University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Promising practices of anti-bullying: safe and supportive environments for all students

(USC Thesis Other)

Promising practices of anti-bullying: safe and supportive environments for all students

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 1
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING: SAFE AND SUPPORTIVE
ENVIRONMENTS FOR ALL STUDENTS

by

Dana Jo Tate

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2014

Copyright 2014 Dana Jo Tate
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 2
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to my son, Nicholas Anthony Tate. Your perseverance and
struggle through years of bullying made me become a better mother and advocate for you and
your brothers. I will be a supporter for anti-bullying efforts in schools because of your
experience. I love you.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 3
Acknowledgements
This dissertation could not have been accomplished without the support from a number of
people. I would like to express my appreciation to them.
Maya Angelou said, “Whatever you want to do, if you want to be great at it, you have to
be able to love it and make sacrifices for it.” My family did that for me. Cheryl, Nicholas,
Matthew and Joseph, you often sacrificed family time so I could finish a chapter or another paper
because you knew how much this doctorate meant to me. You are my heroes and I am so
thankful to have you in my life. I am incredibly blessed to love you and especially cherish how
much you love me.
My mentor, Brenda and her partner, Joy, were the encouraging parents I never had. I will
never forget the phone calls and emails asking how I was doing and the weekends at your
beautiful valley retreat (I needed those times of peace and quiet). Your faith in me has lifted me
to higher ground and I love you both very much.
My advisor, Dr. Kathy Stowe, who encouraged me throughout my frustrations, gave me
meaningful feedback, was incredibly motivating and gave new meaning to the phrase “what’s the
so what?”. My dissertation committee: Professor . Shafiqa Ahmadi who was very helpful with
feedback and helped guide me with questioning and inquiry and Dr. Mora-Flores who was kind
with her suggestive feedback and took the time out of her schedule to direct and encourage all of
us.
To my thematic group-mates (Edgar, Stephanie and Mark): you guys were the ‘smelling
salts’ of this process and I will always be thankful how that brought us closer together. I will
really miss seeing you guys every week but know this is just the beginning of our journey.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 4
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables 6
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 9
Background of the Problem 11
Statement of the Problem 16
Purpose of the Study 17
Research Questions 18
Significance of the Study 18
Limitations 19
Delimitations 20
Definition of Terms 20
Organization of Study 22
Chapter Two: A Review of the Literature 23
Bullying History 24
Theoretical Framework 28
Macrosystems 30
Exosystem 32
Mesosystem 37
Microsystem 44
Conclusion 50
Chapter Three: Methodology 51
Research Questions 51
Research Design 52
Sample and Population 52
Participants 53
Theoretical Framework 55
Conceptual Framework 56
Methods 57
Data Collection 60
Data Analysis 61
Ethical Considerations 63
Chapter Four: Results 65
Research Questions 67
Research Question 1: Perceived Systems and Structures and the Inclusion/Acceptance to
Students with Disabilities 67
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question One 83
Research Question 2: Implementation and Sustainability of Systems 85
Analysis and Discussion for Research Question Two 94
Chapter Summary 95
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 5
Chapter Five: Summary And Implications Of Findings 96
Introduction 96
Purpose of the Study 97
Summary of the Findings 98
Implications for Practice and Policy 99
Recommendations for Schools and Districts 100
Recommendations for Future Studies 101
Conclusion 102
References 104
Appendix A 115
Appendix B 117
Appendix C 121
Appendix D 122

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 6
List of Tables
Table 1. Participants in the Study 54
Table 2. Special Programs at Trojan Intermediate School 55
Table 3. School and District Demographics 55
Table 4. Data Collection Used in Study 58
Table 5. Alignment of Interview Protocol Questions 59

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 7
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 57
Figure 2: Data Coding Process 63

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 8
Abstract
Bullying is a serious social problem facing school-aged youth to date. While bullying is
generally considered an issue facing the entire student body, research suggests that students with
disabilities are victimized more often in the bullying dynamic. The purpose of this study was to
examine student bullying by calling on the expertise of the teachers, administrators, and school
staff who have used best practices of anti-bullying strategies and disability acceptance in their
schools. In addition, the information gathered from this study may reveal effective interventions
and allow for a streamlined approach when guiding educators and policy for public schools. The
study was conducted in one southern California intermediate public school. Faculty, staff, and
parents who attended this school were interviewed and observed, making for a qualitative study.
Findings from this study indicate that anti-bullying systems and structures were fully ingrained
in every aspect of the school’s culture. All three themes that emerged from the data were
interconnected according to Bronfenbrenner’s Socio-Ecological Model (1977, 1979, 1986) in
order to accomplish the school’s anti-bullying vision and goal. This comprehensive, school-wide
reform is a proactive strategy for meeting the needs of the entire student body.

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 9
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
School violence has become a top concern in the United States. School districts have
taken measures to improve security by amending school policies, adding visitor registration, and
increasing the presence of law enforcement on campuses. According to the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES), this increase in school safety may have reduced the number of
incidences of violent crimes in school, such as assault and vandalism (NCES, 2007). However,
violence such as drugs, theft and bullying continue to cause problems for American schools and
their students. School violence and aggression across the country, including the 1999 Columbine
school shooting where the perpetrators were said to have been bullied and in Red Lake,
Minnesota, where in 2005, ten children were killed by a bully, has made educators, parents, and
children more reluctant to accept that bullying is a ‘rite of passage’ in school (Weinhold, 2000).
Bullying is defined as repeated, persistent, and intentional behavior that fosters a climate
of fear and disrespect and has a traumatic negative impact on physical and/or psychological
health (Olweus, 1993). There are four types of bullying behavior among children: bullies,
victims, bully/victims and non-participants (Olweus, 1993). According to Olweus (1993), a
bully is a child who acts solely with repeated aggressive actions toward his peers. Victims are
children who are the receivers of these repeated negative actions, usually targeted by their peers
for physical and verbal maltreatment (Perry, Perry, & Kennedy, 1992). According to Perry et al.
(1992) bully/victims have recently been identified as aggressive victims or provocative victims,
and can take both the role of the bully or the victim. Non-participants are children who do not
take part in these actions and are not identified as bullies, victims or bully/victims.
When the continuum of the bullying dynamic is considered (i.e., bullies, victims, bully-
victims, non-participants), evidence suggests that bullying involves the overwhelming majority
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 10
of the nation’s student population (Espelage, Bosworth, & Simon , 2000). One of the most
common and pervasive behavior problems in the school setting is bullying (Espelage & Swearer,
2003). At the time of this study, 49 states have taken action and have produced legislation that
prohibits bullying and harassment (USDE, 2012). Not all state legislation aimed at reducing
school violence has proven to be effective, and the question of whether state laws can provide a
useful means for reducing bullying behavior among children remains unanswered (Limber &
Small, 2003). The extensiveness of this phenomenon stems from a general outlook in which
bullying and victimization are regarded as a social ritual (Brendtro, Ness, & Mitchell 2001).
Previous studies on peer victimization in schools have suggested that children with
disabilities are likely to be more frequent targets of peer victimization and are more vulnerable to
victimization by peers who have higher social status and more social power (Rose, Espelage, &
Monda-Amaya, 2010). According to Rose et al. (2010), those students who have higher social
status and power are more likely to manipulate their peers as victims or bystanders. The majority
of studies on student victimization document greater verbal abuse (e.g., name-calling, teasing,
mimicking disability characteristics), social exclusion, and physical aggression among disabled
students compared to nondisabed peers (Rose et al., 2010). For instance, studies that have
examined peer victimization among youth with disabilities, hemiplegia, language impairments,
autism and special health care needs consistently indicated a three to seven times higher risk for
victimization for children with disabilities when compared to their non-disabled peers (Van
Cleave & Davis, 2006; Weiner & Mak, 2009). A child who is physically different is undoutedly
an easy target for victimization, and if that child is easy to provoke or vulnerable, he or she also
provides an instant reward for a bully (Ostrov, 2008).
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 11
In a recent review of the literature, Rose et al. (2010) determined that the documented
national average for adolescent victimization could possibly underestimate the victimization
rates of students with disabilities. Of the 32 articles they reviewed, several authors described
victimization rates of students with disabilities in excess of 50% (Rose et al., 2010). Based on
this extensive review, it can be concluded that students with disabilities are at a greater risk for
involvement in the bullying dynamic when compared to their general education counterparts
(Rose et al., 2010). Although some articles explored perpetration among adolescents with
disabilities, this research study focused on the effect on the disabled victim.
Background of the Problem
Cross-national data indicate that up to one in ten youths are targets of physical attacks,
hostile words, or indirect social aggression from peers during their school years (Nansel, Craig,
Overpeck, Saluja, Ruan, & Bully, 2004). In the United States, national surveys on bullying and
crime victimization report that between 10% and 40% of students in schools are targets of peer
victimization (Dinkes, Kemp, Baum, & Snyder, 2009; Nansel, Overpeck, Pilla, Ruan, Simons-
Morton, & Scheidt, 2001). According to a surveyed study by Dinkes et al. (2009), 32% of
students, ages 12 to 18 reported having been bullied at school during the 2007 school year.
Among them, 21% said they had experienced bullying that consisted of being made fun of; 18%
reported being the subject of rumors; 11% said they were pushed, shoved, tripped or spat on; 6%
said they were threatened with harm; 5% said they were excluded from activities on purpose; and
4% said others had tried to make them do things that did not want to do, or that their property
was destroyed on purpose. In addition, 3.7% of these students also experienced cyber-bullying
which includes students who responded that another student posted hurtful information about the
respondent on the Internet; made unwanted contact by threatening or insulting the respondent via
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 12
instant messaging; or made unwanted contact by threatening or insulting the respondent via text
messaging (Dinkes et al., 2009).
Comparatively, Wang, Iannotti, and Nansel (2009) investigated four forms of school
bullying behavior: physical, verbal, relational, and cyber-bullying using a nationally
representative sample of grades 6 through10. The prevalence rates of victimization occurring at
least once in the last two months were 20.8% physically, 53.6% verbally, 51.4% socially and
13.6% electronically (Wang et al., 2009). The varied prevalence rates for peer victimization
depend on the definition of bullying used, the methods used to measure bullying, and the ending
point for reporting the occurrences (Nansel et al., 2004).
In the United States, bullying perpetration has been examined as well. In 2002, the U.S.
Secret Service analyzed school shootings and found that 71% of the shooters had previously
been victims of bullying (Vossekuil, Fein, Reddy, Borom, & Modzeleski, 2002). Although
much of the formal research on bullying has taken place in Scandinavian countries, the problems
and consequences associated with bullying have been noted and discussed wherever there is
formal education (Olweus, 1999). According to the National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) (2009), about 28% of students ages 12 to 18 reported incidences of bullying during the
school year. Similar to the study by Dinkes et al. (2009), of those students who reported being
bullied at school, students stated they were made fun of, called names, pushed, shoved or tripped
and that their property had been destroyed by others, on purpose (NCES, 2009).
School-based surveys conducted at the elementary and middle school level suggest that
bullying may be more prevalent in those students in lower grade levels (United States
Department of Education, 2011). Data collected from more than 11,000 elementary and middle
school students measuring overt and relational aggression, found that 61% of girls and 60% of
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 13
boys had been bullied one or more times a month (verbally), 22% of girls and 33% of boys had
been threatened physically. Forty-six percent of girls and 31% of boys have experienced
relational aggression in the form of being ‘ignored on purpose’ (Nishioka, Coe, Burke, Hanita, &
Sprague, 2011).
Smith and Shu (2000) obtained a broad sample from 19 urban and rural schools in
various areas in England, all of which had a variery of anti-bullying policies. The sample
consisted of 2,308 students from both elementary and secondary schools (10 to 14 years old)
who completed a modified version of Olweus’ (1993) bully/victim questionnaire. The
prevalence of victimization was significantly higher for the younger students, where 18.7% of
the 10 year-olds reported being bullied compared to 7.5% of the 14 year-olds (Smith and Shu,
2000).
While perpetration and victimization are fundamental issues facing our nation’s youth,
much of the recent research in the United States on the bullying phenomenon was preceded by a
government campaign called The Safe Schools Initiative (Vossekuil, Fein, Reddy, Borum, &
Modzeleski, 2002). This shared initiative between the United States Secret Service and the
Department of Education examined planning and pre-attack thoughts and behaviors of the 41
perpetrators of 37 U.S. school shootings occurring between 1974 and 2000. While an actual
perpetrator profile could not be settled, common characteristics were determined. Most
importantly, researchers discovered that approximately 71% of the school shooters had been
victimized prior to the incident in question (Vossekuil et al., 2002).
Concern over the physical and emotional health of bullying victims and the climate of the
public schools to which they belong has created a demand for the government to respond
(USDE, 1998). Due to the established connection to future psychological maladjustment,
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 14
childhood bullying demands close examination (Olweus, 1994). When children are repeatedly
subjected to bullying, they are more likely to experience loneliness, anxiety, lower feelings of
self-worth and suceptibilty to childhood depression (Craig, 1998; Glew, 2007). Students who are
victims of bullying can develop deep emotional and psychological problems, which may affect
them as adults and interfere with their ability to develop or sustain a variety of relationships.
Students who demonstrate bullying behavior often develop aggressive and negative behaviors
which continue into adulthood and often lead into criminal behavior (Forlin, 2003; Olweus,
1994).
Bullying in schools can have negative consequences for the general school climate and
can affect the right of students to learn in a safe environment without fear (Olweus, 1994).
According to Olweus (1994), in addition to direct attacks, bullying may also be more indirect
and cause a student to be socially isolated. Peers, students of the same age group, perceive
victims of bullying as physically or psychologically weaker than the aggressor(s), and victims
perceive themselves as unable to retaliate (Olweus, 1994). Peers often reject those who are
bullied out of fear of becoming a target of bullies if they are seen with the victims (Weinhold,
2000). The long-term effects (Olweus, 1994) from bullying often result in violent retaliation
from victims. Victims of bullying often experience anxiety, depression and low self-esteem
(Smith et al., 2004). According to Klomek, Marrocco, and Kleinman (2007), these victims
sometimes take their own lives due to the helplessness and frustration they feel as a result of
being victimized.
In fundamental work, Whitney (1994) investigated the victimization rates of 93 students
with disabilities and their demographically matched peers within an confined setting. Through
student and teacher interviews, the researchers determined that 55% of students with mild
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 15
learning difficulties and 78% of students with moderate learning disabilities experienced
moderate to severe levels of victimization (Whitney, 1994). Consequently, only 25% of their
demographically matched peers reported being victimized in the same setting. These findings
are similar in several studies in which students and teachers consistently identified students with
disabilities as frequent victims of bullying (Nabuzoka, 2003).
The most extreme consequence of bullying for disabled victims and society is violence,
including suicide and murder (Glew, 2007). According to Glew (2007), the sense of
powerlessness experienced by children who are victimized can be so profound that some react
with self-destructive acts or lethal retaliation (Garrity, Jens, Porter, Sager, Short-Camilli,1997).
There have been numerous case reports of children who committed suicide or murder largely
because they were chronically bullied and this violent retaliation is said to be more frequent in
the United States as opposed to other countries (Williams, Chambers, Logan, & Robinson,
1996). Recent killings, including those in Kentucky, Arkansas, Orgeon and Mississippi were
committed by children who felt inferior or picked on and their killings are said to be viewed as a
way to end a tortured life (Glew, Fan, Katon, Rivara & Kernic, 2005).
In addition to research findings, there have been several publicized incidents where
disabled children were brutally bullied by their peers. For example, a 14 year-old student in
special education stabbed an older classmate because he was frustrated with what he called
“months of bullying and harassment” by the seventeen year-old student he stabbed (Patterson,
2005). In Philadelphia, a twelve year-old autistic and partially deaf student was harassed
regularly by his classmates, which included a cell-phone video posted by his attackers of them
repeatedly rubbing their crotch on his head while onlookers (peers and one adult) observed the
behavior (DiFilippo, 2008).
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 16
Some studies have shown that students with disabilities have an increased risk for being
victimized (Nabuzoka & Smith, 1993; Yude, Goodman, & McConachie, 1998). Other studies
indicate that students with disabilities are highly represented in the victim population (Mertlew
& Hodson, 1991). Research has also shown that disabled students are more often rejected by
their peers and this rejection is a social risk factor that contributes to a student’s victimization.
Given the severe effects, such as depression, low self-esteem, and suicidal thoughts, it is
imperative to research the promising practices schools implement in order to include students
with disabilities into their anti-bullying plans (Craig, 1998; Glew, 2007). If the goal of the
school district and school is to incorporate all students into the scope of inclusion and anti-
bullying, the acceptance of students with disabilities need to be part of that equation. The
fulfillment of that goal may result in a positive school climate for all students and increased
student success and achievement.
Statement of the Problem
Research says that the majority of states in the United States have authorized legislation
that prohibits bullying and harassment in schools (Swearer et al., 2009). However, evidence
suggests that bullying involves the majority of the country’s 50 million students (United States
Census Bureau, 2011; Espelage et al., 2000). While increased state laws and orders regarding
the prevention of bullying are necessary to prohibit the perpetration and victimization of
students, empirical evidence conveys that certain subgroups of students are at-risk for increased
difficulty within the bullying phenomenon (Espelage et al., 2000). Research on bullying
signifies that approximately 28% of American school children have been victimized during their
educational career (Dinkes et al., 2006).
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 17
In spite of the pervasiveness of bullying, little research exists that examines the
relationship between successful anti-bullying practices in schools and their influence on non-
disabled students and the inclusion and acceptance of children with disabilities. Reiter and
Lapidot-Leifler (2007) emphasized the importance of all students’ achieving social acceptance
within the school and among their peer groups, thus promoting a school climate of inclusion.
The relationship between anti-bullying strategies and best practices needs to be investigated
further in order to provide insight as to strategies which include all students. If students and
school personnel are to include and accept students with disabilities, there needs to be tools
within the curriculum practice and professional development in order to do so (Thompson,
Whitney, & Smith, 2004).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine student bullying by calling on the expertise of
the teachers, administrators and school staff who have used best practices of anti-bullying
strategies and disability acceptance in their schools. By learning about these practices and
interventions, administrators and teachers can gain a better understanding of student bullying,
bullying toward students with disabilities, and the changes that may have to be made to a
school’s practices. In addition, the information gathered from this study may reveal effective
interventions and allow for a streamlined approach when guiding educators and policy for public
schools.
Bullying is a major concern for students, teachers, administrators, and parents and is now
considered a common form of school violence. Bullying is said to intensify during the middle
school years and can have long term effects on the victims and bullies themselves. In order to
learn more about the practices of anti-bullying in middle schools, information on teachers’,
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 18
parents’ and administrators’ perspectives about the implementations of practices in acceptance of
disabled students should be gathered and analyzed. Data from qualitative interviews with urban
middle school administrators, and parents may assist educators in implementing best practices
that focus on the acceptance of students with disabilities which may result in positive school
culture among non-disabled and disabled students on campus.
Research Questions
This study included two main research questions:
 What are the perceived systems and structures that contribute to the inclusion and
acceptance of students with disabilities to establish an anti-bullying culture in schools?
 How are these systems and structures implemented and sustained to support an anti-
bullying culture?
Significance of the Study
The research on bullying interventions and students with disabilities remains limited.
Virtually no research emphasizes the importance of including specific practices concerning the
acceptance and tolerance relating to students with disabilities in their anti-bullying programs or
practices. Most available research findings indicate that children with disabilities tend to be at
greater risk for being bullied compared to their non-disabled peers (Olweus et al.,1999; Secunda,
2005). It may prove beneficial to analyze some of the key components of successful anti-
bullying practices, characteristics and results of these practices regarding special needs of
students with disabilities. The answers found in this study may help in the implementation of
school-wide anti-bullying strategies that include the acceptance of non-disabled and disabled
students and create a safe academic enviornment and collective efficacy among school staff.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 19
Safe schools identify all forms of violence on their campuses. With the high stakes of the
No Child Left Behind standards and legislation, school safety and non-violence is a high priority
(Rose et al., 2010). If schools fail to address all forms of violence, including low-level violence,
they not only risk being designated persistently dangerous and losing federal funds and students
(Whitted & Dupper, 2005) but they put many students at risk for future emotional devastation
and harm. This study may benefit legislators and policy makers in designing a collective
agreement on school-wide practices that combat anti-bullying and promote positive student
interaction.
Limitations
Limitations and delimitations of this study are related to several factors. The study was
conducted in one southern California intermediate school and while the data collected may be
reflective of the participants of the study and their ‘best practices’, the researcher did not attempt
to generalize the findings to schools in different areas of the state, of different populations, socio-
economic status or different grade levels.
The researcher only observed anti-bullying practices in the school, which was deemed so
by the school administrator and may not reflect the daily practices of the classroom or are
generalized to any other school. Faculty, staff and parents of students who attended the case
study school were interviewed and observed, making for a qualitative study. Triangulation is
another part of establishing research credibility in that more than one method source, or type of
data about bullying were used.
Due to the time constraints, this study was limited to a single intermediate school, with
students in grades seven and eight. Considering that this is the only unit of study, this may have
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 20
had an impact on the study. This limited the sample size of participants, the number of
observations and interviews which may have compromised the outcome of the study.
Delimitations
The researcher selected several delimitations for this qualitative study. The subjects of
this study came from one southern California intermediate school and as such, the results may
not be indicative of all intermediate schools or teachers across grade levels. The subjects came
from a public school, therefore the results may not reflect best practices in private or parochial
schools.
The criteria for selection in order to identify schools with promising practices of anti-
bullying on their campus included:
 Inclusion classrooms are on campus
 A school enrollment of 600 students or more.
 A school has a special education population on campus
Definition of Terms
The following terms were defined in combination with the dissertation committee’s
definitions as they relate to this study:
 Accommodations: Strategies for bypassing weak functions.
 Awareness: Having knowledge, being educated and/or conscious
 Bully: Someone who uses his/her power, either physical or psychological, to cause
distress in the victim
 Bullying: Repeated, persistent, intentional behaviors that foster a climate of fear and
disrespect that has a traumatic (negative, significant) impact on physical and/or
psychological health
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 21
 IDEA: (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) The primary special education law.
The act and its requirements are based on the principles below:
 Free and approproate education
 Appropriate Evaluation
 Individualized education program (IEP)
 Least restrictive enviornment
 Procedural safeguards
 Parent and student participation in decision-making.
 Interventions: Strategies for strengthening weak functions.
 NCLB: (No Child Left Behind) Act of 2001 was signed into law on January 8, 2002 by
President George W. Bush. The Act represents the President’s education reform plan and
contains the most sweeping changes to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA) since it was enacted in 1965 (State of New Jersey Department of Education,
2006).
 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973: Makes it unlawful for programs receiving
federal financial assistance, including schools, to discriminate or harass on the basis of a
disability.
 Structures: Instructional mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place by federal,
state and district policies and legislation or widely accepted as the official structure of
institutions that are not subject to change.
 Systems: Coordinated and coherent use of resources (time, personnel, students, parents,
funds, facilities, etc.) at the school site to ensure that school visions, missions and goals
are met.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 22
 Title IX, Educational Amendments of 1972 (Section 1681) (a) Prohibition against
discrimination; exceptions. No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be
excluded from participation in be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
 Victim: A victim is defined as someone who experiences repeated bullying episodes.
Organization of Study
While each of the previous factors is explicitly described in chapter two, the components
of the theoretical framework that guide this study are based on the complex interactions among
individual, familial, peer and school influences. Grounded in the foundational literature, students
with learning disabilities often struggle with membership into the social constructs of school.
Therefore, sense of belonging, familial social support, and school support were investigated to
determine if these ‘best practices’ serve as a unique predictor of the success of students with
disabilities within the bullying dynamic.
Chapter 1 provided an overview of the background of bullying research, significance
regarding students with disabilities, purpose, and research questions of the current study were
presented. Chapter 2 reviewed important research on the history of the bullying phenomenon,
theoretical framework, victimization, disabled students’ rights, and anti-bullying practices.
Chapter 3 provided the research methodology used in this case study. Chapter 4 revealed the
results of the study. Chapter 5 provided the conclusions and further recommendations of the
study.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 23
CHAPTER TWO: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
In the past two decades there have been many concerns among educators and researchers
regarding the ascendency of childhood bullying and the effects it has on those who are involved.
As children with disabilities are integrated into today’s classroom, there is an increased risk that
those students will have experienced victimization by their non-disabled peers (Luciano &
Savage, 2007; Mishna, Scarcello, Pepler, & Weiner, 2005). Based on the high level of American
youth involvement in the bullying phenomena, research on bullying has increased over the past
decade (Espelage & Swearer, 2003).
As long as students with disabilities are being taught with their non-disabled peers, they
are subjected to a variety of childhood experiences and may be at risk for bullying (Rose et al.,
2011). According to Rose et al. (2011), disabled students are victimized more often by their
peers. Incidences of victimization can have a serious impact on those children and their future
outlook about school (Carter & Spencer, 2006). School violence across the country has made
educators, parents and children unwilling to accept that bullying is just another school experience
(Weinhold, 2000).
The purpose of this study was to examine the student bullying phenomenon by calling on
the expertise of teachers and administrators who have used best practices of anti-bullying
strategies and disability acceptance in their schools. By learning about these practices and
interventions, administrators and teachers can gain a better understanding of student bullying,
bullying towards students with disabilities, and the changes that may have to be made to a
school’s practices. The information gathered from this study may reveal effective interventions
and allow for a streamlined approach when guiding educators and policy for public schools.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 24
The literature available in the bullying and victimization of students with disabilities is
reviewed in this chapter. Specifically, the following variables relating to bullying are reviewed:
a) bullying history, b) Bronfenbrenner’s theoretical framework, c) Macrosystems and educators
beliefs, d) Ecosystem and federal and state legislation, e) Mesosystem and peer victimization, f)
Microsystem and the effects on disabled students.
Bullying History
Bullying is a phenomenon that has been studied in Scandinavian countries for the past
three decades. Scandinavian research identified bullying as a growing problem in elementary
school children with Olweus’ 1978 book Aggression in the Schools: Bullies and Whipping Boys
(Smith & Brian, 2000). Bullying is defined as repeated, persistent, and intentional behaviors that
foster a climate of fear and disrespect that has a traumatic (negative, significant) impact on
physical and/or psychological health (Olweus, 1993). When peers attempt to gain power,
dominate or intentionally harm others and use indirect aggression repeatedly, it is also
considered bullying (Espelage & Swearer, 2003; Olweus, 1993). In Olweus’ work in
Scandinavian countries, teachers and peers alike recognized this consistent behavior (Olweus,
1993), and in the United States, bullying is considered the most prevalent form of low-level
violence in schools today (Willet & Dupper, 2005).
Bullying can be a direct or overt aggression exhibited in the physical form typically seen
as pushing, physically fighting, and verbally such as spreading rumors. Recent advances in
technology have created a new arena for bullying behavior known as cyber-bullying where
bullies and victims use cell phone text messaging, chat rooms or emails as their mode of
communication (Wang et al., 2009). Indirect bullying, such as cyber-bullying, involves
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 25
purposeful actions that lead to social exclusion or damage to a child’s status or reputation in an
attempt to get others not to socialize with the victim (Witted & Dupper, 2005).
In the past, bullying behaviors were sometimes described as teasing (Rigby, 1995) and
dismissed as normal childhood behaviors (Olweus, 1993). This unprovoked physical or
psychological abuse of one student or a group of students over time may create an ongoing
pattern of abuse and harassment (Witted & Dupper, 2005). Classic examples include not only
children who are smaller, younger, gay or effeminate, obese, or from different countries, but also
children who look and/or act differently from other children as a result of their physical and/or
mental impairments (i.e., special education children) (Batsche & Knoff, 1994; Olweus, 1993).
There are four classifications that surround bullying behavior among children: bullies,
bully/victims, victims and non-participants (Espelage & Swearer, 2003; Olweus, 1993). A bully
acts solely with repeated aggressive actions toward their peers (Olweus, 1978). Bullies are often
impulsive and frequently exhibit antisocial behavior and are at risk for criminal behavior
(Weiner & Mak, 2009). According to Weiner and Mak (2009), they also exhibit more of a
display of conduct disorders, oppositional defiance disorder and ADHD (Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder) than students who are not bullies.
There is considerable debate on what incorporates bullying. The vast majority of research
concurs (Mishna, 2003; Olweus, 1993) that bullying involves the following: (1) disparity of
power between victim and perpetrator (s), and (2) often repeated incidents. Other publications
have proposed a distinction between “direct” and “indirect” forms of bullying in their definitions
(Espelage & Swearer, 2003) where the former involves face-to-face physical or verbal
confrontations, and the latter is described as less visible harm-doing, such as social exclusion and
spreading rumors.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 26
Bullies possess feelings of control, which reinforces their need to maintain a sense of
power, and they strive to achieve social dominance among their peers (Olweus, 1993). These
children believe they will achieve success using aggression, are unaffected by causing pain, and
process information about victims in an automatic and very severe way (Mishna, 2003). Bullies
also pick on their victim because they are provoked or believe to be provoked, or because they
do not like the victim (Weiner & Mak, 2009). Aggressive bullies also feel that their behavior is
justified, and surprisingly have friends and admirers (Bernstein & Watson, 1997).
Victims are children who are the receivers of repeated negative actions; these children are
a subgroup who is persistently targeted by their peers for physical and verbal maltreatment
(Olweus, 1991). Victims without bullying tendencies are children characterized as being often
withdrawn, picked on emotionally and physically and frequently ignored (Perry et al., 1992) and
are easy targets for bullies. They usually lack solid friendships and their peer group typically
does not value them because they “do not fit in” (Hoover, Oliver, Hazler, 1992, p.101). Bullies
tend to focus on peers who seem vulnerable, such as those who are passive, anxious, quiet,
sensitive, or unusual in some way, such as having an identifiable disability (Hoover & Stenhjem,
2003).
In addition to the prototypical examples of bullying victims, children who look or act
differently from other children as a result of their physical and/or mental disability may
unwillingly call attention to themselves (Batsche & Knoff, 1994; Olweus, 1993). Children in
special education classes may have unrefined behaviors in social situations and may find it
difficult to make sense of social and emotional cues appropriately (Bierman, 2004). Bullied
victims may be overrepresented in special education classes and because of their differences to
children in regular education classes, could be easily targeted (Hoover et al., 1992).
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 27
Few empirical studies have examined bullying and victimization rates among American
schoolchildren within special-education programs. The rates of bullying and fighting
perpetration and victimization among middle-school students and high school students enrolled
in general education and special education programs have been studied (Rose et al., 2010). In
this study, out of 1,009 students, the findings show that students in special education programs
reported 18 percent of bullying, fighting perpetration and victimization than general-education
students. Additionally, students who were in self-contained classrooms reported 21 percent of
perpetration and victimization than those in inclusive settings (Rose et al., 2009).
Bullies engage in conflicts they are sure to win because of their power and those that
bully are merciless in their tactics towards their victims (Willet & Dupper, 2005). A higher
percentage of boys report being victims of boys especially in the junior high grades and girls
tend to participate in more indirect bullying than boys, victims tend to report they are bullied
mainly by boys (Olweus, 1993). The long-term effects of bullying often result in victims taking
their own lives due to the helplessness and frustration they feel as a result from being victimized
(Klomek et al., 2007; Weinhold, 2000).
In addition to the bully and victim, bystander participation and support networks that
reinforce perpetration should be examined (Smith et al., 2004). A bystander is not directly
involved in the act of bullying but can reinforce the bully or support the victim (Marini,
Fairbairn, & Zuber, 2001). Bystanders may include followers (who actively engage in bullying
after the initial onset), supporters (reinforcing the bully but not actively engaging), passive
supporters (support the bully but do not take an active stand), disengaged onlookers (watch but
do not support either party), possible defenders (dislike the bully but do not intervene) and
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 28
defenders (help the victim when they feel it is appropriate) (Olweus, 2003; Salmivalli, Karhunen,
& Lagerspetz, 1996).
A nationally representative research study on the frequency of bullying in the United
States, gathered in 1998 as part of the World Health Organization’s Health Behavior in School-
Aged Survey reported that 30% of students in grades 6 to 10 reported bullying others, being the
target of bullies, or both (Bowman, 2001). Fear of being ridiculed, harassed, threatened and
ostracized at school interferes with a student’s ability to learn (USDE, 2002). If left unnoticed,
bullying can result in more dangerous and sometimes more deadly forms of school violence
(Olweus, 1993). Overall, when bullying is considered holistically, which includes the role of the
bystander, involvement in bullying affects the majority of the student population (Espelage et al.,
2000).
Theoretical Framework
According to Swearer and colleagues (2009), bullying and victimization do not occur in
isolation and result as a complex interaction between the individual and his or her family, peer
group, school community and societal norms. The theoretical framework for this study is based
on Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979, 1986) Social-Ecological Model of Child Development, which
was lengthened by Espelage and Swearer (2004) to include models of bully perpetration and
victimization. This model was used as the framework for this study to identify factors uniquely
associated with disabled students.
The Social-Ecological Model served as the theoretical model for this study primarily
based on the notion that bullying is a series of complex interactions derived from environmental
variables such as family interactions, peer group involvement, community norms, and influences
from society (Swearer, Espelage, Napolitano, 2009). The Social-Ecological Model allows for
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 29
factor comparison among certain subgroups of students in order to evaluate the contribution and
outcome of bullying. Finally, this model accounts for individual and environmental changes
over time, which may influence the flexibility of certain roles: bully, victim, and bully/victim.
Bronfenbrenner’s (1997, 1979, 1986) Social-Ecological Model of Child Development is
the foundation for the Socio-Ecological Framework for bullying and victimization, and includes
five domains. First, Microsystems, refers to the complex relations between the individual and
their immediate setting. Second, Mesosystems, refers to the interrelations among an individual’s
major settings at a specific point in time. Third, Exosystems, refers to formal and informal social
structures that encroach upon the individual’s immediate setting. Fourth, Macrosystems, refers
to institutional patterns of the culture or subculture. Fifth, since the interactions between the
different systems are not static, Bronfenbrenner (1986) introduced Chronosystems, which
signifies the individual’s developmental changes over time within the environment that the
individual resides. This study does not focus on Chronosystems as part of the delineation of
bullying behaviors, and starts with the framework inverted.
The components of the theoretical framework that guide this study are based on the
complex interactions between individual, familial, peer and school influences. Grounded in the
foundational literature, students with disabilities often struggle with acceptance and social
supports. As a result, peer support, acceptance, and school support were investigated through
anti-bullying school practices to serve as unique predictors for students with disabilities’
involvement within the bullying dynamic. While evidence suggests that the observable nature
and severity of the disability predicts victimization, the social and societal nature of bullying
may have roots far beneath what some witness on the school playground. Because of this reason,
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 30
this literature review incorporates the components of the theoretical framework in an inverted
pattern.
Macrosystems
According to Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979, 1986) Socio-Ecological Framework,
macrosystems refers to institutional patterns of the culture or subculture, the overarching beliefs
and values. Bullying behavior is shown to be a learned behavior if children are raised with an
aggressive cultural model (Horne & Orpinas, 2003). These behaviors may be learned and
reinforced in the cultural, societal, familial or individual environment (Newman, Carlson, &
Horne, 2004). Students who exhibit bullying behavior by age eight are six times more likely to
be convicted of a crime by age 24, and are five times more likely to have a criminal record by
age 30 (Olweus, 1991). Bullying crosses socio-economic backgrounds, racial groups, and
different population densities (Nansel et al., 2001). School personnel have frequent interactions
with students and are often involved in bullying interventions (Espelage & Swearer, 2003).
Accordingly, it is critical that staff attitudes and behaviors are evaluated given their importance
to the extensive school culture, which in turns promotes or discourages school bullying (Olweus,
1992).
Educators’ Values and Beliefs
Most adults recall a number of events from their childhood education and those events in
accordance with their educational culture contribute to what Bronfenbrenner (1977, 1979, 1986)
refers to as a macrosystem. The recent victimization of children has made educators, parents and
children more reluctant to accept bullying as just another rite of passage in school (Weinhold,
2000). Many countries have implemented whole-school interventions to challenge how systems
tolerate and foster children’s victimization and to alter their staff and student outlook and
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 31
behavior about bullying (Mishna, 2005). In order to equally identify bullying behavior in
schools, it is essential for the behavior to be identified and recognizable to educators (Olweus,
2003). According to Mishna, (2005) in order to determine the method in which to identify
bullying in schools, educators need to determine what constitutes bullying, although what they
know of bullying may be retrieved from their own experiences and beliefs when they were a
child.
Brendtro (2001) stated that “the quality of peer cultures is largely determined by adults,”
(pg. 49) suggesting that the responsibility for restricting negative youth culture falls on the adult.
In the study by Mishna et al. (2005), when identifying an incident as bullying, teachers were
confused and found it difficult to identify the situation as bullying. According to Mishna et al.
(2005), most teachers had difficulty distinguishing between direct and indirect bullying and
reported that they did not receive training on bullying and did express the desire for more
training. Identifying that an incident is bullying and knowing how to intervene emerged as a
complex and confusing issue for teachers (Mishna, 2005). Several factors emerged as whether
the teacher viewed the incident as serious: whether they viewed the victimized child responsible,
whether the victim and bully matched the characteristics and behaviors as such, and whether they
felt empathy for the child (Mishna, 2005).
A large school-based study in Maryland was used to gather data to examine the
discrepancy between staff and student perceptions of bullying behavior and attitudes toward
intervention and retaliation (Bradshaw, Sawyer, & O’Brennan, 2007). In a study conducted in 75
elementary, 20 middle and 14 high schools, Bradshaw et al. (2007), found that over 49% of the
1,547 children reported being bullied by other students at least once during the past month and
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 32
the perceived estimate by school staff (70% elementary, 40% middle school, 57% high school)
estimated that the percentage of students being bullied was 10% or less.
Some teachers’ perceptions of bullying differ from others’, causing a gap in disciplinary
reactions to certain situations. A study in Australia aimed to examine how teachers’ moral
orientation predicted how they responded to bullying. The method was designed to assess
teachers’ perceptions of how likely they were to use aspects of a problem-solving response or
rules-sanctions response to three situations involving a student bullying another (Ellis & Shore,
2007). According to Ellis and Shore, (2007) the findings of the study showed that the degree to
which the teacher utilizes problem-solving or rules-sanctions would be likely to the perceived
seriousness of the incident and that social bullying continues to be treated less seriously by
teachers as opposed to verbal and physical bullying despite the evidence of the harm it inflicts
upon the victim.
Exosystem
According to Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979, 1986) Socio-Ecological Framework,
exosystem refers to formal and informal social structures that encroach upon the individual’s
immediate setting and may influence the behavior and the relationships of those in the
microsystem as well. These social structures could be an economic, political, education,
governmental and religious system but are not limited to those mentioned. According to the
National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES), the increased amount of school safety may
have reduced the number of violent incidences in school, such as assault and vandalism.
However, bullying continues to be cause problems for American schools and their students
(NCES, 2007). Although state laws may dominate the legal outlook, federal laws and policies do
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 33
provide incentives for school districts to focus on student safety and the rights of the disabled
student within the bullying dynamic.
National Legislation
Although national legislation seemed to focus on increasing the academic outcomes of
schools through the passing of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), NCLB
established that school safety remains a critical aspect of today’s schools. One of the most
common and low-level behavior problems in the school setting is bullying (Espelage & Swearer,
2003) where 40 states have passed laws that prohibit victimization. The Unsafe School Choice
Option, a mandated structure of NCLB, requires that each state define a persistently dangerous
school and that those students who attend one of those schools be allowed to transfer to a safe
school within the district (DOE, 2002). According to the Department of Education (2002), if
school boards and school administrators do not recognize bullying and all forms of violence they
are at risk of being designated as persistently dangerous and lose students and their state funding.
Safe schools address all forms of violence in their schools and school officials must demonstrate
that they are spending public tax dollars wisely by implementing best practices in addressing
bullying in their schools (Whitted & Dupper, 2005).
State Legislation
It is within this mandated structure that schools need to include an anti-bullying system
that encompasses coordinated and coherent resources used to carry out the school’s mission,
vision, goals and follows the anti-bullying definitions and regulations of the California
Educational Code (Ed Code: 32260-32262). The California Department of Education states that
“bullying is a form of hostile acts that are carried out repeatedly over time. The acts involve a
real or perceived imbalance of power, with the more powerful child or group attacking those who
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 34
are less powerful. Bullying may be physical (hitting, kicking, spitting, pushing), verbal
(taunting, malicious teasing, name calling, threatening), or psychological (spreading rumors,
manipulating social relationships, or promoting social exclusion, extortion or intimidation)”
(CDE, 2002, p.378). Educators need a clear definition to determine what behaviors are
considered to be bullying and how to discriminate between bullies and other aggressive children
(Carter & Spencer, 2006). According to Carter and Spencer (2006), this knowledge will advance
educational policy and shape prevention and intervention practices in schools.
Disabled Students’ Rights
Bullying has become a critical issue nationwide and it is particulary true as it applies to
youth with disabilties (Bowman, 2001). In July, 2000, the U.S. Department of Education issued
an official statement on behalf of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and the Office of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) regarding disability hasrassment in school
(Hoover & Stenhjem, 2003; Segunda, 2005). Equal access to educational opportunities and
benefits for students with disabilities will deteriorate through bullying and that includes the
denial of rights under the Individual with Disabilities Act (IDEA), Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act, Title II, and affecting their right to a Free Appropriate Public Education
(FAPE) (Segunda, 2005).
The distinction between students with and without disabilties, in reality, is more complex
that a single divided approach. While the term ‘disabilty’ is used to refer to a large subgroup of
students, in actuality, it refers holistically to 14 separate disability categories that maintain
different eligibility criteria and service needs (Smith, 2007). According to Smith (2007), those
separate disability categories are:
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 35
 Autism
 Deaf-blindness
 Deafness
 Emotional disturbance
 Hearing impairment
 Intellectual disability
 Multiple disabilities
 Orthopedic impairment
 Other health impairment
 Specific learning disability
 Speech or language impairment
 Traumatic brain injury
 Visual impairment, including blindness
Under IDEA, children with disabilties are entitled to that free and appropriate education
(FAPE) in the least restrictive environment possible and protected againist discrimination of any
sort through section 504 of the Rehabiliation Act of 1973 (Eckes & Gibbs, 2012). If the actions
taken by a school district are altered in a case that incorporates bullying and gender harassment
in order to comply with Title IX , the district may be in legal jeopardy (Segunda, 2005).
According to Segunda (2005), special education students may be able to obtain monetary
damages against the school district who was unable to protect them from bullying, which in turn
has violated the child’s right to a fair and public education under IDEA. Allowing a hybrid
model that addresses harassment/bullying of a disabled child by requiring school districts to
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 36
blend both Title IX and IDEA would provide a free and appropriate education to students in a
discriminatory-free and least restrictive environment (Segunda, 2005).
Title IX does not require schools to adopt specific written policies against harassment, so
it is vital that state anti-bullying statues be used (Duncan, 2005). Often times, certain harassment
cases elude the anti-harassment legislation of Title IX and may not get remedied. Therefore, the
anti-bullying policies should not be limited to the most severe instances but instead be inforced
in any harassment that is affecting a student’s ability to participate in or benefit from an
educational program (Duncan, 2005).
In order to provide leadership at the school level, the U.S. Department of Education
(2000) offerred suggestions specifically targeted to prevent disability harassment:
 Create a campus enviornment that is aware and sensitive to disability concerns
and harassment.
 Weave anti-harassment issue into curriculum and extra-curricular programs.
 Encourage parents, students, employees, and community members to discuss the
disability harassment and report it when they become aware of its occurrence.
 Publicize antiharassment statements and procedures for addressing discrimination
complaints.
 Provide appropriate training for staff and students regarding harassment.
 Councel both victims and perpetrators of harassment.
 Implement monitoring programs to follow up on resolved issues of disability
harassment.
 Assess and modify exisint disability harassment policies and procedures to ensure
effectiveness.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 37
Concern over the physical and emotional health of bullying victims and the climate of
public schools to which they belong has created a demand for the government to repond (USDE,
1998). Work is needed with districts, communities and families, especially those whose children
were involved as either bullies or victims (Mishna, 2003). According to Mishna (2003), parents
need to realize that their behavior may contribute to their child’s successes and/or difficulties.
Research using observations and teachers’ assessments depicts this population as more distracted
and less attentive in the classroom than their peers without learning disabilities (Pearl & Bay,
1999). Teachers proposed students with learning disabilities as having deficits in their overall
social functioning, those behaviors may be the primary contributers to poor adjustment (Mishna,
2003). Support in families and school protects children and youth with learning disabilities from
negative school and peer experiences (Pepler & Craig, 2000).
Mesosystem
According to Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979, 1986) Socio-Ecological Framework,
Mesosystems, refers to the interrelations among an individual’s major settings at a specific point
in time. It is during this system in which all involved in the bullying setting are interacting and
the phenomenon is occurring (Nishioka et al., 2011). These major settings could be, but are not
limited to, the individual’s family, school, peers and neighborhood relationships. School is a
place of social interaction, both inside and outside of the classroom. School-based surveys
conducted at the elementary and middle school level suggest that bullying occurs as early as the
elementary school grades (USDE, 2011). Data collected from over 11,000 elementary and
middle school students measuring aggression, found that 61% of girls and 60% of boys had been
bullied one or more times a month (verbally), 22% of girls and 33% of boys had been threatened
physically (Nishioka et al., 2011). 46% of girls and 31 % of boys have experienced indirect
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 38
aggression in the form of being ignored on purpose (Nishioka et al., 2011). Peer victimization is
a serious worldwide problem and is a predictable, accepted and often unspoken, albeit painful,
part of childhood (Olweus, 1994). Recognition of the seriousness of bullying has led to the
accumulation of research about victimization and anti-bullying practices.
Peer Victimization
Schools are major arenas for social interaction. As long as bullies and victims are part of
a system of interaction, an important question arises as to whether there is a group of children
that are victimized more often by their peers. Some researchers agree that victims have
individual attributes that make them easy targets for being bullied (Merrell et al., 2008; Reiter,
2007; Rose et al., 2011). Children who are victimized by their peers tend to be physically weak,
exhibit behavioral problems, poor social skills and impaired social relations (Odom, Zercher, Li,
Marquart, Sandall, & Brown, 2006). As school leaders work to lower the incidents of bullying in
public schools, they should be aware of the experiences of students with disabilties (Mishna,
2003). It is believed that the main reason children are victimized correlates to a distinct pattern
of behaviors that these victimized children display that sets them apart from their peers (Eckes &
Gibbs, 2012; Hoover & Stenhjem, 2003; Olweus, 1993; VanCleave & Davis, 2006).
Although special education status may not serve as a predictor for victimization at the
lower grade level, as students advance through grade levels, the descrepency between students
with and without disabilities becomes increasingly more clear. Contextually, special education
identification may not be a direct predictor during the primary stages of education because,
cognitively, students may not be able to identify the differences, the disability may not be
noticable, or the disability may yet to have been identified (Monks et al., 2005). It could be that
once these differences have been established within a social context, disability status emerges as
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 39
a potential predictor for involvement within the bullying dynamic across all groups with
disabilties. This broad assumption is grounded in the majority of the existing literature that
identifies adolescents with disabilties as being victimized significantly more often than their
general education peers (Rose et al., 2010).
There is limited research on bullying in special education that has indicated that disabled
students are more likely victimized than their disabled peers (Nabuzoka, 2003). In a study with
93 students with disabilities and their matched peers, the studies included children with cerebral
palsey, muscular dystrophy and spina bifida and children who stammer (Nabuzoka, 2003; Rose
et al., 2010). Interviews with students and teachers determined that 55% of students with mild
disabilities and 78% with moderate disabilities experienced moderate to severe levels of
victimization (Nabuzoka, 2003) . Only 25% of their demographically matched peers were
victimized in the same setting (Nabuzoka, 2003; Nabuzoka & Smith, 1993). This empirical
evidence suggests that students with disabilities, because of their social and physical differences,
are more at risk of victimization than their non-disabled peers.
Several researchers have focused on skills deficits and social competance as possible
reasons for the increased vulnerability for students with disabilities. Olweus’ (1993) research
argued that personality characteristics of victims such as shyness, appear to be an excuse for
bullying, only physical weakness has appeared to be a consistent predictor of victimization.
Some studies have demonstrated that children who are victims have social skills deficits and
often display behavioral vulnerability (Hoover & Stenhjem, 2003). Mishna (2003) reviewed
studies linking bullying incidences to learning disabilities and concluded that the combination
put the students in a double jeopardy.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 40
According to Mishna (2003), rejection and low acceptance of children with disabilities
were interrelated. Similarly, Hugh-Jones and Smith (1999) focused on the nature and frequency
of bullying among children who stammer. The sample included 276 teenagers and adults who
stammer, 83% of whom report being bullied in school. Hugh-Jones and Smith (1999) findings
suggest that bullying and children with fluency difficulties are common. A certain level of social
competance is required for making and maintaining social relations and it is through that
communication that one can protect oneself from bullying (Kaukiainen, Salmivalli, Lagerspetz,
Tammininen, Vauras, Maki, & Poskiparta, 2002).
Other reseachers claim that because American schools have been labeling and separating
students based on their academic aptitude or physical disability, that provides an atmosphere for
bullying and harassment (Bowman, 2001). Although bullying may be more severe in the United
States, there appear to be more similiarities across countries motivating this victimization
(Hoover et al., 1992). According to Hoover et al. (1992), children that are stigmitized by their
peers either for social or physical differences are at risk for bullying.
Students with disabilties are often characterized by several attributes that puts them at a
greater risk involvement with the bullying dynamic. Students with disabilties may lack age
appropriate social skills, which may result in fewer close friends or unstable relationships and
their inability to avoid bullying situations (Rose et al., 2011). According to Rose et al. (2011),
this social rejection may lead to additional negative outcomes such as depression, anxiety, poor
self-esteem, a lack of confidence, and minimal academic participation. Students that have
academic deficits in addition to their physical impairments do sometimes have social problems
as well (Mishna, 2003). According to Mishna (2003), these students are more likjely to be
rejected, non-accepted and neglected by their peers.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 41
Victimization
Most American schools have classrooms with a wide variety of student academic and
behavior differences as well as commonalities. Each year, teachers have new students that
establish their own social classroom culture with a variety of cultures, religions, ethnicities,
abilities and home cultures (Katz, 1999). According to Katz (1999), students with disabilties are
being mainstreamed into grade-level general education classrooms which have increased the
differences among the student population. Olweus (1993), described the typical and more
passive victim as being more anxious, insecure and suffering from low self-esteem in
comparison to their peers. According to Olweus (1993), they are often quiet, sensitive, cautious
and usually react by crying and withdrawling when attacked by others. Olweus (1993) also
describes victims as lonely and they describe themselves as feeling stupid, unattractive and
without a friend in the class. This integration of students suggests that the classroom is more
varied in terms of academic and social needs and because of those needs, schools should have
policies in place to accommodate students of all social and academic levels.
With NCLB legislation, more students in special education are integrated into regular
education classrooms (Brininks, 1978). Some of these students’ odd or age-inappropriate
behavior may play a role in attracting bullies within integrated environments, where students
with disabilities frequently occupy the lowest rung of the popularity ladder (Brininks, 1978,
Olweus, 1993).
Some of the research focused on the victims of peer aggression have stated students with
disabilties display these characteristics (i.e. physical weakness, insecurity and shyness) and those
put them more at risk for negative peer interactions (Luciano & Savage, 2007). These
characteristics are said to prevent the child from forming long-lasting friendships which in turn
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 42
may prevent them from being the target of victimization. According to Luciano & Savage
(2007), without the support from strong peer relationships, these at-risk students find themselves
increasingly withdrawn, isolated and having a higher liklihood of becoming a victim of bullying.
Former victims studies, may have internalized the negative evlauations from peers from
chidlhood into adulthood (Olweus, 1993). It is clear that being bullied on a constant basis takes
a toll on its victims.
In research conducted by Favazza & Odom (1997), a combinatiuon of techniques can
change the attitudes and perceptions of chidlren regarding others with disabilities. These
effective strategies include positive contact with children who have disabilties and indirect
experience from books and discussons with adults. According to Favazza and Odom (1997),
acceptance needs to be incorporated into the curriculum in order to foster an understanding and
acceptance toward students with disabilties. Interventions need to be adopted, those that increase
awareness through education and policies. Schools need to adopt a systems approach to
disabilties, pointing out the importance of considering all levels of children as part of their peer
group, classroom and family contexts (Mishna, 2003). The synthesis of prior research suggests
schools incorporate academic and social acceptance strategies and policies into their curriculum
in order to promote social inclusion for all students.
Anti-Bullying Practices
Olweus’ Bullying Prevention Program (Olweus, 1993, 1999) builds on four key
principals dereived from the research on aggressive behaviors:
 Warmth, positive interest, and involvement from adults
 Firm limits on unacceptable behavior
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 43
 Consistent application of non-punitive, non-physical sanctions for unacceptable behavior
or violations of rules
 Adults who act as authorities and positive role models
The first evaluation of the effects of the program evaluated 2,500 students in 42 elementary
and junior high schools in Norway for two and a half years from 1983 to 1985. There was a
reduction in bully/vicim problems by 50%, clear reductions in anti-social behavior, marked
improvement of the social classes and in increase of student satisfaction of school life in which
the intervention schools fared better than the control group (Olweus, 1991).
Most research about anti-bullying practices promoted working with families and community
to heighten the senstitivity to this phenomenon. According to a survey by Smith & Shu (2000),
victims reported that the interventions were effective and stressed the importance of not keeping
silent about the occurrences. Another study looked into the silence of bystanders and found that
peers’ reluctance to become involved when they observe bullying increases with age, and they
contended that schools must continue to develop programs aimed at increasing peer support for
victims (Mishna, 2003).
Some studies have found that children who are frequently bullied are more likely to
internalize their distress than to problem solve (Olweus, 1994). Thompson et al. (1994)
recommended adding disability awareness to the curriculum to promote acceptance of those
students with disabiltiies and to strengthen the effects of anti-bullying programs for chidlren or
adolescents with special needs. According to Thompson et al. (1994), situations need to be
created that alter the staff and students’ responses and that nurture tolerance, which will
encourage adaptive student behaviors. This culmination of research suggests the involvement of
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 44
adults and community into the school’s anti-bullying and disability awareness programs in
schools to promote a positive social climate among students.
Microsystem
According to Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979, 1986) Socio-Ecological Framework,
Microsystems, refers to the complex relations between the individual and their immediate setting.
These major settings could be, but are not limited to the subject’s family, peers, school and
neighborhood. Bullying has long been considered as a normal pattern of interaction among
youth and current research is now challenging this view and how it relates to school climate and
the professional development needed in order to make the school climate safe for all students
(Arseneault, Bowes, and Shakoor, 2009).
Mental Health
While students can experience a wide variety of social supports, family, school and peer
supports have been documented as buffers for involvement in the bullying dynamic. Bullying
behavior (e.g., pushing, shoving) is shown to be a learned behavior if children are raised with an
aggressive cultural model (Horne & Orpinas, 2003). These behaviors may be learned and
reinforced in the cultural, societal, school, familial, or individual environment (Newman et al.,
2004). Rigby’s (1994) study in Australia showed that boy bullies had a dysfunctional home life,
poor relationships with both their mothers and fathers and often experience higher levels of
neighborhood violence (Smith et al., 1998). Researchers have identified some commonalities in a
bully’s home life such as anxiety triggering bullying when the child has problems with
caregivers or when there is a direct change to the family environment (Rigby, 1994).
Bullies are also at an increased risk of experiencing psychosocial maladjustment,
although it is different in nature as opposed to what is felt by victims (Mishna, 2003).
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 45
Researchers have established that aggressive behavior during childhood very often continues into
adolescence. Childhood bullying behavior may progress into adolescent delinquency or gang
activity (Olweus, 1991). Most research concurred that bullying crossed socio-economic
backgrounds, racial groups, and different population densities (Nansel et al., 2001).
Children, who are chronically victimized by peers, are at risk for serious adjustment
problems (Olweus, 1993; Weiner & Mak, 2008). These disabled children and youth report more
symptoms of depression, anxiety and greater times of loneliness as opposed to their non-disabled
peers. In a case study by Hoover et al. (1992), both males and females rated the worst year for
bullying as the late childhood-early adolescent years, although boys indicated that their bullying
problems lasted a year longer. In this study, those 14% that reported these bullying encounters
said they experienced severe reactions to the abuse and that extra year of bullying in males could
correspond to their physical maturation (Hoover et al., 1992). According to Hoover et al. (1992),
the most reasonable conclusion may be that children who are stigmatized by their peers either by
physical or social differences are at risk.
A cross-sectional study by Glew et al. (2005), using 3500 third through fifth grade
students, was done in a west coast public school district to determine the prevalence of bullying
in elementary school and its association with academic achievement and school attendance.
Evidence suggested that the children who are bullied skip school to avoid being bullied, have
difficulty paying attention while they are in school, and have a higher likelihood of dropping out
of school as compared to their non-bullied peers. These students who were bullied either had
low academic achievement prior to the study or as a result to being victimized.
In a longitudinal study conducted with 723 elementary, middle, and high school students
in Great Britain, twenty percent said they would skip school as a strategy to avoid being bullied
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 46
(Sharp, 1995). In that study, which examined the extended impact of bullying, it was found that
Brittish boys that were bullies at ages 14, tended to be bullies at ages 18 and 32. Sharp (1995)
showed in that the continuity of generational bullying from parents to children, it is imperative to
intervene while these students are young.
For some victims, school is a place of isolation and pain. Some victims will go to great
lengths in order to avoid school and being harassed, and some research has found a connection
between the avoidance of bullying and staying home from school. Among a sample of 1,422
students from elementary through high school, one-third of the students identified bullying as the
primary reason they were attending school (Egger, Costello, and Angold, 2003). In addition to
being truant, some of these students studied were suffering from declining grades, sleep
deprivation, and added fear and worry.
Those students that are victimized in school do not always stay away from school but
may show behavior connected to a lack of concentration in their classes. A surveyed study of
485 10 and 11 year-old students was conducted in Great Brittain in relation to self and peer
nominated victimization (Boulton, Trueman, and Murray, 2008). Results of this study indicated
that one out of 20 students reported a high level of disrupted classroom concentration and fear of
future verbal and physical attacks. These studies indicate that the avoidance of school and the
high anxiety of a possible bullying encounter voids the child of a positive educational
experience. This, according to prior research mentioned in this review, is only compounded if
the student is one with a disability.
Findings indicate that problems experienced by victims of bullying are not merely minor
difficulties but include a wide range of serious mental health problems (Arsenault et al., 2010).
The results of a study involving bullies and bully/victims suggested that the perpetrators
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 47
involved were prone to have psychiatric disorders and little contact with mental health
professionals to assist with this disorder (Kumpulainen, Rasanen, & Puura, 2001). Studies have
found that victims of bullying show not only elevated levels of social isolation, depression and
anxiety but also, especially girls, increased self-harm and suicidal thoughts (Klomek et al.,
2009).
School Climate
Family and school supports are protective factors. Coordinating what is needed to
establish a safe home, school and community is essential because environments that tolerate
bullying must change for the benefit of all children, non-disabled and disabled. An increased
awareness of the impact of labeling these children is needed in schools as well as the non-
disabled child’s environment (Mishna, 2003).
In a study conducted by Bradshaw, Sawyer, and O’Brennan (2009), it was found that a
larger school size is associated with higher rates of aggressive behavior and the number of
students to teachers within a building is a better predictor of the school environment. With a
larger student-to-teacher ratio, teachers have a more difficult time managing student behavior
and that may provide more opportunity for bullying to occur (Bradshaw et al., 2009). This, in
turn, may contribute to diminish perceptions of safety and an increased risk for peer
victimization (Glew et al., 2005). Since most of these social behavior opportunities are on the
playground, it is important to stretch best practices to those areas as well as the classroom (Craig
Pepler, & Atlas, 2000).
It is vital that adults on campus are aware of how potentially dangerous bullying can be to
the disabled student. In adopting school-wide interventions to suit the particular school and
students in order to increase the likelihood of success, it may be necessary to incorporate
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 48
accommodations for the students in a manner that does not single them out (McConaughy, Kay,
& Fitzgerald, 1999). According to McConaughy et al. (1999), successful interventions should
contain a combination of primary approaches aimed at all students and secondary strategies
intended to decrease the problems of at-risk children and youth.
When young adults feel physically or socially unsafe, schools become a breeding ground
for ridicule and attack (Brendtro, 2001). According to Brendtro (2001), under such conditions,
bullying may occur allowing those perpetrators a sense of superiority and belonging at the
expense of those who are banished. Subjects viewing themselves as victims felt that school
officials responded to episodes of bullying poorly (Hoover et al., 1992). According to Hoover et
al. (1992), several subjects wrote that either teachers or administrators did not know about the
bullying incidences or did not seem to care.
In a study by Swearer et al. (2009), victimization was more common and it was tracked
back to the school climate and policies in those schools. Based on those findings, Swearer et al.
(2009) case study found that schools must be proactive in addressing bulling and establish a
climate that is not conducive to the victimization of students, especially those that may be of
greater risk. In promoting a well being for children with and without disabilities, the emphasis
must be on addressing those individual and environmental factors that affect a student, such as
school pedagogy and climate, rather than emphasizing the deficits of the child and their family
(Mishna, 2003).
Many countries have implemented whole-school interventions to challenge how systems
tolerate and foster children’s victimization and to alter staff and student outlook and behavior
about bullying (Olweus, 1993). These interventions involve the whole school and create a safe
environment (Olweus, 1993). In most cases, the programs increase the awareness of bullying,
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 49
involve parents in planning and intervening, promote prosocial behavior by using the entire
student body and create clear rules that state that bullying is not tolerated (Mishna, 2003;
Olweus, 1993). According to Mishna (2003), in the classroom there are curriculum-based
activities that promote positive behavior such as problem solving, taking one another’s
perspective and conflict resolution. Victims are provided with protection along with positive and
prosocial ways to help in their social competence. Bullies are encouraged to rework their
behavior into ways to do something for the victim or class as a way of compensating for their
behavior (Mishna, 2003).
A study in New Zealand collected information about the approaches that three primary
schools took in order to develop a more positive school culture and reduce bullying in their
schools (Gaffney, Higgins, McCormack, & Taylor, 2004). Adult participants took part in semi-
structured interviews while the students took part in focus groups of similar age, gender and
ethnicity. The development that all three schools undertook was a single school-wide policy that
managed student behavior and promoted positive relationships. The policy included:
 Creating clear expectations through discussion about what was considered appropriate
school behavior
 Determining fair consequences for appropriate and inappropriate behavior
 Provide support for students to develop positive relationships and how to behave
appropriately
Educators need to be aware of all types of bullying so they know precisely what to look
for since bullying is subjective and difficult to detect (Craig et al., 2000). According to Craig et
al. (2000) without an understanding of the plethora of behaviors that constitute bullying, teachers
will fail to intervene effectively and strategically.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 50
Conclusion
This chapter examined bully perpetration and victimization as it relates to students with
disabilities. While disability is a broad term used to describe multiple subcategories of students
defined under IDEA, it becomes evident that both bullying and disabilities falls on a continuum.
Therefore, the interaction between a disability label and participation in bullying becomes more
complex and must be examined over a period of time. Although complex, the social nature of
bullying and the lack of social skills among students with disabilities who are victims remain
central to preventing bullying among this population of students.
Whole school approaches consist of set of routines rules and strategies to deal with
existing and future bullying problems in schools. The attitudes, routines and behaviors of school
staff (especially teachers) as well as students and parents, are key factors in preventing and
controlling bullying behaviors as well as redirecting these behaviors into more socially
acceptable channels (Olweus, 1993). Comprehensive, school-wide reforms are a proactive
strategy for meeting the needs of students with disabilities, the student body as a whole, school
staff, family and community members.

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 51
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Given the potential aftermath of bullying on children’s physical and mental well-being, it
is understandable why bullying has become a point of interest within society and among
educators (Boulton & Underwood, 2011; Rose et al., 2011). While bullying has been explored
extensively within the general school population, few studies in special education have examined
the relationship between successful anti-bullying practices in schools and their influence on non-
disabled students and the inclusion and acceptance of children with disabilities. The primary
purpose of this qualitative study was to discover the promising practices of anti-bullying
practices in school through the lens of Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979, 1986) Socio-Ecological
Model of Child Development, which was lengthened by Espelage and Swearer (2004) to include
bullying and victimization. This chapter presents research design, definition of the sample,
population and participants, explanation of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks,
instrumentation and data collection, data analysis and ethical considerations.
Research Questions
The research questions for this study focus on the expertise of the teachers, administrators
and school staff who have used best practices of anti-bullying strategies and disability
acceptance in their schools. The specific research questions that guided this investigation were:
 What are the perceived systems and structures that contribute to the inclusion and
acceptance of students with disabilities to establish an anti-bullying culture in schools?
 How are these systems and structures implemented and sustained to support an anti-
bullying culture?
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 52
Research Design
Qualitative researchers are interested in understanding how experiences are interpreted
and how those experiences get put into meaning (Merriam, 2009). In order to construct an
effective qualitative study, one has to interpret, observe and analyze the research questions
(Merriam, 2009). This qualitative study was conducted at one school site and consisted of
interviews of school administration, classified staff and parents of students with disabilities. On
account of the systems and structures of a school to be complex, it was necessary to interview
and observe school personnel in their everyday routine in order to obtain an accurate
interpretation of their methods and operations. It was hoped that these observations and
interviews would provide insight into the experiences of bullies, victims, and bystanders and the
effect on the disabled student. Observations consisted of whole school activities (recess, lunch),
assemblies, and classroom visits over a period of four months. In order to participate in this
study, it was important for the researcher to participate in what the school considers their anti-
bullying practices.
Sample and Population
In order to find the best case to study, specific criteria needed to be established to guide
the case selection of a school that had promising practices of anti-bullying. This summary
explains the selection criteria, sampling procedures, selection of participants and a
comprehensive view of the district and school.
Rationale for a Single School Sample
The intention of choosing Trojan Intermediate for a case study was to prosper an in-depth
understanding of the anti-bullying practices utilized school-wide among educators, classified
staff and students. This case study may support the basis for recognizing systems and structures
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 53
that may reduce the number of bullying incidences in schools. Additionally, it may base a
foundational implementation of anti-bullying interventions throughout districts and states and
add to the current amount of literature on the topic of anti-bullying practices.
This case study attempted to accurately capture the systems and structures of anti-
bullying in schools and therefore helped to decrease the incidences of bullying within the school
culture. This qualitative research attempted to capture the in-depth descriptions of people,
interactions and settings in order to understand the climate of the school. In addition, this case
study allowed for future anti-bullying implementations and interventions and contributions to the
limited amount of research on the topic of ant-bullying practices and students with disabilities.
Selection Criteria
The sample of this study identified one intermediate school located within one southern
California school district. The selection was made based on purposeful sampling in order to
provide information-rich cases for an in-depth study (Merriam, 2009). According to Merriam
(2009), purposeful sampling also allows the researcher to learn a great deal about the issues of
central importance to the purpose of the inquiry, therefore enriching the process and outcome.
The criteria for selection in order to identify schools with promising practices of anti-bullying on
their campus included:
 Special education inclusion classrooms are on campus
 A school enrollment of 600 students or more.
Participants
Site Demographics
Data have been collected from school faculty and classified staff from Trojan
Intermediate, one school in southern California, over a four month period. The study involved
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 54
the site administrator, assistant principal, school psychologist, four single subject classroom
teachers, two special education classroom teachers, secretary and four parents at the school site.
Participation in this study was voluntary, and only those who were willing to be interviewed and
observed were part of this study. A total of 14 faculty, staff members and parents participated in
this study.
Table 1
Participants in the Study
Position Held Number of Years
in Position at
Trojan
Intermediate
Total Number of
Years in Education
Administrator A Principal 4 23
Administrator B Assistant Principal 2 14
Administrator C School Psychologist 5 7
Teacher A English 6 17
Teacher B World History 8 8
Teacher C Mathematics 6 11
Teacher D Physical Education 13 13
Teacher E Physical Education 14 37
Teacher F Special Education
Inclusion
10 15
Office Secretary Office Secretary 8 8
Parent A Daughter was in
Special Education
classes at Trojan
2 years (7
th
and 8
th

grade)

Parent B Parent Teachers’
Association (PTA)
member and
daughter had
bullying incident
2 years (7
th
and 8
th

grade)

Overview of the District and School
Trojan Intermediate is a 7
th
and 8
th
grade intermediate school in Orange County,
California. During the 2011-2012 school year, it maintained an enrollment of 611 students, 30
percent of whom were socioeconomically disadvantaged and 9.2% of whom were qualified as
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 55
students with disabilities. Trojan Intermediate had an overall suspension rate for the 2011-12
school year of .065 as opposed to the district average of 0.139.
Table 2
Special Programs at Trojan Intermediate School
Number of
Students (school)
Number of Students
(district)
English Learners 69 21, 373
Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged
142 23,847
Students with
Disabilities
74 3,824
Source: School Website
The majority of ethnicities at Trojan Intermediate were Caucasian (52.15%), Hispanic
(23.48%), Asian (16.94%), and Filipino (2.67%).
Table 3
School and District Demographics
Caucasian Hispanic Asian Filipino
Trojan
Intermediate
52.15% 23.48% 16.94% 2.67%
District 12.11% .008% .008% .047%
Source: Trojan Intermediate, School report card
Theoretical Framework
Bronfenbrenner’s Socio-Ecological Model served as the theoretical model for this study
primarily based on the idea that bullying is a series of complex interactions derived from
environmental variables such as family interactions, peer group involvement, community norms,
and influences from society (Swearer, Espelage, Napolitano, 2009). The Socio-Ecological
Model allows for a comparison among certain subgroups of students in order to evaluate the
contribution and outcome of bullying. Grounded in the foundational literature, students with
disabilities often struggle with acceptance and social supports. As a result, peer support,
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 56
acceptance, and school support will be investigated through anti-bullying school practices to
serve as unique predictors for students with disabilities’ involvement within the bullying
dynamic.
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system is a useful framework in this study for many reasons.
This ecological theory demonstrates that the student is not merely a reflection of the environment
in which s/he lives. The student’s perceptions of the school climate can cause him or her to act
in an aggressive manner and, therefore, disrupt the school climate and other children.
Bronfenbrenner’s conception of each system specifies which aspects are the most important in
creating meaning for the adolescent- their activities, roles in school and family and personal
interactions. Overall, bullying is best understood as detailed factors as the student interacts with
his or her social environment, which then serves to reinforce bullying or victimization behavior.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework, designed by the thematic group, was based on
Bronfenbrenner’s Socio-Ecological Framework (1977, 1979, 1986). This conceptual framework
was created to show the interaction between the systems and structures of an anti-bullying school
culture and its leadership and sustainability. This model has eight components: 1) stakeholders,
2) funding, 3) policies, 4) staffing, 5) professional development, which reciprocate with the
school’s systems and structures. The school’s systems and structures contribute to its anti-
bullying culture, and that culture will be sustainable depending on its school leadership. Below
is a visual reproduction of the interaction between these components and how they reciprocate
with one another, which form an anti-bullying school culture.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 57

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
Methods
This study used three types of methods for data collection: semi-structured interviews,
observation and artifact collection. Participants were given an explanation of the interview and
observation process and assured their identity would be kept confidential during and after the
study was completed. Qualitative data, in the form of interview transcripts, direct observations
and document analysis, takes researchers into the context under investigation in order to tell a
story (Patton, 2002). As Merriam (2009) has suggested, this data should yield a detailed and
thick description of the phenomenon studied. In order to generate a rich description of the
phenomenon, the researcher often conducts fieldwork, the primary activity of qualitative inquiry.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 58
By going into the field, the researcher has direct engagement with the people and the situation
being studied.
Table 4
Data Collection Used in Study
Research Question Interviews Artifacts
What are the perceived
systems and structures that
contribute to the inclusion
and acceptance of students
with disabilities to establish
an anti-bullying culture in
schools?
Principal
Assistant Principal
Psychologist
Teacher (general education
and Special education)
Counselor
School Mission and Vision
Single School Plan
School Calendar
Student-Parent handbook
Anti-bullying policy (district
and school)

How are these systems and
structures implemented and
sustained to support an anti-
bullying culture?
Principal
Assistant Principal
Counselor
Teacher
Parents
Single School Plan
Agenda
School Calendar

Semi-structured Interviews
The interviews conducted were conversational in nature and began with specific
questions that were followed by more open-ended questions designed to promote thought and the
volunteering of information by the participant. Interviews of school staff and parents were
conducted over a period of four months in which the order of the interviews was random and
depended on the availability of the volunteer participant. The interview protocol allowed me to
take field notes while audiotaping each interview.
Due to the sensitive nature of bullying, the interview approach was also used in this study
to provide for an in-depth probing while keeping within the aim of the study (Patton, 2002).
Even though the interview protocol was asked of the respondent, the researcher was free to probe
based on the participant’s responses. During the interview, each participant was asked the same
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 59
set of questions (Appendix C). Interview questions were thoughtfully phrased in order to make
the participants feel comfortable to discuss their feelings and perceptions.
Table 5
Alignment of Interview Protocol Questions
Research Question Interviews
Questions
What are the perceived systems
and structures that contribute to the
inclusion and acceptance of
students with disabilities to
establish an anti-bullying culture
in schools?
1. What was the driving force behind the start of the anti-bullying
efforts?
2. How do you feel about the culture of the school when it comes
to students with disabilities?
3. Explain the basics of the anti-bullying efforts your institution
has in place.
a. What policies and preventive measures does your school
have in place to prevent bullying?
b. What other factors influence your school’s anti-bullying
efforts?
4. What is the process that occurs when there is a bullying
incident?
5. How are teachers, staff and administrators involved in anti-
bullying efforts?
6. How are students involved in anti-bullying efforts?
a. Tell me what is being done to help students feel more
connected to your institution.
How are these systems and
structures implemented and
sustained to support an anti-
bullying culture in schools?
1. What is your role or your involvement in promoting anti-
bullying at your institution?
2. Tell me about the instances of bullying at your school.
3. What type of training is provided to the staff to identify and
prevent bullying?
4. How are parents and/or other stakeholders involved in anti-
bullying efforts?
5. What data do you use to evaluate your school’s anti-bullying
efforts?
a. How is the data used to sustain and improve the efforts?

Observations
Qualitative researchers depend on a variety of methods for gathering data and the use of
this multiple way of collecting data contributes to its trustworthiness (Glesne, 1999). The three
most recognized techniques in qualitative inquiry are interviewing, participant observation and
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 60
document collection. This practice of using multiple methods for data collection is many times
referred to as triangulation (Merriam, 2009).
According to Glesne (2009), the participant observer’s role involves being present in an
everyday setting that enhances your awareness and curiosity about the interactions taking place
around you. It makes one become immersed in the setting, the people, and the research
questions. Patton (2002) suggests that one purpose of observational data is to describe the
setting, the activities within the setting and the people in order to triangulate data. Making direct
observations in the field of students and teachers provided the researcher with the opportunity to
witness events, patterns and trends that participants may not have reported.
Interviews at the school site were conducted over a four month period, with each
participant interviewed twice, once during the first month and the second being conducted at the
end of the four month period. Observations were conducted once a month in order to record
behavior of the students over a period of time throughout the school year. As well, Special
education inclusion classrooms, anti-bullying staff professional development, department
chairperson meetings, and principal/student meetings were observed within a four month period.
Data Collection
Qualitative data from interviews with administrators, teachers, school staff and parents
and field notes from interviews and observations constituted the core methods of this project. To
be respectful of the method of qualitative research, (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003) the principals were
asked for permission in order to conduct the interviews and observations of their schools. All
interviewees signed a formal consent for the study and were told their participation was
voluntary and they could remove themselves from the study at anytime (Glesne, 2011). This
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 61
case study was considered low risk and was approved by the Institutional Review Board
(IRB).All interviews were recorded and transcribed for analysis.
The staff interviews included both male and female professional staff (such as
administrators, teachers, counselors), paraprofessional staff (aides for special education students,
office staff, non-duty staff) and parents of disabled students. There were a total of 14
participants in the study. Participants were recruited by the principal of the case study school
only. Observations were made in classrooms, the school cafeteria, on the playground, at faculty
meetings and in some cases, the principal’s office. Artifacts collected consisted of student
posters, faculty meeting agendas, school anti-bullying policy and professional development
protocols.
Data Analysis
Creswell’s Model for Data Analysis (2003) was used as the foundation for this case study.
Merriam (2009) recommends recording and transcribing interviews. The interviews for this pilot
were recorded, transcribed, and expanded interview notes were taken in order to highlight or
circle highlighted information from the respondent. After collecting the initial data of the first
interviews, recorded data was checked to expanded field and interview notes. Some of the
interview questions had to be followed up by probing questions (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003), either
because the respondent needed the question clarified.
All forms of data were analyzed by open coding (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Open coding
is described as the “process of breaking down, examining, comparing, conceptualizing, and
categorizing data” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 61). Open coding was used to analyze interview
transcripts and field notes by reviewing each multiple times and documenting possible
interpretations.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 62
Coded data were analyzed both inductively and deductively throughout the duration of
this case study. In addition to coded data, inductive analysis, which involves searching for
patterns, themes and categories within one’s data was used (Patton, 2002). Inductive analysis
involved discovering perspectives and characteristics of the participants without predetermining
themes and patterns prior to data collection. In order to identify patterns and themes related to
the case study and purpose of the investigation the researcher used common underlying themes
recurring throughout the transcriptions.
Data were analyzed based on an identified theoretical framework (Patton, 2002).
Deductive analysis also helped the researcher to evaluate the degree to which the data fits into
the framework of the study (Bronfenbrenner, 1977, 1979). Data were continuously revisited and
themes were identified, tested, and verified throughout the investigation (Patton, 2002). Below
is a visual reproduction of the process used in order to code data from this study.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 63

Figure 2. Data Coding Process
Ethical Considerations
The thematic group considered all elements that were included in the ethical practices of
this study. The students followed the rules and regulations enforced by the University of
Southern California’s Institutional Review Board. The interviews were conducted in an office
that provided ample privacy while providing the participant a comfortable environment. All
participants were asked to sign a consent form (Appendix B) that described the procedure of
research, purpose, risks and benefits, and a statement informing the participant they had the right
to ask questions of the researcher and could withdraw at any point from the research. They were
assured confidentiality within this study and beyond the completion of this study and its results.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 64
Each participant was given a pseudonym for her/himself. Names in transcriptions were
changed, as were the names of schools. The researcher’s notes of individuals and matching
pseudonyms were kept separate from each other and other identification was kept in a secure
place. The study was submitted and approved by the Institutional Review Board. The informed
consent form to be signed by participants is included in Appendix B and the Institutional Review
Board form can be found in Appendix C.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 65
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
Chapter four presents the findings from a case study at an intermediate school that
examined student bullying by calling on the expertise of the teachers, administrators, and school
staff who have used promising practices of anti-bullying strategies and disability acceptance in
their school. By learning about this school’s organizational structures and systems,
administrators and teachers can gain a better understanding of student bullying, bullying toward
students with disabilities, and the changes that may have to be made to a school’s practices. One
intermediate school was selected to serve as the subject of this case study.
Trojan Intermediate is located in Orange County, California and serves the population of
a single urban city in Orange County, California. During the 2012-13 school year, it maintained
an enrollment of 611 students; of these, 30% were socioeconomically disadvantaged and 9.2%
were qualified as students with disabilities receiving special education services. Students
receiving those services had disabilities ranging from mild learning disabilities to severe
orthopedic handicaps. Trojan Intermediate had an overall suspension rate of .065 for the 2011-12
school year, which was the second lowest rate out of the eight district middle schools and lower
than the district average of 0.139.
The findings of this chapter were based on data from interviews, observations and
artifacts. A total of 12 interviews were conducted with administrators, teachers, classified staff
members and parents. Administrator A was the principal at Trojan from 2009 to 2013 and
Administrator B was in his second year as Assistant Principal at Trojan during the interviews and
observations (2013-2014 school year). While serving as an administrator on Trojan’s campus,
Administrator B was very involved in implementing an anti-bullying climate and encouraging all
students to become involved in weekly activities. Shortly after interviewing Administrator B
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 66
was transferred to another school site but was available for questions and further interviewing.
The new Assistant principal and school counselor were not included in this study because they
were new to the campus and were not part of Trojan’s faculty during the 2012-13 year. Table 6
describes certificated administrators and teachers and classified staff members who were
interviewed at the school.
Table 6
Interview Participants
Position Held Number of Years
in Position at
Trojan
Intermediate
Total Number of
Years in Education
Administrator A Principal 4 23
Administrator B Assistant Principal 2 14
Administrator C School Psychologist 5 7
Teacher A English 6 17
Teacher B World History 8 8
Teacher C Mathematics 6 11
Teacher D Physical Education 13 13
Teacher E Physical Education 14 37
Teacher F Special Education
Inclusion
10 15
Office Secretary Office Secretary 8 8
Parent A Daughter was in
Special Education
classes at Trojan
2 years (7
th
and 8
th

grade)

Parent B Parent Teachers’
Association (PTA)
member and
daughter had
bullying incident
2 years (7
th
and 8
th

grade)

Along with ten classroom, school and meeting observations, various artifacts that
informed the research questions were reviewed and analyzed. These artifacts included students’
writing per anti-bullying weekly lessons and bullying scenarios, campus anti-bullying posters,
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 67
and students’ anti-bullying artwork displayed in cases and in classrooms. This chapter was
organized to present the qualitative data in response to each research question.
Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to answer the following research questions:
1. What are the perceived systems and structures that contribute to the inclusion and
acceptance of students with disabilities to establish an anti-bullying culture in schools?
2. How are these systems and structures implemented and sustained to support an anti-
bullying culture in schools?
Data were explained and analyzed, and findings were triangulated using interviews,
observations and gathered artifacts. These findings, interpreted in direct relation to the two
research questions of this study, succeed detailed analysis and discussion.
Research Question 1: Perceived Systems and Structures and the Inclusion/Acceptance to
Students with Disabilities
The first research question asked, “What are the perceived systems and structures that
contribute to the inclusion and acceptance of students with disabilities to establish an anti-
bullying culture in schools?” The organizational structures implemented to support an effective
anti-bullying culture include progressive discipline for preventing bullying, collective leadership,
bullying awareness among the staff and students which includes identifying bullying behaviors
on Trojan’s campus, and year-round student activities and socialization. The organizational
systems that contribute to an effective anti-bullying culture include the acceptance of students
with disabilities, campus-wide anti-bullying efforts, and staff preparedness. As defined in chapter
one and emphasized in the literature review, structures are instructional mechanisms, policies,
and procedures put in place by federal, state and district policies and legislation or widely
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 68
accepted as the official structure of institutions that are not subject to change at the local school
site.. Systems are coordinated and coherent use of resources (time, personnel, students, parents,
funds, and facilities) at the school site to ensure that school visions, missions and goals were met.
This chapter begins with a discussion on structures and then systems that operate within
the school setting. Table 7 represents the thematic structures and systems discussed in this
chapter.
Table 7
Structures and Systems Perceived to Exist at Trojan Intermediate
Perceived Structures Perceived Systems
1. Progressive discipline for the
prevention of bullying
The acceptance of students with disabilities
2. Collective Leadership which included
the creation and implementation of anti-
bullying curriculum
Campus-wide anti-bullying efforts
3. Bullying awareness among staff and
students (bullying types/identification of
bullying among staff)
Staff preparedness and Collaborative
Decision Making
4. Year-round student activities and
socialization
Caring, respectful relationships among
adults and students

Structure 1: Progressive Discipline for the Prevention of Bullying
Brendtro (2001) stated that “the quality of peer cultures is largely determined by adults,”
(p. 49) suggesting that the responsibility for restricting negative youth culture falls on the adult.
Throughout the observations, data collection, and interviews, there was substantial evidence
supporting the underlying issue that bullying is not tolerated on Trojan’s campus. Administrator
A stated that there was zero-tolerance for bullying on any district campus. A bullying offense
was defined as any severely or pervasive physical or verbal act or conduct including
communications made in writing or by means of an electronic act. These acts could include
those committed by a student or group of students directed toward one or more students. This
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 69
policy also extends to cyber-bullying, which includes the posting of harassing images, messages,
direct threats, social cruelty or other harmful texts, sounds or images on the Internet, including
social networking sites.
If the offense were deemed to be bullying, a progressive discipline would be followed
and the offender would receive consequences based on the severity of the offense. The severity
of the case would be determined after administrators interviewed those involved in the bullying
incident and or those who witnessed the incident. The first bullying offense would result in a
school suspension, a parent meeting, and documentation in the child’s cumulative file. A
repeated bullying offense would require the student and parent to attend a district discipline
committee meeting to determine whether the student’s behavior was severe enough to warrant a
school transfer or expulsion from the district. Implementing a progressive anti-bullying school
discipline policy that addresses the harassment/bullying of general education and disabled
students provides a free and appropriate education to students in a discriminatory-free and least
restrictive environment (Segunda, 2005).
A teachers’ awareness of bullying behavior in the classroom is important to ensure school
safety, yet identifying that an incident is bullying and knowing how to intervene is a complex
issue for teachers (Mishna, 2005). Teacher D stated that the staff at Trojan Intermediate value
students’ physical and emotional safety. She said:
It’s something our faculty cares about. I think it’s important at the beginning of the year,
and when they come in, to set a caring climate on campus that the administrators and
faculty care about them. This is so students are able to feel connected with people and
they feel safe.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 70
Teacher F added, “Mostly administrators are involved in the efforts, but good
conscientious teachers are always looking out for other students who might intentionally and
repeatedly hurt their students, physically or mentally, and listen to students who are being
bullied.” While observing Trojan’s campus, it was apparent that teachers continually paid
attention to behavior that is repeated, persistent, and intentionally caused from one student to
another by monitoring halls, locker rooms, blacktop and areas that are difficult to observe from
the central quad area.
In order to prevent disability harassment, the U.S. Department of Education offerred
suggestions to school leadership, one being to create a campus environment that is aware and
sensitive to disability concerns. At Trojan, the role of the administration has been to organize
and release school behavioral expectations to the staff, students, and parents by means of a
school assembly in early September. In order to continually promote a positive and accepting
climate among their students, administrators at Trojan begin each year with an annual anti-
bullying assembly. In this early October assembly, students were introduced to the following
data from the Stop Bullying Now Foundation, which stated:
 280,000 students are physically attacked in secondary schools each month.
 160,000 students miss school each day for fear of being bullied
 77% of students are bullied mentally, verbally, and physically, cyber bullying statistics
are rapidly approaching similar numbers
 43% fear harassment in the bathroom at school
 Every seven minutes a child is bullied.
Following the shared statistics, the administrators initiated a discussion with the students.
Administrator A asked the students, “Why do you feel that these kids don’t want to go to
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 71
school?” While observing, students responded, “They feel alone. No one is there to stand behind
them,” “The school doesn’t help them,” “They need to feel physically and mentally safe at
school.” While observing the teachers at the assembly, their comments were very positive: “this
assembly was just for our students and it had facts that were important to them,” and, “this was
informative to teachers and to students alike because it built school unity and encouraged us to
care for one another as a family would.”
Structure 2: Collective Leadership
Safe schools address all forms of violence in their schools and school officials must
demonstrate that they are implementing best practices in addressing bullying (Whitted &
Dupper, 2005). There are many components within a “safe” school and Trojan’s administration
and teachers work together to make one another equal shareholders and contributors to a positive
school culture by creating and implementing anti-bullying curriculum for its students.
Collective leadership happens at all levels. At the end of each school year, the
administration and the seven teachers who comprised the Health and Safety team at Trojan
Intermediate reviewed the anti-bullying curriculum used during the school year. Administrator B
acknowledged that he wanted to collaboratively create this anti-bullying awareness for Trojan
because the yearly conversations, disciplinary actions, and observations made by the staff would
be essential to tailoring an anti-bullying curriculum to the student population. “We wanted to
encourage as many staff members as possible to give their input in order to gain awareness and
make sure we would all be on the same page,” Teacher D shared. Teacher A concurred, “We
made sure we all spoke the same anti-bullying language and each of Trojan’s stakeholders shared
in this cohesive model.” In order to share efforts in promoting school safety, this collaborative
leadership team created a set of lesson plans focusing on anti-bullying methods used school-wide
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 72
in order to set expectations and uniformity among staff and students. In early September, 2013,
Trojan administered its first bullying survey to its student body as a pre-assessment and
evaluation of what exposure the incoming seventh grade and returning eighth grade students had
in relation to bullying. In order to support the collective leadership and staff awareness at Trojan
this survey will be used as an annual tool to assist administration and Trojan’s Health and Safety
team in generating lesson plans and an anti-bullying school agenda for the following school year.
Weekly classroom lessons. Collective leadership at Trojan maintains the importance of
including the input of stakeholders into the building of anti-bullying curriculum. Teachers
interviewed from Trojan’s Health and Safety team and Administrator B stated they retrieved
some of their bullying topics and lesson plans for the 2013-14 school year from “Cruel Schools-
Discovery Education” on Discovery Health Channel’s website. Teachers on this team decided
on the anti-bullying weekly focus, video segments and role playing scenarios that coordinated
with the topic and writing exercises promoting student accountability. Over a three month
period, these lessons were implemented by each classroom teacher on a weekly basis and the bell
schedule was modified in order to accommodate the thirty-minute lessons (Appendix D). During
said time on Tuesday, each teacher on campus would administer the anti-bullying lesson to their
second period classroom and encourage students to discuss the topic and how it related to their
lives and to the lives of their peers. Administrator B stated, “We want the students to be engaged
as well as know its seriousness.” While observing one of Teacher A’s lesson topics “Bullying
101 and Cyber Set-up”, students shared their definitions of what cyber-bullying is. Students
responded with “It’s causing harm through a screen and teens need to know what to do if this
happens to them”, and “if kids are bullied on the internet, it’s good to know that the internet
company, the school, and the police are on our side to stop it”. When asked if they have either
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 73
seen someone be cyber-bullied or have been cyber-bullied, 10 out of the 28 students in the
classroom raised their hand.
The overall consensus from teacher interviews at Trojan was that student awareness is a
great preventative measure. Teacher A stated that, in Trojan’s weekly anti-bullying lessons,
students read about bullying situations that resulted in death for the victim. He said:
I think students realize that, when reading the devastating statistics, bullying has a
definite effect and that it doesn’t go unnoticed and it definitely causes damage. Once
students realize that their harsh text or their online gossip causes severe trauma, they
begin to realize that it’s not right. Just knowing that the students know there’s a policy in
place and that policy is to get involved, that may be one of the biggest differences on our
campus. Like, if you’re not being bullied or if you’re not a bully, still get involved.
Don’t let it happen.
While observing a classroom lesson in Teacher B’s class, students were very motivated to
share their responses and opinions. When Teacher B asked if they felt the act of cyber-bullying
was cowardly, they responded with “It’s disrespectful, cruel and rude,” and “they’re not happy
with themselves so they lash out.” Another student answered, “You might as well tell them
instead of going behind their backs and bullying them.” Following the discussion, a short video
about the resources were shared with students encouraging them to tell parents or a trusted adult
and report the cyber-bullying incident to their internet company. During the classroom
observation, Teacher B checked students’ planners to make sure they had the phone numbers and
email addresses of anti-bullying resources available to them. Teacher A shared that, during the
weekly lessons, students read about students who have committed suicide because bullying went
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 74
too far. He stated, “I think once students realize that their harsh text or online gossip causes
severe trauma, I think they begin to realize that it’s not right.”
In addition to the weekly classroom lessons, Teacher D discussed different scenarios with
her dance classes and shared that these discussions generated positive and emotional reactions
from some of her students. She stated, “One of the biggest parts of junior high PE is
socialization. Being a dance teacher, I deal with girls and we tend to have a lot of ‘girl drama’. I
want to try and intervene before there’s a problem.” During the weekly dance classes, Teacher D
incorporated different socialization scenarios with her students. While observing one of those
lessons, Teacher D focused and encouraged the acceptance of others’ behavior by commending
students that shared socially positive responses. Table 8 displays the scenario and various student
answers. Answers to these scenarios were discussed as well as written in the table below.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 75
Table 8
Example of Bullying/Socialization Scenarios
Scenario Student Responses
A group of close friends start to pick on or
make fun of one of their good friends.
They aren’t even sure why but before they
know it everyone is talking and treating
the girl badly. Why do you think the girls
turned on her? What could you do to
change your behavior? What do you think
your responsibility is to the group to call
attention to what’s been happening?
“Tell them what they’re doing is wrong.”
“Start a new conversation.”
“Tell the girl that what they’re saying is not
true.”
“Apologize or talk to her and tell her how
you feel. If you really don’t want to be
friends, then be honest with her.”
“Tell the group how it’s making her feel.”
“Try to get an adult involved to help.”
You’ve been friends with someone
through elementary school but since
you’ve been in junior high, you have
become close with other people. Your
long time friend is different than your new
friends and you don’t think they will
click. You don’t want to ignore your long
time friend. How can you keep both your
old and new friendships?
“Have both friends meet.”
“Make time for both friends.”
“Try introducing them and see if they have
a connection.”
“Make an equal amount of time to hang out
with both of them.”
“Sit with both friends at lunch.”
A group of friends are talking in a circle at
lunch. As the discussion gets more
exciting, the circle gets tighter and tighter
and some girls get pushed out of the
circle. How does that girl get back into
the conversation? And what can someone
else do to make sure everyone is
included?
“Open the circle to invite her back in.”
“Make another group.”
“Someone can include them again by
asking their opinion.”
“Find your way back into the group by
keeping up with the conversation.”
“Ask to make the circle bigger.”

Periodically, YouTube videos appropriate to the topic of bullying, peer-pressure or social
exclusion, such as “Don’t Bully Me”, a PSA music video by Cornelius O’Donoghue, or “Strain”,
a silent short video on bullying and suicide by Yin Chang, are chosen by administration and the
Health and Safety team and shared with the school staff as part of their daily announcements.
Teachers are encouraged to show these video clips to their students at their leisure and possibly
pair them with a writing activity. These videos were suggested to encourage dialogue within the
classroom and promote positive social interaction among the students. While observing the
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 76
students in classrooms following the viewing of these videos, students shared their feelings in
pairs and some shared out to the entire class: “It is so sad that bullying came to that” and “Wow,
some people keep so much inside and it’s up to us to help them out of this helpless feeling.”
Administrator B shared that, in order to promote a positive campus culture, students need to
continue positive behavior all year long and that positivity should resonate in few bullying
incidents and low suspension rates.
Structure 3: Bullying Awareness among Staff and Students
In order to identify the act of bullying, one has to know what it is. Bullying can be a
direct or overt aggression exhibited in the physical form, typically seen as pushing, physically
fighting, and verbally, such as spreading rumors (Olweus, 1993). Recent advances in technology
created a new arena for bullying behavior known as cyber-bullying where bullies and victims use
cell phone text messaging, chat rooms or emails as their mode of communication (Wang et al.,
2009). At Trojan Intermediate, an anti-bullying culture was set by expecting positive behavior
from students and reinforced throughout the year by means of assemblies, weekly lessons,
motivational posters on campus, and the progressive bullying discipline policy used within
departments to promote cohesiveness within the campus.
Anti-bullying culture and school expectations among students. In early September,
during the first few weeks of school, Trojan Intermediate’s Principal and Assistant Principal
shared the student behavior expectations with the students in each Physical Education (PE) class.
Three PE classes gathered in the school’s multi-purpose room each class period, and
administrators explained the school’s discipline policy along with their expectations regarding
bullying or any other personal violation. Administrator A encouraged, “Students, we want to
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 77
recognize you for the great things you do. We expect that from you. We want you to be
exceptional leaders.”
According to Favazza and Odom (1997), acceptance needs to be incorporated into the
curriculum in order to foster an understanding and acceptance toward all students, including
those with disabilties. Administrator A and B outlined the behavior needed in order to be a
Trojan scholar outlined in the district’s parent handbook. Administrator B concurred, “It is our
commitment to provide you a safe environment you can learn in, and you have to do your part as
well.” Drawn from the early student survey results stating that 29% of Trojan’s incoming
seventh graders felt bullied and 21% felt excluded from their peers, administration incorporated
bullying behaviors, online harassment and the bullying and exclusion of special education
students to their repertoire of information to share with the students. Administrator A stated:
We felt we needed to take a greater stand and inform the kids a little more. These
assemblies bring the kids to awareness, and there was a different feeling. These
assemblies bring the students to even more awareness. You could see there is a different
feeling on this campus. Kids were reaching out and being friends, eating lunch with
special needs kids. They even thought of a anti-bullying club and had sophisticated ideas
about what they wanted to do.
During observations of the interactions among students in classes with mainstreamed
special education students as well as the general population during the lunch hour, it was
apparent that students included one another in group collaborations, socialized among one
another, and there was laughter and comeraderie among the classes.
Similarly, Teacher E concurred, “It’s important for the kids to know what is going on and
to educate them about what is considered to be bullying and harassment.” Overall, many teachers
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 78
interviewed were certain that these expectations, written in the parent handbook, strengthened
daily in classrooms, and reinforced at school assemblies, set a caring climate on campus and
reiterated to the students that the teachers and administrators care about them. Trojan’s slogan
for their anti-bullying campaign was “Bullying is not something that can be resolved in a week.
Students and adults need to work on it throughout the school year in order for it to be effective.”
Action steps taken by staff. Identifying that an incident is bullying and knowing how to
intervene emerged as complex and confusing issues for most teachers (Mishna, 2005). It was not
any different for teachers at Trojan Intermediate. Bullying, according to the majority of teachers
at Trojan, is really subtle. Teacher A shared that “there are very few incidences where a bunch
of girls or boys are circling one another and just doing something. Most of it’s so subtle like
name-calling.” During three days of observing passing periods and lunch breaks, there was an
apparent integration of all students. A student on crutches walked with another student who
carried her bags. Students who were physically handicapped were dismissed to lunch about five
minutes earlier than the general education students and sat at the lunch benches first. Some
general education students walked over to chat with them as they, too, sat at the benches and ate
their lunch. This camaraderie seemed natural to all the students.
Trojan’s anti-bullying campaign offered teachers many resources to assist them in
recognizing and understanding the effects of bullying. Trojan used Discovery Education’s
website, which offered videos and lessons pertaining to bullying and any form of harassment and
offered discussion questions following the videos. Teachers incorporated all populations of
students within the bullying dynamic and the questions asked during discussions included the
special education population at Trojan. During the 2012-2013 school year, administration asked
willing teachers to collaborate as a Health and Safety team and create lesson plans that
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 79
encouraged anti-bullying behavior. They reviewed current practices and recommended
strategies to encourage school connectedness. While observing a faculty meeting in September,
Administrator B encouraged the staff to become involved in creating these lesson plans while
Teacher D added that it was helpful to have staff members more connected with the students.
Teacher F shared that there were not many programs, assemblies or much of value out
there when it came to anti-bullying. He stated:
We felt a need to create and use what was specialized to our school: teacher-created anti-
bullying lessons, positive self-efficacy scenarios and impromptu discussions for the
classroom and the incorporation of special education students into every aspect of
discussion and learning.
Those teachers on the Health and Safety team created anti-bullying lessons and shared
them with the entire staff to add to the cohesiveness among staff and students. Following the
implementation of the lesson plans, they asked for written feedback from the staff in order to
possibly restructure the lesson plans for the upcoming school year. Administrator B collected
written feedback from all 25 teachers in the form of an email. Responses were overwhelmingly
positive with comments such as, “I am glad the students were able to act out a scenario in order
to take the material to heart” and “My students didn’t know that certain behaviors were
considered bullying” and “Special education students deserve to be made to feel that they’re
included in friendly conversation as well.” There were suggestions such as, “My students
suggested we have classroom bullying ambassadors to assist in anti-bullying efforts at Trojan”
and “In order to get more teachers on the Health and Safety team at Trojan, maybe we should
have a potluck or a social incentive as well.”
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 80
Most anti-bullying assemblies cost money. The Trojan Parent Teacher Association
(PTA) is very active and raised money from a fall fundraiser to assist in paying for an anti-
bullying assembly. This year, instead of hiring the production company who incorporated big
screens and loud music into their assembly, Administrators A and B made their own PowerPoint
and felt it was much more positive among the students. Administrator A said, “I found relevant
video clips and blended them with our expectations and created a presentation that was tailored
for our students.” Trojan’s PTA also supported parental programs on campus that offered
information regarding bullying and other violence prevention strategies. Programs planned to be
scheduled were Ten Educational Commandments, and 40 Developmental Assets, which
encourage parents to become involved in the educational lives of their children (e.g., homework
assistance and time management). There were Parent/Community Outreach meetings scheduled
which provided information and resources on topics such as at-risk behaviors, cyber-bullying,
and drug and alcohol abuse.
Year-round Student Activities and Socialization
The promotion of positive behavior toward all students at Trojan Intermediate School
was evident on campus. Witnessed during observations of the passing, lunch and after school
periods, was that moderately to severe Special Education (SPED) students were dismissed a few
minutes earlier in order to line up to eat or take the bus to leave campus. When the general
education students were walking from class to class, it was impossible to distinguish between
SPED and general education because the students were chatting from class to class and often
greeted one another as they entered and left the classroom. At the lunch benches, students sat
with one another and there were no isolated students. Some physically and orthopedically
handicapped Special Education students were in the lunch crowd accompanied by their adult
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 81
aide because they were in a wheel chair or could not hold their lunch tray. After the students
received their food, they eased over and sat with the general education students and students
already sitting in that area accommodated them.
According to Thompson et al (1994), situations need to be created that alter the staff and
students’ responses and that nurture tolerance, which will encourage adaptive student behaviors.
This culmination of research suggests the involvement of adults and community into the school’s
anti-bullying and disability awareness programs in schools to promote a positive social climate
among students. The students observed on Trojan’s campus exhibited manners and spoke
positively to one another while passing by one another. Teacher E added that Trojan’s SPED
teachers are great at incorporating their students into the mainstream of the day and is
continually amazed at how kind the students are to one another.
Trojan Intermediate has an Associated Student Body (ASB), made up of elected students
who represent the school and are involved in promoting school improvement, academics, and
socialization among their peers. During the school year, the ASB holds a variety of activities
throughout the month to engage students in school connection and socialization. There are
school spirit days during which students can wear the school colors and participate in lunchtime
activities. “The games are fun,” confirmed Administrator B, “they stack M & M’s with
chopsticks or silly things that make them laugh and more engaged at lunch. It’s really a fun
place to be and it comes across that way to the students.”
At Trojan, there are incentives and positive reinforement for exhibiting positive and
scholarly behavior to others on campus. If a student at Trojan is caught “doing something good”
by a staff member, s/he receives a “super job” card. Administrator A explained that students at
Trojan could receive a “super job” card by helping someone pick up an open backpack, helping
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 82
someone walk to class if s/he is on crutches, or anything that happens to show one cares and
would like to help. This card is one the student takes to the principal or office staff for
recognition and placement into a rotating ticket barrel. This barrel is taken out to the quad by
Administrator B on random Fridays at lunch and names are drawn for various prizes such as gift
cards, school supplies, snacks. and ‘ “front of the lunch line passes”. Administrator A’s mission
is to have as many students walk across that stage as possible and be recognized for doing good
work at school. He said, “The kids love it and they get to hear music in the quad during lunch as
well. It’s a win-win situation.” These school activities reaffirm the sustainability of an anti-
bullying school culture.
Another opportunity for all students, including students with disabilities, to be involved
and intergrated at Trojan are lunchtime intramural sports. During this lunchtime sports activity,
the students created teams, named their team, and then participated in the game. Other students
came out to the field or the courts and watched. Teacher A explained,” this is where different
team building emerges.” Teacher A also shared, The school band traveled to San Diego to play
in a parade and flew to New York in the summer as well. There are extra-curricular activities one
could be involved in, and that incorporated all students.” These activites and overall acceptance
of students at Trojan help to increase the anti-bullying culture weaved within the school
throughout the year.
The positive school culture at Trojan does not happen automatically. Each year, one
grade level of students is promoted to high school and another enters from the elementary school,
with rules and expectations needing immediate enforcement. Administrator B shared, “It may
take a few months for students to feel comfortable with the school, and we try and reach as many
students in any way we can.”
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 83
In order to reach students who may feel uncomfortable about sharing a bullying incident
in person, an anonymous drop box is located inside the school office as well as an anti-bullying
email address maintained by Trojan administration. Most of the faculty concurred they have
seen more students being vocal, they were confident that all students’ comfortabilities needed to
be addressed and supported. Teacher B mentioned that, if students feel comfortable with staff,
they will tell you. Administration and faculty were visibly and casually speaking to students
during multiple observations of the lunch period and passing periods throughout the day.
Conversation topics varied from what they did on the weekend to how their soccer game was. It
was evident by the interest in both staff and students that they were building community and,
therefore, stregthening the sustainability of the anti-bullying culture at Trojan.
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question One
Research question one asked, “What are the perceived systems and structures that
contribute to the inclusion and acceptance of students with disabilities to establish an anti-
bullying culture in schools?” Major themes emerged from Trojan Intermediate School that
contributed to the inclusion and acceptance of students with disabilities. The major themes
include the progressive discipline in the prevention of bullying, collective leadership, and the
ability to recognize bullying and increase awareness by staff and students.
Progressive discipline in the prevention of bullying was a critical piece of bullying
prevention as discussed in chapter two (Olweus, 1991). Having a leadership team who are
knowledgeable about the effects of bullying and the impact it has on their students’ emotional
health is a good indicator that Trojan will continue to be a positive campus in which students can
grow educationally as well as emotionally. The results of this study showed that all stakeholders
of the school community comprised the working body of anti-bullying prevention on Trojan’s
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 84
campus. Each was valuable to the success, safety, and positive self-efficacy of the students.
The teachers, office staff, and parents at Trojan were confident that an incident related to
bullying would be resolved once they brought it to the awareness of their administrative staff.
When interviewing two Trojan parents whose disabled children were students in 2011-2013, they
stated that Trojan’s administration was strong and did not accept any kind of bullying. The office
secretary was confident that, when a possible bullying referral was sent to the office, she would
direct them to the administrator because that behavior is not condoned at Trojan. According to
Carter and Spencer (2006), this knowledge encourages and shapes prevention and intervention
practices in schools.
Collective leadership among the staff was also an emerging theme, entailing shared
expectations for staff and students as well as visibility and availability between teachers and
students and between teachers and parents. Administration and staff worked collaboratively to
create an anti-bullying curriculum at Trojan tailored to the needs of the student body. They
continually reconvened to evaluate what strategies and lessons worked well and which ones
would be eliminated for the upcoming school year. The parents who were interviewed in this
study were satisfied with the active school involvement and anti-bullying intervention. As one
teacher described, “the staff cares about it and they let students know we are here to help them.”
Next, the anti-bullying focus among staff and students seems to drive the continuous
awareness and caring of disabled and non-disabled students on Trojan’s campus. The fact that
positive and accepting behavior has been adopted by Trojan’s student body makes Trojan
Intermediate a safe place for academic and emotional growth for all students. As the
administration and teachers are aware of their students’ behaviors and applying the right
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 85
disciplinary measure at the right times, students will continue to achieve academic and personal
goals, one of which is to be an accepting and understanding member of society.
Finally, the year-round student activities and socialization strive to unify all the students
at Trojan. There were multiple opportunities for all students, no matter their learning or physical
disability, to become involved in an activity they enjoyed. These activities were used as positive
reinforcement for all students to behave and encourage one another on and off campus.
Research Question 2: Implementation and Sustainability of Systems
The second research questions asked, “How are these systems and structures
implemented and sustained to support an anti-bullying culture in schools?” Current research
identifies schools as a major arena for social interaction and, since bullies and victims are part of
these interactions, a question arises as to whether some students are victimized more than others
(Katz, 1999). In order to address this research question, the sustainability of these systems in
place at Trojan Intermediate will be explained in further detail. The four systems identified were
the accepting of students with disabilities into the campus, campus-wide anti-bullying
efforts,,staff preparedness and collaborative decision making, and caring, respectful
relationships.
The Accepance of Students with Disabilities
The organizational systems that contribute to an effective anti-bullying culture include
the acceptance of students with disabilities (Luciano & Savage (2007). At Trojan Intermediate,
there are self-contained moderate to severe special education classes as well as students with
disabilities who are included within the general education classroom. Teacher F noted that his
students were more accepted as a regular part of the student body as compared to five to eight
years prior when mildly disabled students were not integrated into the general education
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 86
environment. Now, he adds, “depending on their social skills, some are able to participate in
most school activities.” Administrator A added, “the students work well together and are very
understanding of the needs of other students. I think the special education students work hard to
be included among their peers .”
The school and district’s student handbook also emphasizes the importance of a secure,
safe, and positive learning environment, so all students can perform at their best. Students are
expected to use high standards of behavior at all times in order to develop responsibility for their
own actions, cooperate with others and build a positive attitude towards themselves and the
entire learning community. The faculty is confident that their students already possess the
characteristics of a good citizen and scholar. Teacher E feels that Trojan Intermediate is a
fantastic school:
Our special ed teachers involve their students into everything they can and I’ve seen
some really great things happen with our students here. These teachers integrate these
students into general education classes and help them with social skills and life skills,
even helping in the cafeteria is important for them. It is an amazing place to see and
watch these interactions unfold. Our general education students reach out to them
because they are genuinely good people.
There are times, however, when general education students find fault with another
student who may stand out because of an insufficiency of some sort (slower reader, or one who
shouts out at inappropriate times). Teacher B stated, “Overall, the students are so kind to one
another,even in the inclusion classes”. Teacher A concured with the unpredictable behavior of
certain students and stated:
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 87
Some of the Autistic kids that don’t have those social mirrors and monitors are those that
get the brunt of the comments. I will then speak to the class about the fact that
differences are sometimes not seen as much as they are heard.
During the observation of various Physical Education classes at Trojan, some physically
disabled students were intergrated into the class. Although the students were last to finish the
mile run warm-up, they ran in with another student who decided they would be that student’s
“buddy” during that class. “These students take it upon themselves to walk or run or be on the
same team as these students”, Teacher D said, “it really is a wonderful thing to see. That’s one
of the things that makes our school so amazing.”
Campus-wide Anti-bullying Efforts
Although the National Anti-bullying week for the year of this study was November 18-
22, 2013, Trojan Intermediate focused on acceptance and positive interactions through various
activities during the entire school year, bringing about continuous student and adult involvement.
That focus resonated on Trojan Intermediate’s Anti-bullying campaign, which read, “Bullying is
not something that can be resolved in a week. Students and adults need to work on it throughout
the school year to be effective and positive” (2013, p. 1).
During the first week of school, in September, administrators shared their behavioral and
academic expectations with the physcial education classes. This short assembly of students,
observed through a videotaped copy of the assembly, consisted of three classes for six periods
throughout the day. One topic covered was the Trojan staff’s promise to prepare them for the
world’s challenges and to teach them all the skills necessary to be prepared for college.
Administrator A asked the students “What do leaders do?” and followed with Trojan’s
expectations that the students show others what leaders should do to set a positive environment
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 88
on the campus. The students actively raised their hands and one shared that “it’s important to be
positive to others because they will learn from your example and be a good person.”
During the first week of October and weekly thereafter, weekly anti-bullying lessons
were incorporated into each classroom on Trojan’s campus: defining bullying/bullying
awareness, types of bullying, cyber-bullying and its effects, and forms of physical and verbal
abuse among others. The majority of the teachers interviewed concurred that awareness is a
definite preventative measure and having each Trojan teacher using these lessons in class built
cohesiveness on campus.
Sprinkled throughout those lessons were campus-wide activities that every student could
become a part of, such as wearing the color orange (anti-bullying) or their favorite team jersey.
Posters of encouragement were displayed throughout the campus to remind students of the
activities and to promote positive behavior and interaction.
During National Bullying Week, Trojan Intermediate invited Kaiser Permanente’s
Educational Theatre group to campus to perform “Someone Like Me”, a play that chronicles the
changing friendships of four middle school students and the varying forms bullying can take.
Although this play had never been performed at Trojan before, Administrator B stated, “it was
recommended by other intermediate schools in the district and the students really connected to its
content.” During the play, the students took on issues of rumors and gossip, social, emotional
and physical abuse and sexual pressure and intimidation. The play also addressed relational
bullying such as cyber-bullying and abstinence as the developmentally appropriate choice.
This play taught students they were not alone and that help was available to them. The
program was meant to be a springboard for discussion with teachers, parents and trusted adults,
and each student received a list of resources for themselves or one they could share with
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 89
someone in need. Actors in the play also modeled ways for students to reach out for help (for
themselves or their friends) should they need it. At the end of the performance, the
actors/educators were available to the students one-on-one if the students had questions or
wanted to talk about a pressing situation.
Teachers at Trojan take the well-being of their students seriously. Any disclosures made
by the students regarding abuse, bullying, depression or threats to themselves or others were
taken seriously, and those students were bridged to the principal, counselor or other school
personnel for further follow-up. The administrators and teachers interviewed stressed the
importance for Trojan’s students’ feeling safe at school and feeling comfortable in sharing what
was bothering them with someone they could talk to. That culture of safety is one the staff made
efforts to create each day on Trojan’s campus. Observations following the play were filled with
rich classroom discussion. Students spoke of how they related to some of the characters in the
play. One student said, “I felt glad they had resources to use in case any student needed to share
them with someone who needed them.” This student-staff connectedness makes this another
component of the success of Trojan students.
Staff Preparedness and Collaborative Decision Making
Anti-bullying practices and procedures, which included staff preparedness and
collaborative decision making, was observed and discussed at Trojan. Administrator C discussed
that she, the administration, and the teachers have informal meetings and planning time in order
to decide on the weekly lessons and school agenda for anti-bullying efforts. In order to provide
each subject area with an equal amount of curriculum time, anti-bullying lessons were given
their own time frame within the school schedule on Tuesday mornings in October and
November. It is the current administrator’s belief that all staff members are contributing and
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 90
essential members of the school. In addition to subject area representatives who served on the
school’s Leadership Team, all faculty and staff members are encouraged to provide valuable
input regarding the improvement of a child’s safety at Trojan. These suggestions, either given
by students or staff, are given to Trojan’s administration and Administrator B meets with
volunteering teachers in order to address concerns. For example, the student suggestion of
starting an anti-bullying club was welcomed, and the students were paired with a teacher who
volunteered to advise this club and accommodate them with a meeting room. According to
Administrator B, meeting agendas and weekly calendars were sent to staff members before and
after meetings via staff email in order to encourage participation.
While observing on Trojan’s campus, teachers, staff and administration were clearly
discernable to students. Teacher B stressed how important it is for teachers and staff members to
be visible on campus in order to deter what could potentially be an area where bullying may
occur. During passing periods, breaks, lunch periods, and after school, staff was visible and had
assigned duties as part of their regular contract assignment.. During on observation of Trojan’s
campus, teachers were visible in the hallways, in the locker room, and any areas on campus that
were not easily seen or could be considered an ‘at risk’ area for bullying to occur.
In addition to teachers’ visibility on campus, teachers and staff were steadily aware of the
behaviors to look for among the students. Teachers and staff were to be aware of isolated
students, huddled groups of students, and students that may be in distress. Administrator B
stressed, “I make sure and pay for assigned supervision at lunch as well. I try to have at least
five supervisors at lunch in order to supervise students.” Teachers and classified staff are given
instruction of what behaviors to look for on the playground and supervised areas so they could
intercept potential problems before they occur. Administrator B added:
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 91
When I know there’s problems with kids, I’m able to go to each supervisor and say
‘She’s having problems with that group over there so if you see that group together, go
and intervene right away.’ I am able to reaffirm what they should be looking for.
By having many adult personnel on the school grounds to monitor student behavior, it is
possible less negative interaction will occur. With a larger student-to-teacher ratio, teachers
have a more difficult time managing student behavior and that may provide more opportunity for
bullying to occur (Bradshaw et al., 2009). This lack of supervision may contribute to diminished
perceptions of safety and an increased risk for peer victimization (Glew et al., 2005). Since most
of these social behavior opportunities are on the playground, it is important to stretch best
practices to those areas as well as the classroom (Craig Pepler, & Atlas, 2000). Administrator B
shared that, when he knows there may be problems with certain students, he makes the classified
aide aware of the problems while s/he is on the playground supervising. Teacher A added that
having an adult looking for specific behavior is best. He said, “Teachers do their best to monitor
the kids so there’s someone there but having an adult there that’s specifically looking for that
stuff would be better.”
Overall, the majority of teachers felt prepared to address the issues of bullying and felt
supported by the administration. Teacher B said, “We know the administration will back us up
on the consequences and so forth. Those I sent to the office were dealt with and I haven’t seen
further harassment after that incident.” Teacher B said that, in his Drama class, there are unique
social situations because his classroom borders the SPED classrooms. He said:
One of my students was laughing at one of the SPED students and, instead of calling him
out on his behavior, I spoke to him after school. I talked to him one-on-one and shared
what it meant to have a physical disability. I think he just didn’t understand what was
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 92
really going on with the child and he was naïve and that it wasn’t cool to laugh at
someone.
In all the classes observed, there was a strong sense of student collaboration and work
ethic. Students were paired with one another and also worked in groups, sharing opinions, facts
and tasks at hand. Teachers expressed to their classes that they were going to be expected to
work with one another, get along with one another and co-exist in the classroom. Teacher B
said:
Just being able to work with others helps in the anti-bullying efforts here. In History, we
talk about other cultures and views and students learn how to be tolerant of others’ views.
I think it’s very helpful and tells them that it’s okay to be different.
Collaborating with one another is the key to Trojan’s cohesiveness. Administrator B
recognized that the teachers at Trojan find many avenues for the students to communicate with
one another, and he encourages students to do the same. Being aware of what is said is
imperative to collaboration as well. Teacher A added, “Raising the students’ awareness to know
that bullying trauma can last a lifetime or that something awful may happen, makes a huge
impact on the problem.”
Caring, Respectful Relationships
Trojan Intermediate has a sense of community that is to be emulated. During three
observations at Trojan, teachers not interviewed shared how lucky they felt to teach on campus.
The teachers interviewed concurred that Trojan is an amazing place because students, staff, and
parents work together to make each student achieve to his/her highest potential and become a
good model of society. During an observation, students and staff assisted one another without
being prompted to do so. On one occasion, before class began, a student asked for assistance
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 93
from one teacher about another class, and she welcomed him into her classroom and attempted to
help him solve his math problem. On another occasion, Administrator A walked around Trojan’s
campus and chatted with students about what they did over the weekend. The students involved
in that conversation displayed such excitement that they followed Administrator A around while
he was on duty. It is no wonder that the staff, parents, and teachers enjoy these caring and
respectful environments.
According to Trojan Intermediate’s 2013 Parent Handbook, the entire school community
acknowledges that a child’s education is a responsibility for all involved: parents, staff and
child. This responsibility is one that is felt throughout the school environment, and all share in
the school’s commitment to the success of their children. Trojan Intermediate has a strong and
very active PTA that practices and enhances parental involvement. Administrator B said, “they
are the main communication as to whether bullying is happening and they have no problem
voicing their opinions and concerns right away.” Parents A and B, both having children with
learning disabilities, shared that they felt their students had very positive experiences with other
students during their years at Trojan. Parent A added, “My daughter hasn’t had any student make
mean comments or isolate her until high school. The staff and students are a family, and I
appreciate that as a mother.”
Trojan’s SPED teachers who were interviewed are very aware and sensitive to their
students’ behaviors and behaviors of others toward their students. All the teachers and
administrators interviewed concurred that SPED students are integrated into the regular general
education environment as often as they can be. During an observation of special education
mainstream classrooms, the SPED students socialized and blended so well with the general
education climate that it was difficult to differentiate between the two types of students.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 94
According to Teacher F, the staff is involved in the anti-bullying efforts here, but “good,
conscientious teachers are always looking out for it and listening to students who feel they may
have been bullied.”
Analysis and Discussion for Research Question Two
During the data analysis process in relation to research question two, systems
implemented at Trojan Intermediate School align with systems and structures of anti-bullying
schools that are grounded in the literature reviewed in chapter two. The organizational systems
and structures at Trojan Intermediate were observed and discussed as coordinated and
implemented operations to support a positive, anti-bullying climate of students. The themes
identified as vital components within the systems and structures of Trojan’s anti-bullying culture
were a whole school approach, administrative and teacher visibility, and school-wide acceptance
of students with disabilities.
According to McConaughy et al., (1999), successful interventions should contain a
combination of primary approaches aimed at all students and secondary strategies intended to
decrease the problems of at-risk children and youth. Trojan Intermediate was observed to
incorporate many strategies that targeted the entire school population, and that mindset among
the school culture is what contributed to such a positive environment among staff and students.
Unique to the discussions with the interviewed staff members, there was not a specific
strategy or plan or program that was implemented by Trojan. The school focused on the safety,
comfort, ability, and academic achievement of all students, and with that came the acceptance of
the individuality of the students. Many teachers shared that having at least one adult in school
who understands the students’ social, academic and emotional needs contributed to their levels of
academic achievement and emotional safety. “It’s an amazing place to be”, commented Teacher
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 95
D. When asked during a culminating discussion after one of the bullying assemblies, a student
commented, “It’s okay to be you because you’re one of a kind.” That attitude resonates
throughout the campus.
Creating an anti-bullying campus similar to Trojan’s is not impossible. There is not one
solution but a conglomeration of factors that have to be incorporated and collaborated upon in
order to provide buy-in from staff and students. Leading this anti-bullying effort starts with
strong administration who guides teachers and staff members to visualize the emotional and
physical safety for all students while demonstrating pride in their school. These efforts are not
static and need to be evaluated and implemented based on the students’ needs. Lastly,
collaboration among all shareholders provides communication and investment. With all these
components structurally sound, an anti-bullying culture would be acquired and provide safety in
and out of the classroom for all students.
Chapter Summary
This chapter reviewed the findings based on the data collection for this study followed by
detailed analysis and discussion of the answers to the two research questions. The literature
presented earlier in the study was compared to the research found. The findings in this study
were based on multiple data sources: interviews, observations, and artifacts, which served to
reinforce their validity. The summary, conclusions, and recommendations for future study are
presented in the next chapter.

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 96
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS
Introduction
In the two decades prior to this study, there have been many concerns among educators
and researchers regarding the elevation of childhood bullying and the effects it has on the
children involved. As students with disabilities are incorporated into today’s classroom, there is
an increased risk that those students will have experienced victimization from their non-disabled
peers (Luciano & Savage, 2007; Mishna, Scarcella, Pepler, & Weiner, 2005). Research on
bullying has increased over the past decade based on the high level of American youth
involvement in the bullying phenomenon.
Students with disabilities are subjected to a variety of childhood experiences and may be
at risk for bullying as long as they are being taught with their non-disabled peers (Rose et al.,
2011). According to Rose et al., (2011), disabled students are more often discriminated against
by their peers. School violence across the country has made educators, parents, and children
resistant to the acceptance that bullying is just another experience in school (Weinhold, 2000).
This chapter outlines the implications for educators and researchers based on the
findings. First, the purpose of the study is examined. Next, the chapter provides a summary of
the research findings and their connection to existing literature. Third, this chapter considers the
implications for practice and policy coupled with recommendations for schools and districts to
prevent bullying among students. Finally, recommendations for future studies are suggested.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 97
Purpose of the Study
Given that the importance of improving anti-bullying policies in our nation’s schools
continues to be a significant focus in policy making (Espelage & Swearer, 2003), the purpose of
this study was to examine student bullying by calling on the expertise of the teachers,
administrators and school staff who have used best practices of anti-bullying strategies and
disability acceptance in their schools. With these practices implemented in their schools,
administrators and teachers can gain a better understanding of student bullying, bullying toward
students with disabilities, and the changes that may have to be made in order to create a positive
and accepting school climate.
Considered a common form of school violence, bullying is a major concern for students,
teachers, administration and parents (Witted & Dupper, 2005). Bullying is said to intensify
during the middle school years and can have long term effects on the victims and bullies
themselves. In order to learn more about the practices of anti-bullying in middle schools,
information on teachers’, parents’ and administrators’ perspectives about the implementation of
practices in acceptance of disabled students was gathered and analyzed.
This study aimed to answer the following research questions:
1. What are the perceived systems and structures that contribute to the inclusion and
acceptance of students with disabilities to establish an anti-bullying culture in schools?
2. How are these systems and structures implemented and sustained to support an anti-
bullying culture?
Data collection for this study included interviews with school stakeholders
(administration, teachers, staff and parents), school observations (classrooms, assemblies, open
areas, lunch break, passing periods), and artifact review (anti-bullying lesson plans, videos of
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 98
administrative-led assemblies, anti-bullying posters made by students, school and district
websites). Multiple sources assured triangulation of the data to increase the validity of the
study’s results (Patton, 2002).
Summary of the Findings
Three key themes with related subthemes emerged from the interviews and observations:
whole school approach, administrative and teacher visibility, and school-wide acceptance of
students with disabilities. These themes illustrated the organizational systems and structures of a
school that sustains and supports an anti-bullying school culture. The data gathered showed that
the anti-bullying systems and structures at Trojan Intermediate were fully ingrained in virtually
every aspect of the school’s culture.
The data in relation to the first theme, whole school approach, showed that the majority
of Trojan’s stakeholders are dedicated to preventing bullying and encourage one another to get
involved on campus. Multiple opportunities exist for all members of the school community in
order to support the common goal. Collective leadership included the creation and
implementation of anti-bullying curriculum that improved bullying awareness among staff and
students. Bullying prevention efforts are the responsibility of each member of the school
community. School leaders’ understanding of the cooperation between the multiple facets of a
school contributes to the positive culture in which bullying does not occur. These adults,
according to Olweus’ (1993) research would be authoritative and positive role models.
The data that illustrated the importance of the second theme, administrative and teacher
visibility, also highlighted the importance of having an obvious adult presence in all areas on
campus. One key aspect to this was sharing a common definition of and language relating to
bullying. Supervisory adults were aware of what constituted bullying behavior and knew how to
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 99
intervene should there be an occurrence. According to Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979, 1986)
ecosystem, formal and informal social structures that encroach upon the individual’s immediate
setting may influence their behavior and relationships. At Trojan, adult visibility focuses on
school safety and the rights of the disabled students within the bullying dynamic.
The data that illustrated the importance of the third theme, school-wide acceptance of
students with disabilities, highlighted the school-wide incorporation of all Trojan’s students into
general education classes and activities on campus. Having multiple avenues for stakeholder
involvement helps create an invested school culture. That culture of safety is one the staff makes
every effort to create each day on Trojan’s campus.
Implications for Practice and Policy
The three themes that emerged from the data illustrate the implications for practice and
policy established for schools striving toward promising practices in the prevention of bullying.
The three themes were interconnected, all needing the others to accomplish the school’s anti-
bullying goal and vision. Strong and positive leadership set a clear vision for the entire school
with many opportunities provided for stakeholders to participate. The school environment
affects the interactions between students and adults and each person reacts and interacts
differently. This school environment encompasses certain behavioral disabilities that may
surface in a mainstreamed general education classroom. Students who are aware of these
differences and trusted with this knowledge about their peers may show a greater appreciation
for diversity and allow for a safer educational experience. Research shows that schools that have
incorporated anti-bullying structures and systems have shown more positive results in the
prevention of bullying (Olweus, 1993; Smith, 2004).
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 100
Schools should consider the importance of the whole school and community approach to
preventing bullying, beginning with the appreciation of diversity. While in school, it is
important for students to be taught that those who have differences contribute to our community
and those differences should be welcomed and accepted. This understanding of human diversity
is one that should begin in the home and carry over to the school in order to promote comfort and
safety among all students on campus. The data points to a comprehensive approach in which the
responsibility of anti-bullying efforts lies with the entire school community. Every person in the
school was able to express the vision of the school’s leadership.
When a challenge of bullying occurred, school officials were able to refer to the
progressive discipline and established policies of the school and district. Multiple supports were
used to ensure student success and safety. The consequences of the multiple efforts of anti-
bullying resulted in a more unified school community with reduced student bullying.
Recommendations for Schools and Districts
Data from the findings suggest that, in order to prevent bullying in schools, a multi-
faceted approach should be taken by all stakeholders. According to McConaughy et al. (1999), a
combination of primary approaches aimed at all students and secondary strategies intended to
decrease the problems of at-risk children and youth are the key to successful interventions.
Bullying prevention efforts that are weaved into the daily expectations of students’ behavior are
often more successful. Schools should consider having a committee with multiple school leaders
and school stakeholders—administrators, teachers, parents, and students, to guarantee all voices
are heard. One solution or program to prevent bullying does not exist because each school has a
unique culture.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 101
In order to prevent bullying, schools and districts need to have systems and structures that
support students in multiple ways. These systems and structures that promote acceptance of all
students and result in a low bullying incidences as well as low suspension rates should be shared
with all schools in the district. One recommendation is an annual or bi-annual training by the
district on the identification of bullying and disability awareness in the classroom and school
campus. This training could be coupled with school trainings or meetings to emphasize the
progressive discipline in effect at Trojan.
In concordance with the anti-bullying curriculum at Trojan, a second recommendation is
the addition of disability awareness to the curriculum in order to promote acceptance of students
with disabilities and to strengthen the effects of their anti-bullying program for adolescents with
special needs. In promoting well-being for children with and without disabilities, the emphasis
must be on addressing those individual and environmental factors that affect them (Mishnah,
2003).
In addition to the contribution of stakeholders at Trojan, the last recommendation is to
encourage parents of Trojan students and those of the community to attend informational campus
meetings on topics such as bullying, bullying prevention, and communicating about bullying
with their child. This multi-faceted approach will give parents the tools to approach this subject
at home, allow them the perspective of the teachers and administrators, and bridge clear
communication from the student’s home to the school environment.
Recommendations for Future Studies
Future research in order to further understand how anti-bullying systems and structures
affect the needs of students with disabilities should take several paths:
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 102
 During this research study, one administrator was promoted to another district
position. Further research, as a longitudinal study, should be conducted to determine
whether the low occurrences of bullying among the general and special education
students are evident as new administration enter Trojan’s campus.
 Trojan intermediate’s anti-bullying curriculum did not include specific components
regarding special education students’ behavior although the majority of literature
suggests that special education and general education students are characteristically
and behaviorally different. It is suggested that these differences be examined in order
to develop a more holistic understanding of unique predictors across these differences
and incorporate those distinctions into the schools’ anti-bullying curriculum.
 Interviews conducted in this study were adult stakeholders at Trojan Intermediate.
Student perceptions were not included in this study and would present a different
perspective on the systems and structures in place at Trojan. This perspective may
assist faculty when creating future anti-bullying curriculum.
 During this study, Administrator A stated that students approached him and asked to
start an anti-bullying club on campus. The influence of peer social support has been a
focus of empirical investigations. Therefore, a study on the successes and challenges
of Trojan’s student anti-bullying club may contribute to the school’s bullying
dynamic.
Conclusion
This study focused on a whole school’s anti-bullying approach in order to promote self-
efficacy, safety, and cohesiveness among its students. Although complex, the social nature of
bullying and the lack of social skills among students with disabilities (who are victims) remain
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 103
central to preventing bullying among this population of students. The attitudes, routines and
behaviors of school staff in accordance with the school’s anti-bullying policies are key factors in
preventing and controlling bullying behaviors as well as redirecting these behaviors into more
socially acceptable channels (Olweus, 1993). Trojan’s comprehensive, school-wide reforms are
proactive strategies for meeting the needs of the entire student body.

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 104
References
Arsenault, L., Bowes, L., & Shakoor, S. (2010). Bullying victimization in youths and mental
health problems: ‘Much ado about nothing?’ Psychological Medicine, 40, 717-729.
Batsche, G. M., & Knoff, H. M. (1994). Bullies and their victims: Understanding a pervasive
problem in the schools. School Psychology Review, 23 (2), 165-174.
Bernstein, J. Y., & Watson, M.W. (1997). Children who are targets of bullying: A victim
pattern. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 124, 483-498.
Bond, L., Carlin, J. B., Thomas, L., Rubin, K., & Patton, G. (2002). Does bullying cause
emotional problems? A prospective study of young teenagers. Journal of the American
Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 41(3), 304–308.
Boulton, M., & Underwood, K. (2011). Bully/Victim problems among middle school children.
Brittish Journal of Educational Psychology, 62 (1), 73-87.
Bowman, D. H. (2001, March 21). At school, a cruel culture. Education Week, Volume 20,
Enumber 27, Epage 1, 16, 17.
Bradshaw, C.P., Sawyer, A.L., & O’Brennan, L.M. (2009). A social disorganization
perpective on bullying-related attitudes and behaviors: The influence of school context.
American Journal of community Psychology, 43, 204-220.
Bradshaw, C.P., Sawyer, A., & O’Brennan, L. (2007). Bullying and peer victimization at
school: Perpetual differences between students and school staff. School Psychology
Review, 36(3), 361-382.
Brendtro, L.K., Ness, A., & Mitchell, M. (2001). No disposable kids. Longmont, CO: Sopris
West.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 105
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward and experimental ecology of human development.
American Psychologist, 32, 513-531.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). Contexts of child rearing: Problems and prospects.American
Psychologist, 34, 844-850.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development:Research
peerspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22, 723-742.
Bruininks, V. (1978) Actual and perceived peer status of learning-disabled students in
mainstream programs. The Journal of Special Education, 12 (1), 51-58.
California Department of Education (2003). Bullying at School.
Carter, B., Spencer, V. (2006). The fear factor: Bullying and students with disabilities.
International Journal of Special Education, 21 (1), 11-23.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (Eds.). (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA Sage.
Craig, W.M. (1998) The relationship among bullying, victimization, depression, anxiety, and
aggression in elementary school children. Personality and Individual Differences, 24,
123-130.
Craig, W.M., Pepler, D., & Atlas, R. (2000). Observations of bullying in the playground and in
the classroom. School Psychology International, 21 (1), 22-36.
DiFilippo, D. (2008, January 25). Bully’s taped attack on web: Disabled Logan youth was
beaten in school, mom infuriated. The Philadelphia Daily News. Retrieved May 6, 2013,
from www.phillynews.com.
Dinkes, R., Kemp, J., Baum, K., Snyder, T.D. (2009). Indicators of school crime and
safety:2009. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 106
Dudley-Maring, C., Edmiaston, R. (1985). Social status of learning disabled children and
adolescents: A review. Learning Disabled Quarterly, 8 (3), 189-204.Duncan, S. (2005).
How best to confront the bully: Should title IX of antibullying statutes be the answer.
Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy, 12, 53-80.
Egger, H. L., Costello, E. J., & Angold, A. (2003). School refusal and psychiatric disorders: A
community study. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
42, 7, 797-807.
Erb, T. (2008). Case for strengthening school district jurisdiction to punish off-campus incidents
of cyberbullying. Arizona State LJ, 40, p. 257.
Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S.M. (2003). Research on school bullying and
victimization: What have we learned and where do we go from here? School
Psychology Review, 32, 365-383.
Espelage, D.L., & Swearer, S.M. (2004). Bullying in American Schools : A Socio-ecological
perspective on prevention and intervention. Mahwah, NJ; Erlbaum.
Espelage, D.L., Bosworth, K., & Simon, T.R. (2000). Examining the social context ofbullying
behaviors in early adolescence. Journal of Counseling and Development, 78, 326-333.
Everhart, K., Wandersman, A. (2000). Applying comprehensive qualityprogramming and
Empowerment evaluation to reduce implementation barriers. Journal of Educational and
Psychological Consultation, 11, 177-191.
Favazza, P. C., & Odom, S. L. (1997). Promoting Positive Attitudes of Kindergarten-Age
Children toward People with Disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63(3), 405-18.
Forlin, C., Chambers, D. (2003). Bullying and the inclusive school enviornment. Australian
Journal of Teacher Education, 28 (2), 1-13.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 107
Fox, C. L. and Boulton, M. J. (2005), The social skills problems of victims of bullying: Self, peer
and teacher perceptions. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75: 313–328.
doi: 10.1348/000709905X25517
Gaffney, M., Higgins, N., McCormack, J., & Taylor, N. (2004). Developing a more positive
school culture to address bullying and improve school relationships: case studies from
two primary schools and one intermediate school. Ministry of Social Development.
Garrity, C., Jens, K., Porter, W., Sager, N., Short-Camilli, C. (1997). Bully-proofing your
school: Creating a positive climate. Intervention in School and Clinic, 32(4), 235-243.
Glesne. C. (2011). Becoming qualitative resarcher: An introduction. Boston: Pearson
Glew, R. G. (2007). Bullying: Children hurting children. Pediatric Review , 161 (1), 83- 190.
Glew, G.M., Fan, M.Y., Katon, W., Rivara, F.P., & Kernic, M.A. (2005). Bullying,
Psychosocial Adjustment, and academic performance in elementary school Archives of
Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 159(11), 1026-1031.
Hoover, J., Oliver, R., Hazler, R. (1992). Bullying: Perceptions of adolescent victims in the
Midwestern USA. School Psychology International, 13 (5), 5-16.
Hoover, J., & Stenhjem, P. (2003). Bullying and teasing of youth with disabilities: Creating
positive school environments for effective inclusion. Examining Current Challenges in
Secondary Education and Transition, 2(3), 1-7.
Horne, A., Orpinas, P., Staniszewski, D. (2003). School bullying: changing the problem by
changing the school. School Psychology Review, 32, 431-455.
Kaukiainen, A., Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Tamminen, M., Vauras, M., Maki, H., &
Poskiparta, E. (2002). Learning difficulties, social intelligence, and self-concept:
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 108
Connections to bully-victim problems. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 43, 269-
278.
Klomek, A. B., Marrocco, F., & Kleinman, M. (2007). Bullying, depression, and suicidality in
adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
46(1), 40.
Kumpulainen, ., Rasanen, E., Puura, K. (2001). Psychiatric disorders and the use of mental
health services among children involved in bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 27, 102-110.
Lee, C.H. (2011). An ecological systems approach to bullying behaviors among middle school
students in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(8), 1664-1693.
Limber, S. & Small, M. (2003). State laws and policies to address bullying in schools. School
Psychology Review, 32 (3), 445-455.
Luciano & Savage
Marini, Z.A., Fairbairn, L., Zuber, R. (2001). Peer harassment in individuals with developmental
disabilities: Towards the development of a multi-dimensional bullying identification
model. Developmental Disabilities Bulletin, 29, 170-195.
McConaughy, S. H., Kay, P. J., & Fitzgerald, M. (1999). The achieving, behaving, caring project
for preventing ED: Two-year outcomes. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders,
7(4), 224-239.
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative Research. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons.
Mishna, F. (2003). Learning disabilities and bullying: Double jeopardy. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 36 (4), 336-347.
Mishna, F., Scarcello, I., Pepler, D., Weiner, J. (2005). Teachers’ understanding of bullying.
Canadian Journal of Education, 28(4), 718-738.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 109
Monks, C.P., Smoth, P.K., & Swettenham, J. (2005). Psychological correlates of peer
victimization in preschool: Social cognitive skills, executive function and attachment
profiles, Aggressive Behavior, 31, 571-588.
Nabuzoka, D., & Smith, P.K. (1993). Sociometric status and social behavior of children with
and without learning disabilities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43, 1435-
1448.
Nabuzoka, D. (2003). Teacher ratings and peer nominations of bullying and other behavior of
children with and without learning disabilities. Educational Psychology, 23, 307-321.
Nansel, T.R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R.S., Ruan, W.J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P.
(2001). Bullying Behavior among U.S. youthL Prevalence and association with
psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2094-2100.
Nansel, T.R., Craig, W., Overpeck, M.D., Saluja, G., Ruan, J., & Bully, H.B.S.A.C. (2004).
Cross-national consistency in the relationship between bullying behaviors
and Psychosocial adjustment. Archives of Pediatrics &Adolescent Medicine, 158(8),
730-736.
National Center for Education Statistics (2007). Indicators of school crime and safety, 2007.
Retrieved April 1, 2010, frohttp://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008021.pdf
Newman-Carlson, D., & Horne, A.M. (2004). Bully busters: A psychoeducational intervention
for reducing bullying behavior in middle school students. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 82(3), 259-267.
Nishioka, V., Coe, M., Burke, A., Hanita, M., & Sprague, J. (2011). Student-reported overt and
relational aggression and victimization in grades 3-8. Issues and Answers Report, REL
(114).
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 110
O’Connell, P., Pepler, D., Craig, W. (1999). Peer involvement in bullying: insights and
challenges for intervention. Journal of Adolescence, 22, 437-452.
Odom, S.L., Zercher, C., Li, S., Marquart, J.M., Sandall, S., & Brown, W.H. (2006). Social
acceptance and rejection of preschool children with disabilities: A mixed method
analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 807-823.
Olweus, D. (1993) Bullying at School: What we know and what we can do. Cambridge, MA:
Blackwell.
Olweus, D. (1994). Bullying at school. Basic facts and an effective intervention programme.
Promote Education , 1 (4), 27-31.
Olweus, D. (1994) Annotation: Bullying at School; Basic facts and effects of a school
based intervention program. Journal of Child Psychology and Allied Disciplines, 35,
1171-1190.
Olweus, D. (1999). The Nature of School Bullying: A Cross-national Perspective. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Olweus, D. (2003). A profile of bullying at school. Educational Leadership, 60 (6), 12-17.
Oliver, R., Hoover, J. H., & Hazler, R. (1994). The perceived roles of bullying in small-town
midwestern schools. Journal of Counseling and Development: JCD, 72(4), 416-416.
Ostrov, J.M. (2008). Forms of aggression and peer victimization during early childhood: A
short-term longitudinal study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36 (3), 311-322.
Patterson, G. (2005). The bully as victim? Pediatric Nursing, 17, p. 27.
Patton, M. Q. (2002) Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 111
Pearl, R., & Bay, M. (1999). Psychosocial correlates of learning disabilities. In V.L. Schwean
& D.H. Saklofske (Eds.), Handbook of psychosocial characteristics of exceptional
children (p. 443-470). New York: Klewer/Plenum.
Pepler, D.J., & Craig, W.M. (2000). Making a difference in bullying. LaMarsh centre for
Research on Violence and Conflict Resolution. Retrieved August 2011 from
http://www.yorku.ca.libproxy.usc.edu/research/lamarsh/articles.htm.
Perry, D.G., Perry, L.C., Kennedy, E. (1992). Conflict and the development of antisocial
behavior. In C.U. Shantz & W.W. Hartup (Eds.), Conflict in child and adolescent
development (pp. 301-329) Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Reid, P., Monsen, J., Rivers, I. (2004). Psychology’s contribution to understanding and
managing bullying within schools. Educational Psychology in Practice, 20 (3), 241-258.
Reiter, S. & Lapidot-Leifler, R. N. (2007). Bullying among special education students with
ntellectual disabilities: differences in social adjustment and social skills. American
Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 45(3),174-181.
Rigby, K. (1995). What schools can do about bullying. Professional Reading Guide for
Educational Administrators, 17(1), 1-5.
Rose, C., Espelage, D., Aragon, S., Elliot, J. (2011). Bullying and victimization among students
and special education and general education curriculum. Exceptionality Education
International, 21(3), 2-14.
Rose, C.A., Espelage, D.L., & Monda-Amaya, L.E. (2010). Bullying perpetration and
victimization in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special
Education, 1-17.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 112
Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., Lagerspetz, K. (1996). How do the victims respond to bullying?
Aggressive Behavior, 22, 99-109.
Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., Voeten, M. (2005). Anti-bullying intervention: Implementation
and outcome. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75 (3), 465-487.
Secunda, R. (2005). At the crossroads of title IX and a new idea: Why bullying need not be a
normal part of growing up for special education children. Duke Journal of Gender Law
and Policy, 12 (1), 1-32.
Sharp, S. (1995). How much does bullying hurt? The effects of bullying on the
personalwellbeing and educational progress of secondary ages students. Educational
Child Psychology, 80-105.
Skiba, R., & Fontanini, A. (2000). Fast Facts: Bullying prevention. Bloomington, IN: Phi
Delta Kappa International. Retrieved November 19, 2001, from
http://www.pdkintl.org/whatis/ffl2bully.htm.
Smith, P., Myron-Wilson, R. (1998). Parenting and school bullying. Clinical Child Psychology
Psychiatry, 3 (3), 405-417
Smith, P.K., & Shu, S. (2000). What good schools can do about bullying: Findings from a
survey in English schools after a decade of research and action. Childhood, 7, 193-212.
Smith, P.K., Talamelli, L., Cowie, H., Naylor, P., Chauhan, P. (2004). Profiles of non-victims,
escaped victims, continuing victims and new victims of school bullying. British Journal
of Educational Psychology, 74, 565-581.
Strauss, A & Corbin, J.M. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research : Techniques and Procedures
for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Sutter, J.D. (2009, April 20). Columbine massacre changed school security.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 113
CNN.com/living Retrieved April 1, 2010,
fromhttp://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/04/20/columbine.school.safety/index.html
Swearer, S.M., Espelage, D.L., Napolitano, S.A. (2009). Bullying prevention and intervention:
Realistic strategies for schools. New York, NY: the Guilford Press, Inc.
Thompson, D., Whitney, I. and Smith, P. K. (1994), Bullying of children with specialneeds
inmainstream schools. Support for Learning, 9: 103–106. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-
9604.1994.tb00168.x
Toblin, R., Schwartz, D., Gorman, A., & Abou-ezzeddine, T. (2005). Social-cognitiveand
behavioral attributes of aggressive victims of bullying. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 67, 35-44.
U.S. Department of Education. (1998) Preventing bullying: A manual for schools and
communities. Washington, D.C. Author. Retrieved March 17, 2012, from
http://www.ede.ca.gov.spbranch/ssp/bullymanuek.html.
Van Cleave, J. & Davis, M.M. (2006). Bullying and peer victimization among children with
special health care needs. Pediatrics. 118 (4), 1212-1219.
Vossekuil, B., Fein, R.A., Reddy, M., Borom, R., & Modzeleski, W. (2002). The final report
and findings of the safe school initiative: Implications for the prevention of school
attacks in the United States. Washington, D.C.: United States Secret Service and the
United States Department of Education.
Wang, J., Iannotti, R.J., & Nansel, T.R. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in the
United States: physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45,
368-375.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 114
Weiner, J. & Mak, M. (2009). Peer victimization in children with attention deficit/hyperactivity
disorder. Psychology in the Schools, 46 (2), 116-131.
Weinhold, B. K. (2000). Bullying and school violence: the tip of the iceberg. Teacher Educator,
35(3), 28-33.
Whitted, K., Dupper, D. (2005). Best practices for preventing or reducing bullying in schools.
Health and Social Work on Child and Adolescent Health, 27 (3), 167-175.
Williams, K., Chambers, M., Logan, S., Robinson, D. (1996). Association of common health
symptoms with bullying in primary school children. Brittish Medical Journal, 313, 17-
19.
Vossekuil, B., Fein, R.A., Reddy, M., Borum, R., Modzeleski, W. (2002). The final report and
findings of the Safe School Initiative: Implications for the prevention of school attacks in
the United States. U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education. Washington,
DC.
Wang, J., Iannotti, R.J., Nansel, T. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in the United
States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45 (4), 368-
375.
Whitney, I., Smith, P.K., Thompson, D. (1994). Bullying and children with special education
needs. In P.K. Smith & S. Sharp (Eds.), School Bullying: Insights and perspectives (pp.
213-240). London, UK: Routledge.
Yude, C., Goodman, R., & McConachie, H. (1998). Peer problems of children with hemiplegia
in mainstream primary schools. Journal of Child Psychology, 39 (4), 533-541.
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 115
Appendix A
Interview Protocol

1. What is your role or your involvement in promoting anti-bullying at your institution?
2. How do you feel about the culture of the school when it comes to students with
disabilities?

3. What was the driving force behind the start of the anti-bullying efforts?
4. Tell me about the instances of bullying at your school
a. What factors influences your school’s anti-bullying efforts?
5. Explain the basics of the anti-bullying efforts your institution has in place
a. What policies and preventive measures to prevent bullying does your school have
in place
6. Tell me what is being done to help students feel more connected to your institution
7. What policies and preventive measures do you think are critical to have in place to foster
an anti-bullying culture at your institution?
8. What offices or staff is involved in anti-bullying intervention/training?
9. How are teachers, staff and administrators involved in anti-bullying efforts?
10. How prepared does your staff feel in relation to bullying?
11. How are students involved in anti-bullying efforts?
12. How are parents involved in anti-bullying efforts?
13. Think of an example of when you helped a student that had a problem with bullying.
Explain the situation and tell me about what things are important to have in place to
support a student that is having problems with bulling.
14. Tell me about any strategies that you think may help with problems of bullying
15. What support services or programs do you know of that may help with problems of
bullying?
16. What policies do you think a school needs in place to address the problem of bullying?
17. What staffing needs do you think the school needs in place to help with problems of
bullying?

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 116
18. How have these efforts changed?
19. What is an ideal professional development?

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 117
Appendix B
Observation Protocol

School Name: _______________________________________ Date: _______________

Type of Observation:
_____________________________________________________

Participants: ______________________________ Materials: ____________________________

Researcher: ________________________________________________________

Time Started: ____________ Time Ended: ____________ Total Time: ___________

Environment
What are you looking for? Notes
Location:

What does the environment look like?

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 118

Physical setup:

How are the participants grouped?

Who is leading?
What is the agenda?

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 119

Interactions
What are you looking for? Notes
Context:

Noteworthy interactions:
 Students

 Parents

 School staff

 Community

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 120
Engagement of participants:

Overall tone:

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 121
Appendix C
Survey

PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 122
Appendix D
Anti-Bully Campaign

Bullying is not something that can be resolved in a week. Students and adults need to work on it
throughout the school year to be effective.

October 22, 2013
Student Survey-Today’s topic will focus on students’ responses to the Bully Student Awareness
Survey.
 Provide Bully Awareness Student Survey
o Allow 10-15 minutes to complete.
o After students complete survey review answers and discuss (whole class)
results to all questions. Purpose is to open a dialogue with class.
 If time permits, have students write on a note card/recycled note pad sheets how
they define bullying. Keep cards anonymous and pull cards to use as discussion
points about what bullying means to different people.

November 5, 2013
Discovery Education - Today’s topic is “Cyber bullying.” Cyber bullying happens over cell
phones and the Internet. In your classroom today, you will review what Cyber bullying is and
how to identify it and why it happens.

****For the next two lessons we will be using Discoveryeduaction.com (If you haven’t used
this website before, you will have to set up a username and password)

Site location: http://www.discoveryeducation.com
If you need to set up an account, follow the steps below:
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 123
o Select: Passcode/New User Tab
o Enter the code 19D5-31F4 (case sensitive)
o Create a new Discovery Education Login - follow prompts

 Video:
o Once you have logged in, in the search box type “Cyberbullying”
o Select “What is Cyberbullying?”
o Play the video “What is CyberBullying?”

 Discussion questions:
o Why might kids harass or bully over the Internet /cellphone?
o What is considered to be cyber bullying?
 Additional Videos
o On the internet (3.23 min)
o Through the phone (3.33 min)

 Discussion questions:
o What is the percentage of teens being bullied on cell phones? (40%)
o Is cyber bullying a crime? (Yes)
o Can you be arrested for cyber bullying? (Yes)

If time permits, you can also show the videos below
o Prevention (3.43 min)
o What to do if your Bullied? (6.09min)
o What to do if your see Bullying? (4.13 min)

November 12, 2013
Discovery Education – Todays topic is Bullying (which includes Harassment/Sexual
Harassment). It can be physical, and it also can be emotional and social-using words to hurt
someone, leaving someone out, or gossiping and spreading rumors.

 Site location: http://www.discoveryeducation.com
o Once you have a log in
o Select one of two topics Harassment or Sexual Harassment

Harassment/Bullying
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 124
 Video
o In the search box type “Bullying Not Just A Guy Thing”
o Click on the blue title
o You will see a list of 9 videos to play.
o Play the videos below (each video is 2-3 minutes long you may want to cut
one/two out if class discussion is great). I would suggest you preview them
first.
 Girls taunt a middle school student (3.29min)
 Words of hate: Rumors & Gossip (3.35 min)
 Harassment Continues: Words Hurt (2.08 min)
 Tell someone: Reach out (2.55 min)
 Confronting the Bully (3.32 min)
 Bully’s Stroke of Conscience (4.02 min)

 Discussion Questions
o Why are you not considered a tattletale if you report a bully to a teacher or other
adult? (You owe it to yourself and the bully to say something, so the bully will
stop bothering you, and so he/she will have the chance to change his/her
behavior.)
o What should you do if you see someone else being bullied? (Talk to the person
being bullied and report the bully to a teacher or other adult.)
o How did Stacie and her friends bully Amy? (They called her names, played mean
tricks on her and spread untrue rumors about her.)
o When bullying was defined in the video, what was said about power and
emotions? (The bully is more powerful and more emotionally detached than the
person being bullied.)
o How did Amy respond to being bullied? (She cried, she avoided other students,
she feared come to school and refused to get on the school bus.)
o What should you say to someone who is bullying you? (I don’t like this. I don’t
want you to talk to me that way and I don’t want you to intimidate me.
Sexual Harassment
 Video
o In the search box type “Sexual Harassment”
o Scroll down and select “What is sexual harassment?”
o Click on the blue “Title”
o You will see a list of videos to play.
 Select “What is Sexual Harassment”
 Play the .37 min video.
 Have a conversation based on the definition.

 Use the list examples and ask students if this is considered sexual
harassment or not?
PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-BULLYING 125
Discussion Questions
o What is the percentage of students that are sexually harassed? (80%)
o Can sexual harassment be verbal comments? (Yes)
o Sexual harassment can only happen if a boy does it to a girl, and not if a girl does
it to a boy, or a girl does it to a girl. (False)
o It’s not sexual harassment if you do it on the Internet, by texting or some other
device. (False, it is)
o The first step you should take to stop sexual harassment is to ignore the harasser.
(False. Silence may encourage the harasser to continue or make the harasser think
that the behavior is welcome.)
o Sexual harassment only involves inappropriate touching or comments. (False.)
o Spreading sexual rumors about another person is considered sexual harassment?
(Yes)
o Making unwanted comments about a girl/boys body can be considered sexual
harassment? (Yes)

Additional Information:

Share with students the kind of behavior that is usually considered a form of sexual harassment:
Sexual jokes
Touching in an inappropriate way
Inappropriate gestures
Drawing sexually explicit pictures and passing them around
Rubbing up against someone in a provocative way
Telling sexual jokes
Spreading rumors about a person's sexual behavior
Tell students that in 1999 the Supreme Court heard a case about sexual harassment. The high
court ruled that schools can be sued if they fail to stop sexual harassment. The court further
ruled that schools must take action, such as an education program, to prevent sexual
harassment from taking place. If they do not do so, schools are vulnerable if they get sued.
For more information on this issue, students can look on the following Web sites:
Court's sexual harassment ruling puts schools on notice Davis v. Monroe County Board of
Education

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Promising practices in preventing bullying in K-12 schools: student engagement

PDF

Policies and promising practices to combat bullying in secondary schools

PDF

A case study in promising practices in anti-hazing education training for fraternity advisors

PDF

A case study of promising practices of anti-cyberbullying efforts in a middle school

PDF

Promising practices in the prevention of bullying: using social and emotional skills to prevent bullying

PDF

Why culture matters: a case study to determine the promising practices in the prevention of bullying in K‐12 schools

PDF

A case study of promising practices in the prevention of sexual assault in postsecondary institutions

PDF

Promising practices for building a college-going culture for LatinX students: a case study of a large comprehensive high school

PDF

Building a college-going culture: a case study of a continuation high school

PDF

Pa’delante, la lucha continúa: resiliency among Latinx college students with past experiences of bullying

PDF

Promising practices: promoting and sustaining a college-going culture

PDF

Students' perceptions of school interventions to reduce violence

PDF

How teachers identify and respond to bullying: an evaluation study

PDF

Innovative strategies to accommodate postsecondary students with learning disabilities

PDF

Promising practices for building leadership capacity: a community college case study

PDF

Early identification of a learning disability and its impact on success in postsecondary education

PDF

Elementary principal perceptions of teacher to student bullying within classroom management practices

PDF

Promising practices for building a college-going culture: a case study of a comprehensive high school

PDF

Supplemental literacy instruction for students with Down syndrome: a program evaluation

PDF

The influence of high school bystanders of bullying: an exploratory study

Asset Metadata

Creator Tate, Dana Jo (author)

Core Title Promising practices of anti-bullying: safe and supportive environments for all students

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 05/22/2014

Defense Date 03/15/2014

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag anti‐bullying,bullying,Education,intermediate school,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Stowe, Kathy (committee chair), Ahmadi, Shafiqa (committee member), Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee member)

Creator Email dtate@usc.edu,T8rtots3@aol.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-415113

Unique identifier UC11295939

Identifier etd-TateDanaJo-2526.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-415113 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-TateDanaJo-2526.pdf

Dmrecord 415113

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Tate, Dana Jo

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA