Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Policies and promising practices to combat bullying in secondary schools
(USC Thesis Other)
Policies and promising practices to combat bullying in secondary schools
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: PROMISING PRACTICES 1
POLICIES AND PROMISING PRACTICES TO COMBAT BULLYING IN
SECONDARY SCHOOLS
by
Edgar Melik-Stepanyan
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
May 2014
Copyright 2014 Edgar Melik-Stepanyan
PROMISING PRACTICES 2
Acknowledgements
I was absolutely grateful to have the support and love from so many people as I
completed this dissertation. I want to thank each one of them for motivating me,
challenging me, encouraging me, and supporting me.
To the love of my life, Sarah Nelson, my fiancée whom I have the utter joy and
honor of marrying in a few months. Thank you for being my best friend. I get to spend
the rest of my life having your support and love. I can’t wait. Thank you. I love you!
To my parents, thank you for setting an example with your work ethic. Dad and
mom, your dedication to all four of your kids and five grandkids have set an example for
all of us. I have strived to make both of you proud throughout my life. Thank you for all
of your sacrifices.
To the rest of my family, my brother, my sisters, my nephews and my one and
only niece, thank you for always making me smile, and for always believing in me.
To my friends and colleagues at USC, from the ones who shared the first class
with me three years ago, to those in my thematic group, especially Dana Tate, it has been
a joy to share this experience with you. Thank you for the memories.
To my professors, especially my advisor, Kathy Stowe, thank you for always
challenging me, always pushing me to excel and allowing me to become a better student.
PROMISING PRACTICES 3
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements 2
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 6
Abstract 7
Chapter One: Overview Of The Study 9
Statement of the Problem 13
Purpose of the Study 14
Research Questions 15
Significance of the Study 15
Limitations and Delimitations 16
Glossary of Terms 17
Organization of the Study 17
Chapter Two: Literature Review 19
Overview 19
Bullying 20
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory of Development 25
Macrosystem 26
Teacher and Student Perceptions 26
Exosystem 29
States’ Laws 29
Mesosystem 32
Whole-school Approach 33
Teacher Training 35
Microsystem 39
Characteristics of Bullying 39
Parent Roles 41
Summary 43
Chapter Three: Methodology 44
Research Questions 44
Research Design 45
Sample and Participants 46
Theoretical Framework 47
Conceptual Framework 48
Data Collection 49
Instrumentation 50
Data Analysis 52
Ethical Considerations 54
PROMISING PRACTICES 4
Chapter Four: Results 55
Demographics and Interviewees 55
Findings 57
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question One 69
Research Question 2: How are these systems and structures implemented and
sustained to support an anti-bullying culture? 71
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question Two 79
Chapter Summary 81
Chapter Five: Summary And Implications Of Findings 82
Introduction 82
Purpose of the Study 83
Summary of the Findings 84
Implications for Policy and Practice 87
Recommendations for Future Studies 89
References 92
Appendix A 99
Appendix B 101
Appendix C 103
Appendix D 104
Appendix E 105
PROMISING PRACTICES 5
List of Tables
Table 1 Summary of Instrumentation Used in Study 51
Table 2 Alignment of Interview Protocol Questions 52
Table 3 Certificated Teachers, Counselor and Administrators 56
Table 4 PTA Parents 56
Table 5 Process of Progressive Discipline to Address Bullying 61
Table 6 Elements of Sustainability 71
PROMISING PRACTICES 6
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 49
Figure 2: Creswell’s Model for Data Analysis 54
PROMISING PRACTICES 7
Abstract
The aim of this study was to research and analyze how schools use policies and
promising practices to combat bullying. A middle school in Southern California was
identified for having promising practices that were implemented and sustained to support
an anti-bullying culture. Nine participants, the principal of the middle school, two
assistant principals, two parents of students at the school, a counselor and three teachers,
were interviewed, and observations were conducted in order to gain insights into the anti-
bullying culture of the school. The process of data analysis followed the collection of the
interviews and process of observations, with the research revealing key systems and
structures that were essential in the school having an anti-bullying culture. Structures
included whole-school approaches that included ongoing training and implementation of
strategies to reduce bullying problems in a school, as well as a focus on professional
development to the staff on the basic understandings of bullying and the skills needed to
intervene appropriately in bullying behaviors. Systems included the collaborative
leadership at the school among the administration, teachers, parents, and students, to
eliminate bullying, and the use of time, as the middle school focused on caring for the
mental health of students both inside and outside of the classroom. The results of the
study had implications for district and school administrators in creating policies and
establishing school-wide practices to combat bullying and for future practice in school’s
creating an anti-bullying culture. This study, which used Bronfenbrenner’s ecological
theory of development as a theoretical foundation, increased the understanding of the
systems and structure that allow for an anti-bullying culture in schools, adding to the
PROMISING PRACTICES 8
literature base linking the systems, structures and professional development of a school to
an anti-bullying culture.
PROMISING PRACTICES 9
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Bullying has become one of the most critical issues nationwide (Bowman, 2001).
Although once shrugged off as kids being kids and a rite of passage for students (Stein,
1997), bullying is no longer considered an inevitable fact of school life, as it has been
thrust into the national spotlight. Bullying has garnered national attention because
research has shown the extent of bullying and the damaging effects that bullies can have.
The phenomenon of bullying is common in schools across the United States, as one out
of every four students reported being bullied in 2011. Research revealed that
approximately 160,000 children miss school every day out of fear of being bullied
(United States Department of Education, 2011).
Bullying has affected students in a multitude of ways. Students who have been
bullied have experienced sadness, distress, and anxiety, in addition to being confused,
angry and feeling insecure (Olweus, 1999). Bullied students have also been affected
academically, as they have avoided attending schools, and in some cases, students who
have been bullied have had suicidal intentions (Olweus, 1993). In some cases, students’
suicidal intentions have been carried out, such as in Minnesota, where a 13-year-old girl
committed suicide after being bullied (Schoonover, 2012). Researchers have also
attributed bullying as a cause of high-profile school shooting cases (Hong, Cho, Allen-
Meares & Espelage, 2010). The effects of bullying was attributed as a cause to the 1999
Columbine school shooting incident in which Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, of
Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado committed a massacre (Hong et al, 2010).
In 12 of 15 school shooting cases in the 1990s, the shooters had a history of being bullied
(United States Department of Education, 2011).
PROMISING PRACTICES 10
Research has validated that bullying is a problem that needs to be addressed. In
one of the first studies to investigate the development of bullying in the United States, the
National Association of Secondary School Principals reported in 1984 that a serious
concern for students in the United States was the fear of bullies (Batsche & Knoff, 1994).
Hazler, Hoover and Oliver (1992) showed that 72% of female and 81% of male
respondents in a retrospective data collection of 207 Midwestern middle- and high-school
students reported that they had experienced bullying during some part of their student
lives. Bullying continues to be a problem today. The Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (2011) found that 20% of students in grades nine through 12 experienced
bullying. The prevalence of bullying has occurred mostly on school property; however,
the report also noted that students were being electronically bullied through e-mail, social
media websites or texting.
Students have experienced various forms of bullying. For the purposes of this
study, bullying is defined as repeated persistent intentional behaviors that foster a climate
of fear and disrespect that had a traumatic impact on physical and/or psychological health
(Olweus, 1993). Some of the key components of bullying include: aggression, repetition,
and the context of a relationship with an imbalance of power (Olweus, 1999). Examples
of bullying targets have included children who have been smaller, younger, obese, from
different countries, and children who have acted differently from other children (Batsche
& Knoff, 1994; Olweus, 1993). Bullying in schools has been easy and difficult to detect.
Physical bullying has involved physical assaults and students engaging in aggressive
activities toward a target (Espelage, Bosworth & Simon, 2000). Emotional bullying has
not been as easy to detect. Emotional bullying has taken the form of gossiping, spreading
PROMISING PRACTICES 11
rumors, excluding others from activities or isolating others (Smith & Brain, 2000).
Cyberbullying has involved bullies electronically bullying victims through e-mails, texts,
or phone messages (McGrath, 2007).
With all of the attention to the different forms of bullying and the research behind
the consequences of bullies, federal and state governments have responded. Laws have
mandated that schools respond to bullying. From 1999 to 2010 there were more than 120
bills enacted by state legislatures nationally that introduced or amended education or
criminal statutes to address bullying and related behaviors in schools (U.S. Department of
Education, 2011). As of 2011, 46 states, including California, had bullying laws and 45
of those states directed school districts to adopt bullying policies; three of the 46 states
prohibited bullying without defining the bullying behavior (U.S. Department of
Education, 2011). Additionally, 36 states, including California, included provisions in
their education code to prohibit bullying using electronic devices while 13 states had
policies to allow for schools to have jurisdiction over off-campus behavior of students,
should the behavior create a hostile environment (U.S. Department of Education, 2011).
States have created model bullying policies; out of 41 states that have, 12 of them have
not mandated schools to follow the policies under the law (U.S. Department of Education,
2011). The California Department of Education (2003) has adopted policies to combat
bullying, encouraging schools to develop anti-bullying policies to include examples of
strategies that teachers could use to promote positive behavior. California has also
mandated training for teachers and staff about how to intervene in a dispute, in addition
to requiring conflict resolution training to students (California Department of Education,
2003).
PROMISING PRACTICES 12
As a result of the federal and state laws to combat bullying, schools have been at
the forefront of the efforts to eliminate bullying. Schools have structures, such as state
codes, and systems, such as administrators and school policies, in place to combat
bullying. For the purposes of this study, structures will be defined as mechanisms,
policies, and procedures put in place by federal, state, and district legislation or widely
accepted as the official structure of institutions that are not subject to change and systems
will be defined as coordinated and coherent use of resources (time, personnel, students,
parents, funds, facilities, etc.) at the institution to ensure that the institution vision,
mission, and goals are met.
Consequently, teachers have played an important role to ensure that the mission
and goals of eliminating bullying are met. However, teachers have reported that they do
not feel prepared to tackle school bullying, even though various professional
organizations have recommended that professionals be trained to deal with or prevent
school violence and bullying (Beran, 2005; Yoon & Barton, 2008). Teachers have
reported that they do not receive training on bullying and have expressed the desire for
more training (Mishna, Scarcello, Pepler & Wiener, 2005). Boulton (1997) discovered
that most teachers have not been able to differentiate between physical and emotional
bullying, partly because they have not been aware of the differences and have not been
provided quality professional development opportunities (Townsend-Wiggins, 2001).
Providing professional development opportunities has become vital for teachers to
address and limit bullying, however, opportunities for teachers to learn how to address
and counter bullying in their classrooms has been limited (Yoon & Barton, 2008). The
limits of professional development for teachers to combat bullying could have serious
PROMISING PRACTICES 13
consequences. If teachers are unaware of bullying, bullies are more likely to continue
bullying and victims will likely continue to suffer (Piotrowski & Hoot, 2008; Unnever &
Cornell, 2003). Victims are at risk of prolonged academic problems, absenteeism,
loneliness, and loss of friends if there is no emotional support provided by teachers
(Milsom & Gallo, 2006). Bullies are manipulators and socially skilled who can get
rewards from bullying, and teachers need to be trained to help victims in order to reduce
incidences of bullying (Nicolaides, Toda & Smith, 2010).
Statement of the Problem
The impact of bullies and victims of bullies have been extensively studied, but
bullying is still prevalent in schools. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention
(2011) found that bullying in schools increased from 2009 to 2010 by one percent.
Schools have tried to combat bullying through quick fixes, such as targeting a few
difficult students and hosting outside experts for one day and, but those mechanisms have
failed (Horner, Sugai & Horner, 2000). Research notes the need for systems and
structures using a whole-school approach that incorporates administrators, teachers,
students, parents and the community to combat bullying instead of relying on a magic pill
to solve a school’s problems of bullying (Dake, Price, Telljohann & Funk, 2003). What is
known is the use of a whole-school approach has proven to be effective in combating
bullying. However, what is not clearly known is how are these systems and structures
with the whole-school approach sustained to support an anti-bullying culture.
Additionally, what is known is teachers do not feel prepared to tackle school
bullying and teachers believe they have not received adequate training on eliminating
bullying (Beran, 2005). Teachers have expressed the desire to receive more training to
PROMISING PRACTICES 14
combat bullying, as research has shown the serious effects that teachers being unaware of
bullying have on students. The serious effects of teachers being unaware of bullying
involve students increasingly bullying one another, which leads to various problems for
students in school and through adulthood (Vanderbilt & Augustyn, 2010). Additionally,
what is not known is what the barriers are for the teachers in implementing an anti-
bullying culture.
Purpose of the Study
Although states have legislation that prohibits bullying in schools and educators
understand that bullying may be a precursor for devastating results, the issue of bullying
continues to be a problem for schools, as it impacts students’ academic performance and
their livelihoods outside of school (Nansel, Overpeck, Pilla, Ruan, Simmons-Morton, &
Schmidt, 2001). The purpose of this study was to examine how schools use those policies
and promising practices to combat bullying. The study also identified strategies that
schools used to create an anti-bullying culture, and how systems and structures were
implemented and sustained to support an anti-bullying culture. An aspect of the systems
and structures to combat bullying has included professional development of teachers,
who have been trained to notice instances of bullying and have been given strategies to
eliminate the problem in schools. The strategies that teachers have been given and the
training that teachers have received to create an anti-bullying culture served as another
purpose of the student. The researcher examined the professional development models
schools have used to establish an anti-bullying culture. Research has shown that effective
professional development of teachers has reduced the instances of bullying among
students (Newman-Carlson and Horne, 2004). The purpose of the study was to examine
PROMISING PRACTICES 15
systems and structures that have been in place by successful schools, with an additional
focus on the role that parents have played in helping schools create an anti-bullying
culture in schools.
Research Questions
In an effort to gain insight into an anti-bullying culture of schools, this study
seeks to obtain responses to the following research questions:
1) What are the systems and structures that contribute to an anti-bullying
culture?
2) How are these systems and structures implemented and sustained to support
an anti-bullying culture?
Significance of the Study
This study was designed to increase the understanding of the systems and
structure that allow for an anti-bullying culture in schools. While much literature exists
on bullying prevention programs, there is much less literature on systematic systems and
structures that have been put in place to combat bullying. This study is significant in that
it adds to the limited literature base linking the systems, structures and professional
development of a school to an anti-bullying culture. This linkage helps contribute to the
ongoing search for what is successful in schools, especially as it pertains to combating
bullying.
This study will be useful to school leaders in informing them about systems and
structures to combat and eliminate bullying. Leaders need to initiate, implement and
develop systems with school faculty and students to eliminate bullying. Research has
noted that leaders need to implement a whole-school approach, including an entire school
PROMISING PRACTICES 16
faculty and students, while developing systems and structures in order to have an
effective anti-bullying climate (Dake, Price, Telljohann, Funk, 2003). The whole-school
approach will allow schools to implement and sustain a professional development
program that has clear goals and strategies to eliminate bullying and have an anti-
bullying culture. With a whole-school approach, schools and communities will be
informed on the effective practices schools have used to address bullying.
Limitations and Delimitations
The limitations of this study were conditions that restricted the scope of the study
and may have affected the outcome. The limitations of the study were beyond the control
of the researcher. The following are the limitations to the study:
Even though the qualitative study was comprehensive, the small sample
size of one school prevented any broad generalizations, as the experience
of the school may have been unique to its institution.
The qualitative study allowed for an interview of teachers and
administrators from the school. It was expected that the participants would
respond truthfully, but there were no guarantees or confirmations that they
were truthful in their responses.
The time constraint of the dissertation limited the research to a three-
month span for data collection.
There were also delimitations that the researcher imposed prior to the start of the
study that narrowed the scope of the study. These were factors that affected the study
over which the researcher had some degree of control.
PROMISING PRACTICES 17
The study only interviewed and observed the staff and students at one
middle school in a comprehensive school district in Southern California.
The researcher chose a middle school that had an enrollment of a
minimum of 1,000 students.
The school that was chosen had to have implemented an anti-bullying
program.
Glossary of Terms
The following terms will be used throughout the study.
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.
Structure: Mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place by federal, state,
and district legislation or widely accepted as the official structure of
institutions that are not subject to change.
System: Coordinated and coherent use of resources (time, personnel, students,
parents, funds, facilities, etc.) at the institution to ensure that the institution
vision, mission, and goals are met.
Organization of the Study
This study examined bullying and professional development related to how
faculty used institutional policies and promising practices in combating bullying. The
study identified how systems and structures were implemented and sustained to support
an anti-bullying culture. Chapter one provided an introduction to the study and explained
the purpose and significance of the study. Chapter two presented a review of the literature
PROMISING PRACTICES 18
on bullying, focusing on professional development of teachers in preventing bullying.
Chapter three provided the research methodology, including the research design,
population and sampling procedure, as well as the instruments used in the study. Chapter
four reported the findings of the research by the research questions while connecting the
results to the literature. Chapter five provided a brief summary of the findings, the
implications of practice and recommendations for future studies.
PROMISING PRACTICES 19
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Overview
Bullying has become a serious problem for schools as there are alarming statistics
that show the severity of the issue. One in four people age 18 or younger is bullied in
school (Kim & Leventhanl; Dignan, 2010). The National Center for Education Statistics
and Bureau of Justice Statistics (2008) found that, nationwide, 28% of students in grades
6-12 experienced bullying. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2011)
indicated that, nationwide, 20% of students in grades 9-12 experienced bullying. Bullies
and those being bullied have a higher risk for significant mental and physical
consequences, as victims have reported clinical problems such as bed wetting, sleep
difficulties, anxiety, depression, school phobia, feelings of insecurity and unhappiness
(Kim & Leventhanl, 2008). Consequently, bullying has proven to impact schoolwork,
family and peer relationships, the psychological well-being and the physical health of
bullies and their victims (Brank, Hoetger & Hazen, 2012). While victims have been
affected by the behavior of bullies, the bullies have themselves shown to have been
affected by their behavior, as well (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, 2001). Students who have bullied in K-12 have experienced legal or criminal
problems as an adult (Olweus, 1993). Olweus found that 60% of boys identified as bullies
in grades six through nine had at least one criminal conviction by the time they were 24.
The purpose of this study was to examine how faculty, staff and administrators
use institutional policies and promising practices in combating bullying. To that end, this
study highlights the policies that schools have used to combat bullying and the roles that
the professional development of teachers plays in combating bullying. This chapter
PROMISING PRACTICES 20
examines the classroom level intervention and the individual intervention that schools
employ to have successful anti-bullying climates. Essential to this study is the
examination of the existing literature addressing the upbringing of bullies and victims,
and the role that professional development plays in helping eliminate bullying.
First the definition of bullying and the effects of bullying will be presented to
provide an overview of the issue that schools face. The overview of bullying is followed
by a discussion on the theoretical framework, based on Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological
Systems. Following the framework, a review of the literature related to the differing
perceptions of bullying among teachers and students, and how the differences has led to
conflicting reports of the effectiveness of teachers. After reviewing the literature on
perceptions, the state and federal laws regarding bullying are presented with an analysis
on the use of the laws on schools. Finally, this chapter concludes by providing a summary
of the literature on bullying and connecting it to this present study.
Bullying
There have been a number of definitions of bullying. Olweus (1993) wrote
bullying occurs when a student is being victimized “when he or she is exposed,
repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other students,”
(p. 9). Olweus (1999) used the definition of bullying to include one-on-one attacks of
stronger children against weaker ones. However, bullying has not only included physical
attacks of punching, but also direct verbal attacks such as name calling and teasing
(Smith et al, 2003). Other forms of bullying include emotional bullying, which has taken
the form of gossiping, spreading rumors, excluding others from activities or isolating
others (Werner, 2012; Smith & Brain, 2000). Another form of bullying has included
PROMISING PRACTICES 21
cyberbullying, which has involved bullies electronically bullying victims through e-mails,
texts, or phone messages (McGrath, 2007). For the purposes of this study, bullying is
defined as repeated persistent intentional behaviors that foster a climate of fear and
disrespect that had a traumatic impact on physical and/or psychological health. Having
one definition of bullying for the purposes of this study is vital in order to have a clear
understanding of bullying.
Bullying has been a challenge for schools because of the impact it has on students,
with harmful effects for those being bullied by schoolmates (Aledu et al, 2008). Olweus
(1993) wrote that boys between the ages of 13 and 16 who were bullied at school had low
self-esteem, with Rigby and Slee (1993), Boulton and Smith (1994) and Kochenderfer
and Ladd (1996) also writing that there were connections between low self-esteem and
being bullied at school. Rigby (2000) indicated that the mental health of young
adolescents has been related to the degree of bullying they experienced at school, writing
that students who have reported to be bullied appear to be at most risk of poor mental
health. There have been other effects of being bullied. Most bully victims lack friends
(Olweus, 1993). Bosworth, Espelage and Simon (2001) noted that higher levels of
impulsivity, anger, and depression were associated with greater levels of bullying over
time, with Beran (2006) finding that many victims feel helpless with bullies. Bullies and
victims of bullies have been associated with psychological problems (Vanderbilt &
Augustyn, 2010). Victims of bullies have had health problems, and poorer emotional and
social adjustments (Vanderbilt & Augustyn, 2010). Also, the chances of being diagnosed
with a psychiatric disorder in early adulthood have increased if a child has been bullied or
has bullied another student (Vanderbilt & Augustyn, 2010).
PROMISING PRACTICES 22
Case studies have further examined the effects of bullying. In a study of 432
gifted fifth through eighth-graders from 11 states in America, Peterson and Karen (2006)
asked students to rate the emotional impact of being bullied. Fifth-graders were impacted
by bullies the most, as 13% of fifth-graders indicated an emotional impact on school as a
result of bullying. Additionally, Peterson and Karen (2006) asked about students feeling
distressed from bullying. Sixteen percent of the eighth-graders in the study indicated that
they were distressed because of bullying. The distress of the students might have had an
impact on the students’ perceptions of schools, their academic performance and self-
confidence (Peterson & Karen, 2006).
Another case study discovered the common health symptoms of students being
bullied. Approximately 2,900 students, ages seven to 10, were interviewed in London to
estimate the prevalence of bullying in primary school children and to understand the
effects of childhood bullying. Williams, Chambers, Logan and Robinson (1996) found
that there was a correlation between children reporting being bullied and their everyday
behaviors. Reports showed that they did not sleep well, wet their bed, felt sad and
experienced occasional headaches. The feeling of depression among students in the study
conducted by Williams, Chambers, Logan and Robinson (1996) were also found in an
earlier study by Boulton and Underwood (1992), who discovered that students felt lonely
and depressed from bullying. Slee and Rigby (1994) also researched the impact of
bullying, and found that victims were lonelier than non-victims after studying students in
Australian schools. The feelings of anxiety among bullied students have also been found.
Boulton and Smith (1994) studied 158 students in three urban middle schools in Great
Britain, and found that victims of bullies had feelings of anxiety, with Crick and
PROMISING PRACTICES 23
Grotpeter (1996) also discovering that students felt lonely and depressed after being
bullied.
Studies have examined the relationship between bullying and its impact on
student achievement. After studying, 27,217 students and 1,087 school principals,
Konishi, Hymel, Zumbo and Li (2010) found math achievement was negatively related to
school bullying, with similar results related to reading achievement. Buhs, Ladd and
Herald (2006) found similar results in a longitudinal study of kindergarten through fifth-
graders, discovering that peer exclusion and abuse played a role in children’s
achievement. The rejection that students felt contributed to declining classroom
participation and an increase in school avoidance (Buhs, Ladd and Herald, 2006). A study
by Glew, Fan, Katon, Rivara and Kernic (2005) found additional effects on academic
achievement among students who were bullied. The researchers conducted a cross-
sectional study using 2001-2002 school data in an urban public school district with 3,530
third, fourth and fifth grade students. The measure that the researchers used was self-
reported survey in bullying, and 22 percent of the children surveyed were involved in
bullying as a victim, bully or both. The children who were victims of bullies were more
likely to have low achievement than the bystanders, and were more likely than bystanders
of bullies to feel unsafe at school. Juvonen, Nishina, and Graham (2000) found similar
results of victimized students having lower achievement than comparison students.
Juvonen et al (2000) studied 243 participants, 109 boys and 134 girls, in the seventh and
eighth grade in a large public middle school in California, with the students’ age ranging
from 12 to 15 years. The researchers found that those students who were bullied had
lower grade-point averages than comparison students. Also, even though Nansel et al
PROMISING PRACTICES 24
(2001) did not find a relationship between a victim or a bully/victim and the academic
achievement of those students in an analysis of data from a representative sample of
15,686 students in grades six through 10 in public and private schools in the U.S., the
researchers still noted the academic impacts on bullies. Students completed the World
Health Organization's Health Behaviour in School-aged Children survey during the
spring of 1998, and Nansel et al (2001) found that the students who were bullies were 1.8
times more likely to be below-averaged students than to be good students. The prevalence
of bullying and the impact that bullies have has shown that bullying is a critical issue for
elementary schools and that schools need to use curricula to tackle the problem, which is
affecting students’ academic achievement and their confidence (Glew, Fan, Katon,
Rivara and Kernic, 2005). The academic achievement of students has been a heightened
concern among schools, especially since the passage of No Child Left Behind. Schools
have been concerned about helping students succeed academically and have been kept
accountable through the No Child Left Behind legislation in 2001. Given the connections
between bullying and the potential of low academic achievement, schools have realized
that tackling the issue of bullying is essential (Milsom & Gallo, 2006).Based on the
research and literature on bullying and the effects of bullying, it is vital for schools to
eliminate the problem of bullying. The problems of bullies and their victims might be
carried over into adulthood, and schools and communities need to work together to
eliminate such issues. The next section will advance Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory
of development as a theoretical foundation for the study due to its impact on the social
contexts and influences of development.
PROMISING PRACTICES 25
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory of Development
The social-ecological approach of Bronfenbrenner provides a holistic view of
bullying while studying the microsystems, mesosystems, exosystems, and macrosystems
interactions with the individual. The microsystem refers to the activities and interactions
that occur in the environment of an individual (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The mesosystem
refers to the connections and relationships among microsystems such as homes, schools
and peer groups (Schaffer, 2009). The exosystem refers to contexts that students may not
be a part of, but influence their development. The macrosystem deals with the
institutional patterns of the culture and subculture. Each of these levels will be integrated
into the literature review as the aspects of the theoretical framework will guide the study
based on the interactions between the leadership of a school, the professional
development of a school and the effects of bullying on individuals. Bronfenbrenner
(1979) conceptualized a multi-faceted model that takes into account the physical
environment, and its relationship to people at individual, interpersonal, organizational
and community levels. The theory attempts to understand the interaction between an
individual and his or her environment, with an understanding that individuals develop
and interact within different levels of their environment and each of those levels has a
direct impact on his or her individual development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).
Bronfenbrenner’s theory works best when studying bullying. His theory has been
cited as an influential model that explains bullying and the individual attitudes and
behaviors that effect bullies and their victims (Swearer & Espelage, 2004). When a child
bullies, it is not only because of their personal characteristics but also because of their
actions and interactions with others, such as their peers, teachers, other adults, the media,
PROMISING PRACTICES 26
and industry (Geffner, Loring & Young, 2001). Swearer et al (2009) noted that bullying
does not occur in isolation and is a result of a complex interaction with an individual and
his or her family, community and the societal norms. Another reason that his model
works best is because it takes into account the individual and environmental changes over
time and the influence of the certain roles of the bullies and the victims.
Macrosystem
The macrosystem of Bronfenbrenner’s framework (1979) deals with the beliefs
and values of the culture. This level of the system refers to the cultural, subcultural and
social class structure in which microsystems, mesosystems and exosystems are included
(Schaffer, 2009). The cultural level describes the culture in which people live in, meaning
the ways and thoughts of people within a community. The macrosystem refers to the
cultural beliefs, such as those of teachers and students, which could affect the individuals
in the microsystems. The behaviors of bullies are rooted in the culture of the organization
and society, and there is a need to understand the culture of a school instead of just the
bully (Monk, Smith, Naylor, Barter, Ireland & Coyne, 2000). The next section will
discuss the teacher and student perceptions of bullying.
Teacher and Student Perceptions
Identifying bullying has been difficult, as teachers and students have different
perceptions of bullying (Naylor, Cowie, Cossin, de Bettencourt, & Lemme, 2006). Smith
and Levan (1995) found that most students identified bullying as fighting behavior and
aggressive behavior. Students usually have focused on the more obvious and less subtle
forms of bullying, such as verbal abuse and indirect aggression to describe bullying
(Madsen, 1997). Students have also seen more of a prevalence of bullying compared to
PROMISING PRACTICES 27
their teachers (Espelage & Swearer, 2004). Additionally, students have noted that
teachers are not as effective in combating bullying as teachers think they are in handling
problems (Limber, 2002). Dranoff (2008) found that students believed that teachers have
not always been aware of bullying and student victims have often been unwilling to
disclose the bullying because many students believe that school leadership might not care
or that teacher and administrator response would not help.
Teachers have different perceptions of bullying than students (Naylor et al, 2006).
Yoon and Kerber (2003) studied teachers perceptions of physical, verbal and social
exclusion bullying and found teachers enrolled in graduate class at a U.S. state university
had different attitudes to the types of bullying and used different intervention strategies in
helping students. Out of the various types of bullying, social inclusion was viewed less
seriously (Yoon & Kerber, 2003). Hazler, Miller, Carney and Green (2010) found that
teachers view physical threat or abuse as more severe than verbal or social and emotional
abuse. Teachers have also rated physical conflicts as bullying even when the altercations
did not fit the definition of bullying (Hazler et al, 2010). Further, teachers have
underestimated the number of students involved with bullying. Bradshaw, O’Brennan and
Sawyer (2007) collected data from 15,185 students in grades four through 12 and from
1,545 school staff members, including teachers and psychologists, at 109 elementary,
middle and high schools in Maryland through a web-based survey and found that school
staff underestimated the prevalence of students frequently involved in bullying.
Furthermore, when the staff reported bullying, teachers noted that bullying was a fact of
life that every child has experienced, thus diminishing the effects of such incidences
(Bradshaw, O’Brennan and Sawyer, 2007). While teachers have perceived themselves to
PROMISING PRACTICES 28
be effective at identifying incidences of bullying; research has found that teachers
overestimate their abilities to detect (Limber, 2002).
The lower prevalence of bullying reported by teachers compared to students and
the underestimating of bullying by teachers could imply that teachers are unaware of the
problem and need professional development and other training to become aware and
learn how to handle the problem of bullying. The various perceptions of bullying also
raise concerns about the lack of concern from teachers about the various forms of
bullying that affect the psychological well-being of students (Zerillo and Osterman, 2011).
Another impact of the differences between teachers’ and students’ perceptions of
bullying is the commitment of teachers in attempting to stop bullying among students
(Naylor et al, 2006). If teachers do not recognize bullying situations, they might be less
likely to stop the behavior.
In summary, the issue of teacher and student perceptions of bullying is vital for
the correct reporting of the incidences (Smith, Cowie, Olafsson & Liefooghe, 2002). It is
important to know how the reported incidences of bullying differ and on which
dimensions, whether it is physical bullying, emotional bullying or cyberbulling, they
differ among teachers and students in order to understand the complex issue (Smith et al,
2002). In addition, teachers and students must understand the anti-bullying policies and
practice of a school in order to have an effective anti-bullying climate. Changes in the
perceptions of bullying might have implications for the design of a school-based program
to eliminate bullying. The next section will discuss the state and federal laws, under the
scope of the exosystem, regarding bullying.
PROMISING PRACTICES 29
Exosystem
The exosystem deals with factors granted to schools by virtue of the government
(Bronfenbrenner, 1977). The exosystem greatly influences the child, even though the
child may not interact directly with this system (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). These structures
of the exosystem include the major institutions of society that have been structured and
evolved as they have operated on the federal, state and local level (Bronfenbrenner,
1977). The structures and systems of the federal and state laws will be discussed to
understand the views of lawmakers toward bullying.
States’ Laws
Identifying the various forms of bullying has spilled into the legal arena (Brank,
Hoetger, & Hazen, 2012). Describing bullying has been varied from state to state, with
some states like California including cyberbullying as part of its definition for bullying
behavior and other states like Georgia referring only to physical bullying behavior. Other
states have left the task of defining bullying to local school districts, like Arkansas’ anti-
bullying statue, which requires schools districts to “adopt policies to prevent student
harassment and bullying. Policies must define bullying, prohibit bullying on school
property, at school-sponsored activities and on school buses and state the consequences
of engaging in bullying behavior,” (Arkansas Act 681, HB 2274, 2003). The legislators in
California have described bullying as “an electronic act, as defined in subdivisions (f) and
(g) of Section 32261, directed specifically toward a pupil or school personnel,” (AB 86,
2003). Other states, like Louisiana, Oregon, Oklahoma and New Jersey, have made
bullying synonymous with harassment and intimidation. For example, the Louisiana
statue states:
PROMISING PRACTICES 30
“Harassment, intimidation, and bullying: any intentional gesture or written, verbal
or physical act that: (a) reasonable person should know will have effect of
harming student or damaging property or placing in reasonable fear of same; and
(b) is so severe, persistent or pervasive that it creates an intimidating, threatening,
or abusive educational environment for a student,” (2002).
From 1999 to 2010 there were more than 120 bills enacted by state legislatures
nationally that introduced or amended education or criminal statutes to address bullying
and related behaviors in schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). As of 2011, 46
states had bullying laws and 45 of those states directed school districts to adopt bullying
policies, however, three of the 46 states prohibited bullying without defining the bullying
behavior (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). Additionally, 36 states included
provisions in their education code to prohibit cyberbullying or bullying using electronic
devices while 13 states had policies to allow for schools to have jurisdiction over off-
campus behavior of students, should the behavior create a hostile environment (U.S.
Department of Education, 2011). States have created model bullying policies, but out of
41 states that have, 12 of them have not mandated schools to follow the policies under the
law (U.S. Department of Education, 2011).
Laws on the federal level have also protected students. The Due Process Clause of
the 14
th
Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees no state “shall make or enforce
any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States… nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,”
(U.S. Constitution, 1868). The 14
th
Amendment might be interpreted by the courts to
protect students from being bullied (Brank, Hoetger, & Hazen, 2012). The U.S.
PROMISING PRACTICES 31
Constitution also protects individuals with the Equal Protection Clause, which forbids a
state from denying any person the equal protection of their laws. The Civil Rights
movements in America in the 1950s and 1960s provided more protection for students
(Brank, Hoetger, & Hazen, 2012). Title IX, a federal law that was a portion of the
Education Amendments of 1972, prohibited discrimination on the basis of sex. The
discrimination could include harassment and bullying that is sexual in nature or targets an
individual’s gender or sexual orientation, and schools that receive federal funding could
violate Title IX when harassments by classmates are so severe that it creates a hostile
environment for the victim and the harassment is not adequately addressed by school
employees. Further, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 required all
states to provide a free appropriate public education to all students with disabilities
between the ages of 3 and 21 and a state might be in violation of IDEA if a school is
indifferent to bullying (Brank, Hoetger, & Hazen, 2012).
The passage of federal educational laws has mandated that students are given
guidance and counseling in dealing with educational issues, like bullying. The
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 passed by Congress and President
Johnson emphasized equal access to education for all students. In 2002, Congress
amended the act and reauthorized it as the No Child Left Behind Act. The passing of the
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) established that school safety persist a critical concern
of administrators. The Unsafe School Choice Option, a mandated structure of
NCLB, required 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
that district. The 113
th
Congress of the United States (2013) introduced a bill to amend
PROMISING PRACTICES 32
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to address and take action to
prevent bullying and harassment of students, noting that bullying and harassment include
a range of behaviors that negatively impact a student’s ability to learn and participate in
educational opportunities and activities that schools offer. As defined by Safe Schools
Improvement Act of 2013, bullying behaviors include hitting or punching, name-calling,
intimidation through gestures or social exclusion, and sending insulting or offensive
messages through electronic communications, such as internet sites, e-mail, instant
messaging, mobile phones and messaging, telephone, or any other means.
In summary, the laws around bullying have increased awareness of the issue. The
framework of the laws has been vital for victims and witnesses of bullies to step forward
and to protect students. The laws have also dealt with the legal consequences of bullies,
and the laws might prevent violent bullying actions from occurring. The laws have also
been important because schools have been able to report and document cases of bullying,
and taken steps to prevent such cases. The next section will discuss the approaches that
schools have used to combat bullying.
Mesosystem
The mesosystem describes the interrelations between the major settings in
containing the development of a person in his or her life (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). Thus,
the mesosystem encompasses interactions among family, school, peer groups and
students (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). The mesosystem might also include church, camps, and
the workplace (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). In this section, the major settings of schools will
be discussed in attempting to eliminate bullying and have an anti-bullying climate.
PROMISING PRACTICES 33
Whole-school Approach
Professional development is needed to improve teacher knowledge about effective
school-based bullying prevention activities (Dake et al, 2003). Video presentations or
quick fixes to solve bullying issues at schools have not been effective (Boulton &
Flemington, 1996). The approach that has been most successful to solving bullying issues
has been “whole school approaches” (Dake et al, p. 348, 2003). An entire school
approach to preventing and eliminating bullying has involved incorporating activities for
teachers in the classroom and for the entire school while creating a school culture to
prevent bullying by changing school and classroom rules that target bullying behavior
and changing student attitudes. The whole-school approach has involved incorporating
themes into the classrooms to allow students to discuss bullying, and has also included
working with students to create anti-bullying rules for classes (Whitted & Dupper, 2005).
The whole-school approach has also involved a parental component that requires parents
to be aware of the issues of their children in schools (Dake et al, 2003).
The school-based approach to eliminating bullying has proven to be the most
effective, with the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program being cited as an effective
whole-school approach (Vreeman & Carroll, 2007). The Olweus Bullying Prevention
Program has prevented and reduced bullying through training for school personnel,
materials for parents, classroom curriculum, and evaluation (Vreeman & Carroll, 2007).
The whole-school approach that has involved parents, community members, such as
school bus drivers and local shop keepers, in addition to all staff, has seen the biggest
decreases in bullying behavior (U.S. Department of Education, 1998).
PROMISING PRACTICES 34
The whole-school approach to preventing bullying has created a safe and
supportive school environment for students. Students at schools should feel safety,
connected, accepted, and supported by the staff, and a whole-school approach would also
for prevention of bullying instead of fragmented efforts that might be uncoordinated and
inefficient (Rossen & Cowan, 2010). School-wide programs are more likely to positively
affect the school climate and reduce bullying than individualized or classroom-level
interventions that might be implemented in isolation (Ttofi & Farrington, 2011). The
National Association of School Psychologists (2012) recommended a series of steps to
having a school-wide approach to bullying, including having early intervention, parent
training, teacher training, an attitude change from adults at schools and a positive school
environment.
The elimination of bullying has also involved comprehensive plans that have been
led by the state (Beaty & Alexeyev, 2008). For example, Vermont has required schools to
distribute a model school plan for student discipline that also focuses on bullying, noting
that bullying is a dangerous behavior that requires teachers who witness such acts to
report them to school administrators who should investigate all reports (Vermont House
Bill 629, 2005). Regarding schools, researchers have noted that schools need to have
clear and consistent policies in dealing when dealing with bullying. Unnever and Cornell
(2003) reported that bullies were more likely to continue engaging in bullying behavior
when bullies felt that no one would intervene and there would be no consequences for
them. Olweus (1999) recommended that schools establish a formal committee comprised
of representatives from parents and the community to work on writing policies and
coordinating activities to combat bullying throughout the year. Input from students,
PROMISING PRACTICES 35
teachers and parents should also be used to address the issue of bullying (Olweus, 1999;
Clarke & Kiselica, 1997).
Teacher Training
School-wide policies will not be effective if teachers are not included and are not
made aware of the problem of bullying. Newman-Carlson and Horne (2004) found a
decrease in bullying when teacher training content was focused on recognizing bullying,
intervening, assisting victims and preventing bullying. Teachers who volunteered to be
trained in a bullying program filed fewer bullying-related disciplinary reports after the
training was completed and also reported that they felt more confident in their ability to
intervene with bullies than the teachers who did not participate in the bullying training.
Teachers also reported that they had an increase in personal self-efficacy related to
working with specific types of children who had been bullied. Olweus (1999)
recommended using professional development days at the beginning of the school year to
review bullying policies and noted the importance of using additional training and
support to help teachers deal with bullying.
Evidence of the effectiveness of teacher training in combating bullying has been
found in the United States (Orpinas, Horne & Staniszewski, 2003). For example, a
program that educated students and trained teachers to prevent bullying in the
Southeastern United States found a 40% reduction in self-reported aggression and a 19%
reduction in self-reported victimization after the training of teachers and students
(Orpinas, Horne & Staniszewski, 2003). Other analysis has focused on classroom
management and the social structure of the class, which has had a direct impact on
bullying behavior (Roland & Galloway, 2002). The researchers found that teachers who
PROMISING PRACTICES 36
had competence in teaching, monitored, intervened and cared for students had a direct
impact on the prevalence of bullying other children. Other research has shown that when
teachers have been educated on intervention techniques to combat bullying, and have
been given training, there have been fewer instances of bullying (Gottfredson &
Gottfredson, 1995; Stephenson & Smith, 1989, as cited in Newman-Carlson, 2004).
Teacher teaching has had to be followed up with support through consultation of teachers
in order to have success working with students who have been emotionally disturbed
(Shapiro, DuPaul, Bradley & Bailey, 1996).
Teachers play a central role in monitoring and intervening to limit bullying
(Olweus, 1993). They need to become aware of the problems of bullying in their schools,
and teachers should engage themselves in changing the situation (Olweus, 1993). The
expectation of teachers include monitoring student behavior and responding to the needs
of bullies and their victims (Atlas & Pepper, 1998). Teachers also must implement an
anti-bullying curriculum in their classrooms (Berdondini & Smith, 1996). In addition to
implementing an anti-bullying curriculum, teachers are also relied on to help students by
providing emotional support (Hunter, Boyle & Warden, 2004). Teachers have been
looked to solve student problems, to have empathy for bullied students and to promote
prosocial behavior (Hunter, Boyle & Warden, 2004).
The role of the teacher also extends to supervising the outdoor environment of
students (Olweus, 1993). Most bullying occurs at schools, rather than on the way to and
from school, and less bullying occurs when there are more teachers supervising during
lunch and recess time (Olweus, 1993). Not only should teachers be aware during lunch
and recess time, but teachers should also intervene quickly in preventing bullying instead
PROMISING PRACTICES 37
of stating that students are just having fun (Olweus, 1993). The quick intervention of
bullying will convey a message that bullying is not allowed on campus (Olweus, 1993).
Teachers should take the extra step and report the bullying in order for tendencies of
bullying to be discovered and counteracted (Olweus, 1993).
To prevent bullying inside classrooms and in their schools, teachers need more
training (Boulton, 1997). In a completed questionnaire from 138 preschool, elementary
and secondary school teachers in the North-West of England, Boulton (1997) found that
87% of teachers wanted more training to prevent bullying, as participants in the study
expressed low confidence in responding to bullying. The teachers in the study indicated
that they needed more training to prevent bullying. The training might involve
professional development, which is a federal mandate under No Child Left Behind (2002).
Additional research has discovered the elements of successful teacher training that
has helped teachers deal with bullying in schools. For example, Rigby (2001) wrote about
the need for professional development in order for schools to combat student bullying,
noting the need of schools to deal with preventing bullying before it becomes a pervasive
problem. Benitez, Garcia-Berben and Fernandez-Cabezas (2009) also studied the
importance of professional training for teachers who were dealing with student bullying.
Benitez, Garcia-Berben and Fernandez-Cabezas (2009) studied 199 trainee teachers of
Pre-School, Elementary and Secondary Education, finding that teachers had improvement
in their ability to characterize bullying problems, to differentiate between victims and
aggressors through a specific training on combating bullying. The authors wrote that the
specific training on recognizing bullying had a positive impact.
PROMISING PRACTICES 38
Case studies have documented what has made professional development effective.
Penuel, Fishman, Yamaguchi and Gallagher (2007) used a sample of 454 teachers in an
inquiry science program to examine the effects of professional development on teachers’
knowledge and ability to implement the science program. After analyzing results from
surveys of teachers, the researchers found that the incorporation of time for teachers to
plan for implementation of content was essential to having effective professional
development. Additionally, a focus on the content of the science program during the
professional development was a predictor of teachers’ feeling more prepared to
implement the program. The study showed the significance of time and focus to
professional development, showing with a devoted amount of time and a central idea,
professional development could be effective. The idea that a professional development
needs to be focused was also found on a study that was completed by Garet, Porter,
Desimone, Birman, and Yoon, 2001. The researchers used a national sample of 1,027
mathematics and science teachers to understand the effects of different characteristics of
professional development on teachers’ learning. They found that in order for professional
development to be effective, it has to be ongoing as opposed to one time workshops that
are often short and not focused on subject matter content and are poorly administered
(Garet et al, 2001). The content of professional development is important because
teachers need to be presented with relevant topic and be able to use those skills in their
classrooms to enhance student achievement. In addition, research indicates that
continuous and intensive professional development is more likely to have a positive
influence than are short workshops (Garet et al, 2001).
PROMISING PRACTICES 39
In summary, research has found that preventing bullying could not be done
through quick fixes or conferences that have no follow through. Preventing bullying and
having an anti-bullying climate involves a host of members, from the community to the
teachers to administrators. All members of the community need to be involved, and
trained through effective strategies, in order to have a successful anti-bullying climate.
Without a comprehensive plan and a plan of action among the various stakeholders, anti-
bullying strategies might fail.
Microsystem
The microsystem refers to the complex of relations between people and their
environment (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). The microsystem refers to the roles of families and
teachers for particular periods of time (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). The factors of place, time,
physical features, activity, participant, and role are also some of the elements of this level.
In this section, the characteristics of bullying will also be presented. In addition, the role
of families will be discussed when dealing with bullying.
Characteristics of Bullying
One characteristic of bullies is their aggression toward peers (Olweus, 1993).
Bullies are also aggressive toward adults, whether the adult may be a teacher or a parent
(Olweus, 1993). In addition, bullies have a positive attitude toward violence and use
violent means against their victims (Olweus, 1993). Bullies have a strong need for power
and dominating others, and appear to enjoy being in control (Olweus, 1993). The
commonalities among bullies include characteristics such as being angry and being quick
to act, in addition to having revenge-seeking thoughts and actions (Hazler, Carney, Green,
Powell & Scott, 1997). The National Center for Education Statistics (2009) has found
PROMISING PRACTICES 40
that boys are more likely to bully than girls. Espelage, Bosworth & Simon (2001)
discovered that most bullies are male, popular, and often athletes with social skills and
the ability to attract many followers, and easily manipulate others. Vanderbilt and
Augustyn (2010) found that bullies have high social status, and tend to have more
conduct problems, with alcohol use and history of physical abuse precipitating bullying
behavior.
Victims of bullies have also had similar characteristics, including having a poor
self-image, feeling inadequate, blaming themselves for bullying, and believing to have a
lack of control of their environment (Hazler et al, 1997). Most victims are also lonely,
abandoned, and usually do not have a single good friend in school (Olweus, 1993). The
loneliness of victims has led to impaired peer relationships and an increased problem
with peer involvement, as victims have felt more depressed than non-bullied students
(Meland, Rydning, Lobben, Briedablik, Ekeland, 2010).
Victims have been attacked by bullies on and off school grounds (National Center
for Education Statistics and Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2008). Seventy-nine percent of
victims have reported that they were bullied inside the school, 23% said that they were
bullied outside on school grounds, eight percent said they were bullied on the school bus,
and four percent said they were bullied somewhere else (National Center for Education
Statistics and Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2008). Bullying has occurred mostly in school,
with a lesser amount on school property. Among students ages 12 through 18 who
reported being bullied at school during the 2008-09 school year, 47.2% of students
reported being bullied in a hallway or stairwell and 33.6% of students reported being
bullied in a classroom (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). Victims have also
PROMISING PRACTICES 41
been attacked on the Internet (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). The
National Center for Education Statistics (2009) found that cyberbullying for middle-grade
levels has been the least prominent type of bullying, but has increased in high school
students.
Parent Roles
Parents play an important role for understanding the reasons for bullying
problems and seeking further avenues to change bullying behavior (Smith & Myron-
Wilson, 1998). The experiences that a child at home can affect how the child may act in
school (Smith & Myron-Wilson, 1998). When there is a problem at school for bullies,
there are usually issues at home, as well (Swearer & Espelage, 2004). Parents of bullies
have been described as having little warmth for their children and fathers of bullies have
not been active in the lives of their children who are (Berdondini & Smith, 1996). The
researchers studied 20 bullies and 20 victims from four schools in Tuscany, Italy, and
found that bullies show lower cohesion with their parents. Other research has found
disunity between parents and their children who are bullies, as there are arguments and
disagreements between the family members (Ahmed & Braithwaite, 2004). Ahmed and
Braithwaite (2004) also found that bullying was related to children reporting having
family disharmony after 1,401 students from 32 public and private schools in Australian
Capital Territory voluntarily completed questionnaires. Connolly and Moore (2003)
noted that bullies tend to have destructive family settings with poor problem-solving
skills and poor relationships with their mothers, fathers and siblings. Parents usually do
not monitor the behavior of their children who are bullies, as there is little
communication and low trust between parents and their children (Pepler, Jiang, Craig &
PROMISING PRACTICES 42
Connolly, 2008). Pepler et al (2008) found that if elementary school students had
problems in relationships with their parents, they were between two and four times more
likely to bully in secondary school. Olweus (1994) noted that parents of bullies do not
place limits on their children and are tolerant of their bullying behavior toward their
victims.
Whereas parents of bullies and their children have limited and dysfunctional
relationships, the parents of victims also tend to be close to one another and parents seem
to be overly involved in the lives of their children (Berdondini & Smith, 1996). Parents of
victims of bullies are also highly involved in schools (Swearer & Espelage, 2004).
However, studies have shown that children who are overly protected by their parents
have high levels of anxiety and panic, which might lead to a risk of being a victim of a
bully (Swearer & Espelage, 2004). Finnegan, Hodges and Perry (1998) found that boys
who had a fearful coping style and overprotective parents were more likely to be
victimized by bullies.
The research behind the role of parents provides a direction for prevention of
bullying (Pepler et al, 2008). Interventions of bullying must not only focus on the actions
of the bully and the victim, but also the development of the bully and victim, as well as
the social cognitions and social problem-solving skills should be focused on to have a
successful anti-bullying climate (Pepler, Craig, Connolly, Yuile, McMaster, Jiang, 2006).
Interventions should also focus on relationships between parents and bullies, as well as
parents and victims of bullies (Pepler et al, 2006).
PROMISING PRACTICES 43
Summary
Bullying is a complex process that has numerous layers and affects victims and
bullies (Olweus, 1993). Victims of bullies do not have many close friends and feel
isolated, while bullies have had problems with the law in adulthood (Olweus, 1993).
Teachers and students do not appear to have a clear perception of bullying, leaving the
state and federal governments to define bullying (Naylor et al, 2006). State and federal
governments deal with the issue of bullying by including anti-bullying policies and laws
to prevent such actions; however states have been inconsistent in their policies, as some
states have definitions for bullying, while others leave the task of defining the acts of
bullying to local districts (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). Much of the existing
literature has focused on how to prevent bullying (Olweus, 1993). The whole-school
approach has been the model that researchers have pointed to as the most effective to
limit bullying (Dake et al, 2003; Olweus, 1993), with factors of classroom intervention,
individual intervention, teacher training and professional development also playing a role
in combating bullying. Parents and teachers have also played a vital role in combating
bullying (Smith & Myron-Wilson, 1998), as the development of bullies and at home have
led to bullying in school (Pepler et al, 2006).
PROMISING PRACTICES 44
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Schools have struggled to eliminate bullying on and off campuses, as the issue of
bullying has become a national problem that schools have tackled. The intent of this
study was to examine how faculty, staff and administrators use institutional policies and
promising practices in combating bullying. The study examined strategies that successful
schools used to create an anti-bullying climate, and how systems and structures were
implemented and sustained to support an anti-bullying culture. The goal of the study was
to examine systems and structures that have been employed by successful schools.
This chapter outlines the research design of the study and provides a synopsis of
the participants and the sample selection. This chapter also reexamines the theoretical and
conceptual frameworks that formed the foundation of the study. In addition, the
procedures for the data collection, as well as the instrumentation utilized, are presented in
this chapter. The chapter also includes the format for data analysis. To complete the
chapter, the ethical considerations of the study are presented to ensure the safety and the
confidentiality of the participants.
Research Questions
In an effort to gain insight into an anti-bullying culture of schools, this study
seeks to obtain responses to the following research questions:
1) What are the systems and structures that contribute to an anti-bullying
culture?
2) How are these systems and structures implemented and sustained to support
an anti-bullying culture?
PROMISING PRACTICES 45
Research Design
The research questions provided a structure for the study and were followed with
a choice for the research method for data collection. In order to gain insights into the anti-
bullying cultures of schools and understand the experiences of teachers it was determined
that qualitative methods would be best suited for this study. The qualitative methods are
the means to answering the research questions (Maxwell, 2013). The methods of
qualitative research allow researchers to understand “the meaning people have
constructed, that is, how people make sense of their world and the experiences they have
in the world,” (Merriam, 2009, p. 13). This study was meant to help contribute to the
ongoing search for what is successful in schools, especially as it pertains to combating
bullying, and the most effective way of presenting the information of a successful school
was through a qualitative data collection. Qualitative data collections rely on observations
to make sense of the data, in addition to interviews and artifact analysis (Erickson, 1984).
Consequently, this study captured data through interviews, observations, in addition to
artifact analysis.
As a result of the detailed interviews and observations, the qualitative case study
approach allowed for a delineation of the process of forming an anti-bullying climate, as
well as an interpretation for what the school experienced. The qualitative approach was
suitable for this study because its concern was to understand the “phenomenon of interest
from the participants’ perspective, not the researcher’s,” (Merriam, 2009, p. 14), which
was vital to learning how a school has successfully tackled bullying. An advantage of
qualitative research is that the participants’ perspective can be captured through rich
descriptions, rather than using numbers to convey what the researcher has learned. The
PROMISING PRACTICES 46
descriptions can be laid out with descriptions of the context, the participants involved,
and the activities of interest (Merriam, 2009). The descriptions contribute to the
descriptive nature of the qualitative research.
Sample and Participants
This study examined the experiences of one school. The small sample size of one
school prevented any broad generalizations, as the experience of the school may have
been unique to its institution. The one school sample was a purposeful sample that
allowed the researcher to discover, understand and gain insight from which the most can
be learned (Merriam, 2009). The purposeful sampling allowed for an observation of the
phenomenon that the researcher is researching (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam, 2009). The
purposeful sampling also allowed the researcher to select a site where an anti-bullying
culture had been established. This type of sampling included locating a few key
participants who met the criteria that was established for this study.
The selection criterion for this study was chosen by the thematic group. The
thematic group determined that the study would be of one school that would have an anti-
bullying climate. The systems and structures included policies, funding, curriculum,
professional development and a leadership team in place that tackled the issue of bullying.
The school was selected through referrals from colleagues. Once the school was
identified, a recruitment letter was sent to the school’s principal. The letter included a
request to participate in the study, as well as a summary of the study and the requirements
for the participants. As a result, the researcher selected a middle school located in
Southern California that had an anti-bullying policy and created an anti-bullying climate
through professional development of teachers and students. The anti-bullying policies
PROMISING PRACTICES 47
were adopted a year prior to the study, and the training of teachers and students was
conducted during the 2011-12 school year. The participants for the interviews included
the principal of the middle school, two assistant principals, a counselor and three teachers.
The principal referred the researcher to the assistant principals and the teachers. In
addition to the staff members at the school, two parents were interviewed to understand
the roles of parents in the anti-bullying program. The principal of the school referred the
researcher to the parents. All of the participants volunteered for the interviews, and no
coercion was used by the principal or the researcher.
Theoretical Framework
This study was guided by Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory of development,
which was chosen for the study due to its impact on the social contexts and influences of
development. Bronfenbrenner’s model theorized that individuals develop and interact
with his or her environment, with an understanding that individuals develop and interact
within different levels of their environment and each of those levels has a direct impact
on his or her individual development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The levels of
Bronfenbrenner’s model include the microsystems, mesosystems, exosystems, and
macrosystems. The microsystem refers to the activities and interactions that occur in the
environment of an individual (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The mesosystem refers to the
connections and relationships among microsystems such as homes, schools and peer
groups (Schaffer, 2009). The exosystem refers to contexts that students may not be a part
of, but influence their development. The macrosystem deals with the institutional patterns
of the culture and subculture. The levels of Bronfenbrenner’s model are presented on a
PROMISING PRACTICES 48
daily basis within a school, as various factors influence students and their behaviors
toward others.
Conceptual Framework
As discussed in chapter two, a whole-school approach is most successful to
solving bullying issues (Dake et al, 2003). The whole-school approach involves having
systems and structures that are implemented and sustained to support an anti-bullying
culture in schools. There are various pieces that comprise the systems and structures
within a school, such as funding, policies, training, staffing and professional development.
Together, these components are ultimately what shape a school’s anti-bullying culture.
Leadership is critical for the sustainability of stable systems and structures. Leadership
coordinates the systems and structures, as well as the visions and feedback from various
pieces, in order to have a successful anti-bullying culture. The following conceptual
framework, which was created by the thematic group, illustrates how these systems and
structures are implemented and sustained to support an anti- bullying culture in schools.
PROMISING PRACTICES 49
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
Data Collection
The study was conducted through using semi-structured interviews with nine
participants, observations of professional development meetings, classrooms and snack
and lunch, and through an analysis of artifacts, such as the school policies and school-
wide memos on bullying. Interview and observation protocols were designed by the
dissertation cohort, and are included in Appendices A and B. As suggested by Bogdan &
Biklen (2003), the principal of the middle school that was going to be studied was asked
for permission to interview teachers and observe her school in order to be respectful of
her school and the methods of qualitative research. Prior to the actual interviews, the
PROMISING PRACTICES 50
interview protocols were piloted with the dissertation group to ensure that the interview
questions would answer the research questions. All of the participants for the interviews
volunteered for the interviews and signed a formal consent form before being interviewed.
The interviewees understood that they could opt out of the study (Merriam, 2009). All of
the interviews were recorded and transcribed to be used for analysis. The interviews
lasted between 45 and 60 minutes.
The observations were made of professional development meetings, snack and
lunch breaks of students, which included observing the cafeteria, the front of the school,
before the beginning bell and at the end of the school day. Observations lasted between
30 to 60 minutes. The observations allowed for a holistic understanding of the
phenomena of the study and increased the validity of the study by allowing the researcher
to observe the context of the circumstances that were described in interviews.
Additionally, the observations allowed the researcher not only to answer the research
questions, but also to look for nonverbal expressions, interactions within groups, and
participant communications that could allow the researcher to discover themes in the
findings (DeWalt & DeWalt, 2002; Schmuck, 1997). The artifacts collected included
school memos about bullying, school posters about bullying, including agendas and the
professional development training tools used by the district and the school. The artifacts
would be important to analyze because, for example, the agenda would inform the
researcher the focus and goals of the professional development.
Instrumentation
The semi-structured interviews, observations, and artifact analysis provided
multiple sources of data to compare and check in order to answer the research questions.
PROMISING PRACTICES 51
Semi-structured interview and observation protocols, created by the thematic group, were
used for the study (Appendix A, Appendix B). The semi-structured interviews also
allowed for probing questions when applicable to the interview. Observations also
followed a protocol and focused the research on specific information related to an anti-
bullying culture. The various methods of data gathering provided for a triangulation of
information, which has been the “most well known strategy to shore up the internal
validity of a study,” (Merriam, 2009, p. 215). Triangulation of information involves
cross-data validity checks to check for consistency from multiple methods (Patton, 2002).
It is important to triangulate information because triangulation improves the validity and
reliability of the research.
The following table demonstrates how the interviews, observations, and artifacts
were used to answer the research questions. The interviews answered both research
questions, with the observations and artifacts also providing data on the research
questions.
Table 1
Summary of Instrumentation Used in Study
Research Question Interviews Observations Artifacts
What are the systems and
structures that contribute to
an anti-bullying culture in
schools?
Administrators
Counselor
Teachers
Parents
Professional
development
meetings at the
start of the
school year
Teacher training
Student training
School Mission &
Vision
Single School Plan
Disciplinary Matrix
Anti-bullying policy
Agenda
School Calendar
How are these systems and
structures implemented and
sustained to support an anti-
bullying culture?
Administrator
Counselor
Teacher
Professional
development
Teacher lesson
Hallways
during passing
periods
Single School Plan
Agenda
Lesson plans
School Calendar
PROMISING PRACTICES 52
Before school
Snack and lunch
breaks
After school
Table 2
Alignment of Interview Protocol Questions
Research Question Interviews
What are the systems and
structures that contribute to
an anti-bullying culture in
schools?
1. What was the driving force behind the start of the
anti-bullying efforts?
2. 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?
3. What is the process that occurs when there is a
bullying incident?
4. How are teachers, staff and administrators involved
in anti-bullying efforts?
5. 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?
Data Analysis
The process of data analysis followed the collection of the interviews and process
of observations. Data analysis was an intensive study once all the data was set, and
allowed for finding themes of the interviews, observations and artifacts, exploring the
PROMISING PRACTICES 53
literature on the field and using charts to manage the data through coding (Merriam,
2009). Essentially, the data analysis allowed for the use of thinking strategies to make
sense of the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The thinking strategies were tools for
strategically and purposefully analyzing the data, helping “get a grasp on the mountains
of data,” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008, p. 67). Creswell’s (2003) six steps were used for the
data analysis. Once the interviews were recorded and transcribed, the analysis process
began by reading the data. Creswell then suggested coding of the data, which included
the interview notes, the observations and the artifacts. The coding of the data followed an
open-coding process, which allowed for themes to emerge from the data. The open-
coding process involved using phrases and concepts from the literature and data to
develop codes, as suggested by Merriam (2009). The codes were then categorized and
once the categories were set, an in-depth analysis began. The following chart, which was
developed by the thematic dissertation group, illustrates the process of the data analysis.
PROMISING PRACTICES 54
Figure 2. Creswell’s Model for Data Analysis
Ethical Considerations
The reliability and validity of the study depended on the ethics of the researcher
(Merriam, 2009). The study was carried out with integrity and involved the researcher
following the university’s protocol for ethical conduct in research, as described by the
Institutional Review Board (IRB). The individuals who participated in the study were
protected from harm, had a right to privacy and consented to the interviews and
observations. The interviews and observations also presented ethical dilemmas (Merriam,
2009). To protect the confidentiality of each participant and the institution, pseudonyms
were used and the names were changed. Additionally, the data were kept in a secure
location to prevent tampering from unauthorized observers and users.
PROMISING PRACTICES 55
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
This study examined strategies that successful schools used to create an anti-
bullying climate and how systems and structures were implemented and sustained to
support an anti-bullying culture. Chapter four presents the findings from a case study of a
middle school located in Southern California that created an anti-bullying climate,
identifies the systems and structures, and provides findings from the case study and the
analysis of the findings.
The findings presented were directly related to the following two questions:
1) What are the systems and structures that contribute to an anti-bullying culture?
2) How are these systems and structures implemented and sustained to support an
anti-bullying culture?
The study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with 10 participants
and observations of professional development meetings, classrooms and snack and lunch
periods. An analysis of artifacts, including school policies and school-wide memos on
bullying were also used. The triangulation of the multiple sources of data increased the
validity of the study’s findings (Merriam, 2009).
Following an introduction of the participants of the study, the study’s findings are
presented in alignment with the research questions.
Demographics and Interviewees
Valley Middle School is located in Los Angeles County, California, and serves
the population of a single urban city located in the Mountain Unified School District. In
2012-2013, Valley had an enrollment of 1,210 students, with 55.2% of them identified as
White, the largest ethnic group in the school, and 23.8% Korean, the second-largest
PROMISING PRACTICES 56
ethnic group in the school. The school also had 51 teachers, with 97.44% of them being
considered highly qualified teachers, defined as having at least a Bachelor’s Degree and a
California teaching credential.
The findings in this chapter are based on data from interviews with administrators,
a counselor, teachers and parents as well as observations and artifacts. The following
table describes the certificated teachers, counselor and administrators who were
interviewed at the school.
Table 3
Certificated Teachers, Counselor and Administrators
Pseudonym Position Held Number of Years in
Position at Valley
Total Number of
Years in Education
Mr. Lincoln History Teacher 20 20
Ms. Washington History Teacher 14 16
Ms. Jackson Math Teacher 4 11
Dr. Madison Principal 4 18
Ms. Jefferson Assistant principal 1 14
Mr. Adams Assistant principal 43 43
Ms. Van Buren Counselor 5 20
The following table describes the PTA parents who were interviewed.
Table 4
PTA Parents
Pseudonym Title Age Number of Years in PTA
Mr. Bush PTA President 40 7
Ms. Clinton PTA member 48 8
The teachers, administrators, counselor and parents who were interviewed for this
study provided insight into the experiences of the staff and students at Valley. The
participants of this study supported the research with their candid feedback and
perspectives, helping the researcher understand and describe the anti-bullying culture at
PROMISING PRACTICES 57
Valley. The following section describes the study’s results by each research question as
gathered from interviews with the participants, observations of Valley and a collection of
artifacts, such as the school policies and supervision schedules.
Findings
Research Question 1: What are the systems and structures that contribute to an
anti-bullying culture?
The first research question asked, “What are the systems and structures that
contribute to an anti-bullying culture?” For the purposes of this study, structures are
defined as mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place by federal, state, and district
legislation or widely accepted as the official structure of institutions that are not subject
to change. Additionally, systems are defined as coordinated and coherent use of resources
(time, personnel, students, parents, funds, and facilities) at the institution to ensure that
the institution’s vision, mission, and goals are met. At Valley, the policies,
responsibilities of administrators, teachers, parents and students and professional
development of teachers were the significant structures that allowed the school to create
an anti-bullying culture. The use of the time within the school and the personnel, such as
administrators, teachers, parents, and students, involved within Valley were two critical
systems that worked within the structures to have a successful anti-bullying culture.
Chapter four begins with a discussion of the structures followed by the systems that
worked within the structures.
Structure 1: Whole-school policies. For the purposes of this study, bullying is
defined as repeated persistent intentional behaviors that foster a climate of fear and
disrespect that had a traumatic impact on physical and/or psychological health (Olweus,
PROMISING PRACTICES 58
1993). Prompted by district personnel’s desire to have a comprehensive and systematic
approach to reduce bullying, the Mountain Unified School District began looking, in
2007, for way to reduce bullying at all 30 of its schools. The district looked toward the
Olweus Bullying Prevention Program, which has been cited as an effective whole-school
approach to eliminate bullying (Vreeman & Carroll, 2007). “The district wanted to have a
program that was researched. We had addressed bullying before, but never in a
comprehensive way like the Olweus program,” said Dr. Madison, the principal at Valley.
The Olweus Bullying Prevention program is a research-based bullying prevention
training plan that involves ongoing training and implementation of strategies to reduce
bullying problems in a school. Goals of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program include
reducing bullying problems, preventing the development of new bullying problems and
having better relations among students at school. Through the observations, data
collections and interviews, it was evident that Valley used the Olweus Bullying
Prevention Program to institute its policies toward bullying.
History behind Olweus Bullying Prevention Program at Valley. The school’s
administrators and teachers were dramatically affected as a result of a suicide in the
region in 2012 by a high school student who had attended Valley. Two of the three
teachers who were interviewed said that it was their understanding that the suicide in the
region prompted the district to push toward having a systematic approach for an anti-
bullying culture throughout its elementary, middle and high schools. “The suicide had a
big impact on this community,” said Ms. Washington, a history teacher at Valley. The
family of the student who committed suicide filed a $2-million claim against the district
and alleged that school officials failed to protect the student from bullying. The counselor
PROMISING PRACTICES 59
at Valley, as well as one of the assistant principals, did not know whether the suicide had
to do with bullying. The Los Angeles Sheriff’s investigators stated that four notes found
in the student’s backpack after the suicide did not mention bullying. “There is a lot of
hurt in the community,” said Dr. Madison.
An emphasis of the school following the suicide was not only to continue to
provide high-quality education to its students, but to focus on making a difference and a
having positive impact on the lives of the students. The school emphasized not only
focusing on instruction of its students and improving its Academic Performance Index
(API) score of 937 from the previous year, but also paying attention to the well-being of
students and caring for their mental health, both inside and outside of the classroom.
“We’re building relationships with the students,” said Ms. Jefferson, an assistant
principal at the school. Building relationships and caring for students allowed the school
to build trust and rapport with students who have been made to feel comfortable sharing
instances of bullying.
Process. The dialogue at Valley has focused on having a specific process to
follow when bullying has been reported by parents, teachers, and/or students. When
bullying has been witnessed by parents, teachers, and/or students, an incident report form
has been filed. The bullying incident report includes the date and time of the incident and
whether the bullying happened before. It also includes other information, such as the
incident, the names of students involved in the bullying behavior, the names of
witnesses/bystanders, the type of bullying and bullying behaviors, and a description of
the incident (Appendix D). Once the incident report has been submitted, an administrator
has followed through on the report by investigating the incident. The investigation by the
PROMISING PRACTICES 60
principal or other school personnel has included communication with the reporter, target,
instructor, teacher, witnesses and parents individually. “Immediate action is always taken.
Our clerical staff is also involved. We’re involved in every step of the investigation,” said
Ms. Van Buren, one of the two counselors at the school.
Immediate action by administrators, counselors and teachers entailed asking
questions and listening to the reporter, target of the bully and the student who was
accused of bullying. “We listen to all sides,” said Mr. Adams, one of the assistant
principals at Valley. The school stressed to its staff to immediately act on possible
bullying situations by not ignoring bullying behaviors in the classroom and in the
hallways, and to report the bullying behaviors so that they may be investigated. When the
investigation revealed bullying behavior, the principal or other school personnel met with
the person demonstrating bullying behavior and provided consequences. Administrators
followed up on incidents and offered necessary support. Targets have been encouraged to
report any repeat offense immediately.
The importance of the incident report has been that it brought bullying to the
attention of the school while also allowing personnel to help prevent further bullying
through identifying the issues and problems between students. “We have been in front of
issues. We want to be proactive and identify issues before they escalate,” said Ms.
Jefferson, one of the assistant principals at the school. The following table illustrates the
process followed in bullying situations.
PROMISING PRACTICES 61
Table 5
Process of Progressive Discipline to Address Bullying
Classroom Referral -1 Referral -2 Referral -3 Referral -4
1. Warn student
2. Warn student and
phone call home
Out of classroom:
1. Warn student
2. Repeated
behavior, bring to
office/referral
1. “Think
about it”
Form
2. Meet with
administrato
r
3. Phone call
home
4. District
Orange
Bully Form
1. “Think about
it” Form
2. Detention
3. Phone call
home
4. District
Orange
Bully Form
1. “Think
about it”
Form
2. ATS
3. Phone call
home
4. District
Orange
Bully Form
1. “Think about
it” Form
2. Suspension
(Progressive)
3. Phone call
home
4. District
Orange Bully
Form
The process that Valley followed allowed the school to deal with bullying in a
systematic approach. An important aspect of the systematic approach has been that the
Valley’s teachers, administrators, and counselors, as well as the parents, have been
involved in addressing bullying situations. Collaboration among the various stakeholders
has allowed the school to become aware of the bullying incidents and inform the
stakeholders of the consequences through each step. The process has also allowed for
consistency of actions throughout each bullying incident. Consistency among the teachers,
administrators and counselors has allowed students to clearly understand the discipline
procedures set by the school, and made all stakeholders aware of the uniform process.
The parents who were interviewed felt that the uniform policy was fair because the
discipline was consistent for all students at Valley.
Structure 2: Professional Development. The professional development on
bullying prevention for administrators and teachers at Valley began after teachers
voluntarily opted to join the school’s Bullying Prevention Coordinating Committee in the
fall of 2012. Approximately 21 members, out of 51 teachers, of the committee attended a
PROMISING PRACTICES 62
two-day committee training conducted by a certified Olweus trainer. The members were
introduced to research on bullying behaviors and taught strategies on addressing bullying,
the effects of bullying on students, and the need for bullying behavior prevention and
intervention. Dr. Madison was one of the members of the school to be trained. She shared
the following:
“We received some pretty extensive training in anti-bullying. We really talked
about what bullying is and what is not accepted. With Olweus, it’s much more
detailed into how to assist students and transform a school. What we needed to do
was come up how to get the message out to kids and how to get the message out
to parents and then really train the teachers so that they are clear in understanding
what bullying is and what bullying isn’t, as well as focusing on a constant and
consistent message to students when we see it.”
The members of the committee returned to Valley and provided full-day training
to the staff on the basic understandings of bullying and the skills needed to intervene
appropriately in bullying behaviors. The committee members followed the Olweus
Bullying Prevention model and adopted procedures, such as the bullying incident report
form and discussed classroom and parent components of the program.
One of the foci of professional development in the beginning of the 2013-14
school year was to re-introduce the bullying incident form and provide teachers with on-
the-spot interventions, or what were described as teachable moments at Valley. Training
for the on-the-spot interventions was completed in August during the first of two full-
days of professional development for teachers at Valley (Appendix E). Teachers were
taught how to stop the bullying behavior and asked to support the student who
PROMISING PRACTICES 63
experienced bullying behavior, to name the bullying behavior and to refer to the school
rules on bullying. Teachers were also asked to engage the bystanders, followed by
imposing immediate and appropriate consequences and, finally, to protect the students
from future bullying behavior. We are constantly putting the issue of bullying out in front
of the teachers,” said Mr. Adams, who has been an assistant principal at Valley for the
past 23 years.
Valley’s administration shared anti-bullying strategies with the teachers. These
strategies included e-mails to the staff, encouraging teachers to stand in the hallways
during passing period and bullying prevention professional development meetings
regarding the importance of preventing bullying behavior in the classroom. Professional
development has been adopted based on the student survey data that the school received.
Based on the Olweus Bullying Questionnaire, the school discovered that students felt
their teachers could do more in the classroom to cut down on bullying. During
professional development meetings, teachers discussed what more they could do to
reduce bullying in the classroom, such as pacing the classroom during student work time
and being attentive to student conversations with one another. Data also showed that only
13% of students tried to stop a student who was being bullied at school. “We’re looking
at the data to give us a sense of what we need to do,” Ms. Jefferson said. Valley discussed
how administrators, teachers and counselors could encourage students to report bullying
incidents, and brought strategies to help students report, such as making students feel safe
about reporting.
System 1: Collaborative Leadership. The administration, staff, students and
parents collaborated to create an anti-bullying culture. The most successful strategy has
PROMISING PRACTICES 64
been “whole-school approaches” (Dake et al, p. 348, 2003) that involve collaboration
among various stakeholders. Valley took on the whole-school approach from the outset
of its program. Administrators, counselors and teachers within the school trained the staff
on the approach, and administrators, parents, and teachers had responsibilities to handle
bullying issues. The administration collaborated with the Bullying Prevention
Coordinating Committee to develop professional development for teachers. In turn, the
teachers used the professional development in their classrooms and worked with students
to create the anti-bullying culture while also soliciting assistance from parents. The
following sections discuss the leadership of the administration, staff, parents, and
students.
Administrative leadership. All three administrators at Valley collaborated and
adopted a process for receiving and investigating reports, including having a timeline to
investigate and resolve incidents. Both assistant principals handled the majority of the
bullying incident reports and reported the incidents to the principal. All three publicized
policies, including information about the manner to file a report to students, parents, and
teachers, and made appropriate translations for parents and students. They have been the
leaders of the policies that Valley implemented and worked with parents, students and
teachers to create an anti-bullying culture by being explicit about their expectations for
the school. “We have to be clear of what we want. We have to model it,” Dr. Madison
said.
As leaders, the administration has modeled the behavior for teachers by
establishing clear communication with parents, students and teachers in bullying
situations. The administration has maintained documentation of bullying incidents, and
PROMISING PRACTICES 65
reported it to teachers, counselors and parents. Parents have been made aware of the
bullying and been informed of the steps followed to ensure that their child is safe at the
school. “Parents want to know that their child is safe at school,” Mr. Adams said. During
the interview with Mr. Adams, he displayed the documentation of bullying reports filed.
Following the interview, he spent time in the afternoon following up on incidents by
calling parents, calling students in and talking to teachers about the instances with the
goal of eliminating bullying and protecting students. Mr. Adams and two administrators
demonstrated leadership by “walking the talk.” When administrators asked teachers to be
in the hallways during passing periods, all three administrators were in the hallways as
well, greeting and welcoming students into classrooms. As leaders, they listened to
different perspectives and strategies for an anti-bullying culture, which included listening
to students’ suggestions about the prevention of bullying. Administrators have welcomed
perspectives and feedback from parents, teachers and students, showing that collaborating
with each stakeholder helps build an anti-bullying culture.
Staff leadership. The staff at Valley was asked to be leaders inside the
classroom. Teachers received professional development focused on identifying bullying
and were asked to take immediate steps to intervene when the staff witnessed an act of
discrimination, harassment, intimidation, or bullying. Staff members have been required
to submit a bullying incident report when they witnessed an incident. Teacher leadership
has been evident in the classroom, where teachers, like the ones interviewed, created an
environment where students understood that bullying was inappropriate and would not be
tolerated.
PROMISING PRACTICES 66
Creating a safe environment for students was a focus of all three teachers who
were interviewed. Mr. Lincoln mentioned the importance of setting the tone in the
classroom from the beginning of the year. He said, “It’s important that students respect
one another in the class. I don’t want students mocking each other during readings.”
During an observation of his classroom, the students discussed various topics about the
government shutdown and the views of political parties as well as the students’ own
perspectives about governmental issues. Students’ views on the government clashed with
one another; however, the students respected each other’s thoughts. Notably, when
students read passages from the Constitution about the House of Representatives and
came upon difficult words, students helped each other sound out the words and did not
mock each other when one student struggled with a phrase from the Constitution. Dr.
Madison, who also sat in Mr. Lincoln’s class during the observation, later mentioned the
respect that students have for Mr. Lincoln and each other, and the positive and caring
climate that Mr. Lincoln, along with other teachers, established in his classroom. “You
make a point to know each student, you try to get to know their names, you stand at the
door, you care,” Mr. Lincoln said. As a result, Mr. Lincoln noted that students felt valued,
creating a climate of respect for students and teachers.
Parent leadership. Parents were informed about the school’s direction toward
building an anti-bullying culture and were made aware of the specific policies that Valley
implemented. As a result, parents became a vital component of the school’s anti-bullying
culture by being aware of the school policies and being aware of students in the
community. “Parents will talk to us. They are the eyes in the community. They don’t
hesitate to let us know about bullying that takes place outside of school,” Mr. Adams said.
PROMISING PRACTICES 67
Parents have helped generate ideas about how to have an anti-bullying culture at
school, such as helping develop a Kindness Week at Valley that involved students doing
something nice for each other each day, and serving lemonade to every student to show
that they are supportive of the students during Kindness Week. Parents were asked to
maintain open lines of communication with students, teachers, administrators and other
staff, and were included in discussions with administrator and teacher leaders about
strategies to have an anti-bullying culture at Valley. “We can’t do our jobs if we don’t
know about the bullying,” Dr. Madison said. “We’ve asked the district to have an online
bullying report so that parents could report, anonymously.” Reporting by the parents has
allowed the administrators to meet the needs of students who have been bullied.
Administrators and teachers have resolved bullying issues between students, making sure
to involve parents through the process.
Student leadership. Students at Valley have also acted as leaders and been
expected to contribute to building a culture of inclusion and respect. Through daily
announcements and posters developed by the school’s associated student body, students
were encouraged to not engage in or contribute to bullying behaviors. Students in the
various clubs acted as leaders, as students encouraged one another to get involved in
extracurricular activities, to make a difference in the community through random acts of
kindness and to help one another when in need. “If a student wants to be a leader, there’s
a place for them to be a leader because we have so many service clubs,” Mr. Lincoln said.
The student leaders have taken a part in the anti-bullying culture by setting
examples for other students. Students have made a difference by caring for others, with
an example including student leaders purposely eating lunch with students who
PROMISING PRACTICES 68
previously ate lunch by themselves with the hope of developing friendships and making
other students feel connected to the school. The student leaders had a positive impact on
the school by encouraging each other to stand up against bullying and by informing
adults about bullying.
System 2: Use of time within the school. Valley began its first period classes at
8 a.m. Fifteen minutes prior to the first class, teachers were assigned duties in the main
building, amphitheater and covered area to supervise students. The use of time before the
beginning of school allowed teachers to look for instances of bullying, which has proven
to be vital because less bullying occurs when there are more teachers present (Olweus,
1993).
Teachers and administrators also used snack time to supervise students. Teachers
were assigned duties in the snack lines, main building, food cart area, cafeteria,
amphitheater, stage of amphitheater and the covered area for supervision. The time
during snack was not simply for clearing halls and making sure that students picked up
their trash. “Our whole theme is taking a second, making a difference. Take one second
to address a child and to see a kid,” Dr. Madison said. Dr. Madison’s phrase about seeing
a child and addressing a child was observed through conversations that teachers had with
students through passing periods. Through each passing period, teachers stood at their
doors, welcomed students to their classes and asked about the students’ day, their
activities before and after school and asked about various topics, ranging from the
students’ completion of homework to conversations about the hot topic in sports and
entertainment. “They see that I care when I stand in front of the door. I am greeting them
PROMISING PRACTICES 69
and asking them about their day instead of just being behind a pile of papers in front of
my computer,” Mr. Lincoln said.
The dedication of teachers like Mr. Lincoln has been important for Valley
because of its focus on caring for students both inside and outside of the classroom.
Administration and teachers were constantly visible and available to the students in the
halls, during snack and lunch and following the final bell of the day. All three teachers
interviewed at Valley stressed the importance of remaining visible to students, expressing
the need to eliminate bullying.
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question One
Prior to 2011, Valley addressed bullying haphazardly. However, it did not have a
successful anti-bullying culture until it received training in anti-bullying strategies and
implemented a whole-school approach that involved the support and buy-in from the
administration, counselors, teachers, parents and students. The process of transforming
the school began with extensive training of the principal and the assistant principals. In
addition, the committee members took the lead in adopting policies, such as the
procedures to be followed after a bullying incident. Policies have been consistent at
Valley. Administrators, counselors and teachers interviewed for this case study all
expressed the importance of the common policies that have been uniform throughout the
school and allowed staff members to be aware of the steps to follow regarding a bullying
situation.
Professional development regarding the school’s policies and practices has been
ongoing. Training has been extensive on how to combat bullying, and the teachers who
were interviewed said that they have felt comfortable handling the issues of bullying
PROMISING PRACTICES 70
inside of their classrooms. “We have had the training, and we know what to do,” Mr.
Lincoln said. Professional development focused on building character and ethics in
students, which has also been a focus of the district, and stressed the need to make
students feel safe and secure. However, the school community, like the teachers who
were interviewed, understood that further professional development is needed regarding
handling bullying via social media websites.
Valley’s drive to implement an anti-bullying culture has been led by Dr. Madison.
She took on a leadership role to combat bullying and to promote an anti-bullying culture.
Dr. Madison also realized that she needed help to have an anti-bullying focus. She
involved more than two dozen teachers who took on roles of leadership outside of their
classrooms as advisors to clubs and other activities that connect students to the entire
school. One of those teacher leaders was Mr. Lincoln, a history teacher who also serves
as the school’s Associated Student Body advisor. Mr. Lincoln helped students become
involved at the receiving end of the message that bullying is not allowed at Valley.
Administrators and teachers have not been the only leaders in the school’s drive
to build an anti-bullying culture. Students in the Associated Student Body have also been
trained by student-leaders in the district’s three high schools, at an annual conference, on
becoming leaders in their school. Students, teachers, administrators and parents have
been leaders at Valley. Students have been leaders in classes by speaking against bullying
and participating in service clubs. Teachers set an example by caring for students and
investing in students’ mental health. Administrators have shown leadership and
dedication by encouraging an anti-bullying culture with useful strategies teachers could
use to prevent bullying in the classroom. Parents have served as leaders by being present
PROMISING PRACTICES 71
in the community and notifying the school when bullying occurs. Their collaboration in
building an anti-bullying culture has created an environment that is supportive and caring.
Research Question 2: How are these systems and structures implemented and
sustained to support an anti-bullying culture?
The second research question asked, “How are these systems and structures
implemented and sustained to support an anti-bullying culture?” Research showed that,
once implemented, programs needed to be sustained in order to have the desired results.
Marek and Mancini (2004) measured sustainability of a program through a series of
earlier studies using mixed methods. As indicated in table six, Valley demonstrated all
seven elements of sustainability as defined by Marek and Mancini (2004). Sustainability
is discussed as the systems and structures implemented and sustained to achieve a
successful anti-bullying culture.
Table 6
Elements of Sustainability
Perceived
Structures
Perceived
Systems
Structures and systems
as discussed by Marek
and Mancini (2004)
Implemented and
sustained systems
and structures at
Valley
Policies Collaborative
leadership
1. Leadership
competence
X
2. Understanding the
community
X
3. Strategic funding X
4. Staff involvement X
Professional
development
Use of time within
the school
1. Effective
collaboration
X
2. Demonstrated
program results
X
3. Program response X
PROMISING PRACTICES 72
Leadership competence. Dr. Madison has been the leader at Valley for four
years. “It all starts with me. I have to set an example as the leader. It’s important that the
principal models the expected behavior and the treatment of staff and students,” she said.
However, Dr. Madison also stressed the need to have a competent team of leaders around
her to build an anti-bullying culture. “I can’t do it all alone. I am lucky that I have people
around me that are smart and driven and really care about our school,” Dr. Madison said.
She solicited assistance in order to develop and articulate the vision and the objectives of
Valley in its quest to have an anti-bullying culture. Approximately 21 members of her
staff responded and self-selected to become leaders for the school’s anti-bullying
program.
As articulated by one the committee members, Ms. Jackson, a math teacher, the
members of the committee have regularly met to assess the school’s progress and adapt to
student needs based on conversations with parents, teachers, counselors, district
personnel and students. Ms. Jackson mentioned that the committee meets on a quarterly
basis to discuss new strategies to help teachers deal with bullying, such as taking
immediate action, talking to students and referring them to the administration to stop the
bullying behavior before it prolongs. Ms. Jefferson, an assistant principal at Valley,
mentioned that committee members incorporate staff feedback while discussing strategies
to combat bullying. “We want teacher input,” she said. The input from teachers is used to
plan for professional development regarding the anti-bullying culture.
Understanding the community. A key feature of understanding the community
includes connecting with the community and the community’s participation in programs.
Valley involves parents in the committee for the Olweus Bullying Prevention program.
PROMISING PRACTICES 73
Dr. Madison said the issue of bullying is not just a school issue. The issue has also
involved parents, Dr. Madison said:
“I think bullying is a community issue, not a school issue. Kids attend our schools.
I speak to parents. They say, ‘I hear there is bullying here.’ I say, ‘did you have a
bully in your in sixth grade?’ Guess what, he’s coming here. We don’t have
bullies hidden here, waiting for your kids to arrive. They are with you already.
We don’t manufacture them and we won’t blame that [Valley] bears a bullying
problem.”
Dr. Madison, both assistant principals, the teachers and the parents all mentioned
the hurt in the community following a suicide in 2012 by a high school student in the
Mountain Unified School District. The community outreach included involving the
firehouse down the street from the school as a safe place for students to complete
homework and study. “Students are not running amok after school. They have a safe
place to go,” Dr. Madison stated. Community leaders also volunteered to speak at the
school and participated in other activities. Some of those activities included providing
food for the firehouse as needed, celebrating other community leaders in a Founder’s Day
celebration, hosting a Family Civil War Night and recognizing the staff during Staff
Appreciation Week. Other community leaders, such as various churches in the
community, helped with a number of activities like a Lunch on the Lawn event that
students enjoyed with their parents. “We want to get out and help them as much as
possible,” said Ms. Clinton, a PTA member who is also a part of a local church that
volunteered to assist Valley with Lunch on the Lawn. Church members baked homemade
cookies for students to enjoy with their parents during a lunch at the school.
PROMISING PRACTICES 74
Strategic funding for extracurricular activities. Valley has used
extracurricular activities as a way to encourage students to be connected to the school,
emphasizing programs in an effort to build an anti-bullying culture. Leaders, like Mr.
Adams, at Valley understood that extracurricular activities help students in a variety of
ways. “The students have a sense of belonging to the school. They love representing the
school,” the long-time assistant principal said. For example, students have become
dedicated to programs at the school, spending countless hours after school to help each
other improve their skills in sports and other programs, such as drama and dance.
Students have also motivated each other and learned from lessons such as teamwork and
management from coaches and other program advisors. As a result, students have become
connected to the school culture of caring for one another.
To provide such programs, strategic funding had to take place. Strategic funding
has been an essential basis in Valley’s efforts to build an anti-bullying culture. The
school sought funding to expand the extracurricular programs that it offered students.
Prior to 2011, Valley did not compete in the district’s sports leagues for middle school
teams, which include girls’ and boys’ basketball teams during the fall season, and soccer
and football squads during the spring season. However, the administration worked with
the community to secure funding for the after school program to allow Valley students to
compete against the other three middle schools in the district. Funding was provided by
an educational foundation within the district, sending the message to the district and the
community that, even though the funding was not initially available, Valley cared about
its students’ involvement in extracurricular activities. The program for girls’ lacrosse,
boys’ and girls’ soccer, boys’ and girls’ basketball, football, drama, dance and
PROMISING PRACTICES 75
improvisation groups run at approximately $12,000 per year. “It’s important for the
kids,” Dr. Madison said. The funds to support these extracurricular activities have been
important for students because they have learned valuable lessons such as respect,
dedication and teamwork. They also received additional academic help through tutoring
provided by the teams and were mentored by dedicated teachers.
Staff involvement. The trust between the staff and the administration was a
critical component of the staff involvement. The administration involved the staff in the
decision-making process, trusting their opinions and treating teachers as capable
professionals who understand the needs of students. Ms. Jackson, who was one of the
teachers on the Olweus committee, mentioned the trust that administration has of teachers.
“[Dr. Madison] believes in us and trusts that we are capable of making smart decisions
for the students,” she said. Mr. Adams mentioned that a key component of trust between
the administration and teachers is respect for their innovation. Teachers have
experimented with lesson plans in the classroom and have taken risks with new ideas,
knowing that the administration will support their willingness to innovate both inside and
outside of the classroom
From observations of the school’s culture and analysis of artifacts such as the
school’s club lists, it was evident that teachers at Valley were committed and involved in
the lives of students inside and outside the classroom. The staff strengthened ties to the
school, as Valley offered a wide range of extracurricular activities for students. Teachers
committed themselves to the school, as shown through various clubs and activities.
Valley had 22 clubs, 15 of which meet after school. Teachers devoted time, most of them
voluntarily, to provide students extracurricular activities such as a robotics club, tutoring,
PROMISING PRACTICES 76
lacrosse, basketball, and drumline. The activities, as previously mentioned, connected
students to the school and provided opportunities for students to respect and learn from
each other and their opponents from different middle schools in the district.
Effective collaboration. The relevant stakeholders in the process of building an
anti-bullying culture included district personnel, the administration, teachers, parents, and
other community leaders. The stakeholders were involved in and affected by the school’s
policies, exchange viewpoints, and searched for solutions to problems in regards to
bullying at Valley. The school’s Bullying Prevention Coordinating Committee regularly
met to discuss the program and the steps needed to help the staff, such as providing
further training on helping bystanders and victims of bullying. All stakeholders
communicated and coordinated plans for the Olweus Bullying Program, such as the on-
the-spot interventions.
The school’s administration was present at PTA meetings to discuss the anti-
bullying measures and kept parents updated on the progress of the school. “We’re always
in the loop about what the school is doing [in regards to bullying],” said Ms. Clinton. The
responsibilities, as outlined earlier in the chapter, were identified for each stakeholder.
“Administration, parents, teachers, students, everyone is working together,” Mr. Adams
said. The school was contacted by counseling services from outside of the district to help
students who might be in need. For example, during one observation, an administrator,
Ms. Jefferson, and both counselors met with intervention counselors who discussed ways
to assist students through coordinated efforts. “We’re all trying to help the kids who are
in need,” Ms. Jefferson noted during the discussion with intervention counselors.
Coordinated efforts included Valley administrators and counselors’ referring students to
PROMISING PRACTICES 77
the intervention counselors, who worked with interns at a local university, to help
students with emotional needs. Both Valley counselors noted they could use more help
with students who have emotional needs, and would be willing to refer their students to
outside counseling experts.
Demonstrated program results. Valley evaluated its progress through the
Olweus Bullying Questionnaire, a standardized, validated, multiple-choice questionnaire
that measured various aspects of bullying at the school. The questionnaire contained 42
questions about bullying, including the reactions of other students to bullying, the
students’ perceptions of the attitudes of teachers in regards to bullying and questions
about specific time and reference periods of bullying.
A total of 1,125 students completed the questionnaire in the 2012-13 school year.
Findings showed that 776 students had not been bullied, but 31 students had been bullied
several times a week, with 246 students reporting that they had been bullied once or twice.
Dr. Madison shared the following:
“What we found out from the survey from the kids, and this was the biggest ah-ha
for the teachers, students said bullying takes place in the classroom when the
teacher is present. That was a huge ah-ha moment. We started talking about what
that looks like. The teachers were like, oh my gosh, we know what they’re talking
about. They realized that they are present and there is a class bully.”
The results of the questionnaire were shared with the school’s bullying prevention
coordinating committee. The committee members, as well as the administration,
examined the results and discussed the school’s policies and procedures in regards to
PROMISING PRACTICES 78
bullying. Changes were made where necessary, such as in asking teachers to be more
attentive in the classroom in order to counteract bullying.
During the year of this study, teachers were provided with on-the-spot
intervention steps, as discussed earlier. Teachers were able to tackle the issue of bullying
among students at the outset of a situation, and intervened, without letting it escalate. Ms.
Washington expressed that the on-the-spot intervention steps gave teachers the tools to
help students, specifically mentioning that teachers had a guideline for intervention in
bullying situations. In the past, teachers relied on their own knowledge without the
information provided in the training.
The guidelines of the intervention steps that were provided teachers also helped
the counselors. Both counselors, as Ms. Van Buren stated, were knowledgeable about the
steps taken by teachers and administrators, and the clear lines of communication among
teachers, students, administrators and parents helped counselors promptly and efficiently
deal with issues of bullying. Results of the questionnaire were also shared with the staff
at the initial professional development day at the beginning of the 2013-14 school year.
Findings from the questionnaire allowed the school to discuss, in further detail,
the focus of building an anti-bullying culture and the efforts that the administration,
teachers and parents needed to make in order to combat bullying. The plan for using the
survey in the future includes administering the survey in the next school year and
analyzing the data to see where Valley improved in dealing with bullying and where
improvements might still be necessary
Program response. Results from the questionnaire showed needs in the
community, as well. A total of 69 students stated that an adult at home had contacted the
PROMISING PRACTICES 79
school to try to stop bullying of their child at school. Dr. Madison stated that the school
has been ready and willing to deal with concerns from parents who suspect their child has
been bullied. “We will investigate and follow through on every complaint,” Dr. Madison
said. The teachers who were interviewed stated that they always contacted parents at the
outset of a bullying situation, as they were trained. Community members have also been
included in combating bullying and creating an anti-bullying culture. Community
members included mental health specialists, faith-based organizations and businesses that
stepped in to help and mentor students. “The parents have been there for the kids. “We’re
lucky to have the community of people who reach out to kids,” said Mr. Bush, the PTA
president. Parents reached out and responded to the needs of the program by being more
involved in the school. For example, during one observation, posters were displayed in
the hallways of a pancake breakfast the parents hosted for the students at the school on a
Saturday morning. The hope of the parents, as explained by Mr. Bush, was to make
students feel welcome and connected to the school. The PTA was invaluable in helping
the school deal with bullying by being a supporter of events and by being a supporter of
the school’s policies outside of the classroom.
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question Two
Valley implemented the Olweus Bullying Prevention program and had a
systematic approach to building an anti-bullying culture from the top-down. Dr.
Madison’s leadership and her committee’s commitment to improving the school’s culture
led to parents and teachers’ taking notice of the school and its culture, as was noted in
interviews and observations. Leaders at the district and school levels understood the
PROMISING PRACTICES 80
willingness of the community to be involved at the school. Valley reached out to its
community and parents stepped forward to help the school build the anti-bullying culture.
The results from the Olweus Bullying Prevention questionnaire were eye-opening
for Valley’s leaders. Although school leadership, like Dr. Madison and her administration,
realized they could never fully eliminate bullying, they took steps and learned from
mistakes to improve the school’s culture. The improvements included the district’s
funding of the sports and arts programs in order to connect students with the entire school.
Through the clubs, art, drama, and sports programs, teachers dedicated themselves to
outreach to students beyond just the 55-minute classroom sessions. Teachers cared about
students, and this led to students caring about one another as well, as evidenced through
the sports programs and observations of students in the snack lines, outside the school
before the first bell and after the final bell. Students respected one another in the snack
lines, and when the hallways became crowded, without prompting from an administrator,
students did not push each other and allowed others to go before them in order to get to
class on time. Students in history classes debated ideas about the government shutdown
and the House of Representatives. Students respectfully voiced their opinions, which
differed from those of other students’, and did not put each other down. The openness
among students allowed for free dialogue about ideas about the government. When a
student read aloud and mispronounced a word, other students did not laugh at the student,
but allowed the student to correct himself with help from the teacher.
It was evident from the observations that students cared about one another and
that Valley built a positive and anti-bullying culture. Students helped each other when
their classmates were in need, such as the case of students giving away clothes and other
PROMISING PRACTICES 81
goods when one of their classmates lost the family home to a fire. Students supported one
another in classrooms, during practices and at games, developing a family-like unit that
transformed the culture of the school into one that caused students to reach out and care
for each other. As students reached out and cared for one another, they became leaders
within the school, becoming empowered with leadership roles. Along with the leadership
of administrators, teachers and parents, students at Valley created a healthy environment
where students felt safe at a school that has created an anti-bullying culture.
Chapter Summary
This chapter reviewed the findings of the two research questions. To answer the
questions, the data were collected, analyzed and discussed. The data were correlated with
the literature presented in the first three chapters of this study. This study captured data
through interviews, observations, and artifact analysis. The summary, conclusions and
implications of the study are presented in the next chapter.
PROMISING PRACTICES 82
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS
Introduction
Bullying has become a nationwide issue that is no longer just an inevitable fact of
school life (Bowman, 2001). Government officials, the media and school leaders have
devoted attention to bullying because of the damaging effects that bullies can have, as
evidenced by research that has shown that approximately 160,000 children miss school
every day out of fear of being bullied (United States Department of Education, 2011).
Further research has found that 20% of students in grades 9 through 12 experienced
bullying, as evidenced by a study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(2011). Researchers have also attributed bullying to the cause of school shootings, such
as the 1999 Columbine school shooting incident in which Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan
Klebold, 17, of Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado committed a massacre
(Hong et al, 2010).
Serious effects of bullying have generated a call to action to combat bullying,
including laws that have mandated that schools respond to bullying. From 1999 to 2010
there were more than 120 bills enacted by state legislatures nationally that introduced or
amended education or criminal statutes to address bullying and related behaviors in
schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). As of 2011, 46 states, including
California, had bullying laws and 45 of those states directed school districts to adopt
bullying policies (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). California has adopted such
policies regarding bullying, encouraging schools to develop anti-bullying policies to
include examples of strategies that teachers could use to promote positive behavior. The
state has mandated that districts provide training for teachers on how to intervene in a
PROMISING PRACTICES 83
bullying dispute. As a result, schools have instituted professional development that has
focused on anti-bullying strategies, providing teachers with the skills needed to eliminate
bullying. Training to prevent bullying has also been extended to parents and students.
Purpose of the Study
Even though states have passed legislation to prohibit bullying in schools and
educational leaders have understood that bullying has led to killings such as those at
Columbine, bullying has still been a problem for schools, impacting students’ academic
performance, as well as the livelihoods of students outside of the school (Nansel,
Overpeck, Pilla, Ruan, Simmons-Morton, & Schmidt, 2001).
The purpose of this study was to research and analyze how schools use policies
enacted by state legislatures, such as those in California, and promising practices to
combat bullying. The study of a middle school in Southern California identified the
systems and structures that were implemented and sustained to support an anti-bullying
culture. For the purposes of this study, structures were defined as mechanisms, policies,
and procedures put in place by federal, state, and district legislation or widely accepted as
the official structure of institutions that were not subject to change. Systems were defined
as coordinated and coherent use of resources (time, personnel, students, parents, funds,
facilities, etc.) at the institution to ensure that the institution vision, mission, and goals
were met. In an effort to gain insight into an anti-bullying culture of schools, this study
sought to obtain responses to the following research questions:
1) What are the systems and structures that contribute to an anti-bullying
culture?
PROMISING PRACTICES 84
2) How are these systems and structures implemented and sustained to support
an anti-bullying culture?
Summary of the Findings
This study was guided by a conceptual framework, created by the thematic group,
that involved having systems and structures that were implemented and sustained to
support an anti-bullying culture in schools. There were various pieces that comprised the
systems and structures within a school, such as funding, policies, training, staffing and
professional development. The research on Valley showed two structures and two
systems that were central to having an anti-bullying culture. The structures included
whole-school policies and a focus on professional development, and the systems included
the collaborative leadership at the school and the use of time within the organization.
Within the structures, there were key components, including the history behind the
Olweus Bullying Prevention Program at Valley and the process the school followed in
handling bullying situations. Several elements were evident in the systems, as well,
including the administrative, staff, parent, and student collaborative leadership. Together,
the components of the structures and systems ultimately shaped the school’s anti-bullying
culture.
One component of the structures included Valley’s whole-school policies.
Literature showed that the approach that had been most successful to solving bullying
issues had been “whole school approaches” (Dake et al, 2003, p. 348). An entire school
approach to creating an anti-bullying culture at Valley involved creating a school culture
to prevent bullying by changing school and classroom rules that targeted and eliminated
bullying behavior. Changes in school rules included having a structural process to follow
PROMISING PRACTICES 85
when bullying was reported by parents, teachers, and/or students. The process involved
parents, administrators, teachers, and district personnel, and included initial warnings to
students for bullying behavior that escalated to progressive suspensions for continued
actions. The whole-school approach that Valley implemented set up an anti-bullying
culture that encouraged reporting of bullying situations by parents and students, and
established a consistent approach to combat bullying by all members of the community.
The whole-school approach to having an anti-bullying culture might not have
been effective without professional development. Olweus (1999) recommended using
professional development days at the beginning of the school year to review bullying
policies and noted the importance of using additional training and support to help
teachers deal with bullying. Valley followed Olweus’ recommendations. Approximately
21 members of the school attended a two-day committee training conducted by a certified
Olweus trainer to have an anti-bullying culture and then returned to the school to provide
full-day training to the staff on the basic understandings of bullying and the skills needed
to intervene appropriately in bullying behaviors. As the school year progressed, teachers
obtained additional professional development to combat bullying, such as pacing the
classroom during student work time and being attentive to student conversations with one
another. The professional development also proved to be an essential component of the
school’s culture because it provided teachers and administrators the knowledge of how to
identify bullying, and the best practices to prevent bullying in the classroom and in the
hallways. The best practices that were learned in the professional development meetings
were used throughout the school year, allowing Valley to have a successful anti-bullying
culture.
PROMISING PRACTICES 86
Administrators and teachers at Valley were not the only ones involved in the
whole-school approach to combat bullying. Parents also played a vital role, with research
backing the need for parents to be involved in order to have an anti-bullying culture.
Smith and Myron-Wilson (1998) found that parents play an important role for seeking
further avenues to change bullying behavior. Parents were made aware of the problem of
bullying, and were involved in school activities and volunteered where needed, such as
through various events. Also important, parents have been asked to frequently take time
to talk to their children, to express their own standards for their child’s behavior and to
set rules for their children, helping the school administration and teachers build students
who are mentally healthy and care for one another.
The administration, staff and students also made up the collaborative piece of the
essential systems of the school. Administrators collaborated and adopted a process for
receiving and investigating bullying reports, the staff took immediate steps to intervene
when it witnessed an act of discrimination, harassment, intimidation, or bullying and
students acted as leaders to build a culture of inclusion by encouraging one another to get
involved in extracurricular activities.
The success of a school’s anti-bullying efforts relies on the efforts of the
administration and the teachers Among students ages 12 through 18 who reported being
bullied at school during the 2008-09 school year, 47.2% of students reported being
bullied in a hallway or stairwell and 33.6% of students reported being bullied in a
classroom (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). The findings at Valley
addressed the visibility of teachers in the hallways between classes and throughout the
campus before the first bell, during snack and lunch and after school. The teachers’
PROMISING PRACTICES 87
willingness to be visible and care for the well-being and mental health of students helped
to transform the school’s culture. Teachers devoted extra time before and after school to
become involved in students’ extracurricular activities, bringing students together and
creating a bond between students who participated on the school’s sports teams and 21
various clubs on campus. As teachers devoted their time and energy to become more
involved in students’ activities and became more aware of the mental health of students,
students responded by caring for one another’s well-being, as well. Students became
leaders on campus, reached out to students who were in need of friendship by purposely
having lunch with those who ate alone, and supported one other on sports teams and
projects to build an anti-bullying culture at Valley.
Implications for Policy and Practice
This study identified the promising practices that Valley used to create an anti-
bullying culture, with a focus on the systems and structures that were implemented and
sustained to support the culture. Although the study had limitations, such as the small
sample size of one school in Southern California and the time constraint, which limited
the research to a three-month span, the results of the study had implications for district
and school administrators in creating policies and establishing school-wide practices to
combat bullying and for future practice in school’s creating an anti-bullying culture.
Policy. The policies adopted by the Mountain Unified School District played an
important role in the steps that Valley took to have an anti-bullying culture. The
procedures that Valley used to build an anti-bullying culture were steps that were
outlined by district policies. The district stressed to its schools the need to have an anti-
bullying culture and a clear system for dealing with bullies. As a result of the district’s
PROMISING PRACTICES 88
initiative, Valley created its whole-school approach that involved administrators, teachers,
parents and students in dealing with bullying.
District and school administrators should consider collaborating to build anti-
bullying policies. The findings of this study showed that when district administrators
work with school leaders, a school is able to create a successful anti-bullying culture.
School leaders, such as administrators, teachers and counselors, should also consider
involving parents because the research noted the important aspect of the parents’ role in a
student’s life (Smith & Myron-Wilson, 1998). District and school administrators,
teachers, and parents should considering being trained throughout the process of building
anti-bullying policies in order to achieve a common approach. The policies of a school
should also be systematically followed by teachers in their classroom, in the halls, before
and after school, and during snack and lunch breaks to allow for cohesiveness.
Practice. The practice of having an anti-bullying culture at Valley started with
the professional development of committee members of the Olweus Bullying Prevention
Program at Valley. Implications from the study suggest that districts and schools should
consider providing professional development for its teachers, administrators and
counselors. The professional development should meet the needs of the school’s students,
with clear defined roles for administrators, teachers, parents, and students. The anti-
bullying strategies, such as the reporting system that was set at Valley, learned from the
professional development should be implemented in the classroom and followed-through
with feedback from teachers and administrators to allow for continued learning on how to
build an anti-bullying culture.
PROMISING PRACTICES 89
Administrators, teachers, students and parents should consider being committed to
building an anti-bullying culture. A collaboration of administrators, teachers, students
and parents should consider being school leaders who are dedicated to providing an anti-
bullying culture for a school. The team of leaders should consider including others in the
process of building that culture and being dedicated to providing a safe and comfortable
working environment for teachers. Leaders should also consider being open to feedback
from others in order to continually improve a school’s anti-bullying culture.
Recommendations for Future Studies
This study focused on understanding the systems and structures that allow for an
anti-bullying culture in schools. Interviews and observations provided substantial
information about the successful systems and structures that were put in place at Valley,
however, there is still more to be learned about the systems and structures implemented
in schools that have a successful anti-bullying culture. Efforts were made to obtain more
comprehensive data about Valley’s systems and structures, however, the limitations of
the study, such as the time period, produced additional questions that might be answered
in future studies. The following are recommendations for future studies.
The participants for this study included the principal of Valley, two assistant
principals, a counselor, three teachers and two parents. Although their responses
provided insight into the experiences of the staff and students at Valley, this study
did not address the student perspective of the school’s anti-bullying culture. A
study that included the student input of the anti-bullying culture would be
important because the students’ personal experiences would provide a unique
PROMISING PRACTICES 90
piece of information into the school’s anti-bullying culture, in addition to
providing a more comprehensive view of the anti-bullying culture of the school
One of the components of the Valley’s anti-bullying culture was the dedication of
its teachers and students to the school’s extracurricular activities. Students were
dedicated to programs at the school, spending countless hours after school to
improve their skills in sports and other programs. Through these programs,
teachers helped students learn lessons in teamwork and management. Even
though the relationships between teachers and students were noted in the study,
the impact of the relationships between teachers and students was not
comprehensively studied. The additional study would be important to note the
impact of teacher-student relationships on a school’s anti-bullying culture, and
would further highlight the successful strategies schools use to sustain an anti-
bullying culture.
Teachers and parents at Valley lauded the efforts of the principal, Dr. Madison,
whose leadership helped create an anti-bullying culture. Dr. Madison was credited
for being a collaborative leader who sought feedback from teachers, parents and
students. A future study should focus on how new leadership sustains an anti-
bullying culture that has been developed.
This study only focused on Valley; however three other elementary schools in the
Mountain Unified School District also instituted the Olweus Bullying Prevention
program and took whole-school approaches to build an anti-bullying culture. A
more comprehensive study of all of the schools in the district that implemented
the Olweus Bullying Prevention program would provide additional evidence of
PROMISING PRACTICES 91
the successful systems and structures schools instituted in order to have an anti-
bullying culture. The study would provide more research to educators of not only
the successful strategies that middle schools used, but also strategies that were
implemented in elementary schools.
Conclusion
The purpose for this study was to research and analyze how schools use policies
and practices to combat the serious problem of bullying. Valley Middle School
understood the power of bullying, and took steps to create an anti-bullying culture. Those
steps included instituting whole-school anti-bullying policies, focusing on professional
development and having a leadership team that collaborated to shape a successful anti-
bullying culture. As other schools attempt to eliminate bullying, Valley’s model of
collaborative leadership involving administrators, teachers, and parents, as well as the
focus on professional development should be considered. The collaborative leadership
team provided ongoing professional development that allowed the teachers,
administrators, and counselors to identify bullying through the use of a common language.
The use of common language with parents also contributed to creating and sustaining an
anti-bullying culture.
PROMISING PRACTICES 92
References
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.
Benitez, J. L., Garcia-Berben, A., & Fernandez-Cabezas, M. (2009). The impact of a
course on bullying within the pre-service teacher training curriculum. Electronic
Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 7(1), 191-208.
Beran, T. (2005). Attachment quality and bullying behavior in school-aged
youth. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 25, 5-18.
Boulton, M. J. (1997) Teachers’ views on bullying: definitions, attitudes and ability to
cope. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 223-233.
Boulton, M., & Smith, P. (1994). Bully/victim problems in middle-school children:
Stability, self-perceived competence, peer perceptions and peer acceptance.
British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12, 315-329.
Boulton, M., & Underwood, K. (1992). Bully/victim problems among middle school
children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 73-87.
Bowman, D. H. (2001). At school, a cruel culture. Education Week, 20 (27), 1-16, 17.
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.
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.
PROMISING PRACTICES 93
Buhs, E., Ladd, G., & Herald, S. (2006). Peer exclusion and victimization: Processes that
mediate the relation between peer group rejection and children. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 98(1), 1-13.
Bullying at school. (2003). California Department of Education. Retrieved July 3, 2013,
from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ss/se/documents/bullyingatschool.pdf.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). Morbidity and mortality weekly
report.
Crick, N., & Grotpeter, J. (1996). Children’s treatment by peers: Victims of relational and
overt aggression. Development and Psychopathology, 8, 367-380.
Dake, J. A., Price, J. H., Telljohann, S. K., & Funk, J. B. (2003). Teacher
perceptions and practices regarding school bullying prevention. Journal of
School Health, 73(9), 347-355
DeWalt, K., & DeWalt, B. (2002). Participant observation: a guide for fieldworkers.
Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
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 of
bullying behaviors in early adolescence. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 78, 326-333.
Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of
teachers.American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
PROMISING PRACTICES 94
Glew, G., Fan, M., Katon, W., Rivara, F., & Kernic, M. (2005). Bullying, psychosocial
adjustment, and academic performance in elementary school. Archives of
pediatrics & adolescent medicine, 159(11), 1026-1031.
Hong, J., Cho, H., Allen-Meares, P., & Espelage, D. (2011). The social ecology of the
Columbine high school shootings. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(6),
861-868.
Hoover, J., Oliver, R., Hazler, R. (1992). Bullying: Perceptions of adolescent victims in
the Midwestern USA. School Psychology International, 13 (5), 5-16.
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Horner, H. F. (2000). A Schoolwide Approach to Student
Discipline. School Administrator, 57(2), 20-23.
Juvonen, J., Nishina, A., & Graham, S. (2000). Peer harassment, psychological
adjustment, and school functioning in early adolescence. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 92(2), 349-359.
Konishi, C., Hymel, S., Zumbo, B., & Li, Z. (2010). Do school bullying and
student−−teacher relationships matter for academic achievement? A multilevel
analysis. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 25 (1), 19-39.
Limber, S. & Small, M. (2003). State laws and policies to address bullying in schools.
School Psychology Review, 32 (3), 445-455.
McGrath, M. J. (2007). School bullying: Tools for avoiding harm and liability. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Mancini, J.A., & L.I. Marek (2004) Sustaining Community-Based Programs for Families:
Conceptualization and Measurement. Family Relations, 53, (4), 339-347.
PROMISING PRACTICES 95
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.).
Los Angeles: Sage Publications
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Milsom, A. and Gallo, L. (2006). Bullying in middle schools: Prevention and intervention.
Middle School Journal, 37(3), 12-19.
Mishna, F., Scarcello, I., Pepler, D., Weiner, J. (2005). Teachers’ understanding of
bullying. Canadian Journal of Education, 28(4), 718-738.
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Schmidt, P.
(2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with
psychological adjustment. Journal of American Medical Association, 285(16),
2094-2100.
Newman-Carlson, D., Horne, A. (2004). Bully busters: A psychoeducational intervention
for reducing bullying behavior in middle school students. Journal of Counseling
and Development, 82(3), 259-267.
Nicolaides, S., Toda, Y., & Smith, P. K. (2010). Knowledge and attitudes about school
bullying in trainee teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 105–
118.
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.
PROMISING PRACTICES 96
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.
Orpinas, P., Horne, A., & Staniszewski, D. (2003). School bullying: Changing the
problem by changing the school. School Psychology Review, 32(3), 431-444.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks,
California: Sage.
Penuel, W., Fishman, B., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. (2007). What makes
professional development effective? strategies that foster curriculum
implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921-958.
Peterson, J., & Karen, R. (2006). Bullying and the gifted: Victims, perpetrators,
prevalence, and effects. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 50(2), 148-168,190.
Piotrowski, D., & Hoot, J. (2008). Bullying and violence in schools: What teachers
should know and do. Childhood Education, 84(6), 357-363.
Rigby, K. & Slee, P.T. (1992). Dimensions of interpersonal relation among Australian
children and implications for psychological well-being. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 132. 33-42.
Rigby, K., & Australian Council for Educational Research, V. (2001). Stop the
Bullying: A Handbook for Schools.
Schmuck, R. (1997). Practical action research for change. Arlington Heights, IL:
IRI/Skylight Training and Publishing.
PROMISING PRACTICES 97
Schoonover, J. (2012, May 21). Hundreds walk for Rachel Ehmke. McClatchy - Tribune
Business News.
Shapiro, E. S., DuPaul, G. J., Bradley, K. L., & Bailey, L. T. (1996). A school-based
consultation program for service delivery to middle school students with
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders, 4, 73-81.
Smith, P., & Brain, P. (2000). Bullying in schools: Lessons from two decades of research.
Aggressive Behavior, 26, 1-9.
Stein, N. (1997). Beating the bullies. Teacher Magazine, 6.
Townsend-Wiggins, C. (2001). Teachers’ perceptions of and interventions in episodes of
bullying in schools. Dissertation Abstracts, 2001-2003/05.
Unnever, J. D., & Cornell, D. G. (2003). The culture of bullying in middle
school. Journal of School Violence, 2(2), 5-27.
United States Department of Education, (2011). U.S.. department of education, office of
planning, evaluation and policy development, policy and program studies service,
analysis of state bullying laws and policies. Washington D.C.:
Whitted, K. & Dupper, D. (2005). Best practices for preventing or reducing bullying in
schools. Children & Schools. 27(3), 167-175.
Williams, K., Chamber, M., Logan, S., & Robinson, D. (1996). Association of common
health symptoms with bullying in primary school children. British Medical
Journal, 313(7048), 17-19.
Vanderbilt, D., & Augustun, M. (2010). The effects of bullying. Pediatrics and Child
Health, 20(7), 315-320.
PROMISING PRACTICES 98
Yoon, J.S., & Kerber, K. (2003). Bullying: Elementary teachers’ attitudes and
intervention strategies. Research in Education, 69, 27-35.
Yoon, J. S., & Barton, E. (2008). The role of teachers in school violence and bullying
prevention. In T. Miller (Ed.), School violence and primary prevention (pp. 249–
275). New York, NY: Springer
PROMISING PRACTICES 99
Appendix A
Interview Protocol
1. What is your role in this institution?
2. What has been your experience at this institution?
3. How do you feel about the culture of the institution?
4. What is your role or your involvement in promoting anti-bullying at your
institution?
5. What was the driving force behind the start of the anti-bullying efforts?
6. Tell me about the instances of bullying at your school
a. What factors influences your school’s anti-bullying efforts?
7. 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 to prevent bullying?
b. What other factors influence your school’s anti-bullying efforts?
8. Tell me what is being done to help students feel more connected to your
institution
9. What policies and preventive measures do you think are critical to have in place
to foster an anti-bullying culture at your institution?
10. What offices or staff is involved in anti-bullying intervention/training?
11. How are teachers, staff and administrators involved in anti-bullying efforts?
12. How prepared does your staff feel in relation to bullying?
13. How are students involved in anti-bullying efforts?
14. How are parents involved in anti-bullying efforts?
15. 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.
16. Tell me about any strategies that you think may help with problems of bullying
17. What support services or programs do you know of that may help with problems
of bullying?
PROMISING PRACTICES 100
18. What policies do you think a school needs in place to address the problem of
bullying?
19. What staffing needs do you think the school needs in place to help with problems
of bullying?
20. How have these efforts changed?
21. What is an ideal professional development?
PROMISING PRACTICES 101
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?
Physical setup:
How are the participants grouped?
Who is leading?
What is the agenda?
PROMISING PRACTICES 102
Interactions
What are you looking for? Notes
Context:
Noteworthy interactions:
Students
Parents
School staff
Community
Engagement of participants:
Overall tone:
PROMISING PRACTICES 103
Appendix C
Interview Protocol (for parents)
1. What is your role or your involvement in promoting anti-bullying at your child’s
institution?
2. What was the driving force behind your involvement in the anti-bullying efforts?
3. Tell me about the instances of bullying at your child’s school
a. What factors influences your school’s anti-bullying efforts?
4. Explain the basics of the anti-bullying efforts your child’s institution has in place
5. Tell me what is being done by parents to help students feel more connected to
your child’s institution
6. What policies and preventive measures do you think are critical to have in place
to foster an anti-bullying culture at your child’s institution?
7. How prepared do you feel in relation to bullying?
8. How are parents involved in anti-bullying efforts?
9. Tell me about any strategies that you think may help with problems of bullying
10. What support services or programs do you know of that may help with problems
of bullying?
11. What policies do you think a school needs in place to address the problem of
bullying?
PROMISING PRACTICES 104
Appendix D
BULLYING INCIDENT REPORT FORM
Date of Incident: ________________ Time of Incident: ____________ Has this happened before?______________
Location of Incident (circle all that apply):
Hallway Restroom Classroom Gym Lunch Room Playground/Field Locker Room Bus Stop On Bus Parking Lot
To/From School After School Program School Sponsored Event Text/Phone/Internet/Social Media Other: _____________________
Name of student(s): Name of student(s) involved in: Name(s) of witnesses/bystanders:
bullying behavior
_______________________________ ______________________________ _____________________________
_______________________________ ______________________________ _____________________________
_______________________________ ______________________________ _____________________________
Type of Bullying Behavior:
□ Verbal
□ Physical: Result in injury? YES NO Reported to Health Office? YES NO Reported to Police? YES NO
□ Relational
Bullying Behaviors (circle all that apply):
Shoved/Pushed Hit, Kicked, Punched Threatened Stole/Damaged Possessions
Social isolation/Excluded Taunting/ridiculing Writing/Graffiti Told Lies or False Rumors
Staring/Leering Intimidation/Extortion Demeaning Comments Inappropriate touching
Cyber-bullying using: Text messages Website Email Other: _____________________________________
Racial, Sexual, Religious or Disability Circle one and describe: _____________________________________________________________
Reported to school by (circle all that apply):
Teacher Student Bystander Target Parent Bus Driver Anonymous Other: _______________________________
Describe the incident:
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Physical Evidence? Notes Email Graffiti Video/audio Website
Other:____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Actions Taken By School Administrator:
Consequences: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Intervention: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Referral for additional support services: _________________________________________________________________________________________
Parent Contact: Date ____________ Time ____________ Person making contact: _______________________________________________________
Result: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Today’s Date: ________________ Reported by: __________________________ Signature: _____________________________
Appendix E
PROMISING PRACTICES 105
PROMISING PRACTICES 106
PROMISING PRACTICES 107
PROMISING PRACTICES 108
PROMISING PRACTICES 109
PROMISING PRACTICES 110
PROMISING PRACTICES 111
PROMISING PRACTICES 112
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The aim of this study was to research and analyze how schools use policies and promising practices to combat bullying. A middle school in Southern California was identified for having promising practices that were implemented and sustained to support an anti‐bullying culture. Nine participants, the principal of the middle school, two assistant principals, two parents of students at the school, a counselor and three teachers, were interviewed, and observations were conducted in order to gain insights into the anti‐bullying culture of the school. The process of data analysis followed the collection of the interviews and process of observations, with the research revealing key systems and structures that were essential in the school having an anti‐bullying culture. Structures included whole‐school approaches that included ongoing training and implementation of strategies to reduce bullying problems in a school, as well as a focus on professional development to the staff on the basic understandings of bullying and the skills needed to intervene appropriately in bullying behaviors. Systems included the collaborative leadership at the school among the administration, teachers, parents, and students, to eliminate bullying, and the use of time, as the middle school focused on caring for the mental health of students both inside and outside of the classroom. The results of the study had implications for district and school administrators in creating policies and establishing school‐wide practices to combat bullying and for future practice in school’s creating an anti‐bullying culture. This study, which used Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory of development as a theoretical foundation, increased the understanding of the systems and structure that allow for an anti‐bullying culture in schools, adding to the literature base linking the systems, structures and professional development of a school to an anti‐bullying culture.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Promising practices in preventing bullying in K-12 schools: student engagement
PDF
Promising practices of anti-bullying: safe and supportive environments for all students
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
Promising practices: promoting and sustaining a college-going culture
PDF
Leadership succession: promising practices to develop a sustainable leadership pipeline at a secondary school
PDF
Promising practices to promote and sustain a college-going culture: a charter-school case study
PDF
Building a college-going culture: a case study of a continuation high school
PDF
Promising practices: building the next generation of effective school principals
PDF
School culture and its impact on PBIS implementation
PDF
A school leadership approach to building a college-going culture for low-income Latinx students: high school case study
PDF
Promising practices for building a college-going culture: a case study of a comprehensive high school
PDF
The influence of high school bystanders of bullying: an exploratory study
PDF
Sustaining quality leadership at prep academy charter schools: promising practices for leadership development in public schools
PDF
School connectedness and teacher reflective practices
PDF
Self-reflective practices and procedures to systematically examine reading comprehension instruction
Asset Metadata
Creator
Melik-Stepanyan, Edgar
(author)
Core Title
Policies and promising practices to combat bullying in secondary schools
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
04/28/2014
Defense Date
04/25/2014
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
bullying,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
emelik-stepanyan@gusd.net,melik1515@hotmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-385618
Unique identifier
UC11295421
Identifier
etd-MelikStepa-2421.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-385618 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-MelikStepa-2421.pdf
Dmrecord
385618
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Melik-Stepanyan, Edgar
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
Tags
bullying