University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Strengthening community: how to effectively implement a conflict resolution and peer mediation program on a secondary school campus: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Strengthening community: how to effectively implement a conflict resolution and peer mediation program on a secondary school campus: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 1

Strengthening Community: How to Effectively Implement a Conflict Resolution and Peer
Mediation Program on a Secondary School Campus, An Evaluation Study
By
Kenneth Lopour

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

August 2019

Copyright 2019 Kenneth Lopour
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 2

Dedication
This work is dedicated to my daughter, Ruby Louise. May the memories of your father’s hard
work remain with you, and inspire you, as my memories of my mom’s doctoral journey inspired
me. You are intelligent. You are strong. You are beautiful. You are my daughter, and I will
love you forever and ever.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 3

Acknowledgments
I have treasured memories of my mom taking me to Heritage Park in Cerritos while she
studied to earn her own doctorate from USC. She would lay out a blanket under a shady tree and
read while I ran around and played for hours. I remember watching her graduate while I pushed
my grandpa around in his wheelchair. I knew, even then, that I too would one day earn my own
doctoral degree. It has taken me almost 25 years to accomplish that goal, but here I am, because
of my mom. She has been a mentor and an inspiration my entire life, and I would not be here if
it were not for her.
To my wife, Allison. You have supported me all along, and I could not have done any of
this without you. You inspire me always. You are moon to my tide. I will love you forever. I
only hope that I can support you as fully during all of your future personal and professional
endeavors.
To my family and friends. Your support and care have helped carry me through this, and
I will forever be grateful.
An enormous thank you to my chair, Dr. Fred Freking, and my gracious and supportive
committee members, Dr. Brandon Martinez and Dr. Doug Lynch.
And to my colleagues and friends in Cohort 7. We did this together, and I will forever be
grateful for your support and guidance.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 4

Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
Table of Contents 4
List of Tables 8
List of Figures 10
Abstract 11
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 12
Introduction to the Problem of Practice 12
Organizational Context and Mission 12
Organizational Performance Status 14
Importance of Addressing the Problem 15
Related Literature 16
Organizational Performance Goal 17
Description of Stakeholder Groups 17
Stakeholder Group for the Study 18
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions 18
Methodological Framework 19
Definitions 20
Organization of the Project 20
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 22
Influences on the Problem of Practice 22
The Context of Adolescent Conflict 22
Conflict Resolution Strategies 26
Theoretical Frameworks 31
Social Interdependence Theory 31
Conflict Strategies Theory 32
Conflict Resolution Programs in Secondary Schools 33
Historical Origins of Conflict Resolution Programs on Secondary School Campuses 33
Types of Conflict Resolution Programs 34
Efficacy of Conflict Mediation and Peer Mediation Programs 36
Limitations on Conflict Resolution and Peer Mediation Program Effectiveness 36
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences Framework 38
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivational, and Organizational Influences 39
Stakeholder Knowledge Influences 40
The mediation process and procedures 41
Benefits of conflict mediation 42
Conflict mediation as an everyday tool 42
Stakeholder Motivational Influences 45
Expectancy Value Theory 46
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 5

Self-Efficacy Theory 47
Stakeholder Organizational Influences 49
Cultural Model 51
Cultural Settings 51
Conceptual Framework: Interaction of Knowledge, Motivation and the Organizational
Context 54
Summary 60
Chapter Three: Methodology 61
Participating Stakeholders 62
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale 63
Survey Recruitment Strategy and Rationale 63
Interview/Focus Group Sampling Criteria and Rationale 64
Interview/Focus Group Recruitment Strategy and Rationale 64
Quantitative Data Collection and Instrumentation 66
Surveys 66
Survey instrument 66
Survey procedures 67
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation 68
Interviews 68
Interview protocol 68
Interview procedures 69
Documents and Artifacts 70
Credibility and Trustworthiness 71
Validity and Reliability 73
Ethics 74
Limitations and Delimitations 76
Chapter Four: Results and Findings 78
Participating Stakeholders 79
Results and Findings 81
Knowledge Influencers 82
Staff Stakeholder Group 82
Staff procedural knowledge of the CRPM program 82
Staff declarative knowledge of the CRPM program 85
Student Stakeholder Group 90
Student procedural knowledge of the CRPM program 90
Student declarative knowledge of the CRPM program 92
Student metacognitive knowledge of conflict resolution skills 95
Motivational Influencers 98
Staff Stakeholder Group 99
Student Stakeholder Group 102
Organizational Influences 106
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 6

Cultural Model: Organizational Support of the CRPM Program 107
Cultural Setting 1: High Programmatic Visibility 108
Cultural Setting 2: Adequate Definition of Logistical Processes and Procedures 112
Cultural Setting 3: Adequate Supply of Necessary Resources 114
Synthesis 116
Research Question One 116
Research Question Two 116
Research Question Three 118
Research Question Four 119
Chapter Five: Recommendations 121
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 122
Knowledge Recommendations 122
Introduction 122
Increasing Student Knowledge of Participant Outcomes 123
Increase Procedural Knowledge of Program Access 125
Motivation Recommendations 125
Introduction 126
Increase Student Perception of Utility Value in CRPM Program 127
Organization Recommendations 128
Employ Organizational Goal Setting to Support the CRPM Program 130
Utilization of Multimodal Communication Strategy 131
Supply Adequate Resources to Support Program Implementation 132
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 133
Implementation of Evaluation Framework 133
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations 134
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 135
Level 3: Behavior 137
Critical Behaviors 137
Required Drivers 138
Organizational Support 139
Level 2: Learning 142
Learning Goals 142
Coordination Meeting and Program Planning 143
Training Required for Program Staff, Teachers, and Students 144
Integration of Communication Strategy 146
Marshaling Program Resources to Achieve Success 146
Evaluation of the Components of Learning 147
Level 1: Reaction 149
Evaluation Tools 150
Immediately following the program implementation 150
Delayed for a period after the program implementation 151
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 7

Data Analysis and Reporting 152
Summary 153
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach 154
Future Research 155
Conclusion 155
References 158
Appendix A: Survey Protocol 168
Appendix B: Staff Interview Protocol 172
Appendix C: Focus Group Interview Protocol 174
Appendix D: Focus Group Interview Protocol 176
Appendix E: Minor Consent Form 177
Appendix F: Immediate Evaluation Instrument: Teacher Program Lead 179
Appendix G: Immediate Evaluation Instrument: Discipline Office Administrator 181
Appendix H: Blended Evaluation Instrument: General Staff Members 182
Appendix I: Blended Evaluation Instrument: Student Participants 183
Appendix J: Blended Evaluation Instrument: Trained Student Mediators 184
Appendix K: Data Reporting Dashboard 185

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 8

List of Tables
Table 1: Demographic Information 13
Table 2: Knowledge Influencers 44
Table 3: Motivation Influencers 47
Table 4: Organizational Influencers 53
Table 5: Number of Years of Teaching Experience 80
Table 6: Subject Area Representation 80
Table 7: Teacher Reported Sentiments Regarding CRPM Knowledge and Communication 84
Table 8: Teacher Reported Actions to Address Conflict in Their Classroom 88
Table 9: Student Responses to Metacognitive Skill Retention Questions 97
Table 10: Staff Responses to Utility Value Questions 100
Table 11: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 123
Table 12: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 126
Table 13: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 128
Table 14: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 136
Table 15: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 137
Table 16: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 138
Table 17: Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 148
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 9

Table 18: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 149

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 10

List of Figures
Figure 1: Conflict Organization 25
Figure 2: Types of Conflict 28
Figure 3: Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within 57
Organizational Cultural Models and Settings

Figure 4: Survey Population by Age 79
Figure 5: Number of Staff Recommendations to the CRPM Program 90
Figure 6: Most Effective Communication Methods to Staff 110
Figure 7: Most Effective Communication Methods to Students 110

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 11

Abstract
Interpersonal conflict on a secondary school campus is a significant area of concern for school
administrators, teachers, and parents. One effective mechanism for addressing this issue is a
conflict resolution and peer mediation program (CRPM). This evaluation study investigated the
implementation of one such CRPM program at a high school in California. Specifically,
organizational implementation was evaluated utilizing Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge,
motivation, and organization gap analysis framework. The study employed a mixed-methods
approach including a quantitative survey, qualitative interviews/focus groups, and document
analysis. There were two stakeholder groups: student participants and certificated staff
members. Ultimately, five validated organizational gaps were identified. Data analysis showed
significant knowledge and motivation gaps, primarily with the student stakeholder group. There
were also context-specific organizational gaps identified centering on resource distribution.
Recommendations follow the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)
and focus on improved communication strategies, organizational goal setting, and revised
resource distribution protocols.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 12

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
Adolescents in a secondary school setting face a variety of challenges every day, and one
particularly pernicious challenge is interpersonal conflict. While conflict is a natural and healthy
part of the adolescent experience, it can also become destructive. Unfortunately, many
adolescents have not been explicitly taught how to productively resolve conflict, and many times
negative outcomes result. Adolescents who engage in destructive conflict resolution strategies
tend to have significantly negative emotional and physical outcomes as a result (Luther &
Becker, 2002; Allen; 2013). To help adolescents manage conflict more effectively, a set of
interventions, collectively called conflict resolution and peer mediation (CRPM) programs, have
been created (Johnson & Johnson, 1996). These programs seek to both explicitly teach students
about the nature of conflict and help them utilize constructive conflict resolution strategies. This
study is about one such CRPM program, in the initial stages of its implementation, on a
secondary school campus. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the
organization’s implementation of the CRPM program and ultimately to determine the extent to
which the campus community is utilizing the program’s services.
Organizational Context and Mission
This study was conducted at El Arroyo Grande High School (EAGHS, a pseudonym). It
is a large school with over 3,200 students (School Accountability Report Card [SARC], 2016)
located in the coastal area of Orange County, California. It primarily serves three affluent
neighboring communities and is high performing in terms of academic, athletic, and performing
arts programs. It was recently rated one of the top 100 high schools in the nation and is home to
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 13

many national and state titles (e.g. Choir, Song, Cheer, Drama, Football, Softball, Advanced
Placement honors). While the majority of its students are white, it is still home to a moderately
diverse student population. There are relatively small populations of English Language Learners
(ELL) and students from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Demographic data is
summarized in Table 1 (SARC, 2016):
Table 1
Demographic Information

Group Percent of Total Enrollment

Black or African American 3.7
American Indian or Alaskan Native 0.3
Asian 11.9
Filipino 2.8
Hispanic or Latino 19.1
Hawaiian Native or Pacific Islander 0.8
White 61.4
2 or More 5.8
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 11.8
English Learners 0.6
Students with Disabilities 6.4

As stated in its annual School Accountability Report Card (2016), El Arroyo Grande’s
mission is “through a diversified and balanced curricular and co-curricular program, […] to
provide a meaningful standards based curriculum that guarantees all students the opportunities
and resources to attain the skills, knowledge, and values necessary to function as responsible and
productive members of society.” In addition, the school has four guiding principles it calls
“Graduation Goals.” The first goal is to foster Academic Achievers who demonstrate the ability
to meet or exceed content standards across the curriculum, and who read, write, speak, listen, and
reason effectively. The second goal is to foster Complex Thinkers who demonstrate critical and
creative thinking, exhibit a willingness to challenge themselves, and analyze and problem solve
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 14

effectively. The third goal is to foster Self-Directed Learners who set goals to maximize their
potential and demonstrate practical skills including organization, studying, test-taking and time
management. The final goal is to foster Productive Citizens who are active and informed
individuals with an appreciation for other cultures, perspectives, values, and people with diverse
abilities, and who display qualities of character such as honesty, integrity and sportsmanship. El
Arroyo Grande High School clearly focuses on nurturing academically prepared, well-rounded,
and productive citizens. An implied aspect of this focus is to foster effective school programs,
like a CRPM program, to support a positive and productive student experience.
Organizational Performance Status
The organizational performance problem at the root of this study is a consistent rate of
student interpersonal conflict on campus. While the number of conflicts is not excessive, they
still negatively impact those involved and the overarching culture of the institution. According
to EAGHS’s 2015 California Healthy Kids Survey results, 21% of the school’s 9
th
grade students
and 16% of 11
th
graders had “been made fun of, insulted, or called names” four or more times in
the past 12 months. The California Healthy Kids Survey from the previous year (2013), reported
similar percentages, with the same 16% of 11
th
graders and 19% of 9
th
graders having “been
made fun of, insulted, or called names” four or more times in the past 12 months. This data
shows that interpersonal conflict is a consistent and pernicious issue at EAGHS. Another
statistic from these reports is that in both the 2013 and 2015 California Healthy Kids Surveys,
19% of students report having “had sexual jokes, comments, or gestures made” to them four or
more times in the last 12 months. In order for EAGHS to fulfill its mission of creating
productive and healthy citizens, it is imperative that the school reduce the percentage of students
who experience significant interpersonal conflict and help them to resolve their conflicts more
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 15

effectively. As a mechanism to achieve this, EAGHS has created its own CRPM program with a
large focus on peer mediation, with the ultimate goal of embedding these peer mediation sessions
into the fabric of social life on campus. The ideas being that, the more often students utilize the
peer mediation services to resolve their conflicts, the less contention will impact their daily lives
and the more productive conflict resolution skills they will acquire. Failure to effectively
implement this program could result in continued mental and potentially physical problems for
students, both on and off campus, and potential loss of support (financial, etc.) from parents and
other community members.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
While conflict between students is inevitable, it is important to explicitly teach them
conflict resolution skills and help them to address conflicts through the peer mediation process
(Liang et al., 2016; Luthar & Becker, 2002). Although many counseling resources exist at
EAGHS to support students in conflict, many are still unsupported when they experience
interpersonal conflict. In April of 2018, a pilot CRPM program was implemented on campus
and a cadre of students were trained to be peer mediators. As a group, they were able to mediate
eight conflicts in the final eight weeks that school was in session. At the start of the 2018-2019
school year, an expanded CRPM class was put into place that not only continued the peer
mediation program, but also added additional whole-school elements (such as awareness
campaigns) with the intent to foster a culture of conflict resolution across campus. There was a
need to ingrain this fledgling program, and its CRPM components, into the fabric of campus life.
The goal was to provide the campus with a student-driven alternative support structure that
pupils could turn to when they found themselves embroiled in potentially serious interpersonal
conflicts. Administrators believed that, if there was strong awareness of the CRPM program
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 16

among students, and a general belief that it could improve their lives, then the program could
grow and be more readily utilized on campus.
Related Literature
Conflict is an inevitable aspect of the human condition. As such, conflicts can be either
constructive or destructive. When constructive, they encourage personal development, bolster
critical thinking, and support communication skill development; when destructive, they can lead
to violence, anger, hostility, and other negative outcomes (Yavuzer, 2012). Conflict within a
secondary school setting can be particularly destructive, as it can result in physical, emotional, or
structural problems for the individuals engaged in the conflict, and in aggregate, also negatively
impact the overall climate of the school. San Francisco Community Boards Center for Policy
and Training (1972) describes four main causes of conflict in secondary schools: peer pressure,
self-image, cultural differences, and power. One way to effectively deal with conflict is through
the creation and implementation of a conflict resolution/peer mediation program (Turnuklu, et
al., 2008). Secondary schools generally implement one of two different types of CRPM
programs, or a hybrid of both. The first type of program is called the cadre approach, where a
small group of peer mediators is trained to mediate individual conflicts (Johnson & Johnson,
1996). The second type of program is called the total student body approach, wherein the entire
student body is taught a conflict resolution and campus inclusion curriculum (Levy, 1989;
Maxwell, 1989; Turnuklu, et al., 2008). A hybrid program would employ both whole school
elements that focus on inclusion and conflict resolution, as well as a cadre of trained mediators to
mediate individual student conflicts (Turnuklu, et al., 2008). According to many researchers,
CRPM programs (in their varied forms) have been shown to be an effective mechanism to reduce
conflicts on a school campus (Johnson, Johnson, Dudley & Magnuson, 1995; Johnson &
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 17

Johnson, 1996; Garcia-Raga, Grau, Lopez-Martin & Ramon, 2016; Brinson, Kottler & Fisher,
2004; Laursen, Finkelstein & Betts, 2001). Peer mediation sessions specifically have been found
to be very effective at both resolving the conflict in question and teaching adolescents how to
resolve conflicts on their own in the future (Johnson, et al., 1995; Garcia-Raga, et al., 2016;
Turnuklu, et al.; 2008). Once implemented, a CRPM program at EAGHS helped students learn
more effective coping skills, mediate individual conflicts, and improve overall student
academic/social outcomes.
Organizational Performance Goal
During the concluding eight weeks of the 2017-2018 school year, the then newly
implemented CRPM program at EAGHS was able to conduct eight peer conflict mediations,
with an average of one mediation per week. Additionally, the school principal and entire site
administrative team set the goal for El Arroyo Grande High School to increase the number of
peer conflict mediations to at least 18 per semester, or an average of one mediation per week, by
the end of the 2018-2019 school year. The achievement of this goal was measured by examining
the total number of peer mediation sessions conducted during the data collection period.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
At EAGHS, the relevant stakeholder groups are the students and certificated staff. The
students are the most important stakeholder group in that their daily experiences are most
impacted by these interpersonal conflicts and by the CRPM program. There are over 3,200
students at EAGHS who come from a diverse array of ethnic backgrounds and socio-economic
strata. The second stakeholder group is the certificated staff, who have deep levels of daily
interaction with students and are primarily responsible for implementing the policies and
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 18

procedures related to student interaction and conflict. One principal, six assistant principals, and
128 teachers make up this stakeholder group.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although a complete evaluation of the effectiveness of EAGHS’s conflict mediation
program would involve all stakeholder groups, for practical purposes, only the certificated
teaching staff and student stakeholder groups were chosen as the focus for this study. Both
groups have the most impact on how the program is implemented and are most affected by that
programmatic implementation.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this project is to conduct an evaluation study of the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources necessary to reach the organizational performance goal
of increasing the number of peer mediation sessions to a minimum of 18 per semester by May of
2019. The analysis will focus on knowledge, motivation and organizational elements related to
achieving this organizational goal. While a complete evaluation project would focus on all
stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholders to be focused on in this analysis are the
students and certificated teaching staff.
As such, the questions that will guide the evaluation study are as follows:
1. To what extent is El Arroyo Grande High School meeting its goal of increasing the
number of peer conflict mediation sessions to 18 per semester?
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 19

2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs for El Arroyo Grande
High School during its implementation of a conflict resolution/peer mediation (CRPM)
program with the aim of increasing the number and efficacy of peer mediation sessions?
3. What is the interaction between El Arroyo Grande High School’s organizational culture
and context, and stakeholder knowledge and motivation, as it relates to the
implementation of a CRPM program?
4. What are recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources to address those needs?
Methodological Framework
This study employs the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model, which analyzes the
gap between and organization’s actual and preferred performance. The model will be adapted to
identify and analyze EAGHS’s organizational needs. The study identifies the assumed
knowledge, motivational, and organizational gaps rooted in the related literature and personal
organizational experience.
Following the identification of assumed needs, this study then seeks to authenticate those
needs through a mixed-methods study design. This study employs both quantitative and
qualitative data collection methods within a larger phenomenological research design (Creswell,
2014). A survey that specifically addresses the research questions will be administered to the
certificated staff (n=88). Additional staff members directly responsible for the implementation
of the program will also be interviewed. The student population will be subdivided into two
groups: those who are trained mediators, and those who have had a conflict mediated by the
CRPM program. There will be focus groups conducted with each subgroup of students. Finally,
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 20

all related program documents will be analyzed. Following data analysis, the study recommends
research-based solutions.
Definitions
Mediation: An action whereby disputants work to settle a mutual issue through either agreement
or reconciliation (Johnson & Johnson, 1996).
Peer Mediation: A form of conflict resolution that is youth to youth and based on integrative
negotiation and mediation (Johnson & Johnson, 1996).
Conflict Resolution and Peer Mediation (CRPM) Program: For the purposes of this study, the
conflict resolution and peer mediation program at EAGHS consists of a class called Griffins
Reaching Out (GRO), which is a hybrid CRPM program that involves both whole school efforts
to improve conflict resolution skills as well as a trained cadre of peer mediators who work to
resolve individual student conflicts (Johnson & Johnson, 1996).
Organization of the Project
This study is organized into five chapters. This first chapter is meant to provide the
reader with an overview of the key concepts regarding peer mediation and school climate. It also
states the organizational mission, goals of the study, key stakeholder groups, and the initial
elements of the gap analysis process. Chapter Two provides a review of the literature and a
focus on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements at the core of the
organizational problem. Theoretical underpinnings of the mediation process, types of peer
mediation programs, and impacts of peer mediation programs are some of the overarching
concepts that will be discussed. Chapter Three will detail the assumed causes for the study and
discuss the study’s methodology in regard to participants, data collection, and analysis. In
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 21

Chapter Four, the data and results will be discussed and analyzed. Finally, Chapter Five will
discuss solutions based on the data and prevailing literature, highlight gaps in the study, and
make recommendations for implementing and evaluating a related evaluation plan.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 22

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This literature review will examine the structure and efficacy of conflict resolution/peer
mediation (CRPM) programs specifically within secondary school settings. It will begin with a
general definition of conflict and then move towards an examination of research on the context
of adolescent conflict. This is followed by an examination of the two main theoretical
frameworks that ground much of the work on conflict mediation and were the basis for the
creation of many of the seminal CRPM programs across the country. There will then be a
description of the main types of CRPM programs commonly employed in secondary schools, and
an examination of the research regarding the efficacy and limitations of these programs.
Following the general review of the research literature, the focus will shift to the Clark and Estes
(2008) Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework, and specifically the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on the effective implementation of CRPM programs on a secondary
school campus. A final section will present the conceptual framework that grounds this study.
Influences on the Problem of Practice
The Context of Adolescent Conflict
Conflict is a fundamental element of the human experience and an integral part of the social
learning process (Mayorga, 2011). Be it the formative relationships newborns have with their
parents or a teenager navigating to school through gang territory, conflict both drives and defines
the human experience. Its ubiquity extends in some way to all of our external social and physical
relationships, and also inward to our most private thoughts and subconscious yearnings. As
such, in the context of this study, it is important to understand the specific role that conflict plays
in the lives and experiences of adolescents, and a crucial element of that understanding is to
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 23

accurately define conflict. Seminal conflict researchers Johnson and Johnson (1996)
acknowledge the ubiquity of conflict in the human experience and add that it can be either
constructive or destructive in a person’s life. It is one’s perception of conflict, and their
management of conflict, that determines whether or not the conflict becomes constructive or
destructive to their lives.
Adams and Laursen (2001) go on to define conflict as a time distributed social episode,
comprised of several discrete elements including the topic, initiation, intensity, resolution, and
outcome. They also state that conflicts generally have a sequential structure and organizational
scheme that can be likened to a play or story, and that they unfold in formulaic and well-
rehearsed ways. It is because of the ritualized and formulaic nature of most conflicts that CRPM
programs can successfully teach discrete repeatable conflict resolution skills to adolescents that
apply in varied situations. Shahmohammadi (2014) adds that conflict can be classified into four
basic types: interpersonal, between two individuals; intrapersonal, within an individual; intra-
group, between members of a team; and inter-group, between different teams. These
classifications help to highlight that conflict happens within an individual or amongst large
groups and involves dynamic and complex human interactions. This interactional complexity
suggests that adolescents, and children in general, need to be explicitly taught conflict resolution
strategies to better understand the nature of conflict and the most effective ways to resolve it in
their own lives (Johnson, Johnson, Dudley & Magnuson, 1995).
In general, conflict resolution strategies can be broadly categorized into two main groups:
those that generally lead to constructive outcomes—also called integrative—and those that
generally lead to destructive outcomes—also called competitive (Johnson & Johnson, 1996).
Within scenarios where constructive/integrative conflict resolution strategies are used, the
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 24

following tends to be true: 1) communication is open and honest; 2) perceptions tend to be
accurate; 3) there is mutual trust; and 4) there is recognition of the legitimacy of the other
parties’ claims/interests (Johnson & Johnson, 1996). These types of conflicts generally
encourage personal development, bolster critical thinking, and improve communication skills
(Yavuzer, 2012). They are the sort that teach valuable lessons, and ultimately strengthen the
individual and his or her social bonds. CRPM programs were explicitly created to help
adolescents reframe their interpersonal conflicts in more constructive and productive ways
(Johnson & Johnson, 1996).
Alternatively, conflicts can also be destructive/competitive, where they tear down the
individual and create barriers within communities. Within scenarios where
destructive/competitive conflict resolution strategies are used, the following tends to be true: 1)
communication is generally avoided or contains misinformation/threats; 2) there are frequent
distortions of perception; 3) existent mistrust and possible exploitation is at play; and 4) there is
denial of the legitimacy of the other position (Johnson & Johnson, 1996). These destructive
conflicts can lead to significantly negative outcomes like violence, anger, hostility, or avoidance
behavior (Yavuzer, 2012). In fact, Ubinger, Handal, and Massura (2013) posit that conflict
avoidance, specifically, is deleterious to mental health. These are the types of conflict outcomes
that CRPM programs were explicitly created to help adolescents avoid.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 25

Figure 1. Conflict Organization
As this study is specific to conflict within a secondary school context, it is important to
highlight the five types of conflict that occur within a secondary school setting: physical
aggression, verbal disagreements, non-verbal aggression, conflicts of interest, and
communication conflicts (Turnklu, Kaemaz, Kalender, Sevkin & Zengin, 2008). Each type of
conflict can be effectively addressed by a robust CRPM program. Such programs help students
develop their conflict resolution skills, resolve conflicts through peer mediation, and more
importantly, proactively address conflict in future interactions (Johnson & Johnson, 1996).
While each of these types of conflict necessitate a unique and nuanced response on the part of
Conflict
Destructive (Competitive)

Constructive (Integrative)
Causes of Conflict
1. peer pressure

2. self-image

3. cultural
differences

4. power
dynamics
Types of Conflict
1. physical
aggression
2. verbal
disagreement
3. non-verbal
aggression
4. conflicts of
interest
5. communication
conflicts
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 26

the individuals involved, all share a common set of causes. The San Francisco Community
Boards Center for Policy and Training (1972) describes four main causes for conflict in
secondary schools: peer pressure, self-image, cultural differences, and power. Interpersonal
conflicts on a secondary school campus are varied and complex interactions, and many times
those involved lack the experience or conflict resolution skills to navigate them successfully.
This is where a robust CRPM program can help adolescents resolve the conflict in the moment,
learn effective conflict resolution skills, and proactively address conflicts in the future. With an
understanding of the nature of conflict itself, this review then moves to an understanding of the
types of conflict resolution strategies that adolescents utilize.
Conflict Resolution Strategies
According to seminal and prolific conflict resolution researchers Johnson and Johnson
(1996), there are five strategies that adolescents utilize in order to resolve their daily conflicts:
integrative, compromise, smoothing, withdrawing, and forcing/distributive. These strategies can
be visualized on a grid wherein the x-axis is “concern for relationships” and the y-axis is
“concern for goals” (see Figure 2). The first strategy of conflict resolution in the top right
quadrant is called integrative, where problem solving negotiations are used, both parties fully
achieve their goals, and negative feelings are resolved. This is the most preferred method of
conflict resolution in that both parties leave the conflict with mutual satisfaction. The second
most preferred method is located in the center and is called compromise, where both parties
negotiate a resolution and each gives up a portion of their personal goals and sacrifices part of
their relationship with the other disputant. With this method, there is some sacrifice on the part
of each disputant, yet both parties are still able to reach the majority of their goals. The third
method, located in the bottom right quadrant, is called smoothing, wherein one disputant gives
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 27

up their goal entirely to maintain their relationship with the other person. This is not a preferred
method since one disputant’s goals and needs become totally subservient to the other disputant.
The fourth method, located in the bottom right quadrant, is called withdrawing, wherein neither
the goal nor the relationship is important, so one disputant simply disengages from the conflict.
This is a common but not preferred method, since one disputant completely withdraws from the
conflict resolution process. Finally, the fifth conflict resolution strategy, located in the top left
quadrant, is called forcing/distributive, wherein there are win/lose negotiations, and one
disputant tries to achieve their goal through some measure of force (persuasion). This is the least
optimal conflict resolution method as it usually results in negative outcomes for at least one
disputant. Generally, CRPM programs focus on teaching adolescents to actively address their
conflicts through the use of either integrative or compromise-related conflict strategies and to
avoid smoothing, withdrawing, or forcing. CRPM programs aim to help adolescents engage
more effectively in those conflict resolution strategies that involve positive negotiations and
generally result in mutually beneficial resolutions.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 28

Figure 2. Types of Conflict
The types of conflict resolution strategies that adolescents employ are also impacted by
the different types of relationships that exist in adolescents’ lives (Connolly, Baird, Bravo
Lovald, Pepler & Craig, 2015). For example, friendships are voluntary relationships, so there is
an inherent desire to maintain personal interconnections. As a result, when there is conflict
within these relationships, those involved tend to use conflict resolution strategies that involve
negotiation or that place high value on the relationship, as seen in the integrative, compromise, or
soothing types of conflict. In contrast, adolescents’ relationship with their parents are not
voluntary, so conflicts in that context tend to involve much more coercion and tend to use the
forcing/distributive or withdrawal types of conflict resolution strategies (Adams & Laursen,
2001).
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 29

Not surprisingly, there are also studies that point to gendered differences in how
adolescents both experience and respond to conflict (Coban, 2013; Hampel & Peterman, 2006;
Luther & Becker, 2002; Sanchez, Lambert & Cooley-Strickland, 2012; Santiago & Wadsworth,
2009; Seiffge-Krenke, 2000; Wadsworth & Compass, 2002). For example, Connolly, et al.
(2015) found that females tend to display what they term affiliative conflict resolution strategies
(humor and affection), while males tend to show more aggressive conflict resolution strategies
(e.g. teasing, mock aggression, etc.). Many researchers have found that there are significant
differences in the type of conflict that males and females experience, with females experiencing
more frequent lower level drama and males experiencing less frequent conflict, but with a higher
likelihood of violence or avoidance behaviors (Elgar, Arlett & Groves, 2003; Flett & Hewitt,
2014; Luther & Becker, 2002; Lund & Dearning, 2012; Park, Heppner & Lee, 2010).
In addition to the often informal interpersonal conflict resolution strategies mentioned
above, there are also a variety of formalized processes that organizations and societies use to
help individuals and groups resolve conflicts. The New South Wales Department of Education
and Communities (NSWDEC) (2012) notes that there are three basic types of formalized conflict
resolution processes that many schools and other organizations employ. The first is a system for
adjudication, where, for example, an administrator in charge of discipline might be referred
students who are in conflict, would then hear out either side, and then ultimately pass some sort
of judgement based on school policy and that administrator’s personal assessment of the
situation. A second type is a system for arbitration. Similar to the example given above, those in
conflict would go to a third party who would listen to both sides and ultimately make a decision
on behalf of the disputants. The third type is a system of mediation, where` a third party helps
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 30

the disputants talk to each other and ultimately decide upon a mutually agreeable course of
action.
This study will focus on the third type, mediation, and in particular peer mediation.
NSWDEC (2010) defines peer mediation as:
the process by which the participants, together with the assistance of a neutral
person or persons, systematically isolate disputed issues in order to develop
options, consider alternatives, and reach a consensual settlement that will
accommodate their needs. Mediation is a process that emphasizes the
participants’ own responsibility for making decisions that affect their lives (p. 5).
It is a well-defined process whereby students in conflict are initially self-recommended to the
peer mediation program or recommended by school staff or friends. Once recommended, a
trained peer mediator is chosen to meet with the disputants and to lead the mediation session.
During the session, the peer mediator begins with an explanation of how the mediation process
works, what role the mediator will play, and what the disputants need to do during the session.
The mediator then leads them through a process where each side gets to share their perspective,
and then ultimately leads them to an agreements phase, where both sides agree to courses of
action or norms of behavior for the future (San Francisco Community Boards, 2014). With an
understanding of the context and mechanisms of adolescent conflict, this literature review can
now move to the theoretical frameworks that underpin CRPM programs in secondary schools.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 31

Theoretical Frameworks
While there are many theoretical frameworks that provide a base for CRPM programs,
for this study there are two that best shed light on the mechanics and underpinnings of successful
CRPM programs: social interdependence theory and conflict strategies theory.
Social Interdependence Theory
Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (2007) identify social interdependence theory (SIT) as a
major theoretical base for CRPM programs. SIT frames conflict as a natural part of any social
relationship and states that the structure of conflicts tends to follow well-defined and relatively
consistent patterns. SIT has three main propositions: 1) conflict can be either framed as
constructive (integrative) or competitive (destructive); 2) whether the conflict is integrative or
competitive depends on both the context of the conflict and the strategies used to resolve the
conflict; and 3) conflict is a ubiquitous and necessary aspect of the human condition (Johnson &
Johnson, 1996). When a specific conflict can be framed in a constructive (integrative) fashion,
with individuals working collaboratively to reach a solution, this tends to create a healthy
resolution to the conflict.
When a conflict is framed in a destructive (competitive) manner, the disputants engage in
an oppositional interaction that creates destructive and unhealthy resolutions. The determinant
of whether or not the conflict becomes constructive or destructive relates less to the specifics of
the conflict and more to how the disputants view the conflict. This is where an effective CRPM
program enters, first as a method to help disputants reframe how they view the conflict, and then
to provide a structure to cooperatively and fully resolve the conflict. A conflict is considered to
be resolved in a productive manner when 1) the outcome is mutually agreeable; 2) it improves
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 32

the relationship between the disputants; and 3) it improves the ability of disputants to resolve
future conflicts (Johnson & Johnson, 1996). It is the overarching purpose of a CRPM program to
help adolescents frame their conflicts in a constructive (integrative) manner and to work towards
cooperative solutions that fully resolve the issue.
Conflict Strategies Theory
While SIT helps to define the nature and structure of conflict within interpersonal
relationships, conflict strategies theory (CST) is more acutely focused on conflict resolution
strategies. This theory has its basis in the Conflict Management Grid developed by Blake and
Mouton (1964) where one’s concern for the relationship is contrasted with one’s concern for
accomplishing their goal. This theoretical framework posits that there are two main dimensions
or concerns involved in conflict resolution: 1) self-centered concerns about personal interests,
and 2) relational concerns in maintaining a mutually beneficial relationship with the other person
or group (Van de Vliert & Kadanoff, 1990). In essence, these two dimensions compete with one
another, and those in conflict must balance their own personal interests against their desire to
maintain a mutually beneficial relationship with the other person or group. While SIT frames
conflict as a natural and oft beneficial part of the human experience, CST theory adds the
complexity of these self-centered calculations that individuals make when engaged in an
interpersonal conflict.
As mentioned in the previous section, there are five strategies that a person can use to
resolve a conflict: integrative, compromise, smoothing, withdrawing, and forcing/distributive
(Johnson & Johnson, 1996). Depending on the situation, any of the five strategies can be used
effectively and appropriately to resolve the conflict. It is up to the individual to find that balance
between their own goals and the relationship in question, and to utilize the appropriate conflict
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 33

resolution strategy to reach a constructive outcome. This is where an effective CRPM enters as a
mechanism to explicitly teach adolescents how to manage this balance and choose the most
constructive conflict resolution strategies for the situation. Both of these theoretical frameworks
helped early CRPM program designers to understand more about the structure and nature of
adolescent conflict and ultimately helped them to create effective and responsive programs.
Conflict Resolution Programs in Secondary Schools
Historical Origins of Conflict Resolution Programs on Secondary School Campuses
Modern efforts to design and develop conflict resolution programs within US schools
have their origins in the mid-1960s with the work of four main groups: conflict resolution
researchers, non-violence advocates, anti-nuclear war advocates, and those in the legal
profession (Johnson & Johnson, 1996; Mayorga, 2011). Each of these initial efforts started in
response to a significant rise in violent conflict rates within inner city schools and a desire to
explicitly teach communities and individuals how to resolve conflict in mutually beneficial and
effective ways. Early on, researchers Johnson and Johnson (1996) developed the “Students to Be
Peacemakers” program that focused on teaching the nature of conflict and various conflict
mediation strategies to students in the inner city. Later, Quaker nonviolence advocates who
worked in New York City in 1972 created the “Children’s Creative Response to Conflict”
program that focused on justice, integrity, and compassion (Mayorga, 2011). Subsequently, in
the 1980s, President Carter’s “Neighborhood Justice Centers” were created in an effort to create
conflict management programs wherein a trained cadre of peer mediators were employed to help
disputants reach constructive conflict resolutions. This work was then expanded upon by anti-
nuclear war activists in 1985, who developed the “Resolving Conflict Creatively” program that
focused on group relations, cooperative learning, and peer mediation training. As time passed,
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 34

additional programs such as Peer Assistance and Leadership (P.A.L.) in California; San
Francisco Community Boards, also in California; Peace Builders in Arizona; Resolving Conflict
Creatively in New York; and Students for Peace in Texas worked to expand and customize
CRPM programs to meet the specific needs of their unique communities (National Center for
Injury Prevention and Control, 2003). Each of these programs served to strengthen their
respective communities through teaching effective conflict management, and from these origins,
CRPM programs have continued to evolve as they address the developing needs of the modern
school and adolescent.
Types of Conflict Resolution Programs
There are generally three ways to categorize modern CRPM programs in secondary
schools: the cadre approach, the whole school approach, and hybrid approaches. Each of these
program types is embodied by three purposes: conflict resolution, conflict prevention, and
personal empowerment (Raga, Sanchis, Mora & Santana, 2016). The first type of CRPM
program, called the cadre approach, is where the school or community organization trains a small
group of individuals to be peer mediators who specifically intervene when people or groups are
in conflict. This cadre of peer mediators is trained to follow a very specific protocol during the
conflict mediation sessions, intended to remove bias from the mediators’ interactions and to help
facilitate integrative or compromise-oriented resolutions to conflicts (San Francisco Community
Boards, 1972; New South Wales Government, 1998). The school or community organization
then creates a logistical system wherein disputants are either recommended for a peer mediation
session by another individual within the organization or can recommended themselves. Many
researchers find that that this type of CRPM program is beneficial for both those who have their
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 35

conflicts mediated and those trained members of the peer mediation cadre (Mayorga, 2011;
Turnuklu, et al., 2008).
A second type of conflict resolution program is called the total student body approach.
This is where the entire student body is taught a conflict resolution curriculum (Levy, 1989;
Maxwell, 1989; Turnuklu, et al., 2009). Programs like this tend to be based on either a skills-
oriented curriculum that teaches interpersonal skills needed to resolve conflicts or academically-
oriented curriculums that emphasize the intellectual and cognitive processes surrounding conflict
resolution (Opotow, 1991). One example of this is the “Teaching Students to Be Peacemakers”
program designed by Johnson and Johnson (2004), where both staff and students are taught not
only about the nature of conflict and its many forms, but also the various conflict resolution
strategies and how/when to utilize them. The goal is to create a school-wide environment that
encourages cooperative behavior and constructive conflict resolution. To accomplish this, the
program has four parts. The first is to teach stakeholders to understand the nature of conflict; the
second is to teach them how to choose the appropriate conflict resolution strategy; the third is to
learn to negotiate a solution to the problem; and the fourth is to mediate others’ conflicts
(Johnson & Johnson, 2004). This particular program is just one example, but total student body
CRPM programs follow a similar pattern, educating the population about the nature of conflict,
teaching them how and when to utilize various conflict resolution strategies, and then
empowering students to utilize these lessons throughout their lives (Gray, 2010; Gray, 2016;
Peer Resource Training and Consulting, 2008).
Finally, there are also the hybrid programs that combine elements from both the cadre
and total student body approaches. Many modern programs incorporate the hybrid approach, as
researchers have noted that students who have been previously trained in conflict resolution
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 36

strategies are not only better able to resolve conflicts in the moment of a peer mediation session,
but also more likely to utilize them in their daily interactions (Dart, et al., 2014; Ibarrola-Garcia
& Iriarte, 2014; Johnson, Johnson & Dudley, 1992; National Center for Injury Prevention and
Control, 2003; Viadero, 2010). Most of these programs train a cadre of student peer mediators to
operate alongside a larger school-wide conflict resolution knowledge and application curriculum.
Such programs can take on myriad forms that are either modeled after a particular state or
regional program, such as the Peer Assistance and Leadership (P.A.L.) (2016) program in
California, or are specifically crafted for an individual school site such as the CRPM program at
EAGHS that is the focus of this study. While each program may look different in that it is
crafted for an individual site’s needs, there is a clear consensus in the literature that most of these
programs have generally positive impacts for individual students and campus climate as a whole.
Efficacy of Conflict Mediation and Peer Mediation Programs
According to many researchers, CRPM programs (in their varied forms) have been
shown to be an effective mechanism to reduce conflicts on a school campus (Brinson, Kottler &
Fisher, 2004; Garcia-Raga, Grau, Lopez-Martin & Ramon, 2016; Johnson, Johnson, Dudley &
Magnuson, 1995; Johnson & Johnson, 1996; Laursen, Finkelstein & Betts, 2001). Numerous
studies also report that after the effective implementation of a CRPM program, there is a
significant reduction in exclusionary discipline resulting from interpersonal conflict, in violence
on campus, and in administrative time spent on discipline (Cook & Boes, 2013; Dart, Collins,
Klingbeil & McKinley, 2014; Mayorga, 2011). Peer mediation sessions specifically have been
found to be very effective at both resolving in the moment conflicts and teaching adolescents
how to resolve conflicts on their own in the future (Johnson & Johnson, 1996).
Limitations on Conflict Resolution and Peer Mediation program effectiveness
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 37

In general, CRPM programs have been shown to be effective in both reducing conflicts in
the moment (via peer mediation sessions) and teaching adolescents conflict resolution skills to
better resolve conflicts in their own lives. However, these programs have limitations. Since
there are myriad CRPM programs operating in this country, there exists significant variation in
both the efficacy of implementation and the effectiveness of the program itself from site to site
(Theberge & Karan, 2004). Several researchers note that while CRPM programs have intuitive
appeal, their true effectiveness can vary greatly.
For example, in their seminal review of CRPM programs and related research, Johnson
and Johnson (1996) note that there are issues that arise in the peer mediation sessions that hinder
the effective resolution of conflict. They state that peer mediators are not helpful when: 1) there
is a high level of hostility between the disputants; 2) the mediator is not trusted; 3) there is a lack
of resources; 4) the issue involves core beliefs; 5) there is unequal power between the disputants;
or 6) there is a lack of trust in the mediation process (Johnson & Johnson, 1996). Similarly,
Theberge & Karan (2004) note that there are six limitations to CRPM programs: 1) student
attitude and behaviors regarding mediation; 2) student individual method of dealing with
conflict; 3) student attitudes toward school; 4) school climate; 5) the structure of the mediation
program; and 6) cultural trends in the larger society about conflict. These limitations are due to a
variety of factors including the training the peer mediators received, organizational resource
allocation issues, the mindset of those being mediated, and the type of conflict being mediated.
Some of these limitations are within the scope of the CRPM program to address, such as those
involving resource allocation or improved programmatic protocols, but others are mostly outside
the scope of CRPM programs, such as the larger societal beliefs about conflict or the individual’s
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 38

feelings towards school in general. It is the goal of this study to analyze the implementation of
the CRPM at EAGHS through the lens of these limitations.
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences Framework
The preceding portion of this literature review framed the general research on the nature of
conflict and conflict resolution strategies as well as the structure and effectiveness of CRPM
programs. This next section will move from a general review of these topics to a more specific
review of the literature in terms of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements that
impact the effective implementation of CRPM programs. This section will be broken into three
parts based on the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework. This framework focuses on
what Clark and Estes (2008) term the “big three” causes of organizational failure: knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences (KMO). These three areas lie at the heart of
organizational gaps between desired outcomes and actual performance.
Gaps in the area of knowledge appear not only when stakeholders lack the information or
skill sets to know how or what to do to achieve organizational goals, but also when they do not
know why those goals are important to organizational success. Relatedly, gaps occur in the area
of motivation when a stakeholder’s personal interests do not fully intersect with organizational
goals and there is a lack of willingness to do what is necessary to achieve those goals. Thirdly,
there can be gaps related to organizational influences that occur when either the structure or
culture of the organization negatively impacts the ability of relevant stakeholders to accomplish
organizational goals. Clark and Estes (2008) stress that organizations need to comprehensively
and honestly asses their organization in these three areas to effectively identify and address
barriers to organizational success. The following section will analyze what the literature states
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 39

about how organizational constraints in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences can impact the effective implementation of a CRPM program on the EAGHS campus.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivational, and Organizational Influences
Research shows that successful conflict resolution/peer mediation (CRPM) programs
within school settings can help to mitigate interpersonal issues between participating disputants,
while also supporting a larger culture of conflict resolution on campus (Cooks & Boes, 2013;
Dart, Collins, Klingbeil & McKinley, 2014; Ibarrola-Garcia & Aznarez-Sando, 2017; Johnson &
Johnson, 2004; Theberge & Karan, 2004). In order to create and implement a successful peer
mediation program, school staff and the student body need to acquire a very specific set of
knowledge and skills (Theberge & Karan, 2004). Specifically in regard to the element of
knowledge, Clark and Estes (2008) note knowledge enhancement, in the form of education and
training, is an integral part of organizational success. This need for education and training also
holds true in regard to CRPM programs, as stakeholder knowledge is vital to programmatic
success.
Successful school-based CRPM programs require that both staff and students gain needed
knowledge of the site-specific practices, protocols, and procedures surrounding the CRPM
program. It is important for stakeholders to know not only what to do in terms of the
implementation of a CRPM program, but also why such a program is important for participating
individuals and the larger school community (Rueda, 2011; Sinek, 2009). Conflict mediation,
and in this case peer mediation programs specifically, are focused not only on the resolution of
individual conflicts, but also more broadly on teaching a school community about effective
conflict resolution strategies. This is similar to what Grossman and Salas (2011) consider a
transfer of knowledge, where individual characteristics (self-efficacy, motivation, etc.), training
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 40

program design, and physical environment combine to support the transfer of knowledge or skills
from a controlled environment to similar dynamic situations in the real world. In the
examination of effective CRPM programs, it is vital to identify not only what knowledge is
needed, but also how to effectively apply that knowledge.
While the idea of knowledge as a general concept may seem straightforward, it is in fact
quite complex and can be broken into several distinct types. Krathwohl (2002) identified four
types of knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Factual knowledge is
the simplest form of knowledge, and it encompasses basic, discrete facts fundamental to
understanding a larger concept, like details or terminology (Rueda, 2011). Conceptual
knowledge is incrementally more complex, as it denotes an understanding of more involved
combinations of information such as concepts, principles, or theories (Krathwohl, 2002, Rueda,
2011). Procedural knowledge differs slightly, as it deals with how something is done, and thus
refers to the specific series of steps required to accomplish a task (Krathwohl, 2002, Rueda,
2011). Finally, metacognitive knowledge is the most complex, as it refers to one’s ability to
understand his/her own cognitive processes and recognize when to perform a certain task and
why (Rueda, 2011). It is important to analyze several of these types of knowledge when
discussing how to effectively implement a CRPM program.
Stakeholder Knowledge Influences
Several types of knowledge are needed for a school-based CRPM program to function
effectively, and this literature review will address three knowledge influences. The first type of
knowledge is procedural and addresses what students and staff need to know about how the
CRPM program’s processes and procedures function. The second type of knowledge is
declarative and addresses both conceptual and factual information about the program. The third
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 41

type of knowledge is metacognitive, as it addresses what students need to learn about conflict
resolution strategies and how to utilize that knowledge effectively to reduce conflict in their
lives.
The mediation process and procedures. There are many different types of CRPM
programs throughout the country. While many of the programs follow a general set of principles
and common procedures, most programs are customized to the needs of the individual school site
(National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2003). Every program requires its relevant
stakeholders to acquire a robust procedural knowledge of the processes and protocols involved in
order to implement the program effectively. Many studies have identified a lack of procedural
knowledge as a major limitation to programmatic success, and it is no different at EAGHS (Cook
& Boes, 2013; Dart, et al., 2014; Theberge & Karan, 2004).
In order to operate a successful CRPM program, specifically in regard to the conflict
mediation portion, the research states that a commonly held understanding of the mediation
process and related protocols is crucial (Smith, Daunic, Miller & Robinson, 2002; Thegerge,
2004). This procedural knowledge is necessary for several groups of stakeholders: the cadre of
peer mediators, the staff of the school, and the general student body. The cadre of peer
mediators needs to have a clear understanding of the conflict mediation procedures and the
protocols around how and when to engage in formal mediations. The school staff needs to have
a clear understanding of how the conflict mediation program functions, who should be
recommended for mediation, and how to recommend those people (Cook & Boes, 2013; Smith et
al. 2002). Finally, the student body as a whole needs to know that the peer mediation program
exists, how it functions, and how they can participate in the mediations. Ultimately, a clear and
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 42

nuanced understanding of this procedural knowledge is needed in order to operate an effective
CRPM program.
Benefits of conflict mediation. In addition to the procedural knowledge of how a
school’s CRPM program functions, stakeholders also need a declarative knowledge of why the
utilization of a CRPM program generally results in positive interpersonal outcomes.
Specifically, with the peer mediation process, many researchers generally note that it has three
basic purposes: conflict resolution, conflict prevention, and personal empowerment. School staff
and students need to conceptually understand that peer mediations are useful not only when a
conflict has escalated, but also when conflicts are in their initial stages, before emotions veer out
of control (Ibarrola-Garcia & Iriarte, 2014; Raga, Sanchez, Mora & Santana, 2016; Sagkal,
Turnuklu, & Totan, 2016). This idea of peer mediation as both in-the-moment conflict
resolution and as conflict prevention is a cornerstone of successful CRPM programs and is an
important aspect of declarative knowledge that needs to be imparted to the school’s relevant
stakeholders (Johnson & Johnson, 2004). Finally, both the peer mediators and those who have
had a conflict mediated need to conceptually understand that peer mediation sessions not only
help resolve conflicts in the moment, but also help to teach conflict resolution strategies four use
in the future (Johnson, Johnson & Smith, 2004). Much personal empowerment rests in the idea
that one can control their own emotions and, by doing so, keep conflict at a minimum in one’s
life. Successful CRPM programs are able to propagate the idea of peer meditation as an
effective tool in the moment of conflict and also as a reliable way to learn conflict resolution
skills that improve their day to day lives.
Conflict mediation as an everyday tool. Metacognitive skills around conflict mediation
are another necessary element of effective CRPM programs that are taught to both the trained
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 43

peer mediators and those students who have had a conflict mediated (Ibarola-Garcia, Iriarte &
Sanado, 2017). Specifically referring to the cadre of peer mediators, Bell and Song (2005) note
that peer mediators need to pay attention to four categories of emotions: 1) self-conscious
emotions; 2) outwardly hostile emotions; 3) positive emotions; and 4) fear. Each of these
emotions can have a significant impact on the mediation process and need to be addressed
throughout the mediation protocol. Similarly, Jones and Bodker (2001) cite that peer mediators
need to be aware of, and attentive to, three components of emotion that disputants might display
during a mediation: 1) behavior; 2) physiology; and 3) cognition. A large part of the training
process is to teach that cadre of peer mediators how to recognize those three components of
emotion in themselves so that they, in turn, can better recognize and deal with them in disputants
during mediations. These are very distinct metacognitive exercises that require peer mediators to
learn how to recognize and control their own emotional and physical responses as they help
others mediate and productively work through interpersonal conflict.
Given that individuals both conceptualize and interact with conflict in differing and
potentially maladaptive ways, the CRPM program at EAGHS can help teach the students
involved how to more effectively interact with conflict (Theberge & Karan, 2004). An important
part of the mediation process is to help students understand how they generally handle conflict,
and then to give them strategies to better deal with other conflicts in the future (Ibarrola-Garcia,
Iriarte & Aznarez-Sanado, 2007). This is accomplished during the mediation sessions
themselves as part of the mediation protocol or can be explicitly taught to the larger student body
through training sessions or campus-wide initiatives (Johnson & Johnson, 2004). Some research
also suggests that these types of lessons should be incorporated into daily academics throughout
the school’s regular curriculum (Johnson & Johnson, 2004). In all, these metacognitive skills
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 44

help students to both reframe their own conceptualizations of conflict and change how they
personally respond to conflict. As such, they are vital elements in any successful CRPM
program. Table 2 below displays the knowledge influence, knowledge type, and the
corresponding knowledge influence assessment to be used during the data collection process.
Table 2.
Knowledge Influencers
Organizational Mission
Students will thrive in a caring, respectful, and encouraging environment where they
demonstrate academic excellence and develop unique talents in preparation for their future
goals.
Organizational Global Goal
Engage stakeholders in order to build robust student safety programs that focus on:
positive behavior intervention and supports, social, emotional, and mental health, digital
citizenship, and violence, bullying, and substance abuse prevention and response.
Stakeholder Goal
As of the 2017-2018 school year the school principal and the entire site administrative team
have set the goal that by the end of the 2018-2019 school year El Arroyo Grande High
School will increase the number of peer conflict mediations to an average of 18 per
semester.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence
Assessment
Staff need to know that the CRPM
program exists, and how to access
its services.
Procedural Quantitative surveys and
qualitative, open-ended
interviews based on Johnson
and Johnson (1996), also
document analysis.
Staff need to know the benefits of
a CRPM program.
Conceptual Quantitative surveys and
qualitative, open-ended
interviews based on Johnson
and Johnson (1996).
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 45

Stakeholder Motivational Influences
Analysis of effective CRPM programs necessitates discussion around not only the
knowledge-related influences, but also crucial motivation influences as well. Motivation, the
second element of Clark and Estes’s (2008) KMO model of gap analysis, deals with why
stakeholders engage in various behaviors. This section will review literature that focuses on
motivation-related influences that are pertinent to accomplishing the organizational goal at the
center of this study. Clark and Estes (2008) define motivation simply as those elements which
“get us going, keeps us moving, and tells us how much effort to spend on work tasks” (p. 80).
Clark and Estes (2008) more specifically define motivation as comprised of three elements: 1)
active choice; 2) persistence; and 3) mental effort. Active choice is when someone cognitively
chooses to do an activity, where persistence is the choice to continue working on a task even
when it becomes burdensome or uncomfortable. Mental effort is the goal-related investment that
one makes to accomplish the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). Similarly, Mayer (2011) states that
motivation is comprised of four components: 1) personal or an internal state; 2) activating in that
Students need to know that the
CRPM program exists, and how to
access its services.
Procedural Quantitative surveys and
qualitative, open-ended
interviews based on Johnson
and Johnson (1996), also
document analysis.
Students need to know that
participation in the CRPM
program generally results in
positive interpersonal outcomes.
Conceptual Quantitative surveys and
qualitative, open-ended
interviews based on Johnson
and Johnson (1996).
Students need to know how to
effectively mediate interpersonal
conflicts.
Metacognitive Quantitative surveys and
qualitative, open-ended
interviews based on Johnson
and Johnson (1996).
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 46

it initiates behavior; 3) energizing in that it helps maintain behavior; and 4) directed in that the
effort is goal-related. Both frameworks describe motivation as fundamentally revolving around
how one’s personal interests intersect with the external environment. Given this, it is important
to analyze how motivational factors relate to the implementation of effective CRPM programs.
While there are many motivational theories, this study will focus on the two most
relevant to CRPM programs, which are expectancy value theory and self-efficacy theory.
Expectancy value theory helps to frame and examine how students place value on the conflict
mediation process itself. Self-efficacy theory helps to explain the way peer mediation programs
can help students believe that conflict resolution strategies can improve their lives.
Expectancy value theory. According to Eccles (2006), expectancy value theory can be
reduced to two fundamental questions: “Can I do the task?” and “Do I want to do the task?” If
students answer no to either of these questions, then it is unlikely that they will have any
motivation to engage in a task at all. As to the first question, one’s belief that they can actually
“do” the task is of primary importance and will be discussed in more detail in a following section
on self-efficacy theory. The second question, on the other hand, “Do I want to do the task?” gets
to the core of expectancy value theory in that it evaluates the type of value people place on a
certain task. Eccles (2006) breaks this into four related constructs: 1) intrinsic value or the
situational value that an individual places on a certain activity; 2) attainment value or the linkage
between a certain task and one’s own identity; 3) utility value or how the task fits into the
person’s individual goals; and 4) perceived cost of engaging in a particular task. Each of these
constructs helps to conceptualize how individuals formulate the type and amount of value they
put into a particular task, and thus how much motivation they have to start or complete that task.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 47

In regard to the CRPM program at EAGHS, it is foundationally important that both staff
and students believe there is significant utility value in the conflict mediation process and
conflict resolution strategies in general (Sagkal, et al., 2016). Wall, et al. (2001) focused on
mediation as a cultural practice, and through that analysis noted that cultural norms and expected
benefits of participation play a significant role in shaping the mediated interactions. They note
that different countries or societies are more or less apt to accept the mediation process,
depending on how they view conflict in general or how they explicitly view the mediation
process. Given this analysis, it is not difficult to extend their work and see that an individual
school’s culture impacts how much value is placed on the peer mediation process. Johnson and
Johnson (2004) note the importance of teaching conflict resolution strategies to the larger student
body, as it helps the students to learn the value of conflict mediation and conflict resolution in
general. It is important that any CRPM program puts strong emphasis on helping staff and
students see the utility value in the peer mediation process so that they will be motivated to
actively engage in it.
Self-efficacy theory. In essence, self-efficacy theory posits that one’s beliefs and
perceptions about their own capabilities in regard to a specific task fundamentally alters how
much motivation one has to complete that task (Pajares, 2006). The more an individual believes
that he/she can adequately engage in and complete a task, the more motivation to engage in and
complete that task is present. Pajares (2006) importantly notes that one’s belief that she can do a
task is not the same as her outcome expectations and her judgements about the consequences of
engaging (or not) in that task. As to the sources of self-efficacy, Pajares (2006) notes that self-
efficacy is derived from four sources: 1) mastery experience, wherein success improves self-
efficacy and failure lowers it; 2) vicarious experience, wherein the observation of others’ success
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 48

or failure either raises or lowers self-efficacy; 3) social persuasions, wherein verbal and
otherwise social messages about one’s abilities either raise or lower self-efficacy; and finally 4)
physiological reactions, wherein physio-emotive states provide information about one’s efficacy
beliefs. It is important for organizations to promote self-efficacy as much as possible through
these four sources, with the aim of meaningfully improving overall organizational outcomes.
In regard to the CRPM program at EAGHS, student self-efficacy related to conflict
resolution plays an important role in the effectiveness of the CRPM program, especially as it
pertains to conflict mediation and the student’s role in the mediation process. Research shows
that students who are involved in CRPM programs show growth in both their ability to mediate
conflict in the moment and their ability to productively address conflict in future interactions
(Ibarrola-Garcia & Iriarte, 2014; Johnson, Johnson & Smith, 2007; Raga, et al., 2016). This is
true for the cadre of peer mediators themselves and the student disputants from the general
population as well (Raga, et al., 2016). In short, if students’ self-efficacy in terms of their ability
to resolve their own conflicts is strengthened, then their overall motivation to engage with the
CRPM program can also be improved. Table 3 displays the assumed motivational influences
and the corresponding motivational influence assessment to be used during the data collection
process.
Table 3
Motivation Influencers
Organizational Mission
Students will thrive in a caring, respectful, and encouraging environment where they demonstrate
academic excellence and develop unique talents in preparation for their future goals.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 49

Stakeholder Organizational Influences
In addition to knowledge and motivational influences, Clark and Estes (2008) also note
that organizational influences meaningfully impact the attainment of organizational goals. The
third element of Clark and Estes’s (2008) KMO model of gap analysis, organizational
influences, examines how work processes, the use of material resources, and organizational
culture impact stakeholder ability to achieve performance goals. This section will review
literature focused on organizationally related influences pertinent to the successful
implementation of a CRPM program on a secondary school campus.
Organizational Global Goal
Engage stakeholders in order to build robust student safety programs that focus on: positive
behavior intervention and supports, social, emotional, and mental health, digital citizenship, and
violence, bullying, and substance abuse prevention and response.
Stakeholder Goal
As of the 2017-2018 school year, the school principal and the entire site administrative team have
set the goal that by the end of the 2018-2019 school year El Arroyo Grande High School will
increase the number of peer conflict mediations to an average of 18 per semester.
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivational Influence Assessment
Expectancy-Value Theory: Students need to see
the utility value of the CRPM program.
Quantitative surveys and qualitative, open-
ended interviews based on Johnson and
Johnson (1996).
Self-Efficacy Theory: Students need to believe
that they can use the conflict resolution strategies
learned through the peer mediation process to
resolve conflict in their daily lives.
Quantitative surveys and qualitative, open-
ended interviews based on Johnson and
Johnson (1996).
Expectancy-Value Theory: Staff need to see the
CRPM program as valuable and useful in their
daily practice.
Quantitative surveys and qualitative, open-
ended interviews based on Johnson and
Johnson (1996).
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 50

Clark and Estes (2008) separate organizational influences into three broad categories:
work processes, material resources, and value streams. Work processes are those interrelated
practices and procedures within an organization that support the attainment of identified goals.
Material resources refers to the tangible supplies and equipment needed to achieve those goals.
Value streams refer to the internal analysis of departmental interactions and processes that are
meant to improve efficiency and effectiveness of the organization as a whole. When these three
organizational categories are analyzed in concert, they can provide a clear picture of potential
gaps that may hinder the attainment of organizational goals.
Additionally, it is vital to consider the overarching culture of an organization when
conducting an organizational gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008). Erez and Gati (2004) define
culture broadly as the core values and norms of an organization that have been shared and
transmitted through the social processes of modeling and observation. Schien (2004) adds that
culture refers to phenomena that are “below the surface” and powerfully impact an organization,
while mostly operating on an unconscious level. In terms of culture and organizational
performance, Clark and Estes (2008) divide organizational culture into three general areas: 1)
culture in environment, which refers to the overarching organizational culture; 2) culture in
groups, which refers to the specialized culture of smaller factions within an organization; and
finally, 3) culture in individuals, which refers to the cultural influences of individual workers. It
is important to analyze the cultures that operate within an organization because they ultimately
have significant impacts on the organization’s ability to achieve its goals. This is also true in
regard to the implementation of effective CRPM programs in secondary schools. The remainder
of this section will analyze how secondary schools can best address organizational gaps during
the implementation of CRPM programs.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 51

For the purposes of this study, the organizational influences belong in two distinct
groups: cultural models and cultural settings. Cultural models refer to the values, beliefs, and
attitudes within an organization that are generally invisible and automated, whereas cultural
settings refer to the concrete and visible manifestations of the cultural models within an
organization (Gallimore & Goldenburg, 2001). While there are many organizational influences
that impact a secondary school campus, this study will focus on one cultural model and three
cultural settings that are the most relevant to the effective implementation of the CRPM program
at EAGHS.
Cultural Model
Cultural models have been defined by Gallimore and Goldenburg (2001) as “historically
evolved and shared ways of perceiving, thinking, and storing possible responses to adaptive
challenges” (p. 47). These are the often invisible and unnoticed ways that individuals and
organizations collectively operate on a daily basis.
The central cultural model that operates within EAGHS is the organizational need to
support the implementation of the CRPM program. The successful implementation of a CRPM
program necessitates that the program has high levels of support from all stakeholders, both
logistically and with regard to resources (Daunic, Smith, Robinson & Miller, 2000; Humpries,
1999; Sellman, 2011; Wall, Stark & Standifer, 2001). The organization must fundamentally
believe the CRPM program has value and that it can be utilized to improve campus culture and
the lives of the individuals on campus (Dart, Collins, Klingbeil & McKinley, 2014; Ibarrola-
Garcia, Iriarte & Aznarez-Sanado, 2017; Theberge & Karan, 2004).
Cultural Settings
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 52

Linked to the cultural models in place at El Arroyo Grande High School are four cultural
settings, which are the tangible manifestations of those models as they interact with stakeholders
on campus. The first cultural setting revolves around programmatic visibility. Researchers have
noted that a key element of any successful CRPM program is that it is highly visible to the
school community (Association for Conflict Resolution, 1996; Daunic, et al., 2000). The
average stakeholder needs to know that the program exists and also how to access it. Generally,
the more stakeholders productively interact with the CRPM program, the more successful the
program will be at improving the culture of the campus (Sellman, 2011).
The second cultural setting revolves around resources. It is vital for any CRPM program
to have the proper financial, personnel, and other related resources to allow it to operate
effectively (Association for Conflict Resolution, 1996; Mayorga, 2011; Theberge & Karan,
2004). Daunic, et al. (2000) highlight the need for strong leadership within the CRPM program,
from the administrators who oversee the program to the committed core of teaching staff who
directly implement the program. Many researchers stress the need for adequate and consistent
financial resources to support the ongoing implementation of CRPM programs (Association for
Conflict Resolution, 1996). If these resources are not meted out and distributed effectively, then
the CRPM program’s ability to thrive can be severely hindered (Johnson & Johnson, 2004).
Table 4 displays the organizational influencers and the corresponding organizational influence
assessments that will be used during the data collection process.
The third cultural setting revolves around the need for well-defined protocols. Another
key element of a successful CRPM program is that there are clear and universally understood
procedures and practices that guide the program (Association for Conflict Resolution, 1996;
Mayorga, 2011; Theberge & Karan, 2004). There is a distinct need for clarity when engaging
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 53

with CRPM programs; they are inherently complex to both operate and understand, and thus any
lack of clarity about how the program functions decreases its overall efficacy (Cook & Boes,
2013). Furthermore, Smith, Daunic, Miller and Robinson (2002) note that the focus needs to be
not only on processes and procedures, but also on how those inputs directly connect to the
program’s desired outcomes.
Table 4
Organizational Influencers

Organizational Mission
Students will thrive in a caring, respectful, and encouraging environment where they
demonstrate academic excellence and develop unique talents in preparation for their future
goals.
Organizational Global Goal
Engage stakeholders in order to build robust student safety programs that focus on: positive
behavior intervention and supports, social, emotional, and mental health, digital citizenship,
and violence, bullying, and substance abuse prevention and response.
Stakeholder Goal
As of the 2017-2018 school year, the school principal and the entire site administrative team
have set the goal that by the end of the 2018-2019 school year El Arroyo Grande High
School will increase the number of peer conflict mediations to an average of 18 per semester.
Organizational Needs Organization Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence 1:
The organization needs to support the
implementation of the CRPM program.
Survey and interview questions that address
stakeholder sentiment around organizational
support of the CRPM program based on
Johnson and Johnson (1996).
Cultural Setting Influence 1:
The organization needs to ensure that the
CRPM program-related communications
support high visibility within the
organization.
Survey and interview questions that address
the visibility of the CRPM program based on
Johnson and Johnson (1996).
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 54

Conceptual Framework: Interaction of Knowledge, Motivation, and the Organizational
Context
A conceptual framework is an organizational tool that bridges relevant beliefs,
assumptions, concepts, and theories in order to frame and contextualize a research study
(Maxwell, 2013). The purpose of a conceptual framework is threefold: first, to construct a model
of what is to be studied, second, to explain the interactions between elements in the study, and
third, to explain why those interactions are taking place (Maxwell, 2013). In addition, it helps
the researcher to develop appropriate research questions and select appropriate study
methodology (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Researchers combine their own experiential
knowledge, existing theory and research, pilot research, and thought experiments to construct a
preliminary theory about what is happening in their study, and initial conceptions of why it is
happening (Maxwell, 2013). The theoretical framework presented here considers previous
research and theoretical constructs in regard to the implementation of an effective CRPM
program. The framework then contextualizes that previous work with practical experiential
Cultural Setting Influence 2:
The organization needs to supply adequate
resources to support the CRPM program.
Survey and interview questions that address
whether the CRPM program’s processes and
procedures are clearly defined and
understood by various stakeholders based on
Johnson and Johnson (1996).
Cultural Setting Influence 3:
The organization needs to refine the
logistical processes and procedures needed
to efficiently operate the CRPM program.
Survey and interview questions with program
participants that address whether needed and
appropriate resources are available for the
CRPM program based on Johnson and
Johnson (1996).
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 55

knowledge of the researcher to explain how knowledge and motivational needs of both staff and
student stakeholder groups intersect to impact the efficacious implementation of a CRPM
program. This framework is impacted not only by past work and current innovations, but also by
two important worldviews.
Every research study is informed by one or more theoretical worldviews which guide its
form, and in the case of this study, there are two relevant worldviews: pragmatism and
constructivism (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The constructivist worldview posits that there is no
single reality, and thus individuals and groups, through their experiences, create their own
meanings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Constructivist research uses mindful analysis of the
perspectives of those being studied to construct new understandings, either theoretical or
practical, about the world the subjects inhabit. To that end, in this study, it will be important to
understand the individual perspectives of students and staff in terms of how they interact with the
CRPM program, and more specifically, how they frame the overarching campus culture around
conflict, how they see conflict mediation as a potential tool to improve their lives, how it can
improve their adoption of adaptive coping skills, and how it can reduce discipline rates related to
interpersonal conflict.
In addition to constructivism, this study also has a philosophical anchoring in the
pragmatic worldview. According to Creswell and Creswell (2018), the pragmatic worldview
sees truth as contextual—that it is entirely dependent on time, place, and those who are involved.
Research based on this worldview is not anchored entirely in one philosophical or
methodological camp, but rather is free to find the research methods that best address that
particular problem of practice or research questions. Furthermore, it is focused on practical
solutions that work in the real world. As such, the purpose of this study is not simply to learn
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 56

more about conflict on a secondary school campus, but rather to analyze an institutional problem
at El Arroyo Grande High School and provide real policy recommendations to improve life for
all stakeholders there.
While each of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influencers previously
described were presented as independent of one another, they all in fact operate simultaneously.
Clark and Estes (2008) note that organizational goals cannot be fully achieved until
organizational problems are analyzed through the lens of gap analysis in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences. Thus, to achieve the goal of a successful CRPM
program at EAGHS, it is important to understand the gaps in knowledge and motivation in both
the staff and students at the school as they relate to the organizational setting and cultural models
currently in place. The figure below illustrates this study’s theoretical framework that describes
the interaction between knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences at El Arroyo
Grande High School.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 57

Figure 3.
Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within Organizational Cultural Models
and Settings
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 58

This figure demonstrates how the knowledge and motivational needs of staff and students
at EAGHS interact with the CRPM program. Generally, these interactions lead to increased
stakeholder utilization of the CRPM program, which then leads to the organizational goal of
increasing the average number of peer mediation sessions to 18 per semester. The large blue
circle represents the organizational focus of the study, EAGHS, and the cultural models and
settings that exist there. The cultural model is organizational support for the CRPM program
(Johnson & Johnson, 2004; Sagkal, Turnuklu, & Totan, 2016; Theberge & Karan, 2004; Wall,
Stark & Standifer, 2001). The cultural settings include high programmatic visibility, adequate
resource distribution, and refined logistical implementation (Ibarrola-Garcia & Iriarte, 2014;
Johnson, Johnson & Smith, 2007; Raga, et al., 2016; Theberge & Karan, 2004).
Within the organizational setting, there is a smaller yellow circle that represents the
CRPM program that grounds this study. Within this circle are grey boxes that demonstrate the
knowledge and motivational influences that impact the students and staff of El Arroyo Grande
High School. In regard to the staff, there are two central knowledge influences that significantly
impact the implementation of a CRPM program. The first is a procedural knowledge of how the
CRPM program functions, and the second is a declarative knowledge of the general benefits of a
CRPM program for individual students and campus culture generally (Cook & Boes, 2013; Dart,
Collins, Klingbeil & McKinley, 2014; Johnson & Johnson, 1996; Yayuzer, 2012). The primary
motivational influence that impacts staff is related to expectancy value theory in that the staff
need to recognize the utility value of a CRPM in terms of its usefulness in their classrooms
(Cook & Boes, 2013; Eccles, 2006; Levy, 1989; Turnulku, Kaemaz, Kalender, Sevkin & Zengin,
2008). The staff-specific knowledge and motivational factors then interact with each other,
represented in the figure by a double-sided arrow. These interactions help the staff to
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 59

meaningfully engage with the CRPM program and support its effective implementation on
campus.
In regard to the second set of grey boxes, the student stakeholder group, there are three
central knowledge influences that significantly impact the implementation of a CRPM program.
The first is a procedural type of knowledge of how the CRPM program functions, the second is a
declarative type of knowledge of the general usefulness of a CRPM program in their daily lives,
and the third is the metacognitive type of knowledge around learned conflict resolution skills
(Johnson & Johnson, 1996; Johnson & Johnson, 2004; Levy, 1989; Turnuklu, et al. 2008). As
for the student’s motivational influences, there are two operating. The first is related to self-
efficacy in that the students can use conflict resolution skills to proactively avoid conflict in their
lives, and the second is related to expectancy value theory in that the students need to recognize
the utility value of a CRPM (Eccles, 2006; Levy 1989; Turnuklu, et al., 2008). These student-
specific knowledge and motivational factors then interact with each other, and this is represented
with a double-sided arrow. These interactions help the students to meaningfully engage with the
CRPM program and utilize its teachings during their interpersonal interactions on campus.
Both the student stakeholder group and the staff stakeholder group then interact with each
other to support the effective and widespread implementation of the CRPM program. These
synergistic interactions then lead to the organizational goal. Thus, this conceptual framework
posits a theory that these knowledge, motivational, and organizational interactions then lead to
the organizational goal, represented by a one-sided arrow pointing to an orange box. If
implemented correctly this organizational goal, to have an increase in the average number of
peer mediation sessions to 18 a semester, is hopefully attainable.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 60

Summary
In summary, this is an evaluation study meant to analyze the effectiveness of El Arroyo
Grande High School’s implementation of their CRPM program and ultimately to what extent the
program is being utilized by relevant stakeholders. The literature presented in Chapter Two first
looked at the context of adolescent conflict, then moved to theoretical frameworks that underpin
successful CRPM programs, then to the types of CRPM programs operating, and finally to the
efficacy of those programs. Next was an introduction to Clark and Estes’s (2008) Knowledge,
Motivation, and Organizational (KMO) Framework, and then a presentation of the KMO
influences at work on the CRPM program at El Arroyo Grande High School. Finally, there was
an explanation of the conceptual framework that grounds this study, which shows that synergistic
relationships between the student and staff stakeholder groups leads to the attainment of the
organizational goal. Chapter Three will present the methodological approach and rationale for
this study.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 61

Chapter Three: Methodology
This is an evaluation study analyzing the effectiveness of the implementation of a conflict
resolution and peer mediation (CRPM) program at El Arroyo Grande High School, and
ultimately the extent to which it is utilized by the school community. The purpose of this third
chapter is to comprehensively present the research design as well as the chosen methodology for
data collection and analysis. There are four central research questions:
1. To what extent is EL Arroyo Grande High School meeting its goal of increasing the number of
peer conflict mediation sessions to 18 per semester?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs for El Arroyo Grande High
School during its implementation of a conflict resolution/peer mediation (CRPM) program to
increase the number and efficacy of peer mediation sessions?
3. What is the interaction between EL Arroyo Grande High School’s organizational culture and
context, and stakeholder knowledge and motivation as it relates to the implementation of a
CRPM program?
4. What are the recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources to address those needs?
This chapter will begin with a look at participating stakeholder groups, move to an
explanation of the recruitment strategies and rationale for the various instruments used, followed
by an explanation of data collection and analysis procedures. It will then move to a discussion of
credibility and validity concerns and finally to an examination of the limitations, delimitations,
and ethics of the study.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 62

Participating Stakeholders
There will be two sets of stakeholders: the first is comprised of students, and the second
of certificated teaching staff. This study will focus on an evaluation of the implementation of a
conflict resolution/peer mediation (CRPM) program, and ultimately to what extent it is utilized
by those groups on campus. The program has two main elements. The first is a CRPM course
that will be taught for a period during the school day. Its focus will be on leadership,
mentorship, conflict resolution, and social justice. The second element is the peer mediation
session, where individual conflicts are mediated by trained student mediators (Association for
Conflict Resolution, 1996). The CRPM course not only helps to train the cadre of peer
mediators who lead the mediation sessions, but also leverages those students to implement
positive cultural initiatives to reduce conflict on campus. This study is focused primarily on the
peer mediation portion of this program.
One group of stakeholders for this study is comprised of students, and this group will be
subdivided into two groups for the purposes of the study. The first sub-group will be comprised
of students who have directly experienced a peer mediation session (i.e., those who have had a
conflict mediated by a trained peer mediator). The second sub-group will be comprised of the
students who were specifically trained in the CRPM process and have actively mediated their
peers’ interpersonal conflicts (also known as the cadre of peer mediators). The second set of
stakeholders for this study are the certificated staff members, and this group will also be
subdivided into two groups for this study. The first group will be comprised of all certificated
staff members, which includes both teachers and administrators, and the second group will be
those staff and administrative members directly responsible for the implementation of the CRPM
program. Taken as a whole, the input from both the staff and students will help give a clear
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 63

picture of the effectiveness of the implementation of the CRPM program and the extent of its
usage in campus life. It will also provide direction as to how to improve programmatic
effectiveness in the future.
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Staff survey participants must be certificated (administrators/teachers), as this staff
group has the most direct and consistent contact with the student population.
Survey Recruitment Strategy and Rationale
For the quantitative portion of this study, there was a survey given to all certificated staff
members. Since one purpose of this study is to assess staff sentiments around student conflict on
campus, it will be important to survey as many staff members as possible. As the total
population of certificated staff at El Arroyo Grande High School is relatively small, total
population participation would be most illuminating. Each staff member has his/her own
individual relationships with students and is a member of one of our eight different subject
departments; thus, each has a unique and valuable perspective in regard to student conflict and
the CRPM program. The total population size was approximately 135 individuals, and there was
a response rate of 65% or an n of 88 respondents. Research shows that staff sentiment towards a
CRPM program as well as their knowledge about such a program are crucial elements in the
successful implementation of the program (Johnson & Johnson, 1996; Mayorga, 2011; Sellman,
2011). This single stage survey employed a one shot case study pre-experimental design and
took place in the beginning of the data collection process in December of 2018, after the newly
implemented CRPM program has been in operation on campus for five months (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018).
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 64

Interview/Focus Group Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Student participants in the first focus groups must have had a conflict mediated
through participation in a peer mediation session, as these students will have had the most direct
experience with the program.
Criterion 2. Student participants in the second focus group must have taken a CRPM course on
campus and have been trained and operated as a conflict mediator, as these students will have
had direct contact with the program and its impacts on student life.
Criterion 3. Staff and administrative participants in semi-structured interviews must be directly
working to implement the CRPM program, as they know the most about programmatic logistics,
organizational constraints, and impacts on student interactions.
Interview/Focus Group Recruitment Strategy and Rationale
For the qualitative portion of this study, there will be four focus groups and one set of in-
depth interviews. The first focus group will include students who have taken part in a CRPM
session, and the second focus group will include trained student conflict mediators who are
enrolled in the CRPM course and have performed peer mediation sessions. The in-depth
interviews will include both administrative and teaching staff members who are directly
responsible for the implementation of the CRPM program.
The first set of focus groups was comprised of students who have had a conflict mediated
through a peer mediation session by a member of the cadre of trained student mediators. These
groups were also chosen to maximize demographic diversity. Participants in these focus groups
were identified through the records of the mediation sessions kept by the CRPM program
director. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) would define this as a purposeful sampling strategy in that
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 65

all participants were specifically chosen because they have had direct interaction with the CRPM
program and are able to speak about its impact on their lives and the lives of their peers. This
sampling strategy was chosen to ensure enough homogeneity in the groups in terms of peer
mediation session experience in addition to enough variation in group demographics and
experiences to foster productive and variable discussions (Kreuger & Casey, 2009). In terms of
number of participants, a total of 14 peer mediation sessions were conducted over the course of
the data collection period, and 2 small participant focus groups were selected, each comprised of
approximately 4-5 individuals who were representative of the population of students who
participated in CRPM sessions. Since most of the participants had limited experience with peer
mediation sessions, Krueger and Casey (2009) suggest inviting more participants to the focus
groups; however, due to the relatively small population, larger focus groups were not possible.
All of the questions were open-ended, and there was time incorporated into the sessions to allow
for follow-up questions, but questioning stopped once the student responses reached a saturation
point (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). These focus groups were conducted in December of 2018, in
the middle of the data collection period, after the quantitative survey had been administered and
after the CRPM program had at least five months of implementation.
The second two focus groups included students who were scheduled into the CRPM
course and had been formally trained as members of the cadre of peer mediators. Research
shows that this group of students have both the greatest impact on overall campus culture and
personally benefit the most from the CRPM program (Cooks & Boes, 2013; Dart, Collins,
Klingbeil & McKinley, 2014; Ibarrola-Garcia & Aznarez-Sando, 2017; Johnson & Johnson,
2004; Theberge & Karan, 2004). The student participants were purposefully chosen to represent
a variety of genders, grade levels, and social groups (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As with the
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 66

previously discussed focus groups, these followed a semi-structured format, and the questions
were open-ended to maximize student responses. The survey was administered in December of
2018 after the newly created CRPM program had been in operation for five months.
The in-depth interviews were conducted with the teachers and administrators who were
directly responsible for the implementation of the CRPM program on campus. Those individuals
either taught the CRPM course as a period in their day or were directly involved in the
implementation of the CRPM program as part of their regular duties. Currently there is one
teacher and one administrator who are directly responsible for implementing the CRPM
program. All participants will be interviewed about their experiences, impressions, and feedback
regarding the effectiveness of the implementation of the CRPM program and its impacts on
campus culture and student conflict. In terms of timing, as with the focus groups discussed
above, these interviews were conducted in December of 2018, in the middle of the data
collection period, after the quantitative survey had been administered and after the CRPM
program had at least five months of implementation. These were semi-structured interviews as
described by Merriam & Tisdell (2016), wherein the types of questions asked were directly
related to the data that was collected from the quantitative portion of this study and were also
informed by student feedback recorded during the focus groups.
Quantitative Data Collection and Instrumentation
Surveys
Survey instrument. The survey instrument was self-administrated via an online survey
tool called Qualtrics © to all certificated staff members. It was composed primarily of questions
that utilized the Likert scale type responses, but also had demographic and short answer
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 67

questions. In an attempt to maximize both the validity of the survey results and the level of
participation, the survey length was kept relatively short, and responses were anonymous. The
survey investigated five general themes regarding staff sentiments about the CRPM program and
campus response to the program. Specifically, the questions address the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences that impact the efficacious implementation of the CRPM program
on campus, and the extent to which it is utilized by various stakeholders on campus. The first
theme addressed staff sentiments regarding overall student conflict on campus; the second
focused on staff sentiments around the meaning/purpose of the CRPM program; the third
surveyed staff sentiments about the implementation of the CRPM program; the fourth examined
the extent to which each member utilized the program in their daily practice; and the fifth
considered staff recommendations for how to improve programmatic implementation.
Survey procedures. The survey was administered in the beginning of December of
2018, just as the first academic semester at El Arroyo Grande High School was coming to a
close. This timeframe was chosen for two reasons: first, it allowed enough time after the initial
implementation of the program (in August) to elicit honest and valid responses from the teachers,
and second, the timing in the academic year maximized both the response rate and the validity of
the responses. At the end of a semester, as final exams loom and the cumulative stress of
attending school for a long period of time peaks, staff and students tend to become strained. If
the survey had been administered later in the month, these negative feelings and anxieties may
have skewed survey results. The survey was created through a web-based survey creation tool,
Qualtrics, and the link to this survey was shared with all certificated staff via an email and a
presentation during an all-staff meeting. The data was then primarily analyzed using basic
descriptive statistics, such as frequency, measures of central tendency, and measures of
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 68

dispersion, meant to tease out commonalities, trends, and themes (Salkind, 2014). For the open-
ended questions, the responses were coded and then analyzed by response rates (Fink, 2009). As
stated earlier, this survey was intended to measure the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that impact the implementation of the CRPM program and ultimately influence the
extent to which stakeholders on campus utilize the program.
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation
Interviews
Interview protocol. The in-depth interviews utilized a semi-structured protocol. The
purpose was to gather specific information about the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences in operation around the implementation of the CRPM program, and also to make
space for new ideas or concepts that arise (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Maxwell, 2013). In each of
the four focus groups, there were between 12 and 15 questions that addressed various aspects of
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact the effective
implementation of the CRPM program. Each element was addressed by a minimum of three
related questions. Each interviewee was given time to respond to each question, and additional
time was incorporated into the interview structure to allow for follow-up questions (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The audio from the focus groups and interviews was recorded for transcription.
Interview procedures. These interviews/focus groups were conducted before the
document and artifact analysis, and after the staff-wide quantitative survey, to be discussed in a
later section of this chapter. The focus groups and interviews were held during the month of
January, which falls at the beginning of the second academic semester at El Arroyo Grande High
School. The purpose of this timing was to allow the newly implemented CRPM program an
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 69

entire semester to have operated, and thus allow enough time for stakeholders to be able to
adequately evaluate its progress.
As for the focus groups, a total of four were conducted. Two were comprised of students
who were members of the CRPM class and also served part of the cadre of trained peer
mediators. The other two were comprised of students who had participated in a peer mediation
session in order to have one of their conflicts resolved. The focus groups lasted for
approximately 90 minutes. Each focus group was held in a central conference room at the school
site, and light snacks and beverages were provided. This particular location was chosen to
provide participants with a comfortable and familiar setting. Each focus group was notified that
the session would be recorded, and the audio recording was accomplished using an unobtrusive
cell phone recorder application. Before the start of the focus groups, participants were given a
simple introduction reiterating that all of their responses would be anonymous and that the
interviewer’s role was purely as a researcher and not as a school employee. Student consent was
also reaffirmed with each participant before the interview process began.
There were three in-depth interviews conducted with the administrators and the teacher
primarily responsible for the implementation of the CRPM program. While there could have
been valuable data gained if additional teaching staff were interviewed, the average teacher has
so little direct contact with the CRPM program that it would be unlikely that many additional
insights could be gleaned outside of those already gained from the existing staff survey
(described later). Each of the in-depth interviews lasted for approximately 45 minutes. They
were held in a central conference room at the school site, and light snacks/beverages were
provided. As with the focus groups, the choice of location for the interviews was intended to
provide participants with a comfortable, convenient, and familiar setting. Since the main
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 70

researcher in this study is an administrator at the site, it was imperative that a surrogate
researcher conduct the interviews to reduce potential reactivity in subject responses. A
colleague, who was CITI trained and not connected with the CRPM in any meaningful way,
performed the interviews in the researcher’s stead. Before the start of the interviews, participants
were given a simple introduction that reiterated that all of their responses would be anonymized
and the interviewer’s role was purely as a researcher and not as a school employee.
Documents and Artifacts
Documents and artifacts are another important source of data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016),
and they were the final pieces of data collected for this study. They were used to garner useful
information about the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact the
effective implementation of the CRPM program. A great amount of effort was expended to
brainstorm and locate any documents or artifacts that shed light on either the implementation or
effectiveness of the CRPM program. Generally, the documents/artifacts collected fall into three
main groups: those that focus on the training of various stakeholder groups, those that are used as
part of the CRPM process, and those that pertain to informal communications about the program.
The institutional training documents/artifacts include slide-type presentation files that were
presented to various stakeholder groups, informational handouts/materials meant to highlight the
policies and procedures of the CRPM program, teaching materials created and utilized by the
CRPM program teacher-leader, and informal inter-organizational communications. These
documents provided insight into the frequency, specific content, and effectiveness of the CRPM
training and communication protocols. The internal CRPM documents/artifacts used by the
program include session records documents, which are used to help the peer mediators guide the
mediation sessions and record both the reason for the conflict and the mutually agreed upon
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 71

resolution. These documents gave key insights into the types of conflict that students engaged
in, the effectiveness of the peer mediation sessions, and demographic data about those
recommended for peer mediation sessions. Additionally, there are email chains relating to the
CRPM program, sent by administration and staff members, that showed how and when
stakeholders communicated about students in conflict. Each of these types of
documents/artifacts help shed light on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
that either positively or negatively impact the implementation and overall frequency of use of the
CRPM program on campus.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
There were several concrete strategies that were employed to maximize both the
credibility and trustworthiness of the study. Both Maxwell (2013) and Merriam & Tisdell (2016)
caution that the credibility of a study cannot be reduced solely to a question of methods, and thus
sources of bias or undue influence need to be acknowledged and extricated to every extent
possible. Merriam & Tisdell (2016) also note that while it is impossible to fully extricate bias
from a study, there are well established strategies that researchers can utilize to minimize the
impact of bias and improve the overall credibility of the study. Maxwell (2013) adds that there
are two specific threats to validity that he finds to be the most common and detrimental to the
credibility of a study: “researcher bias and reactivity” (p.124). Similarly, these were the two
largest threats to this study as well.
Since the researcher in this study is a long-time administrator at the site, there was a
significant threat of researcher bias. For example, the researcher has a pre-disposition that this
peer mediation program is a necessary intervention on campus (thus the interest in this study),
and he believes that such programs are generally positive for adolescents. Furthermore, the
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 72

researcher has been an advocate for these programs with virtually all stakeholder groups, and
thus he is known as a proponent of such programs. These biases on his part, if not acknowledged
and addressed, could have inadvertently impacted the answers given by participants during the
data collection process or in some significant way impacted the final analysis of the data.
To address this threat, there was triangulation of multiple sources and types of data as
described by Maxwell (2013) in the form of interviews, focus groups, surveys, and document
analysis. Additionally, the respondent validation strategy as described by Maxwell (2013) was
utilized, wherein feedback was solicited from several respondents around data, interpretations,
and conclusions to help ensure that all were justifiable. Thirdly, “rich thick descriptions” as
described by Merriam & Tisdell (2016) were collected. The gathering of this robust data
allowed for the extrapolation of common themes from all respondents, a check on researcher
assumptions, and ultimately supported the verification of conclusions.
A second potential threat to the credibility of this study was “reactivity,” which Maxwell
(2013) defined as “the influence of the researcher on the setting or individuals studied” (p. 124).
Due to the researcher’s position as a long-time campus administrative leader, he had to be
purposeful in the data collection process to minimize the potential that the subjects would
provide responses that they thought an administrator would like to hear. In terms of the
interviews with the administrative and teaching staff, there was another colleague at the site who
was unconnected to the peer mediation program and conducted the interview protocol in the
researcher’s stead. During the focus groups with the students, the researcher utilized an
introductory statement and personal demeanor meant to encourage honest feedback and to
reinforce that participant responses would be anonymized. In other words, it was made very
clear to the student participants that the researcher’s role during the focus groups was as a
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 73

researcher, not as an administrator on campus. Finally, for the certificated staff survey, in an
attempt to encourage honest and valid responses from subjects, all communications about the
survey clearly stated that responses would remain anonymous.
Validity and Reliability
As for the quantitative data, much effort was expended to ensure the validity and
reliability of the data collection instrument as well as the conclusions derived from that data.
Since the survey instrument had not been psychometrically tested, it was vital to garner feedback
from multiple experts about both the content and format of the survey (Salkind, 2014). Once in
draft form, the survey instrument was first given to multiple staff representatives from the school
site to provide feedback not only about the content of the questions, but also the flow and
accessibility (word choice, sentence arrangement, etc.) of the instrument itself. This feedback
helped to improve the survey’s content validity (Salkind, 2014) and shape the wording of each
question. The survey was then given to multiple methodological experts to review and provide
feedback about the structure, format, and arrangement of the questions in order to maximize the
validity and reliability of the instrument. Once a finalized version of the instrument was created,
it was then piloted with a small group of staff members before the actual administration of the
survey to the remainder of the certificated staff population. This was done primarily to ensure
the survey administration method (online tool) was working properly, and also to reaffirm that
the form and flow of the instrument was effective. The goal during the administration of this
survey was to get 100% of the 135 (minus the small pilot group) certificated staff participants to
take the survey. To support this goal, multiple reminder emails were sent out after the survey
was initially communicated out, and during a staff meeting, the principal urged all staff members
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 74

to participate in the survey. Each of these measures was specifically chosen to improve the
validity and reliability of the data collected from the quantitative survey.
Ethics
Ethical practices are fundamental to any research study. They can generally be broken
into two general areas: the first ensures no harm is done to the research subjects themselves, and
the second ensures the integrity and validity of the study results (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016;
Rubin & Rubin, 2012). In this study, in regard to minimizing harm to the research subjects,
there was great care taken to ensure that participants were treated ethically and responsibly
during the data collection process. According to Glesne (2011), participants must be able to both
make informed decisions about their participation in the study and be able to withdraw without
penalty. As such, for the adults, informed consent was obtained using a standard informed
consent form given prior to any data collection, and for the minors, a consent form was obtained
from both their parents and the students themselves. All interviews and focus groups were audio
recorded using the researcher’s cell phone, and this fact was disclosed both in the consent forms
as well as at the beginning of the interview/focus group interaction. The data from these sessions
will be kept on a separate external hard drive for a minimum of five years. Glesne (2011) also
stresses that any unnecessary risk to a research subject must be eliminated, and that the benefits
of the research outweigh any potential risk to the participants. To support these imperatives, this
study was brought for review to an Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of
Southern California for their review and consent.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) note that in addition to ensuring that no harm is done to
research subjects, an important ethical element in any study is connected to its overall validity.
To help ensure the validity of the study, the researcher recognized and accounted for his role as a
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 75

researcher and member of the organization as well as the potential impacts on the research
subjects as a result of his role. The researcher in this study has a supervisory role in the
organization as an assistant principal. This presents some potential conflict in the data collection
process, as the researcher is an authority figure to both the adult participants and the minor
student participants. For the adult participants specifically, care was taken to ensure that they
understood that the role of the research, and the researcher, was to understand more about
organizational needs and not to evaluate or otherwise critique an adult participant’s role in a
CRPM program or the school in general. Furthermore, participants were made aware that all
comments and data collected from them would be anonymized, and any quotes used in the final
report were chosen to minimize the chance of inadvertent identification. As for the student
participants, they and their families were also made aware the research is meant to understand
more about the school culture and student interactions, and that all comments made were
confidential, used solely for research purposes, and would not impact their grades or standing in
the school in any way.
Additionally, it is important to note the researcher in this study is a long-time educator
whose administrative experience has been primarily in the area of student discipline for the past
six years. As such, he has had extensive experience with student conflict and conflict resolution
strategies. It is important to acknowledge this, as this experience can bring important insight to
the research data collected. However, left unchecked, this experience can also color and
potentially taint the data (Glesne, 2011). The researcher had to continuously focus on objectivity
and impartiality to help ensure that both the data collected and the final analysis were as free
from undue bias as possible. In whole, the design of the study and data collection procedures
were meant to reduce the harm as much as is possible to the research subjects, and to
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 76

acknowledge and account for the innate biases and perspectives of the researcher, with the
ultimate goal of maintaining the overall integrity and validity of the study.
Limitations and Delimitations
There are several limitations to this study. The first is that it was not practical to survey
or interview a larger group of the general student population to gain more insight as to general
student population sentiments and awareness of the program. Secondly, there are other
stakeholder groups on campus who either impact or are impacted by the CRPM program, and it
was not practical to survey or interview these other relevant stakeholder groups. Thirdly, while
many efforts were made to put respondents at ease with the research process, it is possible that
some of the respondents were untruthful or inconsistent in their responses.
There are also several delimitations to this study. One revolves around the limits of the
study and its focus on the peer mediation portion of the CRPM program, when the program itself
has additional elements (campus culture, social justice, etc.) beyond mediation. While it would
have been interesting and enlightening to examine these other elements, it was ultimately
unpractical to do so. Secondly, observations of the peer mediation process were not conducted.
While this may have provided valuable information about the mediation process in real time, the
focus of this study was an evaluation of the implementation of the program and not an evaluation
of the mediations themselves. Thirdly, only certificated staff members were surveyed, while
classified staff members were not. While classified staff members have an impact on the
implementation of the CRPM program, that impact is minor in comparison to the certificated
staff population, and thus, it was impractical to survey those additional 90 staff members.
Lastly, in-depth interviews were conducted only with certificated staff members directly
associated with the CRPM program. While there could have been valuable data gathered from
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 77

interviews with general certificated staff members, it was decided that a survey would garner
most of the information needed.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 78

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
The purpose of this evaluation study was to examine the effectiveness of the EAGHS’s
implementation of their CRPM program and to identify gaps in that implementation based on
Clark and Estes’s (2008) Gap Analysis Framework. This framework posits that there are
knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that impact the effective implementation
of any program within an organization. Data collection efforts involved two stakeholder groups,
certificated staff members and students. Data collection methods included: a survey
administered to the certificated staff, four focus groups with student participants in the program,
two in-depth interviews with program leads, and program document analysis. This chapter will
begin with a brief description of the participating stakeholders, then present knowledge results,
followed by motivational results, organizational results, and finally a synthesis section that
explicitly addresses how the data presented relates to each of the four following research
questions:
1. To what extent is EL Arroyo Grande High School meeting its goal of increasing the
number of peer conflict mediation sessions to 18 per semester?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs for El Arroyo Grande
High School during its implementation of a conflict resolution/peer mediation (CRPM)
program to increase the number and efficacy of peer mediation sessions?
3. What is the interaction between El Arroyo Grande High School’s organizational culture
and context, and stakeholder knowledge and motivation as it relates to the
implementation of a CRPM program?
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 79

4. What are recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources to address those needs?
Participating Stakeholders
There were two groups of stakeholders in this study: certificated staff members, and
students. A quantitative survey was sent to all 127 certificated staff members and there were a
total of 85 respondents, for a response rate of 66%. Of the sample population, 39% of
respondents were male, and 61% were female. Figure 4 shows that 41% were between the ages
of 20 and 39, 55% were between the ages of 40 and 59, and 4% were 60 years or older.

Figure 4. Survey Population by Age

As previously stated, this study included only certificated classroom teachers. Table 5 outlines
the number of years of teaching experience in the sample population. The average number of
20-29
9%
30-39
32%
40-49
39%
50-59
16%
60-69
4%
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 80

years teaching was 14.43. Generally, 42% had less than 10 years, 31% had between 11 and 20
years, and 27% had more than 20 years.
Table 5
Number of Years of Teaching Experience

_____________________________________________________________________________
Mean Median Mode Standard Deviation Min Max Range
____________________________________________________________________________
Total Years as
A Full-time 14.43 15 5 8.95 0 46 46
Teacher

The study also sought to develop a sample that represented all subject areas currently taught at
the site. Based on 85 respondents across 7 subject areas, equal representation would be 12.14%
per subject level. All subject areas were in fact represented and within an acceptable range.
Math (20%) was the most represented subject, and Foreign Language (9%) the least. Table 6
shows subject area representation.
Table 6
Subject Area Representation
Subject Area Percentage of total teacher sample
______________________________________________
English 13%
______________________________________________
Math 20%
______________________________________________
Social Studies 15%
______________________________________________
Science 18%
______________________________________________
Art 10%
______________________________________________
Foreign Language 9%
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 81

______________________________________________
Elective 15%

While the quantitative survey was administered to general staff, additional in-depth interviews
were conducted with those staff and administrative leads directly responsible for the
implementation of the CRPM program.
The student population that participated in the focus groups consisted of 14 females and 6
males. In regard to age, 13 of the students were underclassmen in either the 9
th
or 10
th
grade, and
7 were upperclassmen in either the 11
th
or 12
th
grade. The students were further divided by their
level of participation in the CRPM program, where 11 were trained peer mediators and 9 were
from the general population who had one or more of their conflicts mediated through the
program.
Results and Findings
This section reports the results of the survey and the findings of the focus groups, in-
depth interviews, and document analysis. These results and findings are reported through the
distinct lenses of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that were identified in
both this study’s conceptual framework and the literature. Throughout this section, qualitative
data is presented simultaneously with quantitative data, as each type of data helps to bolster the
various assertions that have been made. A note on the survey is that several items utilized a five-
point Likert scale with the response options: Strongly Disagree, Somewhat Disagree, Neither
Agree Nor Disagree, Somewhat Agree, and Strongly Agree. This chapter concludes with a
detailed synthesis discussion of each research question and how these findings and results
triangulate and interact with each other.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 82

Knowledge Influencers
Krathwhol (2002) notes that there are three distinct areas of knowledge: declarative
(factual + conceptual), procedural, and metacognitive. In order to improve organizational
performance, gaps in these areas of knowledge must be identified and addressed (Clark & Estes,
2008). This section presents results from the survey, focus groups, in-depth interviews, and
document analysis as they pertain to the effective implementation of the CRPM program at
EAGHS. There were several knowledge influencer themes that emerged from the data
pertaining to both stakeholder groups. In general, certificated staff members not directly
responsible for the implementation of the CRPM program reported high levels of procedural and
conceptual knowledge of the CRPM program. They also reported modest levels of declarative
knowledge regarding how to help students reduce conflict within their classrooms. Those staff
members who were directly responsible for the implementation of the CRPM program, hereafter
referred to as program leads, reported very high levels of procedural and declarative knowledge
of the program. As for the student stakeholder group, the trained mediators reported very high
levels of procedural, declarative, and metacognitive knowledge of the program, while the
students from the general student population reported significantly lower levels of procedural
and declarative knowledge, but similarly high levels of metacognitive knowledge. What follows
is an examination of the data reported by both stakeholder groups.
Staff stakeholder group. Generally, the staff reported high levels of procedural and
declarative knowledge of the CRPM program.
Staff procedural knowledge of the CRPM program. Procedural knowledge refers to the
understanding of how to do something and the specific skills or steps needed to accomplish
specific activities (Rueda, 2011). This type of knowledge is of primary importance for the
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 83

effective implementation of any CRPM program (Johnson & Johnson, 1996). In order for the
CRPM program to reach its goal of 18 mediation sessions per semester, staff needs to know the
processes and procedures so they can recommend students to the program. Trainings and
communications were vital for staff to gain strong procedural knowledge of the program. As
part of the implementation process, several trainings (during all-staff meetings) were held, and
communications (primarily via email) were disseminated. These communications not only
introduced the CRPM program, but also taught the processes and procedures needed to access it.
The survey contained three items related to staff sentiments regarding their knowledge of
the program and the frequency and usefulness of knowledge-related communications. It is
important to note that all responses in this section were self-reported and there was not any
assessment to verify their reported level of procedural knowledge of the CRPM program. As
shown in Table 7, when presented the Likert scale item, “As a teacher, I believe that I have the
knowledge needed to utilize the CRPM program to help students resolve interpersonal conflict,”
85% of respondents chose the “agree” or “strongly agree” options. Similarly, for the Likert scale
item, “I feel that regular communication (via email, announcements, staff meetings, etc.) about
the CRPM program helps me to remember to utilize the program,” 79% of respondents chose the
“agree” or “strongly agree” options. A third Likert scale item addressing this was,
“Communication to STAFF about the CRPM program has been consistent/sufficient throughout
the year,” where 73% of respondents chose the “agree” or “strongly agree” options. These items
demonstrate that the staff has sufficient procedural knowledge of the CRPM program. However,
when prompted with the Likert scale item, “Communication to STUDENTS about the CRPM
program has been consistent/sufficient throughout the year,” only 45% of respondents chose the
“agree” or “strongly agree” options. This shows they did not feel that procedurally related
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 84

communications to the students were sufficient. This procedural knowledge gap identified by
staff is also mirrored in the data obtained from the students and will be discussed in more detail
in a later section.
Table 7
Teacher Reported Sentiments Regarding CRPM Knowledge and Communication
______________________________________________________________________________

Survey Item % of Teachers % of Teachers % of Teachers
Who Agree or Who Neither Agree Who Disagree or
Strongly Agree Nor Disagree Strongly Disagree
______________________________________________________________________________
As a teacher, I believe that I
have the knowledge needed to 85% 9% 6%
utilize the CRPM program to
help students resolve
interpersonal conflict.
______________________________________________________________________________
I feel that regular
communication (via email, 79% 11% 9%
announcements, staff meetings,
etc.) about the CRPM program
helps me to remember to utilize
the program.
______________________________________________________________________________
Communication to STAFF about
the CRPM program has been 73% 14% 13%
consistent/sufficient throughout
the year.
______________________________________________________________________________
Communication to STUDENTS
about the CRPM program has been 45% 40% 15%
consistent/sufficient throughout
the year.
______________________________________________________________________________

Additionally, the teacher and administrative leads also expressed adequate procedural
knowledge of the program during the in-depth interviews. When the teacher lead was asked
about her level of procedural knowledge of the program, she said:
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 85

“I would say that initially I was rather nervous. But once I was included in the
trainings...I felt very knowledgeable. So I do feel very comfortable in doing that
[training], and I know that there will be support there next year as well.”
She repeatedly mentioned that although she was a novice at implementing a CRPM program, the
procedural training and support she received were adequate in preparing her to implement the
program and take charge of the formal training process in subsequent years. Since the staff
stakeholder group reported strong procedural knowledge of the CRPM program, this is not a
validated knowledge gap. As such, there seems to be little need to significantly modify the
method or frequency of communication or training in regard to procedural knowledge of the
program.
Staff declarative knowledge of the CRPM program. Declarative knowledge is a
combination of factual and conceptual knowledge, where factual knowledge relates to the
specific facts needed to understand a program, and conceptual knowledge relates to the
theories/generalizations needed to understand why a program exits (Rueda, 2011). Theberge and
Karan (2004) note that a lack of declarative knowledge can serve as a significant hindrance to the
effective implementation of a CRPM program. When staff was surveyed about their declarative
knowledge of the CRPM program, they generally reported adequate levels of conceptual and
factual understanding of the program. To understand staff’s conceptual knowledge of the CRPM
program, there was a series of survey items that presented teachers with hypothetical classroom
scenarios wherein students are engaged in various types of conflict. Ideally, each of these
scenarios could result in a recommendation for the students to participate in the CRPM program.
Since the CRPM program is new to campus, part of its charge was to educate the staff that the
program is a viable alternative to more traditional courses of action when students are in conflict.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 86

In the absence of a CRPM program, teachers had been conditioned to take one of two steps when
students are embroiled in conflict: refer them to the discipline office to receive a consequence, or
diffuse the situation on their own. The CRPM program is meant to provide an alternative to
these traditional methods and an additional option to support students in conflict. When CRPM
program training and communication is successful, a significant percentage of teachers will
recommend students to the CRPM program, either in place of or in conjunction with more
traditional courses of action (referral to discipline office, etc.).
The purpose of the related survey items was to measure whether programmatic training
was successful in educating staff about the types of conflicts that ought to result in a
recommendation to the CRPM program. The items asked what actions a teacher would take
(refer to discipline office, recommend to CRPM program, do nothing, etc.) if students were
engaged in either a minor physical altercation, a minor verbal altercation, or a bullying type
behavior during class. For these survey items, respondents could choose as many courses of
action as they felt appropriate for the situation. The CRPM program is meant to be used in
conjunction with the other, more traditional methods of dealing with student conflict (referral to
the discipline office, school-related consequences, etc.), so the most appropriate answers for
these questions, if the teachers had a solid conceptual understanding of the CRPM program,
would be to either refer the students to the student discipline office or recommend the students to
the CRPM program.
As shown in Table 8, for the item that asked, “If two students were engaged in a minor
PHYSICAL confrontation (shoving, pushing, etc.) in your classroom, which course of action
would you most likely take?” 75% of respondents reported that at least one course of action they
would take is referral to the discipline office, while 25% reported that at least one course of
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 87

action would be to recommend the students to the CRPM program. A physical altercation is the
most extreme type of conflict that occurs in a classroom, and teachers would naturally be
expected to refer those students to the discipline office. However, the fact that a quarter of those
surveyed also chose to recommend them to the CRPM program demonstrates a high level of
conceptual knowledge of the program.
For the item, “If two students were engaged in a minor VERBAL confrontation (no
physical interaction) in your classroom, which course of action would you most likely take?”
33% of respondents reported that at least one course of action would be to refer them to the
discipline office, while 41% reported that at least one course of action would be to recommend
them to the CRPM program. Traditionally, teachers would either handle this type of situation on
their own or refer the students to the discipline office. This significant increase in the percentage
of staff who would utilize the CRPM program in these situations demonstrates that they do in
fact see the program as a viable alternative. This data also shows that those surveyed have a
strong conceptual understanding of the role of a CRPM program in a holistic school-wide
conflict resolution program.
When asked about a situation where students were engaged in bullying type behavior,
74% of respondents reported that at least one course of action they would take would be to refer
the students to the discipline office, while 33% reported that at least one action they would take
would be to recommend them to the CRPM program. In the modern school setting, the term
bullying elicits a very strong response, and staff have been conditioned to immediately refer
students to the discipline office. This conditioning is reflected in the very high percentage who
would refer students to the discipline office. However, CRPM can, in certain situations that are
considered bullying, be an effective method to help students resolve their conflict. The fact that
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 88

a third of staff also said that they would recommend students to the CRPM program in such
situations further demonstrates that they have a strong conceptual understanding of the program.
Finally, when asked, “If one of your students came to you to confide that two of their
friends (who are not in your class) were in conflict, which course of action would you most
likely take?” 34% of respondents reported that at least one course of action they would take
would be to refer the students to the discipline office, while 51% reported that at least one action
they would take would be to recommend them to the CRPM program. This type of situation is
very common for teachers, and many times they do not necessarily know what next steps to take.
The CRPM program would potentially be the most effective way to help these students resolve
their conflict, and the fact that such a high percentage of staff would recommend these students
to the CRPM further demonstrates that they have a strong conceptual understanding of the
program.
Table 8
Teacher Reported Actions to Address Conflict in Their Classroom
______________________________________________________________________________
Survey Item % of Referrals % of Referrals
to Discipline Office to CRPM Program
______________________________________________________________________________
If two students were engaged in a minor
PHYSICAL confrontation (shoving,
pushing, etc.) in your classroom, which 76% 25%
course of action would you most likely take?
______________________________________________________________________________
If two students were engaged in a minor
VERBAL confrontation (no physical
interaction) in your classroom, which course 33% 41%
of action would you most likely take?
______________________________________________________________________________
If you witnessed bullying type behavior in
your classroom, which course of action 74% 33%
would you most likely take?
______________________________________________________________________________
If one of your students came to you to
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 89

confide that two of their friends (who are not
in your class) were in conflict, which course 34% 51%
of action would you most likely take?
______________________________________________________________________________

These four items demonstrate that, in general, teachers have a strong conceptual knowledge of
how the CRPM program fits into the existing discipline structure at the high school, and how the
utilization of this program can support students in a variety of different types of conflict in their
classrooms. As such, this is not a validated gap in staff knowledge, and as such, there seems to
be little need to significantly modify the method or frequency of communication in regard to
declarative knowledge off the program.
A final item related to staff knowledge of the CRPM program was, “How many times
have you recommended students to the peer mediation program?” As shown in Figure 5, while
the vast majority of respondents (73%) report never having recommended students to the CRPM
program, 11% of staff reported recommending students to the program once, and 15% reported
recommending students more than once. Since the program is in its initial year of full
implementation, the fact that almost a quarter of all staff members have utilized the program
demonstrates that the general staff has the declarative knowledge needed to utilize the program,
even if a student conflict situation needing mediation has not occurred in most teachers’
classrooms yet. In all, staff reported high levels of declarative knowledge of the CRPM
program, and therefore, this is not a validated knowledge-related gap. From an evaluative
stance, CRPM program training and communication are adequate and little significant change to
current protocols is needed.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 90

Figure 5. Number of Staff Recommendations to the CRPM Program

Student stakeholder group. Student stakeholders were divided into two groups, and
four focus groups were conducted. Two focus groups, with eleven total participants, were
comprised of trained student mediators, and two additional focus groups were conducted with
nine participants from the general population of students who had one or more of their conflicts
mediated through the program. These two groups of students had significantly different
responses when it came to both their procedural and declarative knowledge of the CRPM
program, but very similar responses when it came to metacognitive knowledge learned from their
participation in the program. In general, those who were trained members of the CRPM program
reported high levels of both procedural and declarative knowledge, while those from the general
population reported significantly lower levels of both procedural and declarative knowledge.
Both groups reported high levels of metacognitive knowledge resulting from participation in the
program.
Student procedural knowledge of the CRPM program. The 11 trained mediators
unanimously reported high levels of procedural knowledge of the peer mediation process and the
0 Times
73%
1 Time
11%
2 Times
6%
3+ Times
9%
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 91

program as a whole. There were extensive training sessions conducted for these students by both
the teacher and administrative leads. These trainings were intended to teach not only about the
protocols and procedures of the CRPM program and how to conduct a formal mediation, but also
how to utilize conflict resolution skills in their day-to-day lives. All 11 participants reported
positive regard for program training, preparedness to conduct mediations, and how regularly they
utilized these conflict resolution skills in their own lives. For example, one student said:
“The training was really excellent. It went step-by-step on what I should do, what
I should say, how I should act, and not to attack one person to bring out the truth,
telling them that they’re a liar, but instead trying to find a win-win solution for
both sides.”
Another student said:
“It [training] was really hammering on the brain. ‘This is what you need to do,
this is what you need to say.’ It’s constantly running through every time I sit
down for a mediation. Sometimes, even outside of mediation, I still feel like I’m
Dr. Phil, ready to handle anybody’s problems. That is how good it was.”
Furthermore, when asked about their experience during their first formal mediation, 9 out of
these 11 students explicitly stated they felt adequately prepared to mediate student conflicts.
Many students mentioned they felt nervous before their first formal mediation, but their training
gave them the confidence to conduct a successful mediation. During document analysis, it was
observed that all training materials had been created using research-based CRPM program
training handbooks, which certainly supported the successful transfer of programmatic
knowledge by these students (New South Wales Department of Education and Communities,
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 92

1998; San Francisco Community Boards, 1972). This data demonstrates that, for at least the
trained student mediators, participants received adequate training to instill needed procedural and
declarative knowledge, utilize the CRPM program, and successfully conduct conflict mediations.
Additionally, the skills-based CRPM training program used by EAGHS, as defined by Opotow
(1991), is adequate in that it is currently structured, and little substantive change is needed.
The nine students from the general student population reported far less procedural and
declarative knowledge of the CRPM program. Of these nine students, none were able to clearly
articulate how to access the program, although five did report that they had heard about the
program before participating in it themselves. Three also reported that none of their friends or
associates knew much about the program either. This demonstrates that students from the
general population lack specific procedural knowledge of how to access the program as well as
factual declarative knowledge that the program even exists. Each participant from this group of
students was recommended for participation in a peer mediation session by one of their teachers,
or the discipline office, and so in essence, the CRPM program came to them. The ultimate goal
of the program is not only to have teachers and other administrators recommend students for the
program, but also to have the students recommend themselves or their friends to participate. The
program needs to become ingrained in campus culture so that when students find themselves in
conflict, they know that the CRPM program exists and how to access it to help them resolve that
conflict. Thus, from an evaluative stance, this lack of procedural knowledge is a validated gap in
implementation and serves as a significant barrier to the effective implementation of the
program.
Student declarative knowledge of the CRPM program. Students from both the general
population and trained mediator groups reported different levels of conceptual knowledge of the
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 93

CRPM program. Part of the core mission of any CRPM program is to teach students conflict
resolution skills applicable in multiple aspects of their lives and to support a positive culture
within the larger organization in which they exist (Johnson & Johnson, 1996). This study sought
to understand whether or not students conceptualized that the CRPM program was not only
intended to teach them useful skills individually, but also to positively impact the whole school
culture. Of the eleven trained mediators, seven discussed seeing positive results from the
mediations they conducted for students on campus. For example, one mediator said:
“A couple...I think maybe two times... I know we’ve done a mediation where they
come in not together but, then, after the mediation, they actually leave and you
actually see them interacting as they’re walking away. I think that’s kind of cool,
how they can talk about it outside the mediation too.”
Another said:
“I for sure think that this program is helpful, because it really does let the student
get to know each other with how people are being mean to them or negative
towards them. I think it really does make the campus a safer place for everyone,
because I think even after, hypothetically, a person was being mean to someone
and after peer mediation, I don’t think that person probably wouldn’t treat other
people that way anymore. I think it really opens up students’ eyes and being, like,
‘Oh.’ Almost making them to be a better persona and treat other students better.”
The other four students mentioned some sort of experience outside of the formal mediation
sessions where positive impacts of the program were either witnessed or talked about in casual
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 94

conversation around campus. In all, it is clear that these trained mediators understand how this
program can positively impact the lives of individual students and the campus as a whole.
It was almost the polar opposite for the students from the general population. They
unanimously expressed that prior to their participation in the program, they had significant
factual and conceptual misperceptions of what the program’s purpose was and how it operated.
There were two distinct misperceptions that these students discussed: the first was the program’s
assumed connection to “trouble,” and the second was the program’s assumed lack of
confidentiality.
Of the nine general population students interviewed, five believed that participation in the
program would lead to them getting into what they perceived as “trouble.” It is important to note
that the entire purpose of the CRPM program is to keep students out of “trouble,” and that the
discipline office would only become involved if the students continued to have significant
interpersonal conflict. One student expressed this type of misconception of the program as
follows:
“I feel like most people think it’s gonna be either you’re getting in trouble, or you
are going to be forced to hug the person that you hate, or something like that.”
The other four students in these focus groups responded that they perceived a lack of
confidentiality within the program and feared that outside parties (parents, teachers, etc.) would
be made aware of their participation. It is important to note that one of the other cornerstones of
the CRPM program is confidentiality, and unless the students are in physical danger, their
parents would not be called. One example of such a sentiment:
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 95

“Like I thought it would just be me and this girl arguing and yelling at each other,
and then the next thing you know there’s a phone call [to her mother]: ‘[Your
daughter] was in an argument with some girl,’ and I’m just like, ‘Oh my gosh.’
So when I thought about what peer mediation was, I thought they were gonna
have us talk it out, and then when we left, call our parents and tell them
everything that happened.”
When this student expressed this point, the rest of the focus group all nodded their heads and
agreed that they believed this was a common misconception among students in the general
population. These types of misconceptions are also common among CRPM programs around the
country (Theberge & Karan, 2004). This represents a significant factual and conceptual
knowledge gap with this group of students that will need to be addressed.
Student Metacognitive knowledge of conflict resolution skills. Metacognition is the
awareness of one’s own thinking; it allows the individual to know when and why to do
something (Rueda, 2011). Metacognitive skill acquisition is a key element to any successful
CRPM program as it supports community-wide conflict resolution practices (Mayorga, 2011).
To explore the students’ metacognitive processes around conflict resolution, questions were
asked to the participants in all four focus groups that centered on learned conflict resolution
skills and the use of those skills outside the mediation process. Almost all of the student
participants had gained significant metacognitive knowledge and skills in regard to conflict
resolution. This was true for both the trained student mediators and students from the general
population. As shown in Table 9 with the group of trained mediators, 100% stated they were
able to transfer the conflict resolution skills they learned as part of their training to conflicts in
their daily lives. For example, when the group was asked, “How, if at all, has the peer mediation
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 96

training helped you to learn to effectively deal with conflict in your daily lives?” one participant
said:
“I’ve been having really dark family issues, and it was interesting to use what I
learned, of like, hearing both sides, and not siding with one side, and hearing
both of them out, and that was really important with my parents, because it was
interesting to hear both of their sides and to help them out.”
Another said:
“You kind of start to notice that a lot of problems come from something
beforehand, or something behind...kind of like a deeper problem. I’ve started to
notice when, if I’m starting to feel some beef with my friends, I kind of think
back, think of what could’ve happened before, try and find a deeper problem, then
kind of resolve it so that I no longer have to feel that disconnection with my
friends.”
Additionally, seven of the nine students from the general population report using the conflict
resolution skills they learned from their participation in a mediation session in their daily lives,
even though they were never formally trained in conflict resolution strategies or the peer
mediation process. For example, when asked, “Did you learn anything about how to effectively
resolve conflict as a result of participating in the CRPM program?” one student said:
“I thought one of the skills I learned is mainly not to fight back so much as to talk
it out first. Instead of saying rude things to them while talking it out, maybe stay
calm and have that calm atmosphere. Instead of texting or being on the phone,
talk face-to-face and just remain calm in a private atmosphere.”
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 97

Another student, when asked, “Did the mediation teach you anything about how to resolve
conflicts in your own life without the peer mediators being there?” said:
“I honestly really think so. I think the mediation was very helpful because I
always looked at conflicts as, like, an emotional thing, but this conflict resolution
really helped me realize, like, putting your emotions aside can help you solve the
problem....like it doesn’t matter what emotions you have, but as long as at the end
of the day you’re able to, like, function.”
This quote was not unique in these focus groups, and sentiments like this illuminate the true
value of this program in that it shows all participants (formally trained or not) how to more
effectively and productively resolve conflicts in their own lives. Additionally, when all focus
groups were asked the question, “If you or a friend was in a conflict in the future, would you
recommend that they participate in the program?” 100% of participants responded that they in
fact would recommend their friends. This also demonstrates that participation in the program
has taught them important metacognitive skills around how and when a CRPM program could
support them in the future.
Table 9
Student Responses to Metacognitive Skill Retention Questions
______________________________________________________________________________
Focus Group Question % of Trained Mediators % of General Population
Who Responded With Who Responded With
Affirmative Examples Affirmative Examples
______________________________________________________________________________
How, if at all, has the peer mediation
training helped you to learn to 100% Not asked
effectively deal with conflict in this question
your daily lives?
______________________________________________________________________________
Did you learn anything about how to
effectively resolve conflict as a result Not asked 78%
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 98

of participating in the CRPM program? this question
______________________________________________________________________________
Did the mediation teach you anything
about how to resolve conflicts in your Not asked 33%
own life without the peer mediators this question
being there?
______________________________________________________________________________
If you or a friend of yours was in a
conflict in the future, would you 100% 100%
recommend that they participate
in this program?
______________________________________________________________________________

This data demonstrates that once a student participates in the program, they learn valuable
metacognitive skills around conflict resolution, and thus, this is not a validated gap in the area of
metacognitive knowledge. However, as presented earlier, the average student on campus lacks
knowledge of these programmatic benefits, and that fact will need to be addressed in the
recommendations section.
Motivation Influencers
This section presents data pertaining to motivational influences that have impacted both
stakeholder groups during the implementation of the CRPM program. Clark and Estes (2008)
define motivation simply as those elements which “get us going, keeps us moving, and tells us
how much effort to spend on work tasks” (p. 80). More specifically, they define motivation as
being comprised of three elements: 1) active choice; 2) persistence; and 3) mental effort. Active
choice is when someone cognitively chooses to do an activity, where persistence is the choice to
continue working on a task even when it becomes burdensome or uncomfortable. Mental effort
is the goal-related investment that one makes to accomplish the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
According to Expectancy Value theory, the perception of a task as useful greatly
influences one’s ability to achieve a particular goal related to that task. This perceived
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 99

usefulness is called utility value (Eccles, 2006). In this school context, both staff and students
need to see the utility value in the CRPM program in order to be motivated to engage with it.
Generally, staff reported seeing significant utility value in the CRPM program, and a willingness
to utilize it, thus engaging in what Clark and Estes (2008) describe as the active choice facet of
motivation. The student stakeholder group, however, was more divided in their sentiments, in
that the general student population initially placed low levels of utility value on the program, and
the trained mediators placed significantly more. The literature also pointed to the students’ self-
efficacy in relation to the utilization of the CRPM program as a motivational influence impacting
their use of the program (Theberge & Karan, 2004). Generally, both groups of students reported
high levels of self-efficacy in their use of conflict resolution and peer mediation skills. The
following section will examine data related to these motivational influencers, and each
stakeholder group will be addressed independently.
Staff stakeholder group. In general, the certificated staff showed significant levels of
motivation to engage with the CRPM program. In both the survey and in-depth interviews, they
reported that due to high levels of interpersonal conflict on campus, there is a definite need for a
CRPM program, and accordingly, they have a willingness to recommend students to participate.
As shown in Table 10, in the survey, when presented with the Likert scale item “I believe that
interpersonal conflict between students is a significant issue on campus,” 87% of respondents
chose the “agree” or “strongly agree” options. Additionally, when presented with the Likert
scale item “I believe that conflict resolution strategies (as taught through the CRPM program) are
important for students to learn,” 94% of respondents chose the “agree” or “strongly agree”
options. Staff not only believes that there is a need for the CRPM program on campus, but they
also expressed deep support for the program as it is currently implemented. When presented
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 100

with the Likert scale item “I believe that there is value in having a CRPM program on campus,”
88% of respondents chose the “agree” or “strongly agree” options.
Table 10

Staff Responses to Utility Value Questions
______________________________________________________________________________

Survey Item % of Teachers % of Teachers % of Teachers
Who Agree or Who Neither Agree Who Disagree or
Strongly Agree Nor Disagree Strongly Disagree
______________________________________________________________________________
I believe that interpersonal 76% 15% 9%
conflict between students is a
significant issue on campus.
______________________________________________________________________________
I believe that conflict resolution
strategies (as taught through the 94% 1% 5%
CRPM program) are important
for students to learn.
______________________________________________________________________________
I believe that there is value in
having a CRPM program on 88% 7% 5%
campus.
______________________________________________________________________________

These three items, in concert, show that the staff places a high level of utility value on the CRPM
program, and ultimately has a high level of motivation to utilize it in their daily practice. These
results mirror the findings of several CRPM researchers who note that staff buy-in to a CRPM
program is a major factor in the successful (or not) implementation of that program (Johnson &
Johnson, 2004; Theberge & Karen, 2004).
Additionally, an open-ended item on the survey asked, “If you have recommended a
student to peer mediation, after the mediation, did you see any change in classroom behavior?”
While the majority of staff members have not needed to recommend students to participate in the
program, of those staff members who have, all wrote comments that demonstrated the positive
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 101

effects of the program on their students after participation. For example, one teacher wrote, “I
saw two students who prior to the mediation refused to speak or sit near one another and glared
at eachother (sic). [After mediation] they changed to hugging each other in the halls.” Another
wrote, “Actually, yesterday I checked in with one girl about an issue that I referred her to peer
mediation for and she said it was handled and that she and this other student were fine now.”
Relatedly, during the in-depth interview with the teacher lead of the program, when asked
about whether she saw benefits from the program on individual students or campus culture in
general, she expressed multiple times that she believed the program had significant utility value
for the students and for the campus as a whole. When asked about how other staff members talk
about the program, she said:
“I have heard staff tell me that the student [who has participated in the CRPM
program] is performing better in class. They seem more comfortable. I’ve heard
a lot of secondhand stuff from staff like, ‘My student is no longer fighting with
that person. I think they are friends again.’”
When asked specifically about benefits for the trained mediators, she said:
“I would say their thoughtfulness and empathy and compassion about how they
speak about the problem, their thoughtfulness on talking to one another, is so
great. And they’re very supportive. They are always willing to step up and be
somebody’s mediator.”
When asked about the students from the general population, she said:
“...we’ve had students who come in completely silent. We’ve had students
who’ve come in and wanted to talk over one another. We even had one
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 102

[mediation] where two students screamed at each other the entire time, yet they
were still able to reach agreements.”
Each of these comments reinforces that the staff as a whole believes the CRPM program has
value not only for their own classroom, but also for the campus culture as well. In regard to staff
motivation as a whole, from an evaluative stance, there exists high levels of motivation to engage
with the program, and therefore, this is not a validated motivational gap in the current
implementation of the program.
Student stakeholder group. In general, the student stakeholders expressed mixed
sentiments about the utility value they placed on the program, but universally high levels of self-
efficacy in terms of the skills they learned through the program. Again, there are two groups of
students that participated in the focus groups: those who were trained peer mediators, and those
from the general population who had a conflict mediated.
As for the trained mediators, all 11 relayed a story or anecdote about the positive effects
of the program, either in their own lives or in the lives of those they mediated. For example,
when asked, “Have you been able to see any real impacts of your work on other students?” one
said:
“I like the fact that it’s actually about the student and nothing else. It’s no higher
thing, it’s just about making the people on campus safe and make them feel safe.
I like the fact that it’s students helping other students, so you can really get any
problems across and it’s really a sense of comfort...”
This student’s comment exemplifies a common theme among this group’s responses: that these
trained mediators believe their work not only helps individual students during a conflict, but also
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 103

helps improve overall campus culture. They universally expressed a feeling of pride that
accompanied the belief that they are actively creating a safer and more inclusive campus. This
demonstrates that they place a high level of utility value on the CRPM program, and thus, this is
not a validated motivational gap in the implementation of the program.
Not only did this group of students place high utility value on the program, but they also
expressed a high level of self-efficacy to utilize the conflict resolution skills they learned through
participation in the program. Some students made comments like these:
“You kind of start to notice that a lot of problems come from something
beforehand, or something behind... kind of like a deeper problem. I’ve started to
notice when, if I’m starting to feel some beef with my friends, I kind of think
back, think of what could’ve happened before. I then try and find a deeper
problem, then kind of resolve it on my own so that I no longer have to feel that
disconnection with my friends.”
Another said:
“It’s helped me a lot with my family more, because I’ve been able to sometimes,
when I’m in an argument, you say things that you don’t really mean to say and
that you don’t actually mean. Now, I’m more aware about what I say before I say
things, and I kind of slow down the argument for myself.”
Yet another said:
“There is this one girl in my Spanish class who had a mediation. She was in a
conflict with someone, and she was really upset about it. When she went in first,
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 104

and then the day after she was talking about it, not the situation but the mediation
and how it really helped out her friendship. I just thought that was really cool.”
In all, 100% of this group of students responded that they saw significant utility value in the
program. Each of these responses demonstrates that these students see the tangible value of their
work either in their own friendships, their family life, or in the lives of the students who have had
a conflict mediated. It is clear that they both place a lot of value in the program and also see
significant conflict resolution skill gain. Ultimately, they see the work of the CRPM program as
being enjoyable, valuable, and successful, which underscores their high reported levels of utility
value and their high levels of self-efficacy around conflict resolution skill utilization. As such,
this is not a validated motivation gap in the current implementation of the CRPM program at
EAGHS.
Conversely, the students from the general population discussed significantly lower levels
of motivation to participate in the program, as they initially saw little utility value therein. It is
important to note that they reported these low levels of motivation prior to participation. Once
they had participated in a mediation session, they then unanimously reported high levels of
utility value in the program. However, this initial reticence to participate is likely indicative of
the sentiments of the general student population writ large. All nine (100%) of the students in
this group spoke of their initial trepidation and wariness to participate in a mediation session.
Several described their initial thoughts of the program as “stupid” or a “waste of time.”
However, those same students went on to express that once the mediation session was over, they
immediately saw its value, as their conflict had been successfully resolved. In fact, 100% of
these students said that the mediations were successful and that they now had very positive
impressions of the program. For example, one said:
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 105

“When I first walked in there and sat down, I was really anxious and nervous
‘cause I was scared that this person actually being in the same room and next to
that person would result in something bad, but it didn’t.”
This was a common refrain from all these focus group participants. They were nervous at the
start, but it ended up being a productive experience. When asked about whether their conflict
had been resolved, another student said, “...we’re actually back to normal. How we were. We’re
actually closer.” Another student expressed the following sentiment:
“Yeah, it went really successfully. There used to be a ton of tension whenever
we barely made eye contact, but a little bit after the mediation, we were in a
group project together, and it went really well. Like surprisingly well. We
don’t, like, hang out or anything, but it’s a lot better than it was.”
Such sentiments underscore that once a student participates in a mediation, they place a higher
utility value on the program; however, it also highlights a significant motivational gap for the
general student population at large. If their experience of being initially hesitant to participate in
the program is assumed to be a common sentiment of the general student population, then there
is a significant need to overcome this motivational gap. Theberge and Karen (2004) note that a
major hindrance to the effective implementation of a CRPM program is a lack of school-wide
cultural acceptance in the program, and EAGHS suffers from this exact problem.
When asked about whether this group learned any general conflict resolution skills as a
result of their participation in the program, six of the nine students stated that participation made
them think differently about their conflicts. One student said:
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 106

“I thought one of the skills that I learned is mainly not to fight back so much as to
talk it out first. Instead of saying rude things to them while talking it out, maybe
stay calm and have that calm atmosphere. Instead of texting or [communicating]
on the phone, talk face-to-face and just remain calm in a positive atmosphere.”
Another said:
“I always looked at conflicts as, like, an emotional thing, but this conflict
resolution really helped me realize, like, putting your emotions aside can really
help. It doesn’t matter what emotion you have, as long as at the end of the day
you’re able to function.”
These experiences highlight that these students were not only able to resolve their individual
conflicts, but to also learn conflict resolution skills that they could use in their day-to-day lives.
This improvement shows that they have gained significant levels of self-efficacy around conflict
resolution, and accordingly high levels of motivation to engage with the program in the future.
Accordingly, this is not a validated motivational gap in the implementation of the CRPM
program.
Organizational Influences
Clark & Estes (2008) divide organizational gaps into three main groups: gaps in work
processes, in material resources, and in value chains/streams. Both staff and student stakeholder
groups in this study reported various organizational gaps that have impacted the effective
implementation of the CRPM program. These influences mirror the various cultural models and
settings that were identified via the literature regarding CRPM programs. This section will
examine the collected data as it pertains to each of the cultural models or cultural settings.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 107

Cultural Model: Organizational Support of the CRPM Program. In order for the
CRPM program to grow and thrive, there must be overarching organizational support for the
program (Johnson & Johnson, 2004). In other words, the organization as a whole must
fundamentally believe the CRPM program has value and that it can be utilized to improve
campus culture. This manifests in how various stakeholders feel about the levels of
administrative, staff, and student support of the program and its practices.
The certificated staff stakeholder group generally reported that the program has value and
that there is strong administrative support, but many did not feel there was adequate student
support. For example, four times during the in-depth interview with the teacher lead, she
discussed feeling “highly supported” by administration. Furthermore, she discussed that, in
general, she felt strong support from her teacher colleagues. To this point she said, “They’ve
[the teachers] all said if they see something they’d like to utilize it [the CRPM program]. So I
think there is support there.” This, coupled with the high level of utility value mentioned in a
previous section, suggests high levels of organizational support. There was, however, a
significant percentage of staff responses to the open-ended item “What, if any, resources do you
feel the school needs to expend to better support the peer mediation program?” that suggested
there was a lack of student support of the program. Of the 39 written responses, 15 mentioned
the need to more effectively engage the student population. While nowhere near a unanimous
sentiment, this need to more effectively engage the student population does represent a validated
organizational gap.
As for the student stakeholder group, they felt that there was less organizational support
of the program. The trained mediators were specifically asked, “Do teachers or other school
staff inhibit or support the peer mediation program in any meaningful way?” to which 100%
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 108

responded that there were teachers who strongly supported the program and other teachers who
are neutral or even unsupportive of the program. From the student perspective, while generally
there is organizational support for the CRPM program, there are still those staff members who do
not fully support the work. This view contrasts with the staff survey results, where there was
very high value and support for the program. This inconsistency can likely be explained by
determining which staff members actually took the survey. Only 85 of the total 127 certificated
staff members took the survey; therefore, it is possible that those who found the program
valuable took the survey, while those who did not opted not to take the survey. This might
explain why staff sentiments about the program do not match up with student experiences with
teacher support. This lack of teacher support for the program represents a significant
organizational gap in the implementation of the CRPM program, and thus, processes need to be
put into place to improve buy-in from all teachers.
Cultural Setting 1: The organization needs to ensure that CRPM program-related
communications support high visibility within the organization. This cultural setting is
fundamentally about communication with stakeholders. Messaging within an organization,
along with its policies and procedures, must align with the goals and values of the institution
(Clark & Estes, 2008) as well as actual practice (Schein, 2004) for change efforts to succeed. In
order for the school to develop a strong CRPM program, of primary importance is the need to
clearly and regularly communicate about the program (Humpries, 1999; Johnson & Johnson,
1996; Laursen, et al., 2001). In general, both the staff and student stakeholder groups noted that
communication about the program was a significant organizational gap. On the EAGHS
campus, there are four main methods of communication that the CRPM program utilized: email
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 109

communication, daily morning announcements, presentations at staff/student meetings, and
flyers/posters around campus.
The staff stakeholder group was prompted with two items addressing the methods of
communication they found to be the most effective, and for both, the responses were mixed.
These items asked staff members to rank which method of communication they found the most
effective. As shown in Figure 6, the first item asked, “What are the most effective ways to
communicate with STAFF about the CRPM program?” to which 66% and 59% respectively
responded that staff meeting presentations and email communications were not effective means
of communication, while 67% and 60% respectively responded that morning announcements and
posters/flyers were effective. As shown in Figure 7, the second related item asked, “What are
the most effective ways to communicate with students about the CRPM program?” For this
item, there was less consensus as to which method was most effective to reach students, as 60%
felt that posters and flyers were the most effective means for communication to students, and
60% felt that weekly video news segments were the least effective way to reach students.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 110

Figure 6. Most Effective Communication Methods to Staff

Figure 7. Most Effective Communication Methods to Students

Staff Meeting Email Communication
Morning
Announcements
Posters/Flyers
% Effective 34 41 67 60
% Ineffective 66 59 33 40
Video News Segment Email Communication
Morning
Announcements
Posters/Flyers
% Effective 40 49 54 60
%Ineffective 60 51 46 40
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 111

There were two additional open-ended response items in the survey, where respondents
cited the need for more frequent and consistent communications about the program. The first
item prompted, “Are there any additional ways to improve communication about the program?”
Of the 40 individuals who responded, 10 specifically mentioned the need for “constant
communication” or made a suggestion that referenced the need for “monthly communications.”
Then, of the remaining 30 responses, 19 suggested the increased use of social media as a
mechanism to more effectively communicate to students. The second related short answer item
prompted, “Are there any additional ways to improve communication about the peer mediation
program?” There were 40 total responses, of which 20 respondents recommended some form of
increased social media use, and an additional 10 respondents recommended the creation of
experiences for the general student population that modeled the peer mediation process. These
collected responses demonstrate that there is a validated gap in the area of communication.
The students were not nearly as mixed in their responses as the staff; in fact, they were
nearly unanimous in their opinions about the most effective types of communication. When
asked the question, “What do you think is the most effective way to communicate to students
about the peer mediation program?” 100% responded that the morning announcements and email
were not effective ways to communicate about the program. Many students stated that they
rarely check their school provided email and that during the morning announcements most
classes were allowed to talk too loudly to hear what was said. They were more evenly split with
flyers/posters, where 11 of the 20 students said that flyers/posters were effective, and 9 said that
they were ineffective. Interestingly, 25% of the students suggested that EAGHS model the use
of the program during times of student gatherings (assemblies, rallies, etc.) and a further 50% of
them noted that word-of-mouth was the most effective means of communication. This
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 112

demonstrates that students have a preferred method of communication, and there are
opportunities to expand communication methods to reach more students. Overall, there is a
validated need for increased communication, and this represents a significant organizational gap
that EAGHS needs to address to improve the implementation of the CRPM program.
Cultural setting 2: The organization needs to supply adequate resources to support
the CRPM program. This cultural setting is primarily about the marshaling of sufficient
resources to adequately support the implementation of the CRPM program. As with the previous
cultural settings, those stakeholders who are not closely involved in implementation of the
CRPM (general staff members and students from the general population) are not in a position to
offer substantive feedback about resources distribution. However, those staff members who are
responsible for the implementation of the program, and those students who are trained mediators,
did have some important perspective to share. There were three identified needs in regard to
resources: time, space, and additional funds.
During the in-depth interviews with the teacher and administrative leads, both mentioned
the need for more time. The teacher lead in particular stated that the implementation of the
program takes up a significant amount of her time during the week, and that during busy times
the extra work fatigues her. Of this she said:
“On my end, though, being a classroom teacher, lunch is my only break, and that
is the only time that, with the students and all, we can have the mediations. But
having mediations at lunch is a bit difficult because that takes time away from my
students that I have full time...the other thing is that it is in my classroom. I don’t
mind mediations being in my classroom at all. However, again, that is taking
space and time away from my students. If it’s [mediations] one day a week, that’s
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 113

not a problem. It’s when it’s those weeks with six, and when the program grows,
that I can’t give my classroom up and I can’t give me personally up that much.”
Similarly, the administrative lead said:
“We spend a lot of time putting these things [mediations] together, and on a
normal week, that is fine; however, these things tend to come in waves and there
are times when we have too many mediations to be able to do all of them in a
timely manner. So we really need some additional adults to get trained the
process and help us when things get overwhelming.”
The teacher’s comments highlight the sometimes precarious intersection between the additional
CRPM program assignment and the needs of the students in her traditional classes. All peer
mediations are held during lunch time, as this is the most convenient time for all student
participants, but this timeframe does create time-related problems for the adults who help
administer the program. This, coupled with the administrator’s comments, highlight that
additional time to implement the CRPM program is a validated organizational gap.
A related gap identified through interviews with the program leads was the need for
additional funds to pay teachers for the extra work required to administer the program. As
mentioned previously, the program necessitates a lot of time both inside and outside of the
traditional school day, and thus, program leads thought that a stipend or other mechanism to
financially compensate adult leads would help improve their longevity with the program. In
other words, financial compensation would help these adults feel valued for the additional work
and time the program required of them. As the teacher lead said, “I mean, honestly, financially
[it] would be nice, only in that it really does take a lot of my time. As it stands currently, a lot of
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 114

lunches, a lot of afterschool prep for the trainings. Just things like that.” Additionally, the
administrative lead said, “Yeah, she [teacher lead] works really hard on this program and sooner
rather than later, she will need to be compensated for her time, or else she may just decide that
it’s not worth the hassle.” These comments speak to an organizational gap in the area of
financial compensation. If the organization sees the work of the CRPM as valuable, then it needs
to compensate those who are involved, lest they decide their time is best spent on other activities.
A final gap that was identified through both interviews with the teacher and administrator
leads as well as the trained student mediator focus groups was a need for a neutral physical space
to hold the mediation sessions. As originally practiced, the mediations were held in the
classroom of the teacher lead. Both the teacher lead and the trained student mediators thought it
would be better to hold the mediation sessions in a neutral conference room. The teacher lead
thought this would be better as it would, as she said, “free up space and time during lunch for the
students in my traditional classes to come and ask for help or have a comfortable place to have
lunch.” The idea was also mentioned by three of the eleven trained mediator focus group
participants, who thought a different space would be better since there would be less
“judgement” or “bias” felt by participants. This organizational need was not an overwhelming
theme during data collection with any stakeholder group but was independently discussed in
multiple forums, thus its inclusion here.
Cultural setting 3: The organization needs to refine the logistical processes and
procedures needed to efficiently operate the CRPM program. This cultural setting centers on
the way the CRPM program itself is structured, and whether or not that structure supports its
utilization and effectiveness on campus. The general staff group and both student groups did not
have sufficient functional understanding of the structural workings of the program to comment
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 115

effectively about any potential strengths or weaknesses. As such, the primary source of
information about this cultural setting came from the in-depth interviews with the teacher and
administrator leads. These program leads are the individuals with the most extensive experience
with the structural components of the CRPM program and are in the best position to make
substantive comments about current practices. Overall, they reported positive sentiments about
the processes and procedures in place around the program, but stated that there is still a need for
centralization of information. For example, the administrative lead said, “All in all the program
is running great, but there are still some logistical issues that need to be worked out.” This lead
was specifically referencing the formal mechanism by which students are scheduled for
mediation sessions once they have been recommended to participate in the program. Again, that
same administrator said:
“As it stands now, there is a lot of back and forth, and if there was a particularly
busy week, then there would be ample space for something to fall between the
cracks, or a miscommunication to happen. We need to have one central place
where everyone goes to see what to do next.”
To further this point, the teacher lead said this about the mediation session scheduling
information: “It needs to be somewhere easily accessed to where people can go online on their
computer and click it.” Logistical problems such as these were the main area of concern for
these stakeholders. They saw a need for greater centralization of information to improve the
efficiency of the recommendation process and overall operation of the program.
During document analysis of items pertaining to the recommendation process and record
keeping in general, this need for increased centralization of information was triangulated. In all,
there were five different locations where information about the recommendation process and
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 116

related record keeping were held. There were three hard copy forms, an email stream about each
recommendation, and a Google online spreadsheet. While important information was in fact
being gathered, at times the information was not consistent across all locations, which
underscores the need for additional centralization of program information. This lack of effective
definition of logistical practices and procedures remains a validated organizational gap that
EAGHS needs to address to improve the implementation of the CRPM program.
Synthesis
This study utilized a survey, focus groups, in-depth interviews, and document analysis to
identify the various knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps impacting the effective
implementation of the CRPM program at EAGHS. This data was presented separately for the
sake of clarity, but there are some overarching themes that need to be addressed. As such, this
section will synthesize the findings related to each of the research questions posed for this study.
Research question 1.
To what extent is El Arroyo Grande High School meeting its goal of increasing the
number of peer conflict mediation sessions to 18 per semester?
According to document analysis of mediation records, there were a total of 14 mediation
sessions conducted during the first semester of the 2018-2019 school year. This means that
during the limited data collection window, the organization did not meet its goal of 18 mediation
sessions per semester.
Research question 2.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 117

What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs for El Arroyo Grande High
School during its implementation of a conflict resolution/peer mediation (CRPM) program to
increase the number and efficacy of peer mediation sessions?
According to the previously presented results, there are significant gaps in knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that impacted the effective implementation of the
CRPM program at EAGHS during the data collection window.
As for the gaps in knowledge, while staff members did report high levels of procedural
and conceptual knowledge of the CRPM program, they also reported a significant need for
regular factual knowledge-related communication about the program and its progress. They
further expressed a need to more fully inculcate the program into campus culture and daily life
through regular and targeted knowledge-related communications. The students had a different
perspective. Those who were from the general student population reported very low levels of
procedural, factual, and conceptual knowledge of the program prior to their participation. They
specifically expressed that there were two common misconceptions that hindered participation
by the student body at large, that the program was linked with getting in “trouble,” and that there
was a lack of confidentiality. Several of the students suggested novel ways to communicate and
model the positive impacts of the program to the student body at large. Ultimately, the need for
increased factual communication to both staff and students will need to be addressed, as well as a
mechanism to properly address common student factual and conceptual misconceptions about
the program.
For motivational gaps, the staff stakeholder group generally reported significant levels of
utility value for the program, and accordingly high levels of motivation to utilize the program in
their daily practice. As for the student stakeholder group, the trained mediators reported high
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 118

levels of utility value for the program as well as high levels of self-efficacy in regard to learned
skills from the program. However, students from the general population reported low levels of
utility value for the program, but still high levels of self-efficacy in regard to the learned skills
from the program. Thus, there is a validated gap in the area of expectancy value for the student
stakeholder group that needs to be addressed in the recommendations chapter.
As for gaps in organizational influences, there were several areas identified by either the
staff or student stakeholder groups. In terms of organizational support of the CRPM program,
there was a significant difference between the staff and student stakeholder groups, where staff
generally reported high levels of administrative and organizational support for the program, and
the students maintained that not all staff members were active supporters of the program. As for
the structure of the CRPM program, staff identified minor logistical inefficiencies and
complications related to the process through which students are recommended for mediation
sessions as an area of need. Finally, in the area of resources, staff identified the need for
additional financial resources to distribute to teacher leads, additional time to administer the
program, and a neutral space to conduct the mediation sessions.
Research question 3.
What is the interaction between El Arroyo Grande High School’s organizational culture
and context, and stakeholder knowledge and motivation as it relates to the
implementation of a CRPM program?
EAGHS generally has a strong and supportive organizational culture around the
CRPM program. Among the staff stakeholder group, there is widespread
acknowledgement that the program is needed, that it has value, that it is generally
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 119

supported, and that staff have sufficient motivation to utilize it. This demonstrates that
even if there are some identified gaps in the implementation of the program, and some
areas for programmatic improvement, none of these gaps rise to the level to threaten the
existence of the program. On the whole, programmatic implementation has been
effective in transferring vital knowledge about the program and its policies and
procedures, as well as relaying enough conceptual information about the program to
promote the staff’s motivation to utilize the program.
The student stakeholder group is a different story. It was made strikingly clear
from all of the student participants that a culture of acceptance and use of the CRPM
program has not yet been established at EAGHS. There are significant conceptual and
factual misunderstandings amongst the student population and, as such, very few students
have recommended themselves to participate in a mediation. Again, the ultimate goal for
the CRPM program is to have it fully integrated into campus culture, where not only do
teachers, administrators, and counselors recommend students in conflict to participate in
the program, but more importantly, the students themselves are recommending each other
to participate. There is a need to inculcate the CRPM program into the daily life and
student culture of the campus.
Research question 4.
What are recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources to address those needs?
There are several research-based recommendations that address the validated gaps
mentioned above, and these will be addressed thoroughly in the next chapter of this
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 120

dissertation. Chapter Five will make recommendations for future practices based on the
verified knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps that were identified through both
the literature review and the data collected in this study.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 121

Chapter Five: Recommendations
This evaluation study analyzed the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
impacting the implementation of a CRPM program at EAHGS. Chapters One, Two, and Three
outlined the problem of practice, reviewed existing literature on conflict resolution/peer
mediation, and detailed an explanatory mixed-methods approach to data collection. The data
presented in Chapter Four was collected over a five-month period; it included a quantitative
survey (N=88), semi-structured qualitative interviews (n=2), focus groups (N=20), and document
analysis. In total, seven KMO influencers were identified through the literature review and
validated through data analysis. These identified influencers serve as the basis of the
recommendations to be made in this chapter. In general, validated knowledge gaps focus on
staff and student stakeholder groups’ conceptual understanding of the CRPM program. The
motivational gap is student misconceptions about the program, while organizational gaps are in
the areas of communication protocols and resource distribution.
Chapter Five presents recommendations for the identified and validated gaps impacting
the effective implementation of a CRPM program at EAGHS. While these recommendations are
specifically tailored to the EAGHS campus, they can be applied to other organizations that
implement a CRPM program. Many of the research-based recommendations made in this
chapter are universal and can support CRPM programmatic implementation anywhere. In
addition to specific recommendations, the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) provides the framework for an implementation and evaluation plan to help
ensure that recommended programmatic changes occur and that they remain responsive to the
needs of the organization.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 122

Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Overall, the recommendations in this section can be broadly grouped into two categories:
targeted stakeholder communication and organizational implementation. The findings of this
study demonstrate that teachers need one type of regular communication and students need
another. Teachers specifically need to know how and when to access the program, while
students need to know that the program is useful, not associated with “trouble,” and entirely
confidential. Furthermore, students and staff noted that there is a need for relatable models of
successful program use to help disseminate positive information about the program. The second
group of findings demonstrates that the school needs to more fully integrate a CRPM program
into the functional goals and daily practices of the overall organization. This can be
accomplished by establishing school-wide goals that address conflict resolution generally, and by
incorporating a CRPM program directly into the school’s discipline matrix.
This section will address detailed recommendations for the identified and validated
knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps during the implementation of the CRPM
program at EAGHS. Tables present the validated influencer, context-specific recommendations,
and principles from the literature to support the proposed recommendations. First, knowledge-
related recommendations are presented, followed by a motivational recommendation, and finally
the organizational recommendations.
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. The following section will examine the knowledge influences that have
impacted this study. The information contained in Table 11 represents all of the validated
knowledge gaps in this study that were identified via the survey, focus groups, in-depth
interviews, and document analysis. Generally, the staff have adequate procedural knowledge
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 123

(Krathwohl, 2002) of the CRPM program regarding how and when to utilize it, but the students
have significantly lower levels. Furthermore, the student stakeholder group lacks declarative
knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002) of the program, as they reported significant conceptual and factual
misconceptions about the program. Clark and Estes (2008) note that for procedural knowledge
to improve, there needs to be a solid base of declarative knowledge. Additionally, Rueda (2011)
notes that there are various methods to improve one’s declarative knowledge of a program/skill.
This section will present not only the validated knowledge gaps identified through this research,
but also the theory-based recommendations to address those knowledge gaps.
Table 11
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations

Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation
1. Staff and students
need to know that the
CRPM program
exists and how to
access its services.
(P)
Help individuals identify and
understand important points
(Schraw & McCrudden,
2006).

Information learned
meaningfully and connected
with prior knowledge is
stored more quickly and
remembered more accurately
because it is elaborated with
prior learning (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide staff and students with
frequent and focused informational
models of the CRPM program that
specifically show staff and students
why the program exists and how they
can utilize its services, and also
provides regular updates on
programmatic progress.

2. Students need to
know that
participation in the
CRPM program
generally results in
positive interpersonal
outcomes. (D)
Observational learning where
the use of models who are
credible supports the learning
of tasks and behaviors
(Rueda, 2011).

Modeling to-be-learned
strategies or behaviors
improves self-efficacy,
learning, and performance
Present students with information
about the CRPM program through the
use of credible student models like
testimonials and demonstrations.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 124

(Denler, Wolters, & Benzon,
2009).

Increasing student knowledge of participant outcomes. The results of this study
indicated that 100% of participants from the general student population expressed a lack of
conceptual knowledge of the CRPM program. A recommendation rooted in social cognitive
theory has been selected to close this declarative knowledge gap. Rueda (2011) posits that
observational learning, with the use of credible models, supports the learning of tasks and
behaviors. This would suggest that providing students from the general population with credible
models who have successfully participated in the program would support general use of the
program. The recommendation, then, is to provide communication opportunities for students
who have participated in the CRPM program to demonstrate to others in the general population
how and why the program is effective in creating positive interpersonal outcomes.
Successful CRPM programs require that the general student population conceptually
understands that peer mediation sessions are useful, not only once a conflict has escalated, but
also when conflicts are in their initial stages (Ibarrola-Garcia & Iriarte, 2014; Raga, Sanchez,
Mora & Santana, 2016, Sagkal, Turnuklu, & Totan, 2016). This declarative knowledge of peer
mediation as both in-the-moment conflict resolution and conflict prevention is a cornerstone of
successful CRPM programs, and this knowledge is needed to maximize participation in the
program (Johnson & Johnson, 2004). In order for student conceptual learning about the CRPM
program to take place, it is important to help them acquire new behaviors through demonstration
and modeling (Denler, Wolters, & Benzon, 2009), and these models must be credible in order to
support this learning (Rueda, 2011). Therefore, the school site must create regular
communication opportunities, like testimonials or demonstrations, for students to witness and
interact with student models who have successfully participated in the CRPM program.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 125

Increase procedural knowledge of program access. The findings of this study
indicated that 100% of the students from the general population expressed a need for more
procedural knowledge around how to access the CRPM program. A recommendation rooted in
information processing system theory has been selected to close this procedural knowledge gap.
Schraw and McCrudden (2006) stated that in order for information to be meaningfully learned
and remembered accurately, there must be a focus on what is most important and there must be
connections to prior knowledge. This would suggest that providing learners with regularly
occurring and focused communication around “how” and “when” to use the CRPM program
would support their learning. The recommendation, then, is to provide students with frequent
and focused communication about procedural access to the CRPM program that specifically
demonstrates how and when to utilize its services.
Successful school-based CRPM programs require students to gain needed procedural
knowledge of when and how to access a CRPM program (Johnson & Johnson, 1996; Mayorga,
2011). Many studies have identified a lack of this procedural knowledge as a major limitation to
programmatic success, and it is no different at EAGHS (Cook & Boes, 2013; Dart, et al., 2014;
Theberge & Karan, 2004). In order to increase student use of the CRPM program, it is important
to provide them with meaningful examples of how and when to utilize the CRPM program
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). These communications could also use student models who are
representative of the student body at large so that their message can be seen as credible (Brinson,
Kottler, & Fischer, 2004). As such, based on the literature and data from this study, frequent and
relevant procedural communications must be provided to students to teach them how and when
to utilize the program.
Motivation Recommendations
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 126

Introduction. The following section will examine the validated motivational influences
that were identified via survey, focus groups, in-depth interviews, and document analysis. Clark
and Estes (2008) define motivation simply as those elements which “get us going, keeps us
moving, and tells us how much effort to spend on work tasks” (p. 80). More specifically, Clark
and Estes (2008) define motivation as being comprised of three elements: 1) active choice; 2)
persistence; and 3) mental effort. Active choice is when someone cognitively chooses to do an
activity, where persistence is the choice to continue working on a task even when it becomes
burdensome or uncomfortable, and mental effort is goal-related investment that one makes to
accomplish the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). There was only a single motivational gap validated
by the data collection process regarding the general student population. They placed low initial
utility value on their participation in the CRPM program, and this acted as a significant barrier to
their utilization of the program. Recommendations for addressing this gap that align with
expectancy value theory are presented in Table 12 (Eccles, 2006).
Table 12
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Motivation
Influence
Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation
1. Students need to
see the utility value
of the CRPM
program.
Higher expectations for success
and perceptions of confidence
can positively influence
learning and motivation (Eccles,
2006).

Include rationales about the
importance and utility value of
the task (Pintrich, 2003).

During informational presentations
about the CRPM program,
specifically address common
misconceptions about the program.

During informational presentations
about the CRPM program, include
rationales about the benefits and
utility value of the program.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 127

Increase student perception of utility value in CRPM program. In order to increase
utilization of the CRPM program, students need to see it as valuable and useful in their own
lives. During the focus groups, 100% of students from the general population reported an initial
reticence to participate due to a lack of perceived utility value of the program. They also
unanimously reported holding significant misconceptions about the program prior to their
participation. The student stakeholders’ negative perception of the CRPM program indicates a
solution rooted in expectancy value theory would be most effective in overcoming this
gap. Eccles (2006) found that higher expectations for success and perceptions of confidence can
positively influence learning and motivation, and Pintrich (2003) noted the need to include
rationales about the importance and utility value of the task. This would suggest that there is a
need to provide students with specifically targeted information to both alter their perception of
the program and highlight its utility value in their personal lives. The recommendation, then, is
to include rationales about the benefits/utility value of the program during informational
presentations and in general communications about the CRPM program, as well as specifically
address any commonly held misconceptions.
Theberge & Karen (2004) noted six factors that significantly inhibit the effective
implementation of a CRPM program, but two of them are most relevant here: 1) when students
have an overall poor attitude towards the program, and 2) when the campus culture in general
does not support the ideals of the program. Additionally, Mayorga’s (2011) meta-analysis of
CRPM programs around the country found that successful programs emphasize connections
between students and their environment and that the ideals of conflict resolution permeate the
campus culture. Combined, these studies suggest that effective and targeted communications
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 128

about the utility value of the CRPM program are needed to improve students’ perception of the
program and to increase its general use. Aligning with this, during data collection, 100% of
student participants reported that programmatic misperceptions and a lack of campus-wide
acceptance of the program serve as significant barriers to utilization of the program. As a result,
the recommendation is to include both rationales about the program’s benefits/utility and
information to dispel common programmatic misconceptions within programmatic
communications.
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. The following section will examine the validated organizational
influences that were identified via survey, focus groups, in-depth interviews, and document
analysis. Clark and Estes (2008) separate organizational influences into three broad categories:
work processes, material resources, and value streams. Work processes are those interrelated
practices and procedures within an organization that support the attainment of identified goals.
Material resources refer to the tangible supplies and equipment needed to achieve those goals.
Value streams refer to the internal analysis of departmental interactions and processes that are
meant to improve efficiency and effectiveness of the organization as a whole. There were three
validated organizational gaps in this study, with one gap related to the organization’s cultural
model and two related to the organization’s cultural settings. Table 13 presents
recommendations for action that align with communications and organizational culture theories
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Table 13
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence
Principle and Citation

Context-Specific Recommendation
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 129

1. Cultural Model:
The organization needs to
support the implementation
of the CRPM program.
Effective leaders are
aware of the
influence of motivation
as it relates to
communication and its
role in
organizational change
(Gilley, A., Gilley, J.
W. & McMillan, H.
S., 2009).

Create compelling and consistent
methods of communication to
support stakeholder motivation and
develop an alignment between
program goals and campus culture.

2. Cultural Setting:
The organization needs to
ensure that CRPM program-
related communications
support high visibility within
the organization.
Effective change
efforts are
communicated
regularly and
frequently to all key
stakeholders (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Effective leaders are
aware of various
types of
communication, non-
verbal
communication,
storytelling, person-
centered
communication, and
how these
communication
modalities influence
and
change the
environment within the
organization
(Denning, Stephen,
2005).

Implement a multimodal
communication strategy that focuses
on the creation of stories/person-
centered communications that
convey the usefulness and
importance of the program.

Include a social media presence to
help disseminate program
information to students.

Establish logistical processes that
allow for the centralization and
efficient dissemination of necessary
information to program
implementers.

.
3. Cultural Setting:
The organization needs to
supply adequate resources to
support the CRPM program.
Effective change
efforts ensure that
everyone has the
resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc.)
needed to do their job
Train additional adults moderators
and student mediators to alleviate
time pressures on the teacher lead,
and compensate the teacher lead
with the creation of a stipend
position.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 130

and that if there are
resource shortages,
resources are aligned
with organizational
priorities (Clark and
Estes, 2008).

Perform mediation sessions in a
neutral space.

Employ organizational goal setting to support the CRPM program. While
approximately 88% of the general staff surveyed expressed support for the implementation of the
program, 100% of student participants noted that there are low levels of overall student
understanding and support from those in the general population. This lack of understanding and
support demonstrates a dearth of cultural value placed on the CRPM program, which negatively
impacts its utilization on campus. A recommendation based on communication and alignment
theories has been selected to close this organizational gap. According to Gilley, Gilley, &
McMillan (2009), effective leaders are aware that stakeholder motivation is a vital element to
consider during all communications, and motivation plays an immense role in organizational
change. This would suggest that the creation of a school-wide goal designed to support the
implementation of the program, and its connection to campus culture, could improve stakeholder
motivation to utilize it. The recommendation, then, is to create compelling and specific school-
wide goals that align with the conflict resolution program goals and support its implementation.
Clark and Estes (2008) stated that when there is direct alignment between organizational
structures, processes, and goals, organizational performance increases. The successful
implementation of a CRPM program necessitates that the program has high levels of support
from all stakeholders (Daunic, Smith, Robinson, & Miller, 2000; Humpries, 1999; Sellman,
2011; Wall, Stark, & Standifer, 2001). In essence, all stakeholders must fundamentally believe
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 131

the CRPM program has value, that it effectively supports conflict resolution, and it improves
campus culture (Dart, Collins, Klingbeil & McKinley, 2014; Ibarrola-Garcia, Iriarte & Aznarez-
Sanado, 2017; Theberge & Karan, 2004). This implies a need for a communication strategy that
emphasizes to stakeholders both the purpose of the program and its worth on campus. Mayorga
(2011) noted that successful CRPM programs emphasize the connection between youth and their
environment, and the ideals of conflict resolution can permeate the whole school and improve
overall campus culture. As such, the CRPM program at EAGHS must enact communication
strategies that promote stakeholder utilization of the program and support its integration into the
fabric of campus culture.
Utilization of a multimodal communication strategy. In the survey, 65% of staff
reported a need for additional CRPM program communications, while in the student focus
groups, 80% also reported a need for additional communication about the program. An
additional aspect of these responses was the expressed need for additional forms of
communication (e.g., social media, etc.) to reach a wider group of students. Due to these
responses, it is evident that EAGHS needs to create a holistic communication strategy that
utilizes as many modes of campus communication as possible to improve programmatic
visibility. This lack of effective programmatic communication indicates that a solution rooted in
communication theory would be most effective in overcoming this gap. Clark and Estes (2008)
found that effective change efforts are communicated regularly and frequently to all key
stakeholders, while Denning (2005) found that various communication modalities can influence
and change the environment within an organization. This would suggest that providing all
stakeholders on campus with a consistent, strategic, and multimodal communication strategy
could help organizational acceptance and utilization of the CRPM program. The
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 132

recommendation, then, is for the organization to implement a communication strategy that
frequently and purposefully creates specialized content groups and does so through a variety of
communication methods.
Researchers have noted that a key element of any successful CRPM program is that it is
highly visible to the school community (Association for Conflict Resolution, 1996; Daunic, et
al., 2000). The average stakeholder needs to know both that the program exists and how to
access the program. Generally, the more stakeholders who productively interact with the CRPM
program, the more successful the program will be at improving campus culture (Sellman,
2011). Furthermore, Denning (2005) stated that various types of communication and
communication modalities help to influence and change the environment within an organization.
As such, the literature supports the implementation of a frequent multimodal communication
strategy to improve programmatic visibility. As an example, when communicating to students,
utilize all forms of campus communication including daily announcements, social media
accounts, posters/flyers, weekly campus news program, and student emails.
Supply adequate resources to support program implementation. During in-depth
interviews, all program staff leads expressed a need for more financial and personnel
resources. This identified lack of appropriate resource allocation indicates that a solution rooted
in organizational change theory would be the most effective in overcoming this gap. Clark and
Estes (2008) found that effective change efforts ensure that everyone has the resources (e.g.,
equipment, personnel, time) needed to do their job, and that if there are resource shortages,
available resources need to be re-aligned with organizational priorities. Through staff interviews
and the survey, there were identified gaps in the areas of financial compensation, time, and
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 133

physical space. This would suggest that addressing areas of significant resource scarcity would
support organizational change efforts.
It is vital for CRPM programs to have the proper financial, personnel, and other related
resources to allow it to operate effectively (Theberge & Karan, 2004; Association for Conflict
Resolution, 1996; Mayorga, 2011). If these resources are not meted out and distributed
effectively, the CRPM program’s ability to thrive can be severely hindered (Johnson & Johnson,
2004). As such, the literature supports the reallocation of institutional financial and personnel
resources to support the CRPM program and its program leads. There are three
recommendations made to address the validated organizational gaps. One validated gap relates
to time resources, where program leads expressed being overly taxed by the number of
responsibilities they had for program implementation. The recommendation is to train additional
adult moderators and student mediators to alleviate time pressures on the teacher lead. Program
leads also identified a gap in financial compensation where they were not being fairly
compensated for the extensive additional work they performed for this program. The
recommendation is to address this financial compensation gap by creating a stipend to further
compensate the teacher lead. Finally, both program leads and trained student mediators
identified the need for a neutral meeting space in which to conduct the mediation sessions, so
there is also a recommendation to acquire an additional neutral mediation space and time on
campus.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) four-level training evaluation model will be used to
develop an integrated implementation and evaluation plan to address the validated KMO
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 134

gaps. The New World Kirkpatrick Model is divided into four levels: results, behavior, learning,
and reaction, which are presented in reverse order. The fourth level, results, centers on the
degree to which targeted outcomes occur as a result of the training or intervention. The third
level, behaviors, addresses to what extent participants apply the specific behaviors they learned
during training or intervention while they are back in their normal work environment. The next
level, learning, is a measure of the acquisition of knowledge, skills, attitude, or commitment that
took place during a training or intervention. The final level, results, addresses the extent to
which participants in a training or intervention find the experience engaging and relevant to their
day-to-day experiences (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
El Arroyo Grande High School’s mission is to prepare all its students with the knowledge
and skills to be successful in whatever post-secondary path they choose. A core element of this
mission is to create a campus culture that fosters an intellectually, emotionally, and physically
safe space for students that ultimately allows them to thrive. However, there is a consistent rate
of student interpersonal conflict on campus. While the number of these conflicts is not
overwhelming, these interactions negatively impact those involved and the overarching culture
of the institution. This reality highlighted the need for a program to specifically address student
conflict, and by doing so teach students valuable conflict resolution skills. In the Fall of the
2018-19 school year, campus administration decided that a conflict resolution and peer
mediation program would be implemented to address this need. The initial goal was to conduct a
minimum of 18 peer mediation sessions per semester. This number was chosen as it represents
an average of one mediation session per week, which was a reasonable and attainable goal for a
newly implemented program. In order for the program to thrive, it needed to infuse itself into
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 135

the fabric of campus life and become a normalized alternative course of action when conflict
arose. The idea here was that if the CRPM program was regularly and consistently utilized on
campus, then there would be a reduction in overall student conflict and a positive change in
campus culture (Dart, et al., 2014).
For this study, only the two stakeholder groups with the most direct interaction with the
CRPM program were selected: the students and certificated teaching staff. These groups were
chosen because the students are most impacted by the CRPM program, and the certificated
teaching staff are most responsible for implementing the program. Accomplishing this
organizational goal would support both stakeholder groups as it could improve the daily
experiences of students and provide teachers with another behavioral tool to use in their
classroom environments.
One expectation is that a revised and refocused multimodal communication strategy that
highlights both the utility value of the program and the procedural knowledge needed to access
the program will be implemented. Also, there will be a logistical refinement of the protocols and
procedures related to programmatic implementation intended to improve program efficiency and
ease of access. Finally, there will be a realignment of program resources to better support key
program implementers. If these expectations are met, then it is likely that the organizational goal
of 18 mediations per semester will be met before the end of the 2019-2020 school year, and the
program will become firmly ingrained in campus life and culture.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators

When Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) discuss the relative success of any intervention
program, they are ultimately talking about results, or “the degree to which targeted outcomes
occur” (p. 60). Results also include the idea of leading indicators, which are “short-term
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 136

observations and measurements that suggest that critical behaviors are on track” (p. 60). These
leading indicators can be either internal or external, and their identification serves to keep
initiatives focused on what matters. Due to the nature of a CRPM program on a high school
campus, almost all of the identified leading indicators are internal in nature. This is because the
program is intended to impact stakeholders within the organization itself and not necessarily
those outside the organization. Outside of organizational records, it would be nearly impossible
to measure and evaluate any external leading indicators as they relate to a CRPM program. As a
result, only one external leading indicator has been identified for this section. Table 14 displays
the external and internal outcomes necessary for the successful implementation of the CRPM
program at EAGHS.

Table 14

Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1. Decrease in total number
of student disciplinary
consequences as a result of
interpersonal conflict
A year over year comparison
of number of disciplinary
consequences administered
as a result of interpersonal
conflict
Bi-annual analysis of campus
discipline records
Internal Outcomes
1. Increased staff utilization
of the CRPM program
The number of staff
members who have
recommended students to
participate in the CRPM
program
Mediation record documents
that specifically collect data on
the source of a
recommendation collected bi-
annually
2. Increased student
utilization of the CRPM
program
The number of students who
recommend themselves or
their friends for participation
in the program
Mediation records that
specifically collect data on the
source of a recommendation
collected bi-annually
3. Additional staff mediation
moderators/leads and student
The number of additional
trained staff moderators
Mediation training logs
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 137

peer mediators have been
trained
4. Creation of a stipend for
the CRPM teacher lead
Formal decision made on
increase in CRPM teacher
lead salary
Associated Student Body
(ASB) stipend dispersal
records
5. Allocation of a neutral
space for mediations to
occur
Whether or not a neutral
meeting space is utilized for
mediations
Campus room reservation
system information

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. To support the attainment of the results mentioned above,
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) call for a comprehensive plan to provide stakeholders with
accountability and support. In order to create this plan, the organization needs to adequately
define a few critical behaviors that, if performed reliably, will have the largest impact on
program outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). To achieve its goal, the CRPM program
at EAGHS will have to engage in the critical behaviors described in Table 15. These critical
behaviors include a significant increase in targeted communications to all relevant stakeholders,
a diversification of the methods of communication, the recruitment of additional staff support
personnel to aid the mediation process, and a centralization of program information. These
critical behaviors are all focused on the staff responsible for program implementation, since it is
at this level that most of the significant change can happen, and at this level that there is the
greatest need for action.

Table 15

Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Program teacher leads create
monthly staff-focused
communications that focus on the
utility value of the program and
also specifically demonstrate why
Staff-centered
communications with a
focus on procedural
knowledge and utility
value
Data collected from
communication
logs
Monthly
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 138

the program exists and how staff
can utilize its services.
2. Program teacher leads create
monthly student-focused
communications that emphasize
the utility value of the program
and address common
misconceptions, while utilizing
relatable student models to deliver
the message.
Student-centered
communications with a
focus on utility value,
factual, and procedural
knowledge
Data collected from
communication
logs
Monthly
3. Program leads utilize
multimodal communication
methods for all stakeholders.
Number of modes of
communication utilized
Data collected from
communication
logs
Monthly
4. Student mediators meet weekly
via the Peer Mediation Club to
hone skills and share experiences.
Weekly Peer Mediation
Club meeting agendas
Data collected from
weekly meeting
agendas
Weekly
5. Program leads recruit and train
additional staff moderators/leads
and student mediators.
Number of adult
moderators
Data collected from
mediation training
logs
Bi-
annually
6. Program leads utilize a
centralized location for all
program-related documents and
information.
Utilization of
centralized
documents/forms
Data collected from
communication,
mediation, and
training logs
Weekly

Required drivers. In order to support the critical behaviors mentioned above, a set of
processes and systems that both reinforce those behaviors and create accountability around them
should be created. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) called these systems required drivers and
divided them into four distinct categories: reinforcement, encouragement, rewarding, and
monitoring. To support the critical behaviors needed for effective implementation of the CRPM
program at EAGHS, several required drivers were needed. All required drivers, their
implementation timing, and all associated critical behaviors are outlined in Table 16.

Table 16
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 139

Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
Reinforcing

1. Provide program leads with regular reminders of
communication goal timelines via email or informal
chats.
Monthly 1, 2, 4
2. To foster best practices, create an adult learning
community that connects the teacher lead with other
CRPM program leads at neighboring school sites.
At program kick-
off and
bi-annually
thereafter
3
3. Site administration works with teacher leads to create a
student Peer Mediation Club that meets weekly to help
student mediators refine mediation skills and collaborate
with one another.
At program kick-
off and weekly
thereafter
3
Encouraging

1. Support CRPM program with an aligned and targeted
school-wide goal focused on conflict resolution and peer
mediation.
Annually 1
2. Through the venue of weekly student Peer Mediation
Club meetings, encourage program participants to share
their positive experiences with others.
Weekly 1, 2, 4
Rewarding

1. Work with student discipline office to align student
use of CRPM program with reduced severity of
consequences.
Annually 2
2. Create incentive program to reward teachers who
recommend students to the CRPM program, and
distribute rewards at staff meetings.
Bi-annually 1, 4
3. Distribute annual recognition awards to student
mediators to recognize them for their efforts.
Annually 2, 3, 4
Monitoring

1. Site administration will meet with program leads
weekly to maintain integrity of program initiatives.
Weekly 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
2. Site administration creates and monitors a centralized
communication log to document the types, frequencies,
and modes of stakeholder communication.
Monthly 1, 2, 4
3. Site administration will monitor the recruitment and
training of additional adult moderators and student
mediators.
Bi-annually 3

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 140

Organizational support. In order to successfully implement these required drivers and
reinforce the identified critical behaviors, there will need to be substantial organizational support
put in place. These supports are intended to reinforce programmatic goals, encourage
stakeholder participation, reward program usage, and monitor critical behaviors. The majority of
the recommendations is this chapter revolve around improved and increased communications at
all levels, directed at all stakeholders. As such, the organization will need to provide a robust
system of supports to craft, disseminate, and monitor all communications to relevant
stakeholders. Most CRPM researchers note that effective and frequent programmatic
communication is one of the keys to an effective program (Daunic, et al., 2000; Garcia-Raga, et
al., 2016; Johnson & Johnson, 1996). Program leads will need to craft monthly communications
to the staff that emphasize the utility value of the program, and demonstrate how and when to use
the program. They will also need to craft monthly communications to students that utilize
relatable student models to emphasize the utility value of the program, demonstrate procedures to
access the program, and dispel common misconceptions. These behaviors will be supported with
a training session conducted in the beginning of the school year to help program leads learn to
craft these communications, and weekly meetings between site administration and program leads
will continue thereafter to ensure the recommended communications are being created and
disseminated at monthly intervals.
Another crucial element of organizational support is to help further integrate the CRPM
program into the fabric of campus life. One way this can be accomplished is by site
administration working with staff to create a school-wide goal that centers on conflict resolution
and peer mediation. Since over 76% of certificated staff respondents reported that student
interpersonal conflict is a significant issue on campus, a school-wide goal related to conflict
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 141

resolution should be both widely accepted and practical to improve campus culture. Goal
creation can be accomplished at the beginning of the academic year when staff and
administration are crafting curricular and cultural goals for the upcoming semesters. Such an
action is recommended by many CRPM researchers as an effective way to focus staff on the
CRPM program and its goals (Cavanagh, Vigil, & Garcia, 2014; Cook & Boes, 2013; Johnson,
Johnson & Dudley, 1992; Mayorga, 2011).
Furthermore, several researchers point to an alignment of school discipline policies and
CRPM programs as another way to more fully integrate such programs into campus life (Barton
& Nishioka, 2014; Cavanagh, Vigil & Garcia, 2014; Cook & Boes, 2013; Viadero, 2010). Site
administration will work with program leads to offer students who participate in the program a
potential reduction in the severity of consequences for conflict-related offenses. For example, if
two students were to get into a physical altercation, instead of an off-campus suspension, the
students could agree to a mediation session and not have to serve the suspension. Such a course
of action could both better serve the students in conflict and expand the role of the CRPM
program on campus. Both of these required drivers would support the further integration of the
CRPM program into campus life and help reinforce its utility value to all stakeholders.
Another set of required drivers that require organizational support are related to the
creation of learning communities to support staff leads and trained student mediators. Such
learning communities are recommended by many researchers as they encourage implementers to
hone their skills, and these communities reinforce the practices and procedures necessary for
successful program implementation (Peer Assistance and Leadership, 2016; Peer Resource
Consulting and Training, 2015). This study recommends that site administration work with
program leads to create a Peer Mediation Club for the trained student mediators that meets on a
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 142

weekly basis. The purpose of this club would be to provide a space for student participants to
further develop their mediation skills, share experiences, and at the end of the year distribute
recognition awards. The staff leads will also need to participate in a similar learning
community. To address this from an organizational perspective, site administration will need to
find neighboring schools that operate a CRPM program and create a work-group where all
program leads can collaborate and share best practices. The intent of these actions is to reinforce
CRPM program goals among all stakeholders and encourage staff and student program
implementers.
Another crucial organizational recommendation is the need to both acquire and distribute
resources more effectively to support program implementation. There are three actions that must
occur to accomplish this goal. There was an identified need for additional personnel resources,
and this study recommends that site administration direct and monitor the recruitment and
training process for additional staff and student leads. A related recommendation is for the
creation of a teacher stipend to compensate teacher leads for the additional time outside the
traditional school day that is required to operate a CRPM program. Site administration will have
to locate and distribute funds from the school budget for this purpose. Finally, there was an
identified need for a neutral meeting space where the meditations could occur. Site
administration will be required to locate this space, and program leads will need to reserve this
space for all future mediation sessions. It will be crucial that site administration regularly
monitor these recommended organizational actions to ensure that they take place and that they
are done with fidelity.

Level 2: Learning
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 143

Learning goals. Once the recommendations described above for the CRPM program
have been fully implemented, staff leads should know how to:
1. Create communications directed at staff that address that group’s specific
declarative/procedural knowledge and motivational needs.
2. Create communications directed at students that address that group’s specific
declarative/procedural knowledge and motivational needs.
3. Utilize multimodal forms of communication, including social media, to reach all relevant
stakeholders.
4. Align CRPM program with existing discipline matrix.
5. Engage in stakeholder-specific learning communities.
6. Recruit and train additional staff moderators/leads and student mediators.
7. Create and utilize centralized program documents.

Program. Given the KMO needs analysis and recommendations that have been made
thus far, EAGHS needs to adopt a fairly simple program to improve their implementation of the
CRPM program. All of the recommended modifications to program implementation need to be
executed by either the site administration or program leads. There will be a series of
coordination meetings where program leads are exposed to the identified KMO gaps in
implementation and are given the time and training to make the recommended changes to the
program.
Coordination meetings and program planning. These coordination meetings would
need to take place during a break between semesters, most likely during the summer
months. This will allow the space and time for planning and content creation, without the added
stress of school being in session. These meetings would need to include all adult program leads
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 144

and administrative staff. The overall purpose of these meetings would be to share the results of
this study and to present the various recommendations that have been made. These meetings
would have three main tasks: the first to more closely align and integrate the CRPM program
with campus-wide goals and practices, the second to develop the modified content as has been
recommended, and the third to identify and marshal the necessary resources to support the
program.
The group would first be tasked with aligning and integrating the CRPM program with
campus-wide goals and practices. They would work to create a school-wide goal related to
conflict resolutions. The goal would need to be broad enough to reach all stakeholders on
campus, yet specific enough to be addressed by the average classroom teacher. The CRPM
program would be an obvious mechanism to support this work and will need to be explicitly
mentioned in the wording of that goal. The group would then need to develop a plan to present it
to the general staff to garner maximum buy-in. General staff will need to know that, in this
research, the staff themselves identified student interpersonal conflict as a significant issue on
campus, and the CRPM program is a valid means to address conflict. The presentation of this
goal would take place during the pre-school planning days.
Next, the group would work to integrate the CRPM program into the existing discipline
matrix. They would need to identify the specific types of interpersonal conflict-related
infractions where mediation would be of use, and then how student participation in a mediation
session could impact the severity of their consequences. This would also be a time to clarify and
solidify the practices and procedures necessary to support this integration. The group would then
move on to the planning and creation of the recommended communication strategy.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 145

Training required for program staff, teachers, and students. It is of primary importance
that this planning group understands the core knowledge and motivational gaps that this research
identified, as well as the recommended changes to communication modality, frequency, and
content. To that end, a short training that emphasizes the different communication needs for the
two different stakeholder groups on campus is in order. This training would highlight that staff
need regular communications that emphasize procedural and conceptual understanding of the
program, and students need communications that emphasize factual, procedural, and conceptual
understanding. Sinek (2011) noted that effective organizational communication focuses on why
an organization does what it does, so these communications will need to focus primarily on the
utility value of the program. Once this communications-related training has taken place, work
would then need to shift to planning a staff-wide training about the CRPM program.
The group would need to plan to administer a simple staff training for the beginning of
the year. This training would describe the process of recommending students to the program, as
well as a robust examination of how and when to utilize the program. This would be an annual
training that would take place at the beginning of every academic year, and was already given to
staff at the beginning of the CRPM program implementation in the Fall of the 2018-19 school
year. Exactly 88% of survey respondents reported that they knew how to recommend students
for the program, which demonstrates that the previously administered training was effective. As
such, that same training will again be administered to staff. After this training, a simple survey
would be administered to all certificated staff to evaluate if the training was successful at
relaying necessary procedural and conceptual information about the program (see Appendix
A). Any identified deficiencies would be addressed in subsequent communications. The group
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 146

would also need to plan out and create subsequent monthly communications to staff, with the
addition of social media as part of the communication strategy.
As for communications to the general student population, the group will need to identify
past student program participants who would be willing to serve as relatable models of the
program. These students would be asked to share their positive experiences with the larger
student body. A plan would then need to be formulated as to how to leverage these student
models to show other students how to access the program and, more importantly, why/when they
should utilize the program. This process can be guided by the work of Stephen Denning (2011),
who promotes the idea that storytelling, and the art of crafting organizational narratives, is key to
organizational success. He identified eight different narrative patterns used to craft
organizational narratives and described effective means to relate these narratives to a larger
audience. A targeted training in this work could help planning groups learn to craft effective
communications for the general student body. There are many opportunities throughout the
school year where student models of the CRPM program models could have meaningful
interactions with large groups of students. The planning group would need to identify the best
times and places for these interactions and plan how those interactions would proceed.
Integration of communication strategy. These trainings, focused on organizational
narrative creation, will take place in conjunction with specific direction about the use of a
multimodal communication strategy. The group will need to plan and create monthly
communications for at least one semester in advance. Due to the complexities and difficulties
inherent to whole student body surveys, it is not practical to have the general student population
evaluate the effectiveness of CRPM program communications. It is much more practical to,
instead, have all students who have participated in a mediation session fill out a brief survey
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 147

within two weeks of their mediation session. Appendix D shows an example of a sample survey
questionnaire to be used for this purpose.
Marshaling program resources to achieve success. The group would then be tasked
with identifying and marshaling the necessary resources to support the program. In order to
create robust learning communities for staff and student leads, the group will develop a plan to
coordinate with other local schools to create a CRPM program professional learning community
for the adult program leads, as well as plan out the creation/implementation of a Peer Mediation
Club to support the trained student mediators. Then, to address the need for additional personnel
support, they will develop a plan to recruit and train additional staff moderators and student
mediators. This recruitment process will begin in the initial months of the academic year and
continue through the end of the first semester; the training process would then begin in the
beginning of the second semester. Finally, in terms of monetary and physical resources, the
group would work with the site budget to identify and allocate a club stipend for the program
lead, and with the school facilities calendar to locate a neutral mediation site. The goal of this
work is to create a full implementation plan for the coming school year so that necessary
structures and procedures are in place to increase the utilization of the program and improve its
integration into campus life.

Evaluation of the components of learning. Participants in the previously discussed
planning meetings will need to evaluate not only whether they understand what is needed for
organizational change and what is recommended to be done, but also whether or not they believe
the recommended changes will have positive results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Such
evaluations would be formative in nature, as they are intended to help program implementers
make mid-course corrections to improve practice and implementation. As a result, they are
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 148

conducted shortly after the collaboration/training sessions as opposed to a summative evaluation
held at the end of the academic year (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 17 displays the
necessary evaluation components needed for this work as well as suggested implementation
timelines. Most of the recommended evaluation components tie directly in with the planning
group of administrators and program leads. There would need to be brief post-planning session
interviews with each group member to specifically evaluate their levels of knowledge and
motivation to engage in the recommended program implementation modifications and address
any identified gaps. There is also a need to evaluate the general staff sentiments about their
knowledge and motivation regarding the program after the beginning of the year training.
Finally, there is a need for student participants to be given a brief evaluation survey shortly after
participation in a mediation session as a means to evaluate the effectiveness of the modified
program implementation.

Table 17
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge: “I know it.”

Post session interview questions about factual understanding of
research results.
Within two weeks of
planning meetings
Post session interview questions about conceptual understanding of
KMO gaps in implementation
Within two weeks of
planning meetings
Post-session questions about knowledge of expected communication
timelines for upcoming school year
Within two weeks of
planning meetings
Post-session questions about procedural understanding of resource
distribution
Within two weeks of
planning meetings
Post-training questionnaire questions to general teaching staff about
factual and conceptual knowledge of the CRPM program
Within one week of
staff training
Procedural Skills: “I can do it right now.”

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 149

Post-session interview question: I understand how the CRPM
program will be communicated to students
Within two weeks of
planning meetings
Post-training questionnaire to general teaching staff about
procedural knowledge of program access
Within one week of
staff training
Post-mediation session survey questions for student participants
about knowledge of how to access the program
Within two weeks of a
mediation session
Attitude: “I believe this is worthwhile.”

Post-planning session interview questions about sentiments
regarding the proposed program modifications
Within two weeks of
planning meetings
Post-planning session interview questions about overall support of
the CRPM program
Within two weeks of
planning meetings
Post-training questionnaire to general teaching staff about attitude
towards CRPM program
Within one week of
staff training
Post-mediation session survey questions for student participants
about the utility value of program
Within two weeks of a
mediation session
Confidence: “I think I can do it on the job.”

Post-planning session interview questions about sentiments
regarding confidence in creating modified stakeholder
communications
Within two weeks of
planning meetings
Post-training questionnaire to general teaching staff about
confidence in utilization of program
Within one week of
staff training
Commitment: “I will do it on the job.”

Post-planning session interview questions about sentiments
regarding commitment to program implementation
Within two weeks of
planning meetings
Post-training questionnaire to general teaching staff about
commitment to school-wide conflict resolution goal
Within one week of
staff training
Post-training questionnaire to general teaching staff about
commitment to program utilization
Within one week of
staff training

Level 1: Reaction

Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) Level One addresses the extent to which
participants find the training/program favorable, relevant and engaging to their daily work. This
is the simplest of the levels as it essentially is intended to measure whether or not stakeholders
view the training favorably and find it effective (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). In this case,
formative data will be collected from the certificated staff immediately after their CRPM
program training as well as the group of trained student mediators after their mediation training
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 150

is complete. These evaluation tools will be simple pulse checks to measure stakeholder
impressions of the trainings. Table 18 displays the engagement, relevance, customer service
tools and implementation timelines that will be used to assess stakeholders’ Level One reactions
to the aforementioned recommendations.

Table 18
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing

Engagement
Feedback survey given to teaching staff Directly after the CRPM program training at
start of academic year
Feedback interviews conducted with trained
student mediators
Directly after the mediation training

Relevance
Feedback survey given to teaching staff Directly after the CRPM program training at
start of academic year
Feedback interviews conducted with trained
student mediators
Directly after the mediation training

Customer Satisfaction
Feedback survey given to teaching staff Directly after the CRPM program training at
start of academic year
Feedback interviews conducted with trained
student mediators
Directly after the mediation training

Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. Immediately following the
planning meetings with site administrators and program leads, there will need to be a series of
brief interviews to assess each member’s reactions to the proposed recommendations and their
knowledge and commitment to those changes (Appendix F and G). Generally, Kirkpatrick and
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 151

Kirkpatrick (2016) recommend that such evaluation tools utilize Likert scale items, but due to
the context-specific nature of these program recommendations, a combination of survey items
and open-ended interview questions were chosen as a more effective means to conduct the
evaluation (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Each of these initial evaluation tools contains items
that address both the first (engagement, relevance, and customer satisfaction) and second
(knowledge, skill, confidence, and commitment) evaluation levels. There will be one general
interview protocol for all members of the planning group, and an additional interview protocol
for the administrator in charge of discipline, as that person is directly responsible for the
integration of the CRPM program into the discipline matrix. The results of these interviews
would be used to either affirm or modify the agreed upon practices and protocols before full
program implementation with the general staff and students.

Delayed for a period after the program implementation. There is also need for
delayed evaluation tools to be administered after the initial program implementation. These are
what Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) describe as blended evaluation instruments, which
assess stakeholder sentiment on all four levels of effective training evaluation (reaction, learning,
behavior, and results). The first of these delayed evaluation tools is a survey to be given to
general staff members within two weeks of their beginning-of-the-year training about the
program and the presentation of the school-wide conflict resolution goal (Appendix H). This
instrument contains Likert scale items to assess their sentiments about the program and its
implementation and to ascertain if there are any remaining knowledge or motivational gaps that
need to be addressed. The results of this survey would be used to make needed additions or
modifications to programmatic implementation. This exact survey would also be given at the
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 152

conclusion of the school year as a summative assessment of the program’s effectiveness and to
identify any needed changes for the next academic year.
Additionally, there will need to be a similar delayed evaluation tool administered to the
trained student mediators within two weeks of their program training (Appendix J). This
instrument contains Likert scale items to assess their sentiments about the program and to
ascertain if any remaining knowledge or motivational gaps need to be addressed. The results of
this survey would be used to make needed additions or modifications to programmatic
implementation. This survey would also be given at the conclusion of the school year as a
summative assessment of the program’s effectiveness as a means to identify any needed changes
for the next academic year.
Finally, there will be an evaluation tool administered to students who have participated in
a mediation (see Appendix I). This instrument will contain Likert scale items to address all four
levels of evaluation and will be administered within two weeks of their scheduled mediation
session. The purpose of this timeline is to give the student enough time to see if their conflict
has been successfully mediated before asking them to evaluate the effectiveness of the overall
program.

Data Analysis and Reporting
Once all of the evaluation data is collected, it will need to be reported to all relevant
stakeholders. As for the interview data gathered from the administrators and program leads, a
summary report will be presented to the entire group at a subsequent planning session to be held
shortly before the beginning of the school year. Any suggested modifications or additions to the
program implementation plan will be brought forward for group consideration and decision
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 153

making. All agreed upon changes would then be added to the implementation plan before
presentation to the staff writ large.
Per organizational practices, the staff survey data would be either presented in whole at a
staff meeting or communicated via email. Generally, staff surveys at EAGHS are conducted using
an online tool like Survey Monkey©, and all results are shared utilizing the tools available with
that online service. This same protocol would be followed with this survey data, and any identified
gaps in implementation would be addressed in that same communication. Additionally, as part of
the monthly staff communications, a simple dashboard type display could be utilized to
demonstrate how many mediations had been held, how many of those medications were due to
teacher recommendations, and how many were due to student recommendations. Such a
dashboard (see Appendix K) could serve to both demonstrate the success of the modified program
implementation and communication strategies as well as to remind teachers that they can utilize it
as a tool in their classrooms.
The results of the trained mediator surveys would be shared with the program leads and
site administration to help guide program changes. The survey results would also be shared
directly with the trained mediators during the weekly Peer Mediation Club meetings as a means to
prompt discussion about needed or wanted program changes. As for the surveys given to program
participants, due to the confidential nature of the student mediations, it would not be appropriate
to share the results of student surveys to the student body as a whole, but this information could
be used in communications directed at staff.
Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model was utilized to develop a comprehensive and
extensive plan to implement and evaluate the recommended changes to the implementation of
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 154

the CRPM program at EAGHS. A significant aspect of any planning/training program is an
aligned formative and summative evaluation protocol to adjust the program to organizational
needs and evaluate its overall effectiveness (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). In this case, there
were seven total KMO-related implementation recommendations made based on the research
results, and a robust planning and training regime developed to support the implementation of
those recommendations. The Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) evaluation model was utilized
to ensure that the recommended CRPM program implementation plan aligns with organizational
needs, and also that a formative evaluation plan is implemented to provide necessary feedback to
support change efforts. Hopefully, all stakeholders at EAGHS will be able to positively interface
with the modified implementation of the CRPM program and utilize it to make their own lives
and the campus culture as a whole better.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach

There are several strengths in the approach of this study. The first is the use of both the
Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytical Framework and Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) New
World Kirkpatrick Models. When utilized together, both provided great structure and direction
for this study. They helped to frame a successful study methodology and ultimately to turn the
results into a comprehensive recommendation package. Another strength was the utilization of
multiple stakeholder groups. While this added to the complexity of the study, it ultimately led to
more interesting and meaningful results and findings. Additionally, there is strength in the
research methodology and design as it allowed for the collection of a wide range of data types.
The use of surveys, focus groups, interviews, and document analysis supported the triangulation
of data and allowed for more meaningful assertions to be made.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 155

There were two significant areas of weakness in the study: (a) the short data collection
window and (b) the omission of a general student survey. First, regarding the data collection
window, although the time frame of one semester used in this study was enough to gather
necessary data, it would have been much more useful to have collected data over the course of an
entire academic year. This would have allowed the program to operate for a significantly longer
period of time and for a larger group of student participants to be involved. Secondly, a large-
scale student body survey focused on the implementation of the CRPM program was omitted
solely for pragmatic purposes. There would have been many logistical and practical barriers to
administering such a survey both at the site level and through the Institutional Review Board
review process. As such, there was a well-considered decision to not administer such a survey;
however, a more comprehensive survey of student sentiments about the CRPM program could
have added much valuable information to the study.
Future Research
While there has been extensive research conducted in the area of CRPM program
creation and implementation, productive areas for future research still remain: specifically,
research into the CRPM program acculturation process. School sites need to better understand
how to effectively integrate a CRPM program into daily life on campus. This is a complex and
difficult process, and while many implementation manuals have been produced, little attention is
paid to how to best inculcate the program into the fabric of campus life. Many of the
recommendations made as a result of this research revolve around this acculturation process, and
further research into the impact of multi-modal communication strategies, program integration
into discipline policies, and institutional goal setting would support this work. It would also be
fruitful to research how the acculturation process differs for organizations with varying levels of
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 156

student conflict. There may in fact be significant differences in implementation strategies for
communities or school sites with high levels of student conflict versus those with relatively low
levels. The more contextually relevant information implementing organization have, the better
their overall integration of their CRPM program will be.
Conclusion
This dissertation examined the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
surrounding the implementation of a CRPM program at El Arroyo Grande High School. The
goal of this study was to increase the number of peer conflict mediations to at least 18 per
semester, or an average of one mediation per week, by the end of the 2018-2019 school year.
The research questions driving the design, methodology, data analysis, and recommendations
were:
1. To what extent is El Arroyo Grande High School meeting its goal of increasing the
number of peer conflict mediation sessions to 18 per semester?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs for El Arroyo Grande
High School during its implementation of a conflict resolution/peer mediation (CRPM)
program to increase the number and efficacy of peer mediation sessions?
3. What is the interaction between El Arroyo Grande High School’s organizational culture
and context, and stakeholder knowledge and motivation, as it relates to the
implementation of a CRPM program?
4. What are recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources to address those needs?
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 157

The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytical Framework supported the structure of the
literature review, where influencers in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organization were
identified. Ultimately, only two of the knowledge influencers (staff and student procedural
knowledge, student conceptual knowledge), one motivational influencer (student utility-value),
and three organizational influencers (organizational support, communication strategies, resource
distribution) were validated through the quantitative and qualitative data collection process.
Findings show that EAGHS needs to fundamentally improve how and what they communicate
about the CRPM program in order to inform stakeholders about the nature and utilization of the
program as well as highlight its utility value in their individual lives. Furthermore, there needs to
be a more strategic distribution of organizational resources around the CRPM program along
with streamlined logistical practices.
Change recommendations follow the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The integrated program centers on both the creation of targeted stakeholder
communications and the integration of the CRPM program into overall organizational
goals/practices. There were critical behaviors and leading indicators identified to support this
work, as well as a comprehensive plan to evaluate whether or not the organization is engaging in
those behaviors. Hopefully this work will help EAGHS to implement an even stronger CRPM
program in future academic years and encourage other practitioners to do the same at their site.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 158

References
Adams, R. & Laursen, B. (2001). The organization and dynamics of adolescent conflict with
parents and friends. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 97-110.
Allen, K.P. (2013). Understanding bullying in an affluent, academically rigorous U.S. high
school: A grounded theory analysis. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social
Environment, 23(4), 413-436. doi: 10.1080/10911359.2013.771523
Association for Conflict Resolution (1996). Standards for peer mediation programs. Perspectives
in Peer Programs, 24(1), 20-22.
Barton, R. & Nishioka, V. (2014). Discipline disparities: Implications for school practice and
policy. Principal’s Research Review, 9(4), 1-7.
Bell, C. & Song, F. (2005). Emotions in the conflict process: an application of the cognitive
appraisal model of emotions to conflict management. The International Journal of
Conflict Management, 16(1), 30-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb022922References.
Brinson, J.A., Kottler, J.A. & Fisher, T.A. (2004). Cross-cultural conflict resolution in schools:
Some practical intervention strategies for counselors. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 82(2004), 294-301.
California Heathy Kids Survey Results (2016). Los Alamitos secondary main report. Health and
Human Development Program. West Ed.
Cavanagh, T., Vigil, P. & Garcia, E. (2014). A story legitimating the voices of Latino/Hispanic
students and their parents: Creating a restorative justice response to wrongdoing and
conflict in schools. Equity and Excellence in Education, 47(4), 565-579.
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 159

Coban, A. E. (2013). Interpersonal cognitive distortions and stress coping strategies of late
adolescents. Egitim Arastirmalari-Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 51, 65-84.
Connolly, J., Barid, K., Bravo, V., Lovald, B., Pepler, D. & Craig, W. (2015). Adolescents’ use
of affiliative and aggressive strategies during conflict with romantic partners and best
friends. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12(5), 549-564.
Cook, J., Boes, S.R. (2013). Mediation works: An action research study evaluating the peer
mediation program. Department of Clinical and Professional Studies, University of West
Georgia, Carrollton, GA.
Creswell, J., & Creswell, J. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among
five approaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Dart, E.H., Collins, T.A., Klingbeil, D.A. & McKinley, L.E. (2014). Peer management
interventions: A meta-analytic review of single-case research. School Psychology Review,
43(4), 367-384.
Daunic, A.P., Smith, S.W., Robinson, T.R., Miller, M.D. & Landry, K.I. (2000). School-wide
conflict resolution and peer mediation programs: Experiences in three middle schools.
Intervention in School and Clinic, 36(2), 94-100.
Denler, H., Wolters, C. & Benzon, M. (2006). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/.
Denning, S. (2005). The leader's guide to storytelling: Mastering the art and discipline of
business narrative (Vol. 269). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from http://www.
education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 160

Elgar, F., Arlett, C. & Groves, R. (2003). Stress, coping, and behavioral problems among rural
and urban adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 26 (2003), 574-585.
Erez, M. & Gati, E. (2004). A dynamic, multi-level model of culture: From the micro level of the
individual to the macro level of a global culture. Applied Psychology: An International
Review, 53, 583–598. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00190.x
Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications.
Flett, G. L. & Hewitt, P.L (2014). A proposed framework for preventing perfectionism and
promoting resilience and mental health among vulnerable children and adolescents.
Psychology in the Schools, 51(9), 899-912.
Gallimore, R. & Goldenburg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and setting to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56.
Garcia-Raga, L., Grau, R. & Lopez-Martin, R. (2016). Mediation as a process for the
management of conflict and the improvement of coexistence in educational centers. A
study based on the perceptions of secondary school students. Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences. 237(2017), 465-470.
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction, 4th ed., 162-183. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Gilley, A., Gilley, J. W. & McMillan, H. S. (2009). Organizational change: Motivation,
communication, and leadership effectiveness. Performance Improvement Quarterly,
21(4), 75-94.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 161

Gray, M.L. (2010). The conflict resolution manual. 2gether program. Long Beach, CA: Peer
Assistance Training Course.
Gray, M.L. (2016). Resource book: Curriculum for peer assistant training class. 2gether Tuesday
program. Long Beach, CA: Peer Assistance Training Course.
Grossman, R. & Salas, E. (2011). The transfer of training: What really matters. International
Journal of Training and Development, 15, 103–120.
Hampel, P. & Petermann, F. (2006). Perceived stress, coping, and adjustment in adolescents.
Journal of Adolescent Health, 38(2006), 409-415.
Humpries, T.L. (1999). Improving peer mediation programs: Student experiences and
suggestions. Professional School Counseling, 3(1), 13-20.
Ibarrola-Garcia, S. & Iriarte, C. (2014). Socio-emotional empowering through mediation to
resolve conflicts in a civic way. London Review of Education, 12(3), 261-273.
Ibarrola-Garcia, S., Iriarte, C. & Aznarez-Sanado, M. (2017). Self-awareness emotional learning
during mediation procedures in the school context. Electronic Journal of Research in
Educational Psychology, 15(1), 75-105.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. & Dudley, B. (1992). Effects of peer mediation training on
elementary school students. Mediation Quarterly, 10(1), 89-99.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., Dudley, B. & Magnuson, D. (1995). Training elementary school
students to manage conflict. The Journal of Social Psychology, 135(6), 673-686.
Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (1996). Conflict Resolution and Peer Mediation Programs in
Elementary and Secondary Schools: A Review of the Research. Review of Educational
Research, 66.4 (1996), 459–506.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 162

Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (2004). Implementing the “Teaching students to be peacemakers
program.” Theory into Practice, 43(1), 68-79.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. & Smith, K. (2007). The state of cooperative learning in
postsecondary and professional settings. Educational Psychology Review, 2007(19), 15-
29.
Jones, T. & Bodker, A. (2001). Mediating with heart in mind: addressing emotion in mediation
practice. Negotiation Journal, 17(2), 207-244. doi: 10.1111/j.1571-9979.2001.tb00238.x.
Kirkpatrick, J. D. & Kirkpatrick, W. (2016) Evaluation blunders and missteps to avoid. Training
and Development, November, 36-40.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41, 212–218. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Krueger, R. & Casey, M. (2009). Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research (4th ed.).
Los Angeles: SAGE.
Laursen, B., Finkelstein, B.D. & Betts, N.T. (2001). A developmental meta-analysis of peer
conflict resolution. Developmental Review, 21(2001), 423-449.
Levy, J. (1989). Conflict resolution in elementary and secondary education. Mediation
Quarterly, 7(1), 73-87.
Liang, B., Lund, T.J., Mousseaua, A.M. & Spenser, R. (2016). The mediating role of
engagement in mentoring relationships and self-esteem among affluent adolescent girls.
Psychology in Schools, 53(8), 848-860.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 163

Los Alamitos High School (2016). School Accountability Report Card: 2015-2016. Retrieved
from:http://www.losalusd.k12.ca.us/cms/lib7/CA01000497/Centricity/Domain/56/2015%
20SARC%20LAHS%2020160129.pdf
Lund, T. J. & Dearing, E. (2012). Is growing up affluent risky for adolescents or is the problem
growing up in an affluent neighborhood? Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23(2),
274-282.
Luthar, S.S & Becker, B.E. (2002). Privileged but pressured? A study of affluent youth. Child
Development, 73(5), 1593-1610.
Maxwell, J. (1989). Mediation in the schools: Self‐regulation, self‐esteem, and self‐
discipline. Mediation Quarterly, 7(2), 149–155.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mayer, R.E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA. Pearson.
Mayorga, M.G. (2011). The effectiveness of peer mediation on student to student conflict.
Perspectives in Peer Programs, 22(2), 3-12.
Merriam, S. B. & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. (2003). Centers for Disease Control. Funds
project evaluations. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 164

New South Wales Department of Education and Communities. (1998). Peer mediation for
secondary schools: Helping students to resolve conflict in peaceful ways. New South
Wales, AU: Learning and Engagement Directorate.
Opotow, S. (1991). Adolescent peer conflicts: implications for students and for schools.
Education and Urban Society, 23(4), 416-441.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from:
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Park, H., Heppner, P.P. & Lee, D. (2010). Maladaptive coping and self-esteem as mediators
between perfectionism and psychological distress. Personality and Individual
Differences, 48, 189-201.
Peer Resource Training and Consulting. (2002). PAL: Student Training Manual (3
rd
ed). San
Antonio, TX: Workers Assistance Program, Inc.
Peer Assistance and Leadership. (2002). PAL: Peer Assistance and Leadership Teachers
Training Manual (3
rd
ed). San Antonio, TX: Workers Assistance Program, Inc.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Raga, L.G., Sanchez, C., Mora, A. M. & Santana, G.R. (2016). Strengths and weaknesses of the
school mediation from the perspective of students in secondary education. Journal of
Research in Social Psychology, 2016(28), 203-215.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 165

interviewing: The art of hearing data, (3rd ed.), 85-92. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Sagkal, A.S., Turnuklu, A. & Totan, T. (2016). Peace education’s effects on aggression: A mixed
method study. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 64, 45-68.
Salkind, N. (2014). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (5th edition). Los
Angeles: SAGE.
Sanchez, Y.M., Lambert, S.F. & Cooley-Strickland, M. (2012). Adverse life events, coping and
internalizing and externalizing behaviors in urban African American youth. Journal of
Child and Family Studies, 2013(22), 38-47. doi:10.1007/s10826-012-9590-4
San Francisco Community Boards Center for Policy and Training (1972). Peer mediation in high
schools: A training and implementation guide. San Francisco, CA: Conflict Manager
Program.
Santiago, C. & Wadsworth, M. (2009). Coping with family conflict: What’s helpful and what’s
not for low-income adolescents. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 18(2009), 192-202.
Schein, E. H. (2004). The concept of organizational culture: Why bother? In E. H. Schein (Ed.),
Organizational culture and leadership (3
rd
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Schraw, G. & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from http://
www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 166

Seiffge-Krenke, I. (2000). Causal links between stressful events, coping style, and adolescent
symptomatology. Journal of Adolescence, (23), 675-691.
Sellman, E. (2011). Peer mediation services for conflict resolution in schools: What
transformations in activity characterize successful implementation? British Educational
Research Journal, 37(1), 45-60.
Shahmohammadi, N. (2014). Conflict management among secondary school students. Procedia
– Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159 (2014), 630-635.
Sinek, S. (2009). How great leaders inspire action. TED Talks. Retrieved from:
https://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action.
Smith, S.W., Daunic, A.P., Miller, M.D. & Robinson, T.R. (2002). Conflict resolution and peer
mediation in middle schools: Extending the process and outcome knowledge base. The
Journal of Social Psychology, 14(5), 567-586.
Theberge, S.K. & Karan, O.C. (2004). Six factors inhibiting the use of peer mediation in a junior
high school. Professional School Counseling, 7(4), 283-290.
Turnuklu, A., Kaemaz, T., Turk, F., Kalender, A., Sevkin, B. & Zengin, F. (2008). Helping
students resolve their conflicts through conflict resolution and peer mediation training.
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(2009), 639-647.
Ubinger, M.E., Handal, P.J., & Massura, C.E. (2013). Adolescent Adjustment: The hazards of
conflict avoidance and the benefits of conflict resolution. Psychology, 4(1), 50-58.
Van de Vliert, E. & Kadanoff, B. (1990). Toward theory-based measures of conflict
management. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 199-209.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 167

Viadero, D. (2010). Peer Mediation: When students agree not to disagree. Education Weekly.
Wadsworth, M.E. & Compass, B.E. (2002). Coping with family conflict and economic strain:
The adolescent perspective. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 12(2), 243-274.
Wall, J. A., Stark, J. B. & Standifer, R. L. (2001). Mediation: a current review and theory
development. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45(3), 370-391.
Yavuzer, Y. (2012). Effect of creative drama-based group guidance on male-adolescents' conflict
resolution skills. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, (47), 113–130.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 168

Appendix A
Survey Protocol
Survey Item
1. Are you currently a certificated staff member? (Yes, No)
2. I have worked as a teacher for ____ years.
3. What is you gender: Male Female Decline to state
4.How old are you?
a. 20-29
b. 30-39
c. 40-49
d. 50-59
e. 60-69
f. 70+
5. What is the primary subject area you teach?
a. English
b. Math
c. Science
d. Foreign Language
e. Arts
f. P.E.
g. Social Science
h. Other elective

6. I believe that conflict resolution strategies are important skills for students to learn.
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Agree
e. Strongly Agree

7. I believe that there is value in having a peer mediation program on campus.
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Agree
e. Strongly Agree

8. I believe that interpersonal conflict between students is a significant issue on campus.
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Agree
e. Strongly Agree

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 169

9. As a teacher, I believe that there are tools or programs on campus that I can utilize to help
students resolve interpersonal conflict.
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Agree
e. Strongly Agree

10. I feel that regular communication (via email, announcements, staff meetings, etc.) about the
peer mediation program helps me to remember to utilize the program.
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Agree
e. Strongly Agree

11. Communication to STAFF about the peer mediation program has been consistent/sufficient
throughout the semester.
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Agree
e. Strongly Agree

12. Communication to STUDENTS about the peer mediation program has been
consistent/sufficient throughout the semester.
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Agree
e. Strongly Agree

13. Aside from the peer mediation program, this campus has an effective program/process to help
students manage interpersonal conflict.
a. Strongly Disagree
b. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Agree
e. Strongly Agree

14. What do you think are the most effective means to communicate to staff about the peer
mediation program? (pick one or more)
a. At a staff meeting
b. In an email communication
c. From a colleague
d. From a student
e. During morning announcements/Griffin News

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 170

15. What do you think are the most effective ways to communicate to students about the peer
mediation program? (pick one or more)
a. In a Griffin News segment
b. In an email communication
c. During morning announcements
d. Posters/flyers around campus

16. If two students were engaged in a minor physical confrontation (shoving, pushing, etc.) in your
classroom, which course of action would you most likely take? (choose any that apply)
a. Calm students down and recommend to Discipline office
b. Calm students down and recommend to peer mediation program
c. Calm students down and take no further action
d. Calm students down and contact parents
e. Other

17. If two students were engaged in a minor verbal confrontation (no physical contact) in your
classroom, which course of action would you most likely take? (choose any that apply)
a. Calm students down and recommend to Discipline office
b. Calm students down and recommend to peer mediation program
c. Calm students down and take no further action
d. Calm students down and contact parents
e. Other

18. If you witnessed bullying type behavior in your classroom, which course of action would you
most likely take? (choose any that apply)
a. Calm students down and recommend to Discipline office
b. Calm students down and recommend to peer mediation program
c. Calm students down and take no further action
d. Calm students down and contact parents
e. Other

19. If one of your students came to you to confide that two of their friends (who are not in your
class) were in conflict, which course of action would you most likely take? (choose any that apply)
a. Recommend students to the Discipline office
b. Recommend students to the peer mediation program
c. Calm students down and take no further action
d. Calm students down and contact parents
e. Other

20. How many times have you recommended students to the peer mediation program?
a. 0 times
b. 1 time
c. 2 times
d. 3 or more times

21. How frequently do you witness or hear about student interpersonal conflict?
a. Often
b. Sometimes
c. Seldom
d. Never
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 171

22. If you have recommended a student(s) to peer mediation, after the mediation, did you see any
change in classroom behavior? (Free response)

23. What, if any, resources (monetary, etc.) do you feel the school needs to expend to better
support the peer mediation program? (Free response)

24. What are other ways to improve the implementation of the peer mediation program on
campus? (Free response)

25. Are there additional ways to improve communication about the peer mediation program? (Free
response)

26. Have you had any additional experiences or thoughts, either positive or negative, with the peer
mediation program that you would like to share? (Free response)

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 172

Appendix B
Staff Interview Protocol
Staff who directly implement the CRPM program
1.) What motivated your interest to start working with the peer mediation program?
2.) How do you define the purpose of the peer mediation program? (K-C)
3.) Do you believe you have a solid knowledge of the conflict resolution strategies utilized by
the peer mediation program? How confident are you today in your knowledge of the peer
mediation process? (K-P)
4.) Do you believe that you have or were given the necessary knowledge to train future cohorts
of student mediators? What are ways to improve this knowledge transmission process in the
future?
5.) Do you believe that the trained peer mediators (students) have the necessary knowledge to
perform effective mediations? What are ways to improve their training process?
6.) Do you believe that the staff in general has the necessary knowledge about the peer
mediation program to utilize it regularly? What are ways to better inform the staff? What are
ways to motivate the staff to utilize the program more regularly?
7.) What, if any, impacts on students do you see as a result of this program (either the trained
peer mediators or those students who have had a conflict mediated)? Can you cite any
specific examples of these impacts? (M-EV)
8.) Do you believe this program has value? If so, what kind of value and how much? Value to
you as an individual? Value to the school as a whole? (M-EV)
9.) Do you believe other staff member on campus value the peer mediation program? Do you
think they see peer mediation as a way to improve campus culture? (M-EV)
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 173

10.) What, if any, are the organizational barriers or supports that significantly impact the
implementation of the peer mediation program? (O)
11.) How is the communication between the various members of the peer mediation team?
The adults that run the program? The students who participate in the program? Are there
ways you can think of to improve this communication?
12.) What, if any, are the logistical barriers to implementing the peer mediation program?
13.) Do you feel you have the necessary resources (time, money, etc.) to properly implement
the peer mediation program? Are there any additional resources that you think could help
support your work?
14.) How, if at all, is your work supported by your colleagues? By the general student
population? By the community at large? (O) What, if any, are organizational factors that
support the effectiveness of the peer mediation program on campus? (O)
15.) What is the most effective aspect of the program? What do we need to continue to do in
future years? (O)
16.) What, if anything, can be done to improve the overall efficacy or impact of the peer
mediation program? (O)
17.) Are there any other thoughts you have about the current CRPM program here on campus?

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 174

Appendix C
Focus Group Interview Protocol
Trained Student Peer Mediators
1.) What motivated you to join this course? (M-EV)
2.) What is your favorite aspect of the course and why? (M-EV)
3.) What is your least favorite aspect of the course and why? (M-EV)
4.) Do you find this work to be valuable in your own lives? (M-SE)
5.) Do you feel confident in your knowledge of the peer mediation process? (K-P)
6.) How, if at all, has this course or your PM training helped you to learn to effectively deal with
conflict? (K-P)
7.) Do you feel that you have the necessary knowledge and skills to effectively mediate
conflicts? (K-M)
8.) Have you been able to see any real impacts of your work on other students? If so, cite
examples. (M-SE)
9.) Have you noticed any patterns in the types of conflicts you mediate? (K-C)
10.) How do your fellow students talk about the CRPM program, if at all? Positive, negative,
neutral? (M-EV)
11.) Do teachers or other school staff inhibit or support the peer mediation program in any
meaningful way? If so, how? (O)
12.) What do you think is the most effective way to communicate to students about the peer
mediation program? (O)
13.) Are there any other elements here on campus that inhibit or support your work? (O)
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 175

14.) What aspects of this program do you feel are successful and should remain a part of the
class next year? What aspects do you think can be removed? (O)
15.) Do you have any additional thoughts about what is needed to help this program be more
successful in the future?

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 176

Appendix D
Focus Group Interview Protocol
Students Who Have Participated in a Peer Mediation Session
1.) How did you learn about the peer mediation program? (K-P)
2.) How did you feel when you first sat down to have the mediation? (M-SE)
3.) Was the conflict you came to mediate effectively solved? Has there been any reoccurrence of
that conflict? (M-EV)
4.) What did you find valuable, if anything, about the peer mediation process? (M-SE)
5.) What, if anything, did you find frustrating about the peer mediation process? (M-SE)
6.) Did you learn anything about how to effectively resolve conflict as a result of participating in
the program? (K-M)
7.) If you or a friend of yours was in a conflict in the future, would you recommend that they
participate in this program? (M-EV)
8.) Is there anything that can be done to improve the effectiveness of the program? (O)
9.) Was the communication adequate so that you knew the program existed? Or how to access
it? (O)
10.) Do you think this program does, or has the potential to, make this campus a better place
to go to school? Why or why not? (O)
11.) What do you think is the most effective way to communicate to students about the peer
mediation program? (O)
12.) Do you have any additional thoughts about the peer mediation process or the program as
a whole?

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 177

Appendix E
Minor Consent Form
Parent/Guardian Informed Consent
Identification of Investigators & Purpose of Study
Your child is being asked to participate in a research study conducted by Kenneth Lopour from
Los Alamitos High School. The purpose of this study is to examine the effectiveness of Los
Alamitos High School’s implementation of a new peer mediation program. This study will
contribute to the researcher’s completion of his doctoral research.
Research Procedures
Should you decide to allow your child to participate in this research study, you will be asked to
sign this consent form once all your questions have been answered to your satisfaction. This
study consists of a focus group that will be conducted with a group of 4 participants. Your child
will be asked to provide answers to a series of questions related to the high school’s
implementation of the peer mediation program. Focus groups will be audio recorded for
analysis purposes.
Time Required
Participation in this study will require approximately 60-90 min. of your child’s time.
Risks
The investigator does not perceive more than minimal risks from your child’s involvement in this
study (that is, no risks beyond the risks associated with everyday life).
Benefits
Potential benefits from participation in this study include the ability for your student to help
modify the peer mediation program at Los Alamitos High School to better serve all students.
Confidentiality
Your child will be identified in the research records by a code name or number. The
researcher retains the right to use and publish non-identifiable data. When the results of
this research are published or discussed in conferences, no information will be included
that would reveal your child’s identity. All data will be stored in a secure location
accessible only to the researcher. Upon completion of the study, all information that
matches up individual respondents with their answers will be destroyed.
There is one exception to confidentiality we need to make you aware of. In certain research
studies, it is our ethical responsibility to report situations of child abuse, child neglect, or any
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 178

life-threatening situation to appropriate authorities. However, we are NOT seeking this type of
information in our study NOR will you be asked questions about these issues.
Participation & Withdrawal
Your child’s participation is entirely voluntary. He/she is free to choose not to participate.
Should you and your child choose to participate, he/she can withdraw at any time without
consequences of any kind.
Questions about the Study
If you have questions or concerns during the time of your child’s participation in this study or
after its completion, or you would like to receive a copy of the final aggregate results of this
study, please contact:
Kenneth Lopour
Assistant Principal
Los Alamitos High School
KLopour@losal.org
563-799-4780

Giving of Consent
I have read this consent form and I understand what is being requested of my child as a
participant in this study. I freely consent for my child to participate. I have been given
satisfactory answers to my questions. The investigator provided me with a copy of this form. I
certify that I am at least 18 years of age.

I give consent for my child to be audio recorded during their interview.

________________________________________________
Name of Child (Printed)

______________________________________
Name of Parent/Guardian (Printed)

______________________________________ ______________
Name of Parent/Guardian (Signed) Date

______________________________________ ______________
Name of Child (Signed) Date

______________________________________ ______________
Name of Researcher (Signed) Date

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 179

Appendix F
Immediate Evaluation Instrument
Stakeholder: Teacher Program Leads

Survey Items (5-point Likert scale: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly Agree)
Level One: Reaction
1. I believe that the proposed changes to the CRPM program communication protocols will be
more effective at communicating program policies and procedures to general staff members.
2. I believe that the proposed changes to the communication protocols will be more effective at
encouraging staff members to utilize the program.
3. I believe that the proposed changes to the CRPM program communication protocols will be
more effective at encouraging students to utilize the program.
4. I believe that the proposed addition of additional staff member support will help the
implementation of the program.
5. I believe that that the additional stipend and neutral meeting space will support the
implementation of the program.
6. I believe that the CRPM program alignment with school disciplinary matrix will be
beneficial for the program and campus culture as a whole.
7. I believe that a professional learning community with other local CRPM leads will be useful
in your practice.
8. I believe that a student Peer Mediation Club will be an effective tool for the trained
mediators.
Interview Items:
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 180

Level Two: Learning
1. What are the core areas of need that the students identified in terms of program
implementation?
2. What are the core areas of need that staff identified in terms of program implementation?
3. Do you have a clear understanding of how to functionally utilize the multimodal
communication strategies that are proposed? If not, what additional training do you need?
4. Do you have a clear understanding of the types and frequency of needed communications
expected for each stakeholder group?
5. Do you have the resources and knowledge needed to create and operate a student Peer
Mediation Club? If not, what additional supports do you need?

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 181

Appendix G
Immediate Evaluation Instrument
Stakeholder: Discipline Office Administrator

Survey Items (5-point Likert scale: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly Agree)
Level One: Reaction
1. I believe that the integration of the CRPM program into the school discipline matrix will be
beneficial for students in conflict.
2. I believe that the functional changes to the CRPM program implementation will improve its
utilization and effectiveness on campus.
3. I believe that the increased communications to both staff and students will support the
utilization of the CRPM program on campus.
Interview Items
Level Two: Learning
1. Do you have a functional and conceptual understanding of the CRPM program?
2. Do you understand how the CRPM program can be utilized by your office in a variety of
student conflict situations? If not, in what aspects of the program do you need additional
training?

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 182

Appendix H
Blended Evaluation Instrument
Stakeholder: General Staff Members
Survey Items (5-point Likert scale: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly Agree)
Level One: Reaction
1. I have been able to utilize the CRPM program.
2. I believe the varying methods of communications used regarding the CRPM program (social
media, email, morning announcements, etc.) have been effective in informing me how and when
to utilize the CRPM program.
3. I believe the CRPM program has value on campus.

Level Two: Learning
1. I have a clear understanding of how to recommend students to the CRPM program.
2. I have a clear understanding of when to recommend students to the CRPM program.
Level Three: Behaviors
1. I have successfully recommended students to participate in the CRPM program.
Level Four: Results
1. The CRPM program has improved campus culture in regard to student conflict resolution.
2. The CRPM program has been a useful tool for me to utilize in my classroom management
plan.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 183

Appendix I
Blended Evaluation Instrument
Stakeholder: Student participants
Survey Items (5-point Likert scale: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly Agree)
Level One: Reaction
1. I had a positive experience with the CRPM program.
2. If needed, I would be willing to recommend myself or one of my friends to participate in the
program in the future.
3. I believe the varying methods of communication used regarding the CRPM program (social
media, email, morning announcements, etc.) have been effective in informing me how and when
to utilize the CRPM program.
Level Two: Learning
1. I learned conflict resolution skills.
2. I understand that my participation with the CRPM program will not result in disciplinary
consequences.
3. I understand that the CRPM program is entirely confidential.
4. I know how to recommend myself or one of my friends to participate in the CRPM program if
needed in the future.
Level Three: Behaviors
1. I have recommended a friend or another student to participate in the CRPM program.
Level Four: Results
1. The CRPM program was successful in helping me to resolve my conflict.
2. The CRPM program has helped to make the campus a better place.
STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 184

Appendix J
Blended Evaluation Instrument
Stakeholder: Trained student mediators
Survey Items (5-point Likert scale: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly Agree)
Level One: Reaction
1. I have had a positive experience being a mentor with the CRPM program.
2. I believe the varying methods of communication used regarding the CRPM program (social
media, email, morning announcements, etc.) have been effective at informing the general student
population how and when to utilize the CRPM program.
3. I understand why the CRPM program can be useful when others are in conflict.
Level Two: Learning
1. I feel that the training I have received has prepared me to be an effective mediator.
2. I learned conflict resolution skills that I can use outside of formal mediations.
3. I understand how to communicate about the CRPM to my friends and other students.
Level Three: Behaviors
1. I have successfully mediated a student conflict.
2. I have attended the weekly Peer Mediation Club meetings.
Level Four: Results
1. I have seen the CRPM program help students successfully mediate conflict.
2. The CRPM program has helped me to make the campus a better place.
3. There have been increased communications to students about the CRPM program.
4. There have been more recommendations for mediations this year.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY 185

Appendix K
Data Reporting Dashboard

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Interpersonal conflict on a secondary school campus is a significant area of concern for school administrators, teachers, and parents. One effective mechanism for addressing this issue is a conflict resolution and peer mediation program (CRPM). This evaluation study investigated the implementation of one such CRPM program at a high school in California. Specifically, organizational implementation was evaluated utilizing Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation, and organization gap analysis framework. The study employed a mixed-methods approach including a quantitative survey, qualitative interviews/focus groups, and document analysis. There were two stakeholder groups: student participants and certificated staff members. Ultimately, five validated organizational gaps were identified. Data analysis showed significant knowledge and motivation gaps, primarily with the student stakeholder group. There were also context-specific organizational gaps identified centering on resource distribution. Recommendations follow the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) and focus on improved communication strategies, organizational goal setting, and revised resource distribution protocols.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

One to one tablet integration in the mathematics classroom: an evaluation study of an international school in China

PDF

Organizational agility and agile development methods: an evaluation study

PDF

Principals’ impact on the effective enactment of instructional coaching that promotes equity: an evaluation study

PDF

Effects of mentoring on public school administrators: an evaluation study

PDF

How teachers identify and respond to bullying: an evaluation study

PDF

Employee retention and the success of a for-profit cosmetics company: a gap analysis

PDF

Supporting emergent bilinguals: implementation of SIOP and professional development practices

PDF

Job placement outcomes for graduates of a southwestern university school of business: an evaluation study

PDF

Using digital marketing to reach students in graduate school admissions: an innovation study

PDF

The impact of advanced technologies on the workplace and the workforce: an evaluation study

PDF

Applying best practices to optimize racial and ethnic diversity on nonprofit boards: an improvement study

PDF

Evaluation study: building teacher efficacy in K8 computer science integration

PDF

Advisor impact on student veterans at a post-secondary institution: an evaluation study

PDF

Civic learning program policy compliance by a state department of higher education: an evaluation study

PDF

Challenging stigmas and perceptions in alternative high schools through mentorship: an innovation study

PDF

Child welfare turnover: an evaluation study of work-life balance practices

PDF

Line staff and their influence on youth in expanded learning programs: an evaluation model

PDF

Prior learning assessment portfolios: an evaluation study

PDF

The academic implications of providing social emotional learning in K-12: an evaluation study

PDF

The impact of faculty interactions on online student sense of belonging: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Lopour, Kenneth Glenn (author)

Core Title Strengthening community: how to effectively implement a conflict resolution and peer mediation program on a secondary school campus: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 06/13/2019

Defense Date 03/22/2019

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

Tag conflict resolution,evaluation,OAI-PMH Harvest,peer mediation,program implementation,Secondary School

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Freking, Fredrick (committee chair), Lynch, Douglas Eugene (committee member), Martinez, Brandon (committee member)

Creator Email klopour@gmail.com,lopour@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-173134

Unique identifier UC11660825

Identifier etd-LopourKenn-7470.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-173134 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LopourKenn-7470.pdf

Dmrecord 173134

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Lopour, Kenneth Glenn

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