Time to Rethink & Redirectere are signi"cant concerns regarding the effectiveness of bullying prevention efforts in the U.S., especially at the secondary level. It is essential that schools engage in a reappraisal of what is happening and make the necessary changes to achieve greater effectiveness. Educators know that bullying can contribute to school failure and life-long emotional challenges, school violence or youth suicide, as well as the possibility of school liability or an agency enforcement action. National survey data shows that there has been no decline in student reports of being bullied at the secondary level for the last decade.1 A new study demonstrated signi"cant concerns in the effectiveness of bullying prevention programs at the secondary level.2 Results at the elementary level are mixed and there is no national data collection.e problem does not appear to be that schools aren’t trying. e problem appears to be that what most schools are doing is not working effectively. Also, individual schools differ in their level of attention and effectiveness. Reducing bullying isn’t rocket science--it is far more complicated. Especially at the secondary level, hurtful acts are driven by desire for social dominance--behavior that ethnological research would indicate is instinctual. However, some aggressive behavior is lashing out by those who have been abused, traumatized, or excluded. ose who are more routinely victimized oen lack the self-con"dence and social skills to respond effectively. “Tell an adult” doesn’t work because teens are highly motivated to solve their own relationship problems. Schools are "nancially-strapped and function in an environment where high stakes test scores are unfortunately the only measurement of their value and worth. e current approach to preventing bullying, as required by most state statutes includes a policy against bullying, reporting systems, advising students to report to school staff if bullied, and discipline of “the bully.”3 ese requirements are clearly necessary, but are insufficient

e “just say ‘no’” rules-based approach to adolescent misbehavior has never been found to be effective.4 Adults will never be in a situation to supervise all youth behavior, especially teens and especially in the digital age. e vast majority of secondary students do not report hurtful incidents, because most oen this does not resolve the problem and could very well make things worse.5 Educators are being told to “get tough on bullies” at the same time they are being required to reduce the “zero tolerance” approaches of suspension and expulsion.6 It is well known that these punitive responses do not result in a positive change in behavior.It is time for a redirection of school efforts. ere is solid research that provides insight into how schools can implement more effective and powerfully positive strategies to help students build positive relations. is is what will be outlined in the second half of this report.

Rethinke following section provides into the current challenges which must be identi"ed and considered to effectively support a redirection of school efforts.

Bullying Prevention ~ Is It Working?During this last decade, there has been a signi"cant increase in state statutes requiring schools to better address bullying.7 e federal government has signi"cantly increased its activities in this area through the StopBullying.gov web site and annual summits.8

Secondary School Effectivenessere are two primary ongoing measurements of bullying behavior at the secondary level, the National Crime Victimization Supplement-School Crimes Supplement (NCVS-SCS), which has measured bullying since 2005, and the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), which has measured bullying since 2009.9 ese surveys use different de"nitions of bullying.

- 1 -

Bullying Prevention: Time to Rethink & Redirect

A Special Report from Embrace Civility in the Digital AgeWritten by Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D. ~ February 18, 2015

On neither of these surveys has the rate at which secondary students report they were bullied declined.NCVS-SCS asks students about a range of hurtful acts at school and online and asks about frequency. Based on the NCVS-SCS data, in 2011 close to 1.2 million secondary students reported someone was hurtful to them at school once a week or more and of this number over 500,000 reported this was happening almost daily.10

On the YRBS, a consistent 20% of students report being bullied.11 Educators can check the data from their own state to determine if the rate of reported bullying has declined.A recent meta-analysis of studies assessing the effectiveness of bullying prevention programs demonstrated that current recommended approaches appeared to be somewhat effective up until 6th grade, but efficacy dropped signi"cantly in 7th grade.12 In 8th grade and beyond, efficacy dropped to zero. However, as this was an analysis of various studies, it is unknown what grade con"gurations were present. ere is likely a difference between 6th graders in K-6 schools, as compared to those in 6-8 schools.Since its inclusion in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 1997 and 2004, there has also been a signi"cant increase in the use of the Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) approach in schools.13 e PBIS approach focuses on the observable negative behavior of more troubled students and appears to be helpful in addressing this behavior.14 PBIS is not designed to address concerns of socially skilled students who are hurtful in situations where their behavior is not observed by adults. ere is no data to support its effectiveness in reducing bullying at the secondary level.15

Elementary School EffectivenessUnfortunately, there is no ongoing national collection of data on bullying at the elementary school level. e "ndings from several meta-analyses on bullying prevention strategies at the elementary level have been mixed.16 One recent comprehensive meta-analysis by Farrington and Tto" found that the most effective elements were: classroom management strategies, classroom and school-wide rules related to bullying, training of teachers, playground supervision, consistent disciplinary methods, and parent training activities and information.17 It should be recognized that these are elements of any effectively managed elementary school. Elementary schools in the U.S are oen encouraged to use the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program.18 In fact, this program appears to have been endorsed by the American Association of Pediatrics.19 Espelage, a bullying prevention authority, recently stated:

e efficacy of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP), considered the gold-standard and used in thousands of US school districts, is questionable.20

OB PP h a s n ot d e m onst r ate d e ff e c t ive n e ss i n implementations in the U.S. and is no longer listed as an evidence-based program on the National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices.21

Confusing De"nitionsit is important to discuss the challenge of confusing de"nitions. Most academic literature and information provided to educators presents one de"nition of bullying. Many surveys assess based on another de"nition. Neither de"nition is in accord with statutory de"nitions that provide the basis for the policies that schools must enforce.

Academic De#nitione traditional academic de"nition is common in materials provided to educators and also has been endorsed by the Center for Disease Control (CDC).22 An example is:

Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior among school aged children that involves a real or perceived power imbalance. e behavior is repeated, or has the potential to be repeated, over time.23

is de"nition seeks to exclude more minor altercations, as well as situations involving con&ict. Some surveys, including the YRBS, seek to measure students experiences with bullying by providing a de"nition that seeks to explain “imbalance of power” in the context of social or physical characteristics, such as being more popular or stronger. is approach presumes that students are able to effectively understand this concept, which is doubtful.24

Hurtful ActsA review of the bullying surveys compiled by CDC reveals that most surveys assess bullying by providing youth with a list of hurtful behaviors and asking if they have experienced any of these actions.25 us, these surveys essentially de"ne bullying as a “hurtful act.” is is likely in accord with the common perception of bullying as “someone was hurtful.” But this could include con&ict and minor incidents.e use of the “hurtful acts” de"nition on the NCVS-SCS raises attention to the de"nitional concern. Frequently, it is stated that 28% of students report being bullied, based on this survey. But NCVS-SCS asks students if someone was hurtful in a variety of ways. In 2011, 28% of students reported that someone was hurtful. But 64% of that 28% said this happened “once or twice in the school year.” is low rate of frequency should not be considered “bullying.”

Statutory/Case Lawen, there is the statutory de"nition of bullying--or to be precise--the forty-nine different state statutory de"nitions. ese de"nitions provide the basis upon which schools must enforce policies. ere is a lack of consistency in these statutory de"nitions.26 However, most statutory de"nitions are based on federal case law.27

- 2 -

e case law-based language that forms the basis for many statutory de"nitions can be essentially stated as this:

Pervasive or persistent hurtful acts directed at another student that have caused, or can reasonably be forecast to cause, distress resulting in a signi"cant interference with the ability of the student to receive an education or participate in school activities. (Sometimes this is also called a “hostile environment.”)

e statutory de"nition is the most objective because it focuses on the harmful impact and is the standard schools are required to enforce. is is the de"nition that should be used in instruction for staff and in surveys.

Other Disturbing Findingsere are profoundly different perspectives of effectiveness in addressing bullying when comparing the opinions of students with those of staff. One of the reasons it may be challenging for schools to realize changes are necessary is that staff perceives what they are doing is effective. One study found the following:

• While 87% of school staff think they have effective strategies for handling bullying, 58% of middle and 66% of high school students believe adults at school are not doing enough to stop or prevent bullying.

• While 97% of school staff said they would intervene if they saw bullying, 43% of middle school students and 54% of high school students reported they had seen adults at school watching bullying and doing nothing.

• While only 7% of school staff think they make things worse when they intervene, 61% of middle school students and 59% of high school students believe that teachers who try to stop bullying only make it worse.28

e key message conveyed to students is to report bullying to a staff member. is guidance presumes that students will report and that this will resolve the problem. e Youth Voice Project asked students who were repeatedly bullied and had experienced moderate to very severe levels of distress, whether they reported to an adult at school and, if so, whether things got better, stayed the same, or got worse.29 e "ndings indicated:

• Elementary (grade 5). 46% did not tell an adult, 29% told and things got better, 17% told and things stayed the same, 11% told and things got worse.

• Middle schools (grades 6 to 8). 68% did not tell an adult at school, 12% told and things got better, 8% told and things stayed the same, 12% told and things got worse.

• High schools (grades 9 to 12). 76% did not tell an adult at school, 7% told and things got better, 8% told and things stayed the same, 9% told and things got worse.30

A recent study in middle schools found that the highest reported prevalence rates of bullying occurred in

classroom, hallways, and lunchroom.31 ese are the places where presumably staff supervision should be the highest. Further, victimization in classrooms, compared with other school settings, was most highly associated with feelings of being unsafe at school.It is important to establish ways in every school to increase staff access to student insight into what is happening and the effectiveness of school efforts.

Adult Centrice misperception that bullying behavior is something adults alone can "x is part of the problem. A colleague of mine stated:

For decades, even longer, we have treated youth as having problems that we adults must solve, yet without the active engagement of youth, the real experts in the #eld, nothing will change.32

Required Public ReportingSome state legislatures have enacted a statutory requirement that schools "le annual public reports of how many bullying incidents occurred. Given the exceptionally low numbers of students who do report, if a school improves its interventions, the rate of reporting should increase. But higher reports of bullying would be a “black mark.”What has happened in New Jersey is illustrative. In 2010, the new “Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act” was enacted.33. is Act requires that schools "le annual reports of bullying incidents. In the annual report for 2012-13, there was a 36% decline of incidents deemed to be bullying.34 In fact, 58% of N.J. schools reported zero or one incident of bullying.35 However, on the 2013 New Jersey Student Health Survey (N.J’s version of the YRBS) 21% of students reported they were bullied--a rate that has not declined since 2009.36 e statutory and survey de"nitions are different, but if bullying incidents had actually declined by as much as 36%, this would have resulted in a signi"cant decline on the Student Health Survey as well.is legislative approach would be akin to suggesting the military address the problem of sexual assault solely by requiring each unit commander to investigate and publicly report how many reports of sexual assault they received. e military assesses both anonymous survey data of assaults and the number of complaints.37 e objective is that the number of assaults reported on the survey will decrease and the number of complaints "led will increase. To achieve an actual reduction of bullying school districts are strongly advised to conduct annual or biannual anonymous surveys of students, in addition to maintaining incident reports. Success would be measured by a decrease of incidents on the survey and an increase of incidents reported to the school and effectively resolved.

- 3 -

Despair-MongeringLastly, a very concerning aspect of bullying prevention of late has been the shi to an approach that conveys the message that students should not engage in bullying because this could cause others to suicide or engage in school violence. e movie e Bully demonstrates this ineffective and dangerous approach.38 ere zero evidence that this approach will reduce bullying or increase positive peer intervention. ere is also clear evidence that conveying these kinds of messages may be linked to actual youth suicide and school violence.39 e CDC strongly warns:

(F)raming the discussion of the issue as bullying being a single, direct cause of suicide is not helpful and is potentially harmful because it could ... (p)erpetuate the false notion that suicide is a natural response to being bullied which has the dangerous potential to normalize the response and thus create copycat behavior among youth.40

Schools should maintain a “zero tolerance” approach to despair-mongering as a bullying prevention approach.

Litigation & Agency EnforcementLegal and administrative pressures on schools to reduce the harmful impact of bullying and discriminatory harassment are increasing.

Civil Rights ProtectionsStudents receive federal protections under the following civil rights statutes:

• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits discrimination based on sex and gender identity.41

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin (includes religion if based on national origin).42

• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability.43

• e Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability (ADA).44

State civil rights statutes provide similar protections.

LiabilitySchools can be held "nancially liable under federal civil rights laws if they are:

(D)eliberately indifferent to known acts of student-on-student sexual harassment and the harasser is under the school’s authority, (so long as the harassment is) so severe, pervasive, and objectionably offensive that it can be said to deprive the victims of access to the educational opportunities or bene#ts provided by the school.45

In 2012, the Second Circuit upheld a $1M verdict against a New York school by a student who had endured over three

years of racial harassment.46 It appeared the school was doing everything required in most anti-bullying statutes. It had an anti-bullying policy, provided training, and had a way for students to report. Every time the student reported, the school punished the offenders. e Court noted that over the years, the school ignored many signals that more action was needed and that the school only engaged in “half-hearted efforts” to correct the “culture of bias” that was fueling the harassment.In a more recent court decision involving assertions of anti-Semitic harassment, the district had argued that it had policies, held anti-bullying assemblies, responded properly to the complaints, and disciplined students where appropriate. e school district’s motion for summary judgement was dismissed because of evidence of the school’s failure to effectively respond to the reported incidents and to more aggressively address the school climate that was fueling the harassment.47

As further evidence of growing liability risks, the &yer for a recent school law workshop in New Jersey advertised:

e ultimate seminar on the legal and practical issues surrounding school bullying returns for its 4th year with a focus on bullying-related lawsuits. New Jersey law has reached a point at which these cases are increasing in frequency and success.48

Agency Civil Rights & IDEA EnforcementIn recent years, the U.S. Department of Education has increased its activities in addressing these concerns. In 2012, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issued a Dear Colleague Letter that addressed the intersection between bullying and discriminatory harassment--warning that harassment based on race, color, national origin, sex, or disability, may violate civil rights laws.49 e Letter made it clear that to avoid an adverse agency action, schools must not only intervene in reported incidents, they must engage in comprehensive efforts to address challenged related to the school culture that may suport such harassment. In 2013, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services issued a Dear Colleague Letter that addressed concerns of children with disabilities who are bullied or are engaging in bullying. is Letter emphasized need under the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) to address concerns in an Individual Education Plan meeting and ensure no interference with student’s rights to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).50 In 2014, OCR issued a Dear Colleague Letter addressed discriminatory harassment or denial of FAPE of students with disabilities under Section 504, ADA, and IDEA.51

e OCR also recently release a video advising parents how they can "le a civil rights complaint if concerns of discriminatory harassment are not addressed.52

- 4 -

Recipe for Troublee recipe for liability or an agency enforcement action appear to be a belief that all a school needs to do is:

• Have a policy against bullying and post rules. • Hold occasional “anti-bullying” assemblies.• Tell students to report.• Treat repeated incidents as isolated events with no

attention to the effectiveness of the intervention.• Fail to comprehensively address systemic concerns.

Redirectere is sufficient research insight, as well as legal and agency guidance to provide insight into more positive approaches to assist students in building positive relations, and reducing bullying and other forms of social cruelty. e key to accomplishing this will be to recognize that students are the experts in knowing what is happening in your school. Further, they hold the key to changing the social norms that reinforce hurtful behavior. It is essential for adults to ask and listen to students, to ensure students are empowered with essential skills, and to ensure the ongoing meaningful participation of students.

More than “Bullying”It is not advisable for schools to focus solely on “bullying.” It is important that schools address all forms of social cruelty because these hurtful situations will interfere with student learning and activities, as well as undermining positive school climate. Also, many older teens do not label the se hurtful situations as “bullying.”53 ese forms include:

• Bullying. Pervasive or persistent hurtful acts directed at another student that have caused, or can reasonably be forecast to cause, distress resulting in a signi"cant interference with the ability of the student to receive an education or participate in school activities.

• Discriminatory Harassment. Bullying that is based on sexual orientation or identity, race, national origin, disabilities, or religion or other protected identity. is could constitute a civil rights violation.

• Sexual Harassment. Unwelcome sexual comments, gestures, or touching. Sexual harassment could constitute discriminatory harassment under civil rights laws but frequently lacks the sense of putting down others because they are perceived to be “inferior.”

• Disrespect. Putting someone down. Using insulting terms or symbols that communicate that a person or group of people are inferior.

• Drama. Bidirectional interpersonal social con&ict that is performative and participatory--involving an active and engaged audience, frequently using social media.

• Con#ict. When two or more people are being hurtful to each other, they are all equivalently involved, and they are all at a relatively similar level of social status.

• Exclusion from School Activities. Intentional excluding other students from participating in school activities. (Students should have the right to determine who they will be friends with.)

• Physical Harm or reat. Physical assault, destruction of property, or a threat to do so.

• Dating Abuse. Being hurtful, controlling, or abusive to someone within a dating relationship.

• Retaliation. When a young person who has been bullied, generally chronically, "ghts back to try to get this to stop. It is important to distinguish this from other forms of hurtful behavior and effectively address the underlying situation.

• Hazing. Being hurtful to new or younger members of a team or group as a form of initiation.

• Hurtful by Mistake. Jokes or pranks that weren’t meant to be hurtful, but were--or impulsive, angry outbursts followed immediately by remorse.

Developmental ConsiderationsGiven that young people undergo signi"cant developmental changes starting in middle school, it is important to consider how these changes should be addressed in bullying prevention efforts at the secondary level.54

• Developmental Priorities. Adolescence is a time for developing personal identity and a sense of morality, and establishing independence, competence, and personal control. Teens want to manage their own personal relationship challenges.

• Changes in the Type of Young People who Engage in Bullying Behavior. Students who most frequently are hurtful to others at the elementary level are those who lack social skills, are impulsive, and are “at risk” in many ways. At the secondary level those who are most oen hurtful are strategic, socially skilled students who are seeking to achieve higher social status.

• Change in the Nature of Bullying Behavior. Direct and observable forms of bullying decline as students go from middle school to high school. More indirect forms of bullying, which are less observable, increase.

• Signi"cantly Less Adult Supervision. Teens are not as closely supervised in secondary schools, spend additional time with peers in other environments that lack adult supervision, and use digital technologies.

• Sexual Maturity. Sexual harassment, disagreements between and competition over romantic partners, disparagement based on perceived value as a romantic partner, and bullying of gender non-conforming students is frequent at the secondary level.

- 5 -

• Social Groups and Exclusion. Teens form social groups with others who share their interests that, by their very nature, involve exclusion.

• Autonomy and Reactance to Adult In#uence. Ample evidence from prevention programs demonstrates, such as having adults tell teens to “just say ‘no,’” oen has the opposite effect.

In considering these developmental changes as a whole, it is clear that for adults to better address the challenges of bullying and other forms of social cruelty, it is imperative to work in partnership with young people. When young people enter puberty, their attentiveness to adult guidance wanes. erefore, the pre-teen years are an important time to lay the groundwork. At the middle school age, setting up approaches where young people are talking with each other about their norms and strategies, with adults as “guides by the side” is essential.

Newer & Better Statutory Approachesere are some good examples of newer and better statutory approaches. Both the New York Dignity for All Students Act and the Minnesota Safe and Supportive Schools Act are excellent examples of these newer approaches.55 Distinctive improvements in the newer statutes are the designation of a staff person in each school, school level committees, social emotional learning by students, professional development for staff members, responding to hurtful situations in a way that is focused on remediation and restoration, and the authority to respond of off-campus hurtful acts that are interfering with students’ rights to receive an education.Additional improvements are recommended: meaningful participation of students on school climate committees, the establishment of student positive climate Leadership Teams, an annual student survey assessing climate and negative incidents, and annual focus groups involving more typically targeted students.

e “Players”Based on these developmental considerations, greater efforts must be made to empowering students to effectively manage their own interpersonal relationship challenges.

Helping those Who Are Targeted Gain Resiliencee objective for students who are targeted should be to help them gain self-con"dence and resilience and respond effectively if someone is hurtful. e young people who are most typically targeted are those who are obese, have a minority sexual orientation or identity, have disabilities, or racial, national origin, and religious minorities.56 Other young people are bullied simply because they are “different,” but “being different” generally does not show up on surveys as an item.

ose who are more frequently targeted oen lack self-con"dence and three important social skills, including reading nonverbal cues, understanding their social meaning; and coming up with options for resolving a social con&ict.57 While clearly not blaming students for being targeted, it is essential that schools engage in efforts to assist targeted students in increasing these social competencies.Unfortunately, research also documents that students who are most oen targeted also are humiliated by staff or that staff ignore situations where they have been targeted by other students.58 Schools should assess what practices might be humiliating to students. Consider such practices as: Routinely labeling students with challenges as “red card kids.” Confronting obese students with public BMI screenings. Racial discrimination in disciplinary actions. School objections to LGBT support clubs.Ample, very consistent research documents that those who are chronically bullied demonstrate signi"cant concerns, including higher rates of anxiety, depression, physical health problems, and social adjustment problems. Schools with signi"cant levels of bullying have lower student engagement, grades, test scores, and graduation rates.59 Positive strategies can increase student resilience. ese are discussed below.

Embrace Civility in the Digital Age’s program Be a Friend ~ Lend a Hand helps targeted students Be Positively Powerful. e Professional Development Resources provide more extensive coverage of the challenges of students who are targeted and greater insight into how educators can help targeted students gain greater resilience.

Helping ose Who Are Hurtful Stop, Own it and Fix Ite objective for those who are hurtful is that they will stop themselves, acknowledge their wrongdoing, and remedy the harm. Research has identi"ed that there are two general kinds of young people who engage in bullying or other hurtful behavior.60

Socially Marginalized hurtful students have other risk factors. ese students likely have also been bullied or abused and are "ghting back against a community that has excluded them. ey are oen impulsive, have anger issues, and engage in other risky or violent behavior. To stop their hurtful behavior directed towards others requires a careful investigation into the harm these students have suffered and actions directed at remedying this harm. e positive strategies recommended for students who are targeted, discussed below, will also be helpful to address the concerns of these students. Socially Motivated hurtful students are being hurtful as a way to establish or maintain social status. ese students are well integrated and considered “popular” and “cool.”

- 6 -

ey are strategic and intentional when being hurtful. ey have excellent skills in empathy, which enables them to very effectively socially manipulate others. ese social climbers are oen “hidden bullies.” ey are highly skilled in being hurtful, but behave appropriately in the presence of staff. Frequently, information provided to educators about bullying does not describe students who "t this pro"le. us, the hurtful behavior of these students is less likely to be noticed by staff. Socially motivated hurtful students appear to be predominant in the teen years.61 As explained:

Social prominence, de#ned as perceived popularity or ‘‘coolness’’ in early adolescence, is associated with peer directed aggression. ... Ethological research suggests that aggression is a strategy to establish a dominant position within a group. ... Within human youth, aggression can be considered a strategic behavior that serves similar social dominance functions.62

e majority of students think those who engage in bullying are “popular.”63 is appears to be an assessment of the social status or power of these students.But students do not personally like to see bullying behavior and do not admire those who are hurtful.64 us, there is a signi"cant misperception of the actual social norms. For as long as students believe that disparaging others is the way to be considered “popular,” they will continue to disparage others. It is imperative to focus on the actual norms. e social norms theory suggests that people act in accord with what they perceive the social norms to be.65 When people learn about the actual positive norms, they are more willing to abide by those norms. e Youth Health and Safety Project made effective use of the social norms approach to reduce bullying behavior.66 is project collected school-based data about students’ perspectives on bullying, which demonstrated quite clearly that the vast majority of students disapproved of bullying. is data was used to create posters demonstrating the actual norms. is led to a reduction in the reported incident rate of bullying. Schools are strongly encouraged to emphasize the positive norms and values held by the majority of its students and fully engage students in enunciating these norms. A positive norms approach, with strong student voice, is the vitally important missing component in current bullying prevention. Students who are hurtful must be assisted in stopping themselves, acknowledging their wrongdoing, and taking steps to remedy the harm. For some it is necessary to address their personal challenges. is is discussed below.

Embrace Civility in the Digital Age’s program Be a Friend ~ Lend a Hand helps targeted students Stop, Own It & Fix It. e Positive Relations Professional Development Resources provide more extensive coverage of the two kinds of hurtful students and recommended intervention approaches.

Encouraging Positive Peer Interventione objective for witnesses is that they will step in to help when they see or hear about hurtful situations. Many students would like to help when they see someone being hurtful.67 When students do intervene, they are oen very successful in getting the hurtful situations to stop.68 Bullied students who have supportive friends experience less distress.69 Unfortunately, when hurtful situations do occur, most students do not step in to help.70 When students witness bullying or other social cruelty, they have a choice. ey can be:

• A Hurtful Participant, who joins in or supports the harm.

• A Passive Observer, who ignores what is happening or walks away.

• A Helpful Ally, who steps in to help by reaching out to be kind, saying stop, or reporting concerns.

To increase positive peer intervention requires helping students gain safe and effective skills to intervene in a variety of ways that reduce the risks of embarrassment or retaliation, as well as emphasizing their peer's disapproval of bullying and admiration of those who step in to help--the positive norms approach. is must occur within a positive school climate where staff treat all students with respect and effectively intervene in the hurtful situations they witness.

Embrace Civility in the Digital Age’s program Be a Friend ~ Lend a Hand helps students become Helpful Allies who:• Reach Out. Reach out to be kind to a person being hurt or le

out and help friends resolve con&ict.• Say “Stop.” Safely tell a person being hurtful to stop in private

or publicly.• Report Concerns. Tell an adult who can help about situations

that are serious.Embrace Civility in the Digital Age’s Positive Relations Professional Development Resources provide greater insight into strategies to increase positive peer intervention.

Effective Interventions

Overall ObjectivesIt is necessary to address intervention at two levels: initial staff interventions in situations that they witness or are reported to them and more formal investigations and interventions conducted by a designated staff person. e overall objectives for intervention are:

• Help those targeted become positively powerful.• Help those who were hurtful stop, own it & "x it.• Encourage witnesses to step in to help.

Supportive School DisciplineIn July 2011, the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice launched the Supportive School Discipline Initiative.71 is

- 7 -

Initiative addresses the school-to-prison pipeline and punitive disciplinary practices that push students, especially minority students, out of school and into the justice system. is Initiative encourages discipline practices that foster safe and productive learning environments. In January 2014, the Initiative introduced helpful resources for schools, including a School Discipline Guidance Package which recommends a focus on positive behavior management to address overall management and greater focus on identifying and addressing the underlying reasons for students’ wrongdoing through Multiple-Tier System of Supports and using Restorative Practices.72

Initial Staff InterventionsFor general staff, teachers and support professionals, the key initial actions steps should include:

• Stop the incident. e staff member may directly intervene, if safe to do so. If it is not safe, the staff member should immediately call for assistance.

• Ensure safety of all students. Especially ensure the student who was the target is secure. Also, be attentive to safety needs of other participants.

• Assess the situation. is assessment should determine the type of situation and the apparent degree of severity. From this assessment, a decision is made regarding the appropriate initial response.

• Respond. Based on the severity of the situation, determine and implement an appropriate initial response. - e staff member may be able to intervene effectively

in lower level situations. Alternatively, the situation may be such that a referral to a designated staff member may be necessary.

• Report. e approach, time, and manner for reporting will vary by school.

• Follow-up. Follow-up with both the student who was targeted and the one being hurtful is imperative. It is necessary to ensure the intervention was effective and the problem situation resolved. Ongoing supportive relationships with compassionate caring staff members are a vitally important requirement.

Embrace Civility in the Digital Age’s Positive Relations Professional Development Resources provide greater insight into strategies to increase effectiveness in these initial interventions.

Formal Investigations and InterventionsA more extensive investigation of serious situations should be conducted by a designated staff person. is investigation must not only address what happened, but the challenges faced by the participants. It is also important to determine what risks the targeted student might face if this situation becomes more formal or if parents are noti"ed.Effectively intervening in more serious situations will require an approach that integrates both:

• Multiple-Tier System of Supports (MTSS), with a speci"c focus on social emotional competencies, traumatic distress, and positive approaches to reinforce resilience.

• Restorative Practices (RP), which addresses the interfering impact of rationalizations, emphasizes the positive norms held by the majority of students, and requires a remedy of the harm.

Multiple Tier System of SupportsMTSS uses a multi-level prevention system that includes three tiers of intensity, including Tier II interventions of moderate intensity that addresses the challenges of the more “at-risk” students and Tier III individualized interventions of increased intensity for students who are identi"ed at higher risk. e challenges of socially marginalized hurtful students, as well as some students who are chronically bullied, will generally require a Tier II or III intervention. To ensure the effectiveness of interventions based on MTSS, it is imperative to focus on a number of critical factors:

• e student’s social emotional competencies.• e potential of traumatic distress. • e relationship between this student and staff

members. It is necessary to ensure that all school staff who this student regularly interacts with know how to positively support this student. If staff are being disrespectful to this student in front of his or her peers, or ignoring hurtful situations, this must be addressed.

• is student’s personal strengths which can be built upon to support a positive outcome.

If a student is on an IEP or 504, this assessment and planning should be accomplished in the context of an IEP or 504 meeting, resulting in objectives for functional skills and any necessary accommodations.

Social Emotional CompetenciesAs noted above, both students who are chronically bullied as well as socially marginalized hurtful students oen lack effective, essential social emotional competencies. e Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning has identi"ed the core social emotional competencies.73 ese include:

• Self-awareness. Accurately recognize one’s emotions and thoughts and their in&uence on behavior.

• Self-management. Regulate one’s emotions, thoughts, and behaviors effectively in different situations.

• Social awareness. Ability to take the perspective of and empathize with others and to understand social norms for behavior.

• Relationship skills. Ability to establish and maintain healthy and rewarding relationships.

- 8 -

• Responsible decision making. Ability to make constructive and respectful choices about personal behavior and social interactions.

Increasing the social emotional competencies of chronically bullied students and those who both engage in and are bullied should have a high priority.

Traumatic DistressWhile there is not a signi"cant amount of research, there appears to be a connection between bullying and traumatic distress. Chronically bullied young people, as well as those who are both bullied and engage in bullying demonstrate symptoms associated with traumatic distress.74 Traumatic distress could contribute to behavior that leads to victimization and engaging in hurtful behavior. It could be the outcome of chronic victimization by peers.Symptoms associated with traumatic distress include re-experiencing the incident, avoidance and distressing memories of the event, negative cognitions and mood, and arousal that includes aggressive, reckless, or self-destructive behavior.75 Students who have suffered traumatic distress may “trigger” if stressed or if bullied. is can contribute to ongoing victimization or hurtful behavior.e National Child Traumatic Stress Network provides insight into effective interventions that schools can use to more effectively address the challenges faced by students who have sustained traumatic distress.76

Resilience and Positive GrowthRecent research documented critical factors that led to a successful outcome for bullied students. ese factors included:

• A place of refuge where they could feel safe, appreciated, and challenged in a constructive way.

• Responsible adults who supported and sustained them and provided them examples of appropriate behavior.

• A sense of future possibility to persuade them that staying in school, despite the bullying, promised better things to come.77

Research has also identi"ed that having supportive friends provides very positive bene"ts to those students who are bullied.78 e CDC has also identi"ed “connectedness” as key to addressing the concerns of youth suicide.79

Research in the "eld of Positive Psychology appears to hold signi"cant promise to address the challenges faced by students who have been bullied. Insight to support positive growth includes:

• Emhancing factors that support post traumatic growth.80

• Increasing interpersonal relationship problem solving.81

• Recognizing and believing in the ability of people to change.82

• Focusing on personal strengths and good things.83

• Practicing mindfulness and self-calming.84

• Holding their body in a position that demonstrates self-con"dence.85

Embrace Civility in the Digital Age’s Be a Friend ~ Lend a Hand program teaches students these positive strategies. e Professional Development Resources provide more extensive coverage of these positive psychology strategies.

Restorative PracticesA restorative approach to interventions is appropriate in all situations where a student has been hurtful. is approach should be especially helpful when dealing with socially motivated hurtful students, especially when combined with a focus on positive social norms held by other students. e RP approach to address wrongdoing is grounded in research regarding shame management.86 While certainly it is necessary to hold those who engage in wrongdoing accountable, punitive approaches can result in maladaptive shame displacement, which can lead to withdrawal, attacking self, avoidance, and attacking others. A punishment-based approach seeks to "nd who is to blame and asks these questions:

• Who did it?• What “rule” was broken?• How should the offender be punished?87

RP interventions view transgressions as harm done to people and communities, encourage adaptive shame management, and ask these questions:

• What is the harm to all parties involved and to the community?

• What needs to be done to repair the harm?• Who is responsible for this repair?• What needs to occur to prevent similar harm in the

future?

RationalizationsTo hold students who engaged in wrongdoing accountable requires they accept personal responsibility for the harm they have caused. Students must “own it” before they can “"x it.” Very oen, those who are hurtful will rationalize their wrongdoing.88 is will interfere with acceptance of responsibility and efforts to remedy the harm. e common rationalization approaches are:

• Spin It. “It was a prank.” • Deny Personal Responsibility. “Everybody does it.” • Deny the Harm. “It wasn’t that bad.” • Blame the Victim. “He deserved it.”

Educators and students should both be taught about these common rationalizations, so that when they are used this is immediately recognized and challenged.

- 9 -

Achieving AccountabilityKey questions that can be asked of students who were hurtful are:

• What was your goal? Or what were you trying to accomplish?

• Why did you think this was okay? (Challenge rationalizations.)

• How would you feel if someone did this to you? (Reinforce personal values.)

• What do you think others think about what you did or said? (Reinforce positive social norms.)

• What do you think you need to do to make things right? (Encourage restoration.)

Embrace Civility in the Digital Age’s program Be a Friend ~ Lend a Hand teaches students to recognize and challenge these rationalizations. e intervention approach recommended in Embrace Civility in the Digital Age’s Professional Development Resources focuses on assisting the hurtful student to achieve a full acknowledgement of wrongdoing and recognition of the harmful impact.

Recommended Positive Strategies

Helpful Consent DecreeIn March 2012, the Anoka-Hennepin School District entered into a consent decree with U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, as well as student plaintiffs, that resolved a lawsuit and enforcement action related to Title IX gender-based harassment.89 In a U.S. Department of Education press release announcing the Anoka-Hennepin Consent Decree, was the following statement:

rough the Consent Decree, it is our hope that Anoka-Hennepin, Minnesota’s largest school District educating nearly 40,000 students in 37 schools, will become a model for other school Districts in its efforts to address sex-based and other types of prohibited harassment.90

e importance of student leadership was also emphasized in the press release:

e Departments are especially grateful to the courageous students who came forward in this case and provided invaluable insights that strengthened the Decree. It explicitly provides opportunities for student participation in the District’s ongoing anti-harassment efforts.

Notable inclusions in the consent decree were: • Effective coordination, with a requirement for

designated staff to be responsible for efforts to address these issues at a district and school level.

• An expanded approach to address students’ mental health and social emotional issues.

• Annual measurement, including use of an annual survey and student focus groups.

• Active and meaningful involvement of students both in providing insight and guidance as members of district and school committees and in peer leadership programs.

• Working speci"cally with populations of students that are more typically targeted.

• Assessing the effectiveness of school interventions.

Positive Relations Comprehensive Action Plane following are recommended positive strategies:

• Ensure Focus & Accountability. Place a high priority on addressing the issues of bullying and other social cruelty. Dedicate staff at the district and school level and establish broad-based committees. Use approaches that are grounded in research insight and have a likelihood of success. Engage in local evaluation of effectiveness. Ensure accountability through local measurement that includes survey data, student focus groups, incident reports, and an assessment of the effectiveness of interventions.

• Establish the Foundation. Focus on the school-wide positive management of student behavior and implement a comprehensive approach to increase students’ social, emotional, cultural, and relationship competencies.

• Fully Engage Students. Fully engage students to provide valuable insight through focus groups and with student representation on the school and district committees. Establish a student Leadership Team that will be responsible for activities to support positive school climate and positive personal relationships. Ensure students know how to effectively intervene when they witness bullying or other hurtful behavior, stop themselves from being hurtful and make amends, and effectively handle situations if someone is hurtful to them.

• Provide Professional Development. Prioritize professional development needs based on staff roles. Key groups include Leadership Team and teachers and support profess ionals . Del iver profess ional development in a way that will lead to improved practice.

• Ensure Effective & Positive Interventions. Shi from punitive responses to an approach that combines MTSS and RP to more effectively addresses the challenges faced by all students involved in hurtful situations and hold those students who were hurtful accountable in a manner that remedies the harm and stops the continuation of the problem. Make sure students know they can talk with a school staff member to gain guidance and support in addressing a personal relationship problem without turning this into a disciplinary matter. Evaluate the effectiveness of every school intervention.

- 10 -

Embrace Civility ResourcesPositive Relations @ School (& Elsewhere): Legal Parameters & Positive Strategies to Address Bullying and Harassment is book provides extensive coverage of the issues addressed in this document, along with a comprehensive action plan that was developed in reliance on:

• e Anoka Hennepin consent decree.91

• ED guidance from the Supportive School Discipline Initiative and recommendations for students with disabilities.92

• Research insight.93

• Professional Recommendations.94

Positive Relations Professional Development ResourcesEmbrace Civility in the Digital Age has developed a cost- and time-effective model to facilitate district-wide professional development that will also increase student voice. A “&ipped classroom-student engagement” approach is used. To accomplish this, the issues have been segmented into units that are addressed in short videos (around 20 minutes) and brief documents (5-6 pages). Staff should watch and read these on their own. For most units, several questions for staff to ask students are provided. Staff record their thoughts and insight from students on a one-page report form, which then forms the basis for a staff discussion at a staff meeting. e report form will also provide greater student insight for the Leadership Team.

Positive Relations Teacher & Support Professional Development Resourcese primary focus for these resources is to assist teachers and support professionals in understanding how to discuss positive relations with students and intervene in the situations they witness in a way that supports those who are targeted gain resilience, encourages those who are hurtful to acknowledge wrongdoing and remedy the harm, and encourages witnesses to step in to help. e Bullying Prevention: Time to Rethink & Redirect report and video should be considered part of this program. e additional materials are set forth in four units.

• Helping Students Who Are Targeted Gain Resilience.• Helping Students Who Are Hurtful Stop, Own It, and Fix It.• Encouraging Positive Peer Intervention.• Effective Initial Staff Interventions in Hurtful Situations.

Given the time that will be required the preparation time for each unit should be considered 1.0 Professional Development Unit, with more time allocated based on staff discussion.

Positive Relations Leadership Team Professional Development &Resources (under development)is program is under development and will be offered as an online graduate course, as well as professional development resources. e topics include the above units and the following:

• Discriminatory Harassment & IDEA. • Free Speech v Disparaging & Off-Campus Speech. • Comprehensive Positive Relations Action Plan, with

Framework and Planning Audit.• Ensuring Likelihood of Success & Accountability. • Effective Investigations, with Investigation Protocol.

• Positive Formal Interventions, with Positive Support Guidelines & an Accountability Process and Agreement.

Be a Friend ~ Lend a Hand: How Young People Can Powerfully Promote Positive RelationsBe a Friend ~ Lend a Hand is a student-led program that teaches "ve powerfully positive skills:

Reach Out. Reach out to be kind to a person being hurt or le out and help friends resolve con&ict.Say “Stop.” Safely tell a person being hurtful to stop in private or publicly.Report Concerns. Tell an adult who can help about situations that are serious. Stop, Own It & Fix It. Stop yourself from being hurtful and make things right if you were.Be Positively Powerful. Build your self-con"dence and respond effectively if someone is hurtful.

is program is best implemented using a survey that solicits insight into student norms and skills. is survey also solicits information on school climate and negative incidents that can support more effective assessment and professional development, as well as evaluation.

About the AuthorNancy Willard, M.S., J.D. has degrees in special education and law. She taught emotionally disturbed students, worked in the area of computer law and then educational technology planning. en as students started using the Internet there was a need for combined expertise in youth risk, technology use, and legal issues. Nancy was the author of the "rst book ever published that addressed issues of cyberbullying, Cyberbullying and Cyberthreats: Responding to the Challenge of Online Social Cruelty, reats, and Distress (2007, Research Press). She is also the author of Cyber Savvy: Embracing Digital Safety and Civility (2011, Corwin Press) and Cyber-Safe Kids, Cyber-Savvy Teens: Helping Your Child Use the Internet Safely and Responsibly (2007, Jossey Bass).Along this path, Nancy realized that it is impossible to address issues of bullying in the school environment or when using digital technologies using a 20th Century “rules and punishment” approach. Nancy promotes a 21st Century approach to address the age old problem of bullying by ensuring a positive school climate, engaging students as full participants in the effort, and resolving negative incidents in a positive and restorative manner.

- 11 -

Embrace Civility in the Digital Age Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D., February 18, 2015Website: http://embracecivility.org/ Email: info@embracecivility.org.© 2015 Embrace Civility in the Digital Age. May be reproduced for non-pro"t, educational purposes.

- 12 -

1 Robers, S., J. Zhang, J.L. Truman, and T.D. Snyder, Indicators of school crime safety: 2012, Bureau of Justice Statistics: Washington, DC. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2012/ and http://www.cdc.gov/ healthyyouth/yrbs/pdf/trends/us_violenceschool_ trend_yrbs.pdf.2 Yeager, D.S., Fong, C.J., Lee, H.Y., & Espelage, D. (in press). Declines in Efficacy of Anti-Bullying Programs Among Older Adolescents: A Developmental eory and a ree-Level Meta-Analysis, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. Stuart-Cassel, V, Bell, A. & Springer, J.F. (2011) Analysis of State Bullying Laws and Policies. U.S. Department of Education. http://www.ed.gov/ news/press-releases/us-education-department-releases-analysis-state-bullying-laws-and-policies.4 West, S.L. & O’Neal, K.K. (2004) Project D.A.R.E. Outcome Effectiveness Revisited. Am J Public Health. 2004 June; 94(6): 1027–1029.5 Davis, S. & Nixon, C. (2013) Youth Voice Project: Student Insights into Bullying and Peer Mistreatment. Research Press: Illinois; Davis S. & Nixon, C. (2011) Youth Voice Project, National Data Set. Youth Voice Project. http://www.youthvoiceproject.com.6 http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/secretary-duncan-attorney- general-holder-announce-effort-respond-school-prison-p. e Initiative introduced helpful resources for schools, including: U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, (2014) Supportive School Discipline Initiative, School Discipline Guidance Package. http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/ school-discipline/index.html?exp=1. and Stuart-Cassel, et. al., supra.7 Stuart-Cassel, , et. al., supra.8 http://www.stopbullying.gov/9 Robers, supra and CDC, supra.10 Robers, supra.11 CDC, supra. 12 Yeager, , et. al., supra.13 Positive Behavior Interventions and Support, PBIS and the Law. https://www.pbis.org/school/pbis-and-the-law.14 Bradshaw, C.P., Mitchell, M.M. & Leaf, P.J. (2010). Examining the effects of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on student outcomes: R14esults from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions.15 Personal communications with Rob Horner of PBIS. 16 Ferguson, C., San Miguel, C., Kilburn, J., & Sanchez, P. (2007). e effectiveness of school-based anti-bullying programs: A meta-analytic review. Criminal Justice Review, 32, 401-414; Merrell, K. W., Gueldner, B. A., Ross, S. W., & Isava, D. M. (2008). How effective are school bullying intervention programs? A meta-analysis of intervention research. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 26-42; Ryan, W., & Smith, J. D. (2009). Antibullying programs in schools: How effective are evaluation practices? Prevention Science, 10, 248-259. 17 Farrington, D. P., & Tto", M. M. (2009). School-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization (Campbell Systematic Reviews No. 6). Oslo, Norway: Campbell Corporation. 18 Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school. Oxford, England: Blackwell. 19 American Academy of Pediatrics (2009) Policy Statement—Role of the Pediatrician in Youth Violence Prevention, http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2009/06/11/peds.2009-0943.full.pd. In reading the policy statement there is some question regarding whether the statement constituted an actual “endorsement” but the statement has been translated as such. See: f http://www.clemson.edu/olweus/Training%20Materials/TrainersManualOld/Newsletters/Newsletter-Jun%2009.pdf. Also search for: American Academy of Pediatrics, Olweus, endorsement.”20 Espelage D.L. (2013) is Issue, eory Into Practice, eory Into Practice. 52:4, pp. 229-232.21 A detailed evaluation abstract of OBPP is on the Blueprints site: http://www.blueprintsprograms.com/evaluationAbstracts.php?pid=17ba0791499db908433b80f37 c5c89b870084; e National Registry is here: bhttp://nrepp.samhsa.gov/.22 Center for Disease Control (http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/bullying-de"nitions-"nal-a.pdf23 http://www.StopBullying.gov/what-is-bullying/de"nition/index.html.24 Ybarra M.L., Boyd D, Korchmaros JD, et al. (2012) De"ning and measuring cyberbullying within the larger context of bullying victimization. J Adolesc Health 2012;51(1):53-58. DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.12.031. (Asked students about bullying in a variety of ways, including a format similar to YRB, then asked a follow-up question whether this involved someone with greater power or strength. Only 59% of the students who said they were bullied based on this de"nition, then indicated this involved someone with greater power or strength).25 Hamburger ME, Basile KC, Vivolo AM.(2011) Measuring Bullying Victimization, Perpetration, and Bystander Experiences: A Compendium of Assessment Tools. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2011.26 Stuart-Cassel, et.al., supra27 e standards are derived from these three cases: Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Comm. Sch. Dist 393 U.S. 503 (1969); Davis v Monroe, 526 U.S. 629, 633, 650 (1999); Saxe v. State College 240 F.3d 200 (3d Cir. 2001). ese cases are discussed in full in Willard, Positive Relations @ School (& Elsewhere). 28 Bradshaw, C.P., Sawyer, A.L. & O'Brennan, L.M. Bullying and Peer Victimization at School: Perceptual Differences Between Students and School Staff. School Psychology Review, Volume 36, No. 3, pp. 361-382 (2007).29 Davis, S. & Nixon, C. ,(2013) supra.30 Davis S. & Nixon, C. (2011) , supra

31 Perkins HW, Perkins JM, Craig DW. (2014) No safe haven: locations of harassment and bullying victimization in middle schools. J Sch Health. 84: 810-818.32 Personal communciation from Michael B. Greene, Ph.D. Greene Consulting www.greeneconsultingnj.com.33 http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2010/Bills/PL10/122_.PDF.34 Annual Report of the Anti-Bullying Task Force. http://www.state.nj.us/education/students/safety/behavior/hib/task/AnnualReport14.pdf New Jersey, Department of Education, Commission Report, (2013). http://www.state.nj.us/education/schools/vandv/1314/vandv.pdf.35 Analysis of data from the Commission reported provided by Michael B. Greene, Ph.D., Senior Fellow, School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University, January, 2014.36 http://www.state.nj.us/education/students/yrbs/.37 Steinhauer, J. (November 7, 2013) Reports of Military Sexual Assault Rise Sharply. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/07/ us/reports-of-military-sexual-assault-rise-sharply.html?_r=0.38 e Bully Project. http://www.thebullyproject.com/.39 Willard, N. (2014) What Are You Doing To Prevent Bullying. District Administration. http://www.districtadministration.com/issue/district-administration-september-2014.40 Center for Disease Control’s (2014) e Relationship Between Bullying and Suicide: What We Know and What it Means for Schools http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/bullying-suicide-translation-"nal-a.pdf.41 Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681-1688.42 Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d-2000d-7.43 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. 29 U.S.C § 794.44 e Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12134.45 Davis v Monroe County Board of Education, 526 U.S. 629, 633, 650 (1999). 46 Zeno v. Pine Plains Central School District, 702 F3d 655 (2d Cir. 2012).47 T.E. v Pine Bush. 12-CV-2303.48 Brochure for New Jersey Institute for Continuing Legal Education conference. 8/19/2014. 49 U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (October 26, 2010) Dear Colleague Letter on Harassment and Bullying. http://www2.ed.gov/ about/offices/list/ocr/ letters/colleague-201010.html.50 U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (August 20, 2013) Dear Colleague Letter Keeping Students with Disabilities Safe from Bullying. http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/ guid/idea/memosdcltrs/ bullyingdcl-8-20-13.pdf.51 U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, (2014) Dear Colleague Letter on bullying of students under Section 504. http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-bullying-201410.pdf.52 http://www.stopbullying.gov/videos/2014/02/civil-rights.html. 53 Marwick A. & boyd d., (2014): ‘It's just drama’: teen perspectives on con&ict and aggression in a networked era, Journal of Youth Studies,54 Yeager, et. al, supra.55 http://www.p12.nysed.gov/dignityact/ and http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/SchSup/SchSafety/SafeSuppAct/index.htm56 Bradshaw, C.P. ,Waasdorp, T.E. O’Brennan, L.M. & Gulemetova, M. (2011) Findings from the National Education Association’s Nationwide Study of Bullying: Teachers’ and Education Support Professionals’ Perspectives. National Education Association. http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/ Nationwide_Bullying_ Research_Findings.pdf; U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (2010) Peer-to-Peer Violence and Bullying: Examining the Federal Response. http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/2011statutory.pdf; Lumeng, J.C., (2010) Forrest, P, Appugliese, D.P., Kaciroti, N. Corwyn, R.F & Bradley, R.H. Weight Status as a Predictor of Being Bullied in ird rough Sixth Grades. Pediatrics Vol. 125 No. 6; Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (2011) e 2011 National School Climate Survey. http://glsen.org/nscs; Rose, C. A., Espelage, D. L., Aragon, S. R., & Elliott, J. (2011a). Bullying and victimization among students in special education and general education curricula. Exceptionality Education International, 21(2), 2–14. Rose, C. A., Monda-Amaya, L. E., & Espelage, D. L. (2011b). Bullying perpetration and victimization in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 32, 114–130.57 McKown, C, Gumbiner, L. M. , Russo, N. M. andLipton, M. (2009) 'Social-Emotional Learning Skill, Self-Regulation, and Social Competence in Typically Developing and Clinic-Referred Children', Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 38: 6, 858 — 871.58 GLSEN, supra. Butler, J. (2009) Unsafe in the Schoolhouse: Abuse of Children with Disabilities. e Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, Inc.; Puhl, R.M., Peterson, J.L. & Luedicke, J. (2013) Weight-Based Victimization: Bullying Experiences of Weight Loss Treatment–Seeking Youth. Pediatrics 131:e1-e9; Losen, D.J. (2011). Discipline Policies, Successful Schools, and Racial Justice. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/discipline-policies.59 American Educational Research Association. (2013). Prevention of Bullying in Schools, Colleges, and Universities: Research Report and Recommendations. Washington, DC: http://www.aera.net/newsroom/news/ preventionoullyingresearchreportandrecomm/tabid/14865/default.aspx. pp. 9-10.60 Rodkin, P.C. (2012) Bullying and Children's Peer Relationships. Colleagues Volume 8 Issue 2 Education Matters Article 4, pp 5-10. Rodkin, P. C., Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & Van Acker, R. (2006). ey’re cool: Social status and peer group supports for aggressive boys and girls. Social Development, 15, 175-204; Farmer, T. W., Petrin, R. A., Robertson, D. L., Fraser, M. W., Hall, C. M., Day. S. H., & Dadisman, K. (2010). Peer relations of bullies, bully-victims, and victims: e two social worlds of bullying in second-grade classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 110, 364-392.61 Yeager, D.S., Fong, C.J., Lee, H.Y., & Espelage, D. (in press). Declines in Efficacy of Anti-Bullying Programs Among Older Adolescents: A Developmental eory and a ree-Level Meta-Analysis, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology.

- 13 -

62 Juvonen, J. Wang, Y. & Espinoza, G. (2013) Physical Aggression, Spreading of Rumors, and Social Prominence in Early Adolescence: Reciprocal Effects Supporting Gender Similarities? J Youth Adolescence. 42:1801–1810.63 Juvonen, et. al., supra.64 Rodkin, et. al., supra; Simona, C.S., Caravits, P.D., & Silmivalli C. (2008) Unique and Interactive Effects of Empathy and Social Status on Involvement in Bullying Social Development, Vol. 18, No. 1., pp. 140-163; Salmivalli, C, (2010), supra..65 Berkowitz, A.D.(2010) Fostering Healthy Norms to Prevent Violence and Abuse: e Social Norms Approach. In Kaufman, K. Ed, e Prevention of Sexual Violence: A Practitioner’s Sourcebook, NEARI Press. Page 3.66 Perkins, H.W. , Craig, D.W. and Perkins. J.M. 2011."Using Social Norms to Reduce Bullying: A Research Intervention in Five Middle Schools." Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp. 703-722. DOI: 10.1177/1368430210398004; http://www.youthhealthsafety.org/bullying.htm.67 Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1991). Bullying among Australian school children: Reported behavior and attitudes toward victims. Journal of Social Psychology, 131, 615–627; Rigby, K., & Johnson, B. (2006). Expressed readiness of Australian schoolchildren to act as bystanders in support of children who are being bullied. Educational Psychology,68 Hawkins, D. L., Pepler, D. J., & Craig, W. (2001). Naturalistic Observations of Peer Interventions in Bullying. Social Development, 10(4): 512-527; Henderson, N. R., & Hymel, S. (2002). Peer contributions to bullying in schools: Examining student response categories. Poster presented at the National Association of School Psychologists Annual Convention, Chicago, February; O'Connell, P., Pepler, D., & Craig, W. (1999). Peer involvement in bullying: Insights and challenges for intervention. Journal of Adolescence.69 Sainio, M., Veenstra, R., Huitsing, G., & Salmivalli, C. (2011). Victims and their defenders: A dyadic approach. International Journal of Behavioral Development, vol. 35 no. 2 144-151; Salmivalli (2010), supra.70 Salmivalli, C., Lappalainen, M., & Lagerspetz, K. (1998). Stability and change of behavior in connection with bullying in schools: A two-year follow-up. Aggressive Behavior, 24, 205–218; Rigby & Johnson, supra; Henderson & Hymel, supra; O'Connell, et. al, supra; Salmivalli (2010), supra.71 http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/secretary-duncan-attorney- general-holder-announce-effort-respond-school-prison-p. e Initiative introduced helpful resources for schools, including: U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, (2014) Supportive School Discipline Initiative, School Discipline Guidance Package. http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/ school-discipline/index.html?exp=1.72 Id.73 Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning. http://www.casel.org/social-and-emotional-learning/core-competencies/74 Idsoe, T., Dyregrov, A. & Idsoe, E.C. (2012) Bullying and PTSD Symptoms. J Abnorm Child Psychol 40:901–911. http://www.uis.no/news/being- bullied-can-cause-trauma-symptoms-article62673-8865.html; See also, Penning, Susan Louise, Bhagwanjee, Anil, & Govender, Kaymarlin. (2010). Bullying boys: the traumatic effects of bullying in male adolescent learners. Journal of Child & Adolescent Mental Health, 22(2), 131-143; Vaillancourt, T., Hymel, S., & McDougall, P., (2013). e biological underpinnings of peer victimization: Understanding why and how the effects of bullying can last a lifetime. eory into Practice, 52, 241-248..75 American Psychiatric Publishing (2013) Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/PTSD%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf.76 http://www.nctsnet.org/.77 Seeley, K., Tombari, M., Bennett, L.J. & Dunkle, J.B. (2009) Peer Victimization in Schools: A Set of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies of the Connections Among Peer Victimization, School Engagement, Truancy, School Achievement, and Other Outcomes. National Center for School Engagement.78 Salmivalli, C, (2010) Bullying and the Peer Group: A Review. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 15, 112-120.79 Whitlock, J. Wyman P.A., Moore. S.R. (in press) Connectedness and Suicide Prevention in Adolescents: Pathways and Implications. Suicide and Life-reatening Behavior, e American Association of Suicidology. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/sltb.12071/abstract.80 Tedeshi, R.G., & Calhoun, L.G. (2004). Posttraumatic Growth: Conceptual Foundation and Empirical Evidence. Philadelphia, PA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.81 Shure, M. B. (l992). I Can Problem Solve (ICPS): An Interpersonal Cognitive Problem Solving program [intermediate elementary grades], Champaign, IL: Research Press.82 Heager, DS., Trzesniewski, K.H. & Dweck, C.S. (2013) An Implicit eroies of Personality Intervention Reduces Adolescent Aggression in Response to Victimization and Exclusion. Child Development, Volume 84, Number 3, pp 970-988. 83 Seligman, M.E.P., Steen, T.A., Park, N. & Peterson, C. (2005) Positive Psychology Progress: Empirical Validation of Interventions, American Psychologist. Vol. 60, No. 5, 410–421. See the marvelous Character Strengths Survey on the VIA Institute on Character web site: http://www.viacharacter.org.84 http://www.mindful.org/the-mindful-society/mindfulness-in-education-research-highlights.85 Cuddy, Amy J.C., Caroline A. Wilmuth, and Dana R. Carney. "e Bene"t of Power Posing Before a High-Stakes Social Evaluation." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 13-027, September 2012. http://dash. harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/ 9547823/13-027.pdf?sequence=1. 86 Nathanson, D. (1992). Shame and Pride: Affect, Sex, and the Birth of the Self. New York: Norton. See also the International Institute for Restorative Practices at http://iirp.edu.87 Zehr, H. e Little Book of Restorative Justice. Good Books: Intercourse PA. 88 Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognition theory of moral thought and action. In W. M.Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Handbook of moral behavior and development (Vol. 1, pp. 45-96). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.

89 http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/edu/documents/casesummary.php# anoka. e other parties included several student plaintiffs, whose case was supported by attorneys from the Southern Poverty Law Clinic and Lambda Legal.90 http://www.White House.gov/blog/2012/03/08/us-departments- justice-and-education-resolve-harassment-allegations-anoka-hennepin-s.91 Anoka Hennepin Consent Decree, supra.92 U.S. Department of Education, Supportive School Discipline Initiative. (2014) Guiding Principles: A Resource Guide for Improving School Climate and Discipline http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/school-discipline/ index.htm; USED OSERS, 2013 Dear Colleague Letter, Enclosure,, supra.93 American Educational Research Association, supra; ompson, F & Smith, P.K. (2011) e Use and Effectiveness of Anti-Bullying Strategies in Schools. Research Report DFE-RR098 . UK Department for Education. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the- use-and-effectiveness-of-anti-bullying-strategies-in-schools.94 Rossen, E., & Cowan, K. C. (2012). A Framework for School-wide Bullying Prevention and Safety [Brief]. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. http://www.nasponline.org/resources/bullying/ bullying_brief_12.pdf.