Chapter 14
Prevention of Harassment, Intimidation, and Bullying
Jan Urbanski
I have been bullied all through school. People make fun of me or just mess with me. They pull my hair, push me, and say things like I get my clothes in a thrift store. My best friend even told me once she didn’t need me anymore and I make everyone’s life miserable. I told a teacher once but nothing ever changed. It seems like everyone is on their side so it is really hard.
—Eighth-grade girl
I am not all that popular, but I hang out with kids who are popular. We do pick on other kids, but we are just playing. I never say anything about it or they might not like me. I don’t want them to start messing with me.
—Seventh-grade boy
I am doing this because I am tired of being picked on.
—High school student expelled for making threats
I have witnessed bullying . . . he is always being picked on and called names. . . . They don’t care about the cameras. They know where they are and when they are videotaping.
—Middle school boy
u r a back-stabbing jerk of a x best friend . . . I dont care about u anymore.
—Text message from a fourth-grade girl
Bullying is a reality in schools, one that has gained a good deal of recent attention. Why now? An increased awareness of liability issues, data showing a poor prognosis for children involved in bully/victim problems, emerging knowledge of the impact on academics, new state laws, and an explosion of research on bullying have contributed to this increased interest.
Students learn better when they feel safe and do not fear being ridiculed or humiliated. Bullying can create a climate of fear, and some even consider bullying prevention a human rights issue. It not only affects the student who is bullied or the student doing the bullying. A school is filled with bystanders who see the bullying or know it is happening. These youth are also impacted and may experience guilty feelings or weakened inhibition toward aggression. In comparison, when a school launches a conscious bullying prevention effort, bullying behavior decreases, and there is potential for other antisocial behaviors to decrease while prosocial behaviors increase (Pearl & Dulaney, 2006).
Promoting prosocial behavior in an environment infused with bullying is not possible. Schools must send a clear, consistent message that bullying behavior is not acceptable and work to create an environment that lets students know they are valuable, responsible individuals. This combination of a caring environment and implementation of bullying prevention strategies can create a positive climate that discourages bullying, encourages prosocial behaviors, and provides the foundation to support academic achievement and social-emotional growth.
Bullying in schools is not a new phenomenon. In fact, many reading this can look back on their own schooling and remember seeing or being involved in incidents of bullying. Research in this area also started with Dan Olweus studying bullying in Norwegian schools as early as the 1970s (Olweus, 1993). The problem has really come to the forefront in the United States over the last decade. In the early 1990s, a search of the PsycINFO APA database using the term bully would have identified few publications. The same search today will yield hundreds of articles.
Bullying is a complex behavior that we now know can ultimately cause academic and social problems for students and contribute to a negative school climate. It is also associated with poorer psychosocial adjustment, with consequences that may last into adulthood. It is a low-level, underlying kind of violence that might not be as overtly threatening as weapons but does occur more frequently in schools (Dupper & Meyer-Adams, 2002).
What used to be thought of as kids being kids can be an antecedent to more serious violence and criminal behavior in schools. Bullying threatens the development of prosocial behaviors because it allows students to achieve immediate goals without learning socially acceptable ways to interact with others (Haynie et al., 2001). The fear of physical harm or embarrassment that can occur because of bullying also creates a threat that shuts down the learning process (Mendler, 2001). Therefore, educational discourse can no longer separate academic success from a physically and emotionally safe learning environment.
This chapter will examine the issue of bullying in school. The discussion will start with an overview of what bullying is and what it is not. The various types of bullying and the characteristics of those involved will be identified. Research on prevalence and consequences as well as legal issues surrounding bullying will be presented. Once the basic understanding of bullying in school is established, the chapter will conclude with best practices to address bullying from an environmental, prevention, and intervention perspective. Incorporating these strategies into social-emotional learning programs ensures the physical, emotional, and academic growth of all students.
What Is Bullying?
To understand how to best address bullying in schools, it is important to first understand what bullying is and what it is not. Bullying is a form of peer abuse that can be defined as unprovoked aggression characterized by an imbalance of power where a more powerful person physically or emotionally attacks a less powerful one (Urbanski & Permuth, 2009). There are three characteristics that are common in most if not all bullying situations.
Bullying is an intentional act that is repeatedly directed at a person of less strength or status. In comparison, conflict is a disagreement between two or more people or thoughts. Conflict is generally not a repeated behavior and usually occurs between people who have relatively equal status. Another common behavior seen in schools is lighthearted teasing. This type of playfully annoying or roughhousing is a normal part of growing up. However, it easily crosses the line to bullying if one person is no longer having fun.
The spectrum of bullying behavior ranges from direct, overt acts of physical violence to more indirect, subtle patterns of verbal or relational cruelty (Feinberg, 2003). These generally fall into four categories: physical, verbal, relational, and cyberbullying. It is important to note that students may engage in or be victims of just one or all types of bullying behavior.
Physical bullying involves causing harm to a person’s body or to a person’s belongings. It goes beyond the typical image of a big kid shoving a little kid to include behaviors such as hitting, pinching, kicking, blocking access, book checking, shanking, breaking things, stealing, and any other action that damages someone’s physical property or causes bodily harm.
Verbal bullying is actually the most common type of bullying on school campuses. It involves using words to attack or threaten another person. Verbal bullying includes taunting, teasing, name-calling, extortion, or threats and can have as much negative impact as physical bullying (Windemeyer Communications, 2003).
Relational bullying is an indirect form of bullying that harms or threatens to harm a person’s self-esteem or group acceptance. This type of bullying includes social isolation, exclusion, social manipulation, gossiping, spreading rumors, exclusion, alliance building, and ignoring.
Cyberbullying is a newer yet increasing manner of bullying. It is a type of indirect bullying that involves use of the Internet or other digital communication technologies to harass, intimidate, or threaten another person (Urbanski & Permuth, 2009). It can be done through personal websites, e-mail, blogs, chat rooms, social networking sites, instant messaging, text messaging, online or interactive gaming, and any other electronic form of communication. It may involve a straightforward attack in which messages are sent directly from the perpetrator to the victim, or it may be cyberbullying by proxy, which involves engaging others in the bullying, often without their knowledge.
In addition to these forms of bullying, there are several other behaviors that should be discussed to get a full understanding of what bullying entails. Contagion bullying, commonly known as group bullying, occurs when emotions and/or behaviors are spread from one person to others in the group. Due to the pressure to conform, someone who would not normally bully on his or her own is influenced by peers to take part in the bullying behavior. There is a diffusion of responsibility and guilt resulting in less personal ownership of the behavior.
Hazing involves initiation into a club or activity and is often erroneously considered tradition. Another mistaken belief is that hazing only occurs on college campuses, when in reality 48 percent of high school students who belong to groups reported being subjected to hazing activities (N. C. Hoover & Pollard, 2000). Hazing is a humiliating or dangerous process that someone participates in to join a group or to maintain status within a group. The behaviors range from minor hazing such as deception, social isolation, or disrespect to more serious actions such as verbal abuse and sleep deprivation all the way to binge drinking or expectation of illegal activity. Although bullying usually involves exclusion from a group, and hazing is part of a process to join a group, they are similar in that both behaviors are about power and control and can result in physical or emotional harm (Urbanski & Permuth, 2009).
Harassment is physical or verbal abuse directed toward someone with a legally protected status such as race, religion, age, gender, or disability. These protected classes are defined by both federal and state laws, including Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that deal with disability harassment; Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin; and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibiting sexual discrimination. Harassment causes significant distress for the recipient and creates a hostile environment that ultimately interferes with work or learning. It places a person in reasonable fear of harm to his or her person or damage to his or her property and has the potential to substantially disrupt the orderly operation of a school.
First Amendment rights protect a person’s freedom of speech. However, if that speech is of a derogatory nature and occurs repeatedly, it can constitute harassment by federal law. Verbal harassment includes remarks that refer to someone’s race, religion, sex, disability, age, or other characteristic protected by law, in negative, vulgar, or derogatory terms. Statements about inappropriate stereotypical ideas, attributes, or characteristics can also be harassment.
Not all harassment is verbal. Written or pictorial representations of graphically derogatory material about protected characteristics may be considered nonverbal harassment. This can include sending inappropriate texts or e-mails as well as unwelcome, offensive, or hostile facial expressions or body gestures. Although harassment meets the definition of bullying and the two are often grouped together, harassment carries its own legal status and ramifications.
Characteristics and Warning Signs
Since all students are ultimately impacted by school bullying, an understanding of the problem would be incomplete without considering the different roles involved in bullying episodes. In addition to the student who bullies and the student who is being bullied, there are also bystanders who see or know what is happening.
Students Who Bully
Although the smallest percentage of students in the school, we begin with the student who bullies others. This student can be described as someone who repeatedly hurts another person on purpose. Students who do not initiate the bullying but encourage or join in also fall into this category. Students who bully seek power and control and may behave in a nonemotional, controlled, and deliberate manner. These students are generally outgoing, rebellious, and often appear angry. They attempt to get power and control by harassing or using force.
Others are more emotional and impulsive in how they bully. Those who bully in this more introverted way tend to conform to societal rules, are not rebellious, and work to stay unnoticed. They seek power and control through manipulation, smooth talking, misleading, lying, and deceiving. Regardless of the type, common behaviors that can indicate a child may be bullying others include a negative attitude toward school, difficulty conforming to rules, a need to dominate others, lack of empathy, blaming others rather than taking responsibility for one’s own actions, being easily angered, defiant or hostile behavior, and an attitude of superiority. When a child exhibits any of these warning signs, it does not mean the child is definitely bullying others. Instead these indicators should be considered red flags, and an adult should investigate.
A common misconception is that students who bully have a low self-esteem. In actuality, they have equal or higher self-esteem compared to their classmates. Their grades are generally average or above average, especially in elementary school, but may begin to drop in higher grades. They are generally assertive and also good at talking themselves out of difficult situations (Nansel et al., 2001; Olweus, 1993; Slee & Rigby, 1993).
Student Who Is Bullied
The student who is a victim of bullying can be described as the student who is repeatedly targeted for aggression and other negative actions of peers. This can occur as physical attacks, verbal assaults, or psychological abuse. Although never an indication that the victim is at fault, students who are bullied may fall into one of two categories: passive or provocative.
Characteristics of the passive victim may be viewed as both the cause and the effect of being subjected to bullying behavior. These students do not assert themselves, are generally cautious and shy, and respond to bullying with avoidance and withdrawal. This type of victim is often preoccupied with personal safety, thus impairing academic learning.
Students who bully and those who are bullied are not always mutually exclusive, with nearly half of bullies reporting being victims as well (Veenstra et al., 2005). These students are known as provocative victims or bully-victims. This type of student has difficulty reading social signals, can be argumentative or disruptive, and may attempt to fight back when bullied, but usually in an ineffective manner. They may try to bully weaker students, resulting in being punished for their bullying behavior while their experience as a victim goes unnoticed. They face unique challenges since they are at risk of both the consequences related to bullying behavior as well as those of the victim.
People believe that often children are victimized because of outward appearance. In reality, accumulated research indicates that personality characteristics and reaction patterns are more significant contributors to bullying issues (Olweus, 2003). Longitudinal studies also show that students who bully gravitate toward children who are physically weak, exhibit internalizing behaviors, lack prosocial skills, and have low self-worth and perceptions of social competence (Rodkins & Hodges, 2003).
Many victims of bullying do not report it to an adult, but there are warning signs to look for. Once again, these are red flags that indicate a student may be experiencing bullying and an adult should investigate. Indicators include changes in attendance or participation in activities; leaving late, arriving early, or changing route to school; lack of interest in school; decline in grades; difficulty concentrating or being easily distracted; being withdrawn or isolated; poor social skills; being unpopular or having few friends; difficulty standing up for him- or herself; preference for being with adults; bullying others; frequent illness; being overly concerned with personal safety; and unexplained scratches, bruises, or damage to belongings.
Victims of bullying often have difficulty with social skills. Research has identified six social behaviors that were effective predictors of victimization: looks scared, gives in easily, cries when picked on, stands in a way that appears weak, talks very quietly, and looks unhappy (Fox & Boulton, 2005). A similar study investigating characteristics that predict bullying behavior reached a comparable conclusion with aggressiveness, isolation, dislikability, and gender identified as strong predictors, while socioeconomic status, parenting, and academic performance were weak predictors (Veenstra et al., 2005).
Bystanders
An often overlooked role in bullying is that of the bystander. These students are affected by the chronic presence of bullying in schools but also have a powerful role in changing the culture of the school. Bystanders are students and adults who witness or are aware of a bullying situation but do not take an active part. Instead they respond to the situation by reinforcing, observing, opposing, or defending.
Reinforcement involves offering indirect support verbally or through body language. Those who observe do not want to get involved and so ignore the bullying. Some bystanders oppose the bullying but do not know how to respond or do not feel they have the support needed, so they choose to do nothing. Defenders stand up to the student who is bullying and try to stop the behavior by intervening or reporting to an adult.
Adults can unintentionally contribute to the power differential between the student who is bullying and the one being bullied by ignoring the bullying, sending the message that it is okay. Whether ignoring by choice or due to a lack of knowledge of what bullying is, this can be detrimental to the climate of a school, creating a sense that the adults have turned over the reins of the school to the students who are bullying others.
A common fear among bystanders is that there will be retaliation if they get involved (U.S. Department of Education, 1998) or that adults will not do anything if the bullying is reported. This may account for the fact that even though the bystanders make up the largest percentage of students in a school, they seldom intervene on behalf of the victim. Playground studies have shown that peers are present in most bullying situations but intervene less than 20 percent of the time (Hawkins, Pepler, & Craig, 2001). In fact, they participate in the bullying nearly 50 percent of the time and tend to have more reverence for the person engaged in the bullying behavior. This type of behavior very well may perpetuate bullying in school.
Prevalence and Consequences of Bullying
As mentioned previously, research in the area of bullying prevention has recently expanded. What began as defining the characteristics of the student who bullies and the one who is bullied has grown to include the prevalence of the behaviors, the consequences for those involved, and the impact bullying has on schooling.
Although most students in a school are not bullying others or being bullied, there are a significant number who are dealing with this aggression on a regular basis. A 2010 analysis of results from the Olweus Bullying Questionnaire done with over five hundred thousand students from six thousand schools nationwide showed that 17 percent of students indicated that they had been bullied two to three times per month or more within the school semester, and 10 percent of students indicated they had bullied others two to three times per month or more within the semester (Olweus & Limber, 2010).
Comparatively, in a 2010 Josephson’s Institute biennial study of more than forty-three thousand high school students throughout the United States, 56 percent of boys and 43 percent of girls reported bullying, teasing, or taunting someone at least once in the previous twelve months. Additionally, 45 percent of boys and 50 percent of girls reported that they had been bullied, teased, or taunted in a way that seriously upset them (Josephson Institute Center for Youth Ethics, 2010).
Rates of cyberbullying have also been studied. The University of New Hampshire Crimes against Children’s Research Center found that one in seventeen children aged ten to seventeen had been threatened or harassed online (Florida Office of Safe and Healthy Schools, 2005). Similarly, a Canadian study of middle school students showed that 23 percent of responding students were bullied by e-mail, 35 percent in chat rooms, and 41 percent by text messaging (Li, 2005).
Has bullying in schools increased? Previous research varies. A 2003 Gallup youth survey indicated that 37 percent of teens reported being teased or picked on at school (Kiefer, 2003), while a 2001 Kaiser Family Foundation survey indicated that 74 percent of eight- to eleven-year-olds and 86 percent of twelve- to fifteen-year-olds get teased or bullied at their school (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2001). A 2001 survey conducted with eleven thousand students showed a 50 percent increase in bullying victimization when compared to earlier results from the same survey (Olweus, 2003). Considering the dramatic increase in awareness over the last decade, it is difficult to discern if there has been an increase in the actual behavior or just an increase in recognition and reporting.
Knowing the prevalence rates of bullying in schools leads to the question, what does this mean for the students involved? Bullying prevention research shows both short-term and long-term consequences for these students (Olweus, 1993; Indiana Department of Education, 2003). The negative outcomes of bullying and victimization include an increased risk of mental health disorders, antisocial behavior, and poor academic achievement. School safety research is consistent in showing that a lack of physical and emotional safety in school also results in negative educational outcomes including violence, truancy, and poor academic performance (Kent, 2003; McEvoy & Welker, 2001; Zins, Bloodworth, Weissberg, & Walberg, 2004).
Bullying can lead to more serious violent behaviors. Without intervention, children who bully are at a higher risk for engaging in other antisocial behaviors and are more likely to have a criminal record (Olweus, 1993). They also have more cases of alcoholism and substance abuse, more antisocial personality disorders, and are more likely to drop out of school. Studies have also shown a consistent relationship between bullying and interpersonal violence. For example, results from a 2003 study indicated a greater chance of carrying a weapon, increased incidents of fighting, and a higher likelihood to sustain an injury from fighting (Nansel, Overpeck, Haynie, Ruan, & Scheidt, 2003).
There are unique consequences for students who engage in cyberbullying, since without face-to-face interaction the student who is bullying is removed from the immediate reaction of the victim. This lack of feedback indicating emotional harm to another allows for disassociation between the student who is bullying and the victim of the behavior. This can make it easier for a student to ignore the expectations, values, and norms of the family, school, and community, resulting in an increase in antisocial behaviors.
Research on cyberbullying is relatively new, but there are data that indicate it is related to involvement in school problems and delinquent behavior offline (Hinduja & Patchin, 2007) as well as risky online behaviors such as disclosure of personal information, suicide encouragement communities, risky sexual behavior, hate group recruitment, and violent gaming (Willard, 2005). Youth who are subjected to cyberbullying are also more likely to cyberbully others and experience difficulties at school, including low marks, poor concentration, and absenteeism (Beran & Li, 2007).
Being the victim of bullying can have a similar negative impact on a student’s social-emotional and educational success. Experiencing bullying is associated with poor psychosocial adjustment that can last into adulthood. Students who are bullied tend to have lower self-esteem and higher levels of stress, anxiety, depression, illness, and suicidal ideation (Olweus, 1993). Victimization also correlates positively with loneliness (Telljohann, 2003). Lower grades and increased absenteeism are also higher for students who are cyberbullied (Kowalski, Limber, & Agaston, 2008).
The effects of bullying victimization carry over to school success as well. Students who are bullied have higher levels of absenteeism and drop out at higher rates. The National School Safety Center reports that an estimated 160,000 children miss school every day due to fear of attack or intimidation by other students and that as many as 10 percent of students who drop out of school do so because of bullying (Weinhold, 1999). Bullied students who do attend school are likely to spend more time thinking about ways to avoid teasing and taunting than learning.
Another concern is that students who are bullied may become detached and begin to reject social norms. They can begin a downward spiral of withdrawal, rejection, and helplessness that in the worst case can lead to violence against themselves or others. Although the student who bullies may be thought of as the aggressor in school, it is the victim who ultimately may resort to violent behavior. To underscore the importance of this, consider that the Secret Service found that two-thirds of all school shooters since 1974 had been victims of bullying prior to the shootings (Brady, 2001).
Although not directly involved, bullying also has consequences for the bystanders. They may experience a range of emotions including anger, helplessness, and even guilt for not intervening. They may also begin to believe that the school is not a safe place and begin avoiding certain areas where bullying occurs. Research has also shown that bystanders feel powerless and have difficulty with coping and problem-solving skills (Windemeyer Communications, 2003).
There can also be a negative impact on the bystanders’ self-esteem if they do not respond or actually enjoy the bullying that is occurring. They can become desensitized to bullying situations and begin to have reduced empathy for the victim of bullying. Just as with contagion bullying, bystanders may develop a decreased sense of individual responsibility (Olweus, 1993), putting them at risk for joining in the bullying behavior and contributing to a culture of bullying at school. In contrast, empowering bystanders can have a positive effect on the school climate and may even decrease bullying behavior.
Research showing a direct link between bullying behaviors and academic achievement is minimal, but there is evidence that they are at least connected. Advances in brain research and learning show that there can be academic consequences for those involved in bullying. The human brain cannot engage the amygdala, the fight-or-flight area of the brain, and the frontal lobe area associated with thinking at the same time. Since the region of the brain activated during a bullying episode is the amygdala, a student who is bullied is less likely to be focused on academics and learning because the frontal lobe of the brain is not activated.
Additionally, educational literature indicates that school violence influences academic success, leading to a conclusion that physical and emotional safety is integral to the learning environment. A student’s desire to be in school is linked with level of achievement (Bosworth, 1994), and students who experience bullying are more likely to be absent from school. In addition to this decreased connection to school, academic achievement is lower for students engaged in bullying behaviors (Dake, Price, Telljohann, & Funk, 2004).
Legal Issues
In addition to the psychosocial and academic consequences of bullying, there can also be legal implications when bullying in schools is not addressed. Educators are generally required to provide policy and actions to provide a safe environment for the students under their supervision. The failure to do so can open a school to litigation. There are several federal statutes and legal concepts that relate to bullying. Additionally, as of January 2011, forty-five states have enacted bullying prevention legislation. These clearly indicate that there are legal expectations that schools will address bullying issues.
The Doctrine of In Loco Parentis
The doctrine of in loco parentis provides a legal context to act “in place of the parents.” From the school’s perspective, it implies a sense of responsibility to maintain appropriate discipline and control to assure the safety and security of students while under the supervision of school officials. Considering this legal responsibility of parental rights, duties, and obligations, the doctrine calls for faculty, staff, and administration to provide a safe environment for schools. If school personnel fail to act when a student is bullied, they may be in violation of this “duty of care,” resulting in legal action.
Negligence
A basic definition of negligence is a lack of supervision that results in an injury to a child. Negligence can occur in the form of a commission, doing something you should not have done, or an omission, not doing what you should have done. In relation to bullying, acts of omission are a more common complaint and can include failure to have or enforce a bullying prevention policy or rules against bullying, failure to supervise, and failure to follow designated procedures for reporting or responding to incidents of bullying.
Negligence resulting from commission might involve creating an environment that encourages bullying or willfully responding to a bullying incident in a way that is not appropriate. This legal concept implies a duty to anticipate actions that might be harmful to students and develop policies to prevent such acts, as well as an obligation to respond if the problematic action still arises. The legal responsibility of educators to address bullying prevention and respond to the actions of bullies is evident in the increasing number of lawsuits claiming negligence. Following are highlights of recent litigation.
2011—Connecticut parents filed suit on behalf of their son claiming that school officials had actual knowledge of the bullying he was experiencing yet failed to prevent or intervene. Claiming a blatant and utter disregard for their son’s safety, the suit names the Berlin Board of Education, its former and current superintendents, the principal, the athletic director, and the coach of the Berlin High School football team.
2010—The family of a nine-year-old North Georgia student filed suit alleging that the staff at his school knew about the bullying he was experiencing and appropriate action was not taken. The suit names Murray County School System and two teachers.
2010—Parents of a student in the Baltimore area filed suit alleging a middle school’s staff’s willful neglect to address the bullying problem at the school. They claim school personnel failed to protect the student’s rights to due process and equal protection by not intervening in bullying incidents. The suit names all members of the Howard County Board of Education, the principal, the assistant principal, and a substitute teacher.
2009—Parents in Chicago sued the private school their son attended, alleging that he was attacked and injured by another student known for bullying and that the school failed to act even after both the student and his parents notified school staff. The suit names the school and the Catholic Bishop of Chicago.
Disability Harassment
Since special needs students have additional protections provided by federal law, bullying of these students can easily cross the line and become an illegal act. Bullying of a special needs student might reach a level considered to be disability harassment, a form of bullying specifically based on or because of a disability. Verbal, physical, or emotional intimidation or abusive behavior that denies a student with a disability access to, participation in, or receipt of the benefits, services, or opportunities at school, thus creating a hostile environment, is disability harassment.
Federal regulations require school districts to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to students with a disability. Unfortunately, equal access to educational benefits for special needs students can be eroded through bullying. When harassment or bullying is so severe, persistent, or pervasive that it creates a hostile environment, it can violate the student’s rights that are protected by law. It can be argued that districts have a legal responsibility under Section 504, Title II, and IDEA to prevent bullying that could lead to disability harassment and to respond appropriately if it does occur.
Discriminatory Harassment
Discriminatory harassment is verbal or physical intimidation directed toward an individual based on race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, or disability. In addition to the protections afforded by the laws safeguarding students with disabilities, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, need to be considered when issues of bullying arise in schools. Failure to recognize and respond to discriminatory harassment may result in a violation of students’ federal civil rights.
This is highlighted in the October 2010 “Dear Colleague Letter” sent to all superintendents from the Department of Education and the Office for Civil Rights. The letter reminds schools that student misconduct that falls under an antibullying policy may also trigger responsibilities under other antidiscrimination statutes. In addition to enforcing antibullying and other disciplinary policies, school personnel should take into account whether the bullying behavior also resulted in discrimination in violation of a student’s federal civil rights.
First Amendment Rights
First Amendment rights protect free speech and do apply in a school setting, so they must be considered when dealing with issues of face-to-face and cyberbullying. Schools have to find a balance between free speech and the school’s interest in guaranteeing student safety. Fortunately, Supreme Court rulings have resulted in standards that can help schools delineate between free speech and verbal bullying: (1) the Tinker Standard—denial of freedom of speech must be justified by a reasonable forecast of substantial disruption or material interference with school activities, (2) the Fraser Standard—a student’s vulgar and offensive speech is not protected by the first amendment, and (3) the Hazelwood Standard—educators can regulate the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored activities.
These legal standards allow schools to impose educationally based restrictions on student speech when the speech causes, or threatens to cause, substantial and material disruption at school or interferes with students’ right to be secure.
There are unique First Amendment considerations when dealing with cyberbullying. When an incident of cyberbullying is brought to the attention of school personnel, the first step is to determine the school’s responsibility in dealing with the problem by asking three questions: (1) Was school equipment involved? (2) Did it occur or originate at school? (3) Did it create a substantial disruption on the school campus?
If the answer to any of the questions is yes, the school may move forward with investigation and possible disciplinary action. If the answers to all of these questions is no, it is not within the nexus of the school, and disciplinary action may violate a student’s First Amendment rights. Referral to law enforcement or provision of educational materials may be warranted, but disciplinary action would not be appropriate.
State Laws
The number of state legislatures addressing bullying prevention has grown dramatically over the last decade. In 1999, there were no state laws addressing bullying. In 2011 there are forty-five. Many of these statutes were enacted or strengthened following a youth suicide connected to bullying, as evidenced in these five examples.
Florida: The Jeffrey Johnston Stand Up for All Students Act named after a young man who committed suicide after years of face-to-face and online bullying.
Idaho: Jared’s Law, named in honor of a thirteen-year-old who shot himself after experiencing multiple forms of bullying; amends the existing bullying law.
Massachusetts: Antibullying bill passed unanimously two months after Phoebe Prince committed suicide.
New Jersey: Antibullying bill of rights introduced and passed following the suicide of a Rutgers University student who was a victim of cyberbullying.
Vermont: Bullying Prevention Policy Law enacted after the suicide of Ryan Patrick Halligan, a thirteen-year-old who had experienced face-to-face and online bullying.
Laws vary from state to state, but none make bullying an illegal act. Instead, most require school districts to develop a policy to prohibit bullying. Some statutes require states to provide a model policy and technical assistance. Others encourage action such as implementation of a bullying prevention program rather than requiring direct reform. Some statutes also require training for faculty and staff, education for students regarding bullying, and mandatory reporting mechanisms if bullying incidents occur.
In addition to the increased attention at the state level, there has been a heightened federal interest in bullying prevention that goes beyond the legal statutes already discussed. In 2001, the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services collaborated to create the Stop Bullying Now campaign and website. Building on this interagency endeavor, the U.S. Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, the Interior, and Justice formed the Federal Partners in Bullying Prevention Steering Committee to coordinate the federal government’s bullying prevention efforts.
In August of 2010, this committee hosted the first National Bullying Summit in Washington, D.C. Over one hundred professionals representing federal, state, and local agencies; researchers; nongovernmental organizations; corporate leaders; and youth participated in the summit working to develop a national strategy to end bullying in schools. The committee also hosted a webcast as a follow-up to the summit. Another federal effort led by this task force is the new website www.stopbullying.gov, designed to disseminate information about federal bullying prevention activities and evidence-based resources.
The federal interest in bullying problems even extends to the president himself. Following a series of suicides of youth who were being bullied for being gay, President Obama recorded an antibullying video message as part of the “It Gets Better” initiative. The First Lady, Michelle Obama, also spoke out about bullying in a television interview stating that adults can address the problem of bullying if they lead by example. In March 2011, the White House hosted a conference on bullying prevention to discuss the effects and solutions to bullying in schools. The nation was invited to join via live chats on Facebook and iVillage. MTV was also involved by announcing an upcoming original TV movie based on the true story of a bully-victim; MTV also mentioned some new safety features and presented a series of cyberbullying prevention PSAs.
Bullying is a safe school issue, and there are legal expectations as well as support for educators to become involved in the prevention process (J. Hoover & Oliver, 1996). Whether you agree with having federal oversight of the bullying problem or believe it is a local issue, the legal, social-emotional, and academic consequences are a concern for students and schools. It is time to move beyond the political arena, and past the focus on high-stakes testing, and take action to address the very real bullying problem many students face every day in our schools.
Best Practices for Bullying Prevention and Intervention
The emotional well-being and physical safety of students are an integral part of a successful learning environment. In light of the negative consequences surrounding bullying and the potential it has to influence a student’s social-emotional and academic success, schools can no longer afford to ignore the problem. Fortunately, there are effective strategies to address bullying in schools. In fact, research shows that implementing a comprehensive bullying prevention program can reduce incidents of bullying as well as other antisocial behaviors (Cleary, 2000). One public official expressed it poignantly:
We need to communicate from the first moment students come to school on the first day of the school year that bullying and harassment will not be tolerated. We don’t tell kids to do a math problem once. We repeat the message. We have to do that around this.
—Kevin Jennings, former assistant deputy secretary, Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, U.S. Department of Education
Successful antibullying programs use a multicomponent approach, are based on research, and include evidence-based strategies to reduce and prevent incidents of bullying. They increase awareness and knowledge about bullying behavior, provide strategies for confronting bullying actions, and teach skills that promote positive interactions between students and adults in school (Urbanski & Permuth, 2009). This goal can be accomplished by targeting the entire school population, not just focusing on the student who is bullying and the victim of the bullying behavior.
Substantial agreement exists among researchers on what schools can and should do to address bullying. An overview of these strategies is presented here. Keep in mind that any one strategy used alone will not adequately address the problem and can actually make it worse. For best success, the strategies should be interwoven into a comprehensive school safety plan. In order to successfully implement this type of program, a school’s plan needs to include a blend of environmental, prevention, and intervention strategies.
A comprehensive program does more than interrupt negative behavior patterns. It also teaches appropriate social skills and promotes social, emotional, ethical, and cognitive learning. A systemic program that reduces bullying problems can also decrease the levels of other antisocial behaviors, improving the learning environment for all students. This can be accomplished when the program specifies clear standards about bullying and provides students with resources, knowledge, and skills to help them cope with bullying situations. Schools must go beyond the idea of solely implementing an antibullying curriculum and move to a big picture that incorporates a safe environment as the foundation for a successful prevention program (Urbanski & Permuth, 2009).
Environmental Strategies
Environmental strategies are focused on changing the aspects of the school environment that may be contributing to the bullying problem. This approach takes into consideration that bullying does not happen in a vacuum; like all behavior, it is shaped by the environment. Therefore, a systemic change may be in order to create and sustain conditions that will not support bullying.
The success of any schoolwide program begins with support from the top. However, to change the structure and management of the educational environment as well as school norms requires a shared focus with the involvement of administration, faculty, staff, students, parents, and the community. Each has a role in shaping the environment and needs to be considered in all aspects of a comprehensive bullying prevention program.
Although schools often put a high concentration of energy into dealing with the student who is bullying and the student who is being bullied, prevention methods aimed at the shared environment often produce results faster than those aimed solely at individuals. They also have the potential for permanent changes because of the broader reach, with the desired behavior becoming the norm and the prevention efforts becoming self-sustaining (Fisher, n.d.). Effective prevention plans incorporate both environmental and individual approaches. Specific strategies for developing attitudes and creating conditions that will contribute to a decrease in bullying problems in schools are indicated and presented here.
Develop a policy. The first step in implementing an effective bullying prevention and intervention program is to develop a bullying prevention policy that is in alignment with the Student Code of Conduct and other school policies. A sound policy sets the foundation by providing a framework for the school to follow and establishing clear expectations, rules, and consequences regarding bullying behavior. A review of research and policy requirements in state laws (Urbanski & Permuth, 2009) indicates that a credible policy includes the following:
Bear in mind that once developed, the policy is only as good as the paper it is written on until it is disseminated and enforced. Information outlined in the policy should be posted and widely publicized so all staff, students, and families are aware of the standards and expectations. Ideally the policy should also be reviewed periodically and updated as needed.
Conduct a survey. Although rates may vary from school to school, no school is untouched by bullying. In order to obtain reliable information and to determine the extent of the bullying problem at a school, an annual survey should be given. Minimally, students should complete the survey, but triangulation of data from students, staff, and parents will provide a more rigorous evaluation of the issue. Information about where bullying happens, how often bullying occurs, and what type of bullying is most prevalent can assist with planning and identifying hot spots that may need additional supervision. It will also provide data to measure the success of the prevention efforts.
Whether a formal or informal survey is done, it should include the definition of bullying as written in the policy and should include questions such as the following:
Sharing survey results with stakeholders is imperative to build a sense of ownership of the problem as well as the solution. It is also imperative to act on findings.
Increase supervision. Students typically engage in bullying when adults are not watching. Therefore, an effective way to reduce and even prevent bullying is to increase supervision. Using survey results to identify locations where bullying is occurring, educators can work together to monitor these hot spots. An increase in adult visibility is helpful, but all must also be prepared to intervene if bullying occurs.
Review the physical environment. A review of the physical design of the school campus can supplement the data and help create a school environment that is not conducive to bullying behavior. There should not be any physical barriers that block an adult’s view of students. Stairwells, hallways, and other areas where there is only a partial view can be problematic. Keep in mind that cameras are not always a deterrent since students know where they are. Additionally, acts caught on camera are usually seen after something has happened rather than stopping it from happening in the first place.
Promote positive interactions. A safe, respectful environment is the foundation for a successful prevention program. This begins by teaching students appropriate social skills and conflict-resolution strategies as well as helping students develop strong problem-solving skills. Activities that promote positive peer and adult relationships should follow to provide practice for what students have learned. Activities that encourage shared responsibility such as class meetings, democratic rule making, class action research projects, and peer mentoring programs can help build these relationships. Most importantly, consistently modeling the expected behaviors will define clear expectations.
Supportive relationships are a key part of a respectful school environment and contribute to the social, emotional, and academic adjustment of students. Educators can build these relationships by getting to know their students and providing opportunities for students to get to know each other. Interaction and communication builds trust, which is critical in dealing with bullying. Without this, it is unlikely that students will come forward to report when something is happening or going to happen.
Relationships help develop a student’s sense of school connectedness, one component of school climate. It refers to a student’s relationship to school that creates a feeling of belonging to the school and being accepted by others (Blum, 2005). Research shows that students are at less risk for engaging in delinquent behaviors and are more likely to follow the norms and rules of the school community if they have a sense of attachment to the school. However, research also shows that this same connectedness does not serve as a protective factor for bullying victimization (Spriggs, Iannotti, Nansel, & Haynie, 2007).
Along with school connectedness, the interaction of human relationships, physical setting, and psychological atmosphere creates the school climate (Perkins, 2006). This climate is the shared perceptions of a school and consists of the attitudes, beliefs, values, and norms that underlie the instructional practices and operations of a school (McEvoy & Welker, 2000). The importance of a respectful school climate cannot be questioned, but is it enough to address bullying? A Johns Hopkins University survey of eleven thousand middle school students showed that although school climate improved, the self-reported rate of being bullied did not change (Bradshaw, Debnam, Martin, & Gill, 2006). So, the answer is likely no. Improving the school climate alone may not be enough to prevent bullying. A conscious effort to prevent and intervene in bullying is indicated to successfully address bullying in schools.
Consider classroom management. Classroom management can serve as either an enhancement or a deterrent to the learning environment. Although disciplinary factors are usually not considered as contributors to bullying problems, an educator’s disciplinary style and strength can impact whether bullying occurs in the classroom. The frequency with which students are distracted by the misbehavior of other students and how often teachers punish students in class can have an effect on the underlying structure of the classroom and ultimately on whether bullying occurs. Elements of classroom management that may contribute to a reduction in bullying include (1) establishment of fair rules, (2) consistency in punishment for breaking those rules, (3) clear behavioral and academic expectations, (4) mutual respect between educators and students, (5) continuous monitoring of behaviors, and (6) organization and preparation for all components of the day, including transitions, in order to maintain classroom order.
Whether in the classroom, hallway, or community areas, it is imperative to provide adequate supervision to ensure students’ safety. This is more than just being there and observing. Adults must respond promptly, consistently, and appropriately to stop any behavior that may be bullying.
Empower bystanders. Most students in a school are not bullying others or the victims of bullying. Most are bystanders, those who see or know that bullying is happening. Since bystanders outnumber children who bully, developing this positive peer pressure can help stop bullying at school. Empowering this group to confront bullying behaviors is critical to creating an environment that does not tolerate bullying behaviors.
Keep in mind that standing up to someone who is bullying is difficult for a student to do. However, when adults help students develop the courage to stand up for a victim and promulgate the message that bullying is not tolerated at their school, bullying behavior will decrease. Knowledge is empowering. Incorporating a teaching component as part of a comprehensive prevention program reduces bullying behavior (Olweus, 1993). Teaching students what bullying is and how to respond if they see it is a critical step for bystanders that will be discussed further in the “Intervention” section below.
Have reporting procedures in place. Ensuring that there are procedures to report bullying will help empower bystanders to act in bullying situations. Knowing what to do and how to do it will increase a student’s comfort level with reporting, especially if other students have the same knowledge.
The first step is to determine a method for reporting bullying. Options include talking directly to an adult at the school, completing a reporting form, filing an online report, and calling or texting a hotline. It can be beneficial to include an anonymous reporting option for those who fear retaliation. Regardless of the method used, students should be taught to report who was involved, what happened, where it happened, when it occurred, and how often it took place. Procedures for making a report as well as the actions that will occur when a report is received should be outlined and shared with all students, staff, and parents. Once the method is chosen, staff with the capacity to act on reports of bullying should be designated to receive the reports.
When beginning a prevention program, students may believe that reporting to an adult is tattling, ratting, or snitching. Providing students with guidelines on when to report will clarify reporting procedures and ease this concern. It is important to help students understand that reporting is done when someone is in trouble and the student is telling an adult about a potentially dangerous situation to protect someone from getting hurt physically or emotionally. In contrast, tattling, ratting, or snitching is done with the intent of getting someone in trouble. It is also important to facilitate student dialogue about the benefits of reporting as well as the challenges it may pose.
Whether witnessing or experiencing bullying, an important consideration is that students will only report bullying behaviors if they believe the adult will do something about it. So, when bullying is reported, take action consistently and in a timely manner.
Extend efforts to families and communities. A school’s prevention and intervention efforts can be strengthened when there is a consistency of message that can be gained by extending environmental efforts to families and the surrounding community. Parents can reinforce the environmental strategies at school by incorporating similar ones at home.
Schools should encourage parents to talk with their child about bullying, including the importance of upholding the message that it is not acceptable behavior. Parents can also make a difference by helping their child to think critically about messages in media and music. They can monitor their child’s involvement and should know who his or her friends are. Most importantly, parents can discuss and model their family values as they relate to bullying behaviors.
Bullying is not just confined to the schoolhouse. It carries over and can even begin in the community. Therefore, partnering with community members in bullying prevention efforts can serve to strengthen the message that bullying is not tolerated. Community members can help on campus by volunteering or providing resources. They can also assist off campus by reinforcing the school program through posters, brochures, or using the language of the program in their place of business. Rather than simply asking for money, it is important to be creative and open to ideas when enlisting the help of the community. In fact, from the author’s experience in a school district, creating a reciprocal relationship may be the most beneficial since students are also community members and may eventually be employees.
Beginning with these environmental strategies establishes the foundation for a successful bullying prevention program and sets the tone for the prevention and intervention strategies that follow. Clearly defining bullying as unacceptable and having everyone working together toward a solution to the problem creates camaraderie and ultimately a respectful learning environment.
Prevention
A bullying prevention program should help structure the school environment in a way that reduces or eliminates bullying problems to improve the learning environment for all students. A comprehensive bullying prevention program addresses the entire school population, not just the students identified as victims or students who bully. Evidence suggests that successful bullying prevention programs use a combination of school-level prevention, classroom activities, and individual interventions reinforced by administrative support, high-quality training, and integration of activities into existing school operations.
Professional development. Best practice dictates that bullying prevention initiatives begin with staff development to raise educators’ awareness and increase their knowledge of bullying prevention and intervention. In order to avoid inappropriate responses to reporting, staff training should occur prior to teaching students how to intervene in and report bullying situations.
A general consensus supports fundamental components that should be included in bullying prevention training for staff. Professional development should be more than a single event but rather an ongoing process with formal workshops and informal opportunities that include staff discussions and reflection on challenges and successes.
The initial stages of professional development begin with awareness and include information about the definition and types of bullying, the difference between bullying and teasing or conflict, and the causes and effects of bullying. Formal training needs to include prevention measures and procedures to be followed when bullying is witnessed or reported so that all staff can provide an immediate and consistent response. Finally, details about the school’s bullying prevention policy and program should be presented.
Additional professional development can include a review of survey data, development of a common language, reinforcement of program strategies, discussion of the social and academic problems related to bullying, and other issues identified by the staff.
Challenge myths. Education is essential in prevention and intervention. There are a number of common misconceptions regarding bullying that can interfere in the successful implementation of a bullying prevention program. It is important to dispel these myths and replace them with facts.
One common myth is that students who bully have low self-esteem. The fact is research indicates that children who bully have equal or higher self-esteem than their peers, while the victim of bullying behavior suffers from lower self-esteem. Another common myth is that most victims of bullying are targeted because of outward or physical appearance. In reality, victims are singled out because of their reaction patterns rather than their appearance. Bullying can certainly result in violence, but it is a myth that students who are bullying others are the perpetrators of mass incidents of violence. It is more common that the victim of bullying is the architect of this type of school violence. In fact, the Secret Service found that two-thirds of school shooters since 1974 had been victims of bullying prior to the shootings (Brady, 2001).
Classroom activities. Adults cannot be the only ones to work on the school’s bullying prevention program. It is important to give students a voice in prevention efforts by providing them with the opportunity to talk about bullying and enlisting their support in defining bullying as unacceptable. This begins by working with students to establish classroom rules against bullying and then teaching the expected prosocial behaviors.
Topics of regularly scheduled class lessons should include a definition and description of bullying behaviors along with information about the school policy and reporting procedures. Class discussion should also include information to help students respond to bullying. Learning to safely and assertively stand up to inappropriate behavior and having a plan for intervening and reporting are key areas for dialogue. Understanding and accepting different perspectives, managing emotions, and problem solving are subjects that can be included in class discussions. Students can also have rich discussions of ethical issues surrounding bullying, such as the act of doing harm to another, being an active bystander by helping or reporting, and working to build a positive community.
Students who engage in behaviors that can be considered bullying often explain their actions as just playing around. Including strategies to help students assess their own behaviors is another topic of conversation that can be included in classroom activities. Students can learn to use three identifying questions to self-assess their behavior to determine if their actions are simply teasing or have crossed the line into bullying: (1) Is the situation fair or is it one sided? (difference in power); (2) Is the situation uncomfortable for anyone? (intentional aggression); and (3) Have similar situations happened before? (repeated behavior). If there is a difference in power and is a repeated intentional act, the behavior is likely bullying. Helping students recognize this can prevent future problems.
Depending on the climate of the classroom, assessment of victim behavior may also be a valid topic of discussion. It is imperative that this does not become a blame game, with a clear message that blaming the victim is never acceptable. Keeping the focus on behavior by avoiding use of the words bully and victim, stressing that everyone deserves respect, and engaging in developmentally appropriate discussions of civil and human rights can go a long way to prepare youth for this type of dialogue. With this in mind, a discussion of behavior can identify areas for future lessons or individual prevention efforts, possibly including strengthening assertiveness and social skills.
If choosing to purchase a curriculum for classroom activities, it should be evidence based and aligned with the goals and objectives of the school’s bullying prevention initiative. It should also provide students with the skills and knowledge needed to identify bullying and teach the steps for safely intervening and reporting.
Curriculum integration. Just as with professional development for educators, sharing information with students should be more than a one-time classroom presentation. It should be discussed continuously throughout the school year in different contexts to reinforce the message that bullying is not acceptable. An effective way to ensure ongoing dialogue about bullying is to integrate prevention into the existing curriculum.
Many books can be used to discuss bullying and respectful behavior through character analysis or plot discussions. Mapping locations where bullying happens, graphing survey results, or comparing and contrasting bullying to historical events can provide additional learning opportunities. Prevention-themed art contests, development of a logo or theme song for the school’s bullying prevention program, and creation of a prevention newsletter or webpage are additional ways to integrate student involvement, curriculum, and bullying prevention.
Individual prevention. Some students will need an extension of the prevention efforts presented in the classroom. The next level is individual prevention strategies that focus on improving the skills of individual students to help them avoid or deal with bullying situations. This may include individual conferences, teaching friendship skills, practicing assertiveness, developing a plan, choosing specific language to use in a potential bullying situation, or helping a student find a replacement source of power and control.
Misdirected efforts. Knowing what works in bullying prevention is foremost in creating a successful program. Just as important is knowing and avoiding what does not work. Three common approaches to avoid are zero-tolerance policies, using conflict-resolution strategies to handle bullying reports, and group treatment for students who bully others. Although these strategies can be very successful for certain types of behaviors, research does not support using them in bullying prevention efforts. Unfortunately, some can even cause more harm.
A clear message that bullying is not tolerated is not the same thing as a zero-tolerance policy. A zero-tolerance policy punishes all incidents severely and in the same manner, usually with suspension or expulsion from school. This does not necessarily encourage reporting or change the behavior. Additionally, bullying is not always clear cut and there are often differing perceptions, so consistent enforcement is nearly impossible. Instead of a zero-tolerance policy focused on punishment, bullying prevention programs should focus on creating a respectful climate and educating the school community about bullying.
Conflict is a normal part of life and happens daily at any school. Conflict resolution and peer mediation are well established ways to help students work together to resolve disputes based on those involved being of equal status and in a situation where both are partly to blame for the problem. Now consider that bullying is an intentional act of aggression. Using conflict-resolution strategies in a bullying situation can send the message that the victim was partly at fault for what happened, further victimizing the student. It can also perpetuate the imbalance of power by forcing the victim to confront the aggressor.
Although they can be helpful to create a foundation for a successful program, conflict resolution and peer mediation should never be used to resolve bullying issues. Best practice is to have adult intervention and to address the victim and the person who is bullying separately.
While group treatment can be helpful for victims of bullying, the same strategy can be counterproductive for students who bully. Anger management, empathy building, self-esteem, or other group treatment settings can provide a venue for increasing power and control, ultimately making bullying problems worse. Group members may become competitive role models for each other, thus reinforcing bullying rather than stopping the inappropriate behavior. Best practice is to work individually with students who are bullying others.
Intervention
Despite a conscientious effort to address the school environment and develop strong prevention strategies, incidents of bullying may still occur. For this reason, intervention strategies are a necessary component of a comprehensive program. The goals of the intervention program are to stop current bullying behavior and avert future bullying by providing support and protection for victims, empowering bystanders to safely and respectfully intervene in bullying situations, and redirecting students who are bullying by finding replacement behaviors.
Stop bullying behavior. The most important intervention is to address bullying behavior each and every time it is witnessed or suspected. At a minimum this means an adult intervenes by naming the behavior as bullying and stating that it is not allowed. If possible, the individuals involved should be separated and spoken to individually. Depending on the situation, further investigation may be needed to make sure the bullying does not continue.
Investigate bullying reports. All reports of bullying must be investigated in a timely and consistent manner. The procedures for investigating incidents of bullying are similar to the procedures used for investigating other types of misconduct. The first consideration is whether the reported incident is within the scope of the school. Did it occur on school grounds, at a school-sponsored event, or while using school transportation or equipment? Did it cause or threaten to cause substantial and material disruption at the school?
If the answers are no, it may be appropriate to make a referral or provide information to assist the individuals involved, but a school-based investigation would not be indicated. If the answers are yes, an investigation should begin with separate interviews of those involved. Information to be gathered includes a description of the incident, the location of the alleged bullying, the identities of all involved, the relationship between those involved to determine a difference in power or status, the circumstances surrounding the incident, the frequency and severity of the behavior, the pattern of the behavior, and the impact of the incident on the learning environment.
Parents of involved students should be notified whenever an investigation takes place.
Protect the victim. For a variety of reasons, victims of bullying often do not tell anyone what is happening. They may be ashamed, embarrassed, afraid, or think that no one can or will help them. Therefore, when a victim does come forward and report, it is essential to send the message that it is not his or her fault and to take action.
The first step should always be to assess the student’s safety and respond appropriately. Once a student’s immediate well-being has been addressed, the next step is to develop a plan of action to secure the student’s physical and emotional safety while the bullying problem is being dealt with. This safety plan outlines the specific steps that the student and educators will take. Each situation and resulting plan will be different, but there are several common components: areas of increased supervision, what to do if confronted by the student who is bullying, procedures for reporting any future problems, name(s) of trusted adults who will act on reports of bullying, and a communication plan to evaluate the success of the plan.
The safety plan should be developed with input from the student and parent and then be shared with other adults in the school who interact with the student and can be watchful of the situation. Exploring professional assistance or services that might benefit the student should also be part of the overall plan to help the victim of bullying. This may include counseling, role-playing assertiveness, strengthening friendship skills, helping the victim identify allies, or any other relevant service the school can provide.
Redirect behavior. An intervention program must avoid placing too much focus on punishment with too little attention paid to the underlying causes of the inappropriate behavior. Identify the reason for the action, which in cases of bullying is often about gaining power and control. Consequently, redirecting behaviors to find a positive way to meet the need for power and control is just as important as imposing consequences.
Key points to remember are to label the behavior, not the child; focus on consequences in order to teach alternatives rather than punishment as a short-term solution; and increase observation and supervision to monitor the success of the replacement behavior in eliminating the bullying behavior.
Empower the bystanders. Bystanders are often present when bullying happens and have a choice to take part in the bullying, ignore it, or stop it. Rather than being a silent majority, this group of students can be a valuable asset to an intervention program. Encourage bystanders to be courageous and stand up against bullying at school. Set clear expectations that bystanders should not watch, encourage, laugh at, or ignore bullying situations.
Recognize that bystanders may not want to intervene because they are afraid of becoming the next target of the bullying behavior or think that intervening will make the situation worse. They may also be unsure of what to do. These concerns must be addressed so that students can take a stand. Remind students that they can be a part of the solution or a part of the problem, and then provide the knowledge and skills they need to support the school’s bullying prevention program.
Help students change their perception about becoming the next target by explaining that a person who bullies looks for victims who will not stand up for themselves, so assertively intervening is actually a preventive measure. Provide a common language for students to use: “That is bullying, and it is not okay.” If it is not safe to assertively address the student who is bullying, at a minimum bystanders should refuse to join in the bullying. Bystanders should also know procedures and be prepared to report bullying behavior to an adult.
Involve parents. As with all components of the bullying prevention program, parents should get involved when issues of bullying arise. Cooperation between the school and home is particularly important when an investigation is happening or when interventions are put in place. Parents may be the first ones to become aware of bullying behavior and should be educated in appropriate ways to help their child. A parent workshop can provide parents with the information and strategies they need to intervene appropriately. Workshop information includes (1) awareness of behaviors that could indicate there is a problem with bullying, (2) empathy rather than rescuing, (3) avoiding blame, (4) that fighting back or ignoring the behavior will not stop bullying, and (5) sibling bullying.
Whether notified by the school or learning about the bullying from their child, parents should communicate about the current situation and work with the school to prevent future bullying incidents. This may involve working with school personnel to create a safety plan, monitoring behavior, and suggesting replacement behaviors.
Conclusion
The environment in a school impacts how students learn and teachers teach. Thus, creating physically and emotionally safe schools cannot be separated from creating academically strong schools. Schools that practice prosocial education recognize that both are integral components of school and student success that are needed to address the needs of all students in a school.
Bullying is a phenomenon that negatively impacts the school environment. It has the potential to interfere with the healthy social-emotional development of students as well as their academic success. A comprehensive approach with specific strategies to increase awareness of bullying, teach students how to respond to bullying, and address individuals involved in bullying behaviors are needed to effectively address bullying in school.
The environmental, prevention, and intervention strategies presented are the foundation for a successful bullying prevention program. This comprehensive approach structures the school environment in a way that eliminates opportunities and rewards for bullying. In turn, schools will improve the learning environment for all students, which is a fundamental and minimal definition of prosocial education—that is, prosocial education creates a very good learning environment and then goes on to create the conditions for individual cognitive, moral, social, and emotional development, both short-term skills and understandings that build on each other, and long-term understanding.
The fact is that no school can be a great school until it is a safe school first.
—Arne Duncan, education secretary
References
Atlas, R. S., & Pepler, D. J. (1998). Observations of bullying in the classroom. Journal of Educational Research, 92(2), 86–99.
Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2007). The relationship between cyberbullying and school bullying. Journal of Student Wellbeing, 1(2), 15–33.
Blum, R. W. (2005). A case for school connectedness. Educational Leadership, 62(7), 16–20.
Bosworth, D. (1994). Truancy and pupil performance. Education Economics, 2(3), 243–264.
Bradshaw, C. P., Debnam, K. J., Martin, L., & Gill, R. (2006, September). Assessing rates and characteristics of bullying through an Internet-based survey system. Paper presented at the Persistently Safe Schools Conference, Washington, DC.
Brady, J. (2001). An interview with Dr. Russell Skiba of the Safe and Responsive School Project. Retrieved June 21, 2003, from www.guidancechannel.com
Cleary, M. (2000). Bullying information for schools. New Zealand: Telecom.
Dake, J. A., Price, J. H., Telljohann, S. K., & Funk, J. B. (2004). Principals’ perceptions and practices of school bullying prevention activities. Health Education and Behavior, 31(3), 372–387.
Dupper, D. R., & Meyer-Adams, N. (2002). Low-level violence: A neglected aspect of school culture. Urban Education, 37(3), 350–364.
Feinberg, T. (2003). Bullying prevention and intervention. Principal Leadership Magazine, 4(1). Retrieved June 14, 2007, from http://www.nasponline.org/resources/principals/nassp_bullying.aspx
Fisher, D. (n.d.). Environmental prevention strategies: An introduction and overview. Retrieved March 12, 2011, from http://wch.uhs.wisc.edu/docs/SIG/fisher-EnvironmentalPreventionStrategies.pdf
Florida Office of Safe and Healthy Schools, Department of Education. (2005, April). SDDFS notes. Tallahassee, FL: Author.
Fox, C. L., & Boulton, M. J. (2005). The social skills problems of victims of bullying: Self, peer and teacher perceptions. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 313–328.
Hawkins, D. L., Pepler, D. J., & Craig, W. M. (2001). Naturalistic observations of peer interventions in bullying. Social Development, 10(4), 512–527.
Haynie, D. L., Nansel, T., Eitel, P., Crump, A. D., Saylor, K., Yu, K., et al. (2001). Bullies, victims, and bully/victims: Distinct groups of at-risk youth. Journal of Early Adolescence, 21(1), 29–49.
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2007). Offline consequences of online victimization. Journal of School Violence, 6(3), 89–112.
Hoover, J., & Oliver, R. (1996). The bullying prevention handbook: A guide for principals, teachers and counselor. Bloomington, IN: National Education Service.
Hoover, N. C., & Pollard, N. J. (2000). Initiation rites in American high schools: A national survey. Final report. Alfred, NY: Alfred University. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED445809.pdf
Indiana Department of Education. (2003). White paper on bullying prevention and education. Retrieved June 30, 2006, from http://www.doe.state.in.us/legwatch/docs/Bullyingpaper2004session.doc
Josephson Institute Center for Youth Ethics. (2010). The Ethics of American Youth 2010 report: Bullying, violence, high risk behavior. Los Angeles: Author. Retrieved February 26, 2011, from http://charactercounts.org/programs/reportcard/2010/installment01_report-card_bullying-youth-violence.html
Kaiser Family Foundation. (2001). Talking with kids about tough issues: A national survey of parents and kids. Menlo Park, CA: Author. Retrieved August 11, 2004, from http://www.kff.org
Kent, B. A. (2003). Identity issues for hard-of-hearing adolescents aged 11, 13, and 15, in mainstream settings. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8(3), 315–324.
Kiefer, H. M. (2003). Teens and bullying: Who’s taking abuse? Washington, DC: Gallup Organization. Retrieved November 17, 2011, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/10228/Teens-Bullying-Whos-Taking-Abuse.aspx
Kowalski, R. M., Limber, S., & Agaston, P. W. (2008, March). Cyberbullying: Bullying in the digital age. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association, Charlotte, NC.
Li, Q. (2005, April). Cyber-bullying in schools: The nature and extent of adolescents’ experience. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association (AERA) Conference, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
McEvoy, A., & Welker, R. (2000). Antisocial behavior, academic failure, and school climate: A critical review. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(3), 130–140.
McEvoy, A., & Welker, R. (2001). Antisocial behavior, academic failure and school climate. In H. M. Walker & M. H. Epstein (Eds.), Making schools safer and violence free: Critical issues, solutions and recommended practices (pp. 28–38). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Mendler, A. N. (2001). Connecting with students. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Haynie, D. L., Ruan, W. J., & Scheidt, P. C. (2003). Relationships between bullying and violence among U.S. youth. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 157, 348–353.
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behavior among US youth. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 285(16), 2094–2100.
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Olweus, D. (2003). A profile of bullying in schools. Educational Leadership, 60(6), 12–17.
Olweus, D., & Limber, S. (2010). Olweus answers questions, discusses data on bullying. Retrieved from www.olweus.org
Pearl, E. S., & Dulaney, C. L. (2006). Depressive symptoms and prosocial behavior after participation in a bullying prevention program. Journal of School Violence, 5(4), 3–20.
Perkins, B. K. (2006). Where we learn: The CUBE survey of urban school climate. Alexandria, VA: National School Board Association.
Rodkins, P. C., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2003). Bullies and victims in the peer ecology: Four questions for psychologists and school professionals. School Psychology Review, 32(3), 384–400.
Slee, P. T., & Rigby, K. (1993). The relationship of Eysenck’s personality factors and self-esteem to bully-victim behaviour in Australian schoolboys. Personality and Individual Differences, 14(2), 371–373.
Spriggs, A. L., Iannotti, R. J., Nansel, T. R., & Haynie, D. L. (2007). Adolescent bullying involvement and perceived family, peer and school relations: Commonalities and differences across race/ethnicity. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(3), 283–293.
Telljohann, S. K. (2003). The nature and extent of bullying at school. Journal of School Health, 73(5), 173–180.
Urbanski, J., & Permuth, S. (2009). The truth about bullying: What educators and parents must know and do. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
U.S. Department of Education. (1998). Preventing bullying: A manual for schools and communities. Washington, DC: Author.
Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Oldehinkel, A. J., DeWinter, A. F., Verhulst, F. C., & Ormel, J. (2005). Bullying and victimization in elementary schools: A comparison of bullies, victims, bully/victims, and uninvolved preadolescents. Developmental Psychology, 41(4), 672–682.
Weinhold, B. K. (1999, September). Bullying and school violence: The tip of the iceberg. Counseling Today. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.
Weinhold, B. K. (2000). Bullying and school violence: The tip of the iceberg. Teacher Educator, 35(3), 28–33.
Willard, N. (2005, August). Cyberbullying and cyberthreats. Paper presented at national conference of the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, Washington, DC.
Windemeyer Communications. (2003). National Bullying Prevention Campaign formative research report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Zins, J. E., Bloodworth, M. R., Weissberg, R. P., & Walberg, H. J. (2004). The scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 3–22). New York: Teachers College Press.