods used in research and consultation. Childhood, 13/1: 69-89. DOI: 10.1177/0907568206059972.

Holmes, J. and N. Wilson. (2017). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Routledge.

James, A., C. Jenks, and A. Prout. (1998). Theorizing Childhood, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Jenkins, E. W. (2006). The student voice and school science education. Studies in Science Education, 42/1: 49-88. DOI: 10.1080/03057260608560220.

Jewitt, C. and R. Oyama. (2001). Visual meaning: A socialsemiotic approach. In Handbook of Visual analysis, edited by Theo van Leeuwen and Carey Jewitt. London: Sage.

Kalantzis, M. and B. Cope. (2008). New Learning: Elements of a Science of Education. Cambridge University Press.

Lewin, K. R., R. Lippitt, and R. K. White. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behaviour in three social climates. Journal of Social Psy-chology, 10: 271-99.

Lodge, C. (2005). From hearing voices to engaging in dialogue: Problematising student participation in school improvement. Journal of Educational Change, 6/2: 125-146. DOI: 10.1007/s10833-005-1299-3.

Mascolo, M. (2009). Beyond Student-Centered and Teacher-Centered Pedagogy: Teaching and Learning as Guided Participation Teaching and Learning as Guided Participation. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 23/2: pp. 92-97. 

Massaro, T. M. (1991). Equality and freedom of expression. William and Mary Law Review, 32/3: 211-265.

Mortimore, P. (1979). The study of secondary schools: A researcher’s reply’ in The Rutter Research: Perspectives 1. University of Exeter.

Netsafe. (2005). The text generation mobile phones and New Zealand youth: A report of results from the internet. www.netsafe.org.nz/Doc_Library/publications/text_generation_v2.pdf (accessed July 6, 2020). safety group’s survey of teenage mobile phone use.

Nockleby, J. T. (2000). ‘Hate speech’ in (2nd ed., edited Levy, L. W., K. L. Karst et al. (eds.): Encyclopedia of the American Consti-tution. 2nd ed., Macmillan, 1277-1279, retrieved February 5, 21, from http://www.jiffynotes.com/a_ study_guides/book_notes/eamc_03/eamc_03_01193.html.

Prosser, Jon. (2007). Visual methods and the visual culture of schools. Visual Studies, 22(1): 13-30.

Smyth, J. (2006). When students have power: Student engagement, student voice, and the possibilities for school reform around dropping out of school. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 9/4: 285-298. DOI: 10.1080/13603120600894232.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. (1989). UN General Assembly Resolution 44/25. http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/44/a44r025html.

Xu, Z. and S. Zu. (2010). Filtering offensive language in on-line Communities using grammatical relations. 7th Annual Collaboration, Electronic Messaging, Anti-Abuse and Spam Conference, CEAS 2010.

How to cite this paper

Hate Speech: A Linguistic Analysis of Student Messages in Schools

How to cite this paper: Sofia Tsagdi, Kostas Theologou. (2021). Hate Speech: A Linguistic Analysis of Student Messages in Schools. The Educational Review, USA5(4), 98-105.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2021.04.003

Free HPG Newsletters

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from Hill Publishing Group.

Contact us

Hill Publishing Group

8825 53rd Ave

Elmhurst, NY 11373, USA

E-mail: contact@hillpublisher.com

Copyright © 2019 Hill Publishing Group Inc. All Rights Reserved.