Blog

There has been a lot of talk about improving school climate recently, in line with the U. S. Department of Education’s new focus for public schools across the nation (and their Safe and Supportive Schools initiative). I have recently discussed it in January at a NCPC summit, and covered it briefly two weeks ago while at the Bullying Summit in DC, but I’d like to expand on it for our readers. As a starting point, though, I need to provide a foundational backdrop. We’ll explore climate and cyberbullying in great detail over the upcoming months.

To begin, Welsh, Greene, and Jenkins (1999) have defined school climate as “the unwritten beliefs, values, and attitudes that become the style of interaction between students, teachers, and administrators…[it] sets the parameters of acceptable behavior among all school actors, and it assigns individual and institutional responsibility for school safety.” While that is a bit academic and wordy, I feel that it conveys what is meant. Basically, we are talking about the quality of life for students and staff on campus.

The benefits of a positive school climate have been identified through much research over the last thirty years. It contributes to attendance, student achievement, and other desirable student outcomes. Improving climate on school grounds has also been linked to improvements in student behavior – such as a decreased peer-on-peer bullying and an increase in perceived and actual safety.

In a recent study we conducted, students who experienced cyberbullying (both those who were victims and those who admitted to cyberbullying others) perceived a poorer climate or culture at their school than those who had not experienced cyberbullying. Youth were asked a variety of questions, such as if they “enjoy going to school,” “feel safe at school,” “feel that teachers at their school really try to help them succeed,” and “feel that teachers at their school care about them.” Those who admitted to cyberbullying others or who were the target of cyberbullying were less likely to agree with those statements.

We are continuing to explore this relationship, and believe strongly in efforts to enhance climate in schools across the nation. There are very practical ways to do this, and we’ll discuss them in forthcoming blog entries.

References:

Gottfredson, G. D., & Gottfredson, D. G. (1989). School climate, academic performance, attendance, and dropout. North Charleston, SC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Haynes, N. M., Emmons, C., & Ben-Avie, M. (1997). School climate as a factor in student adjustment and achievement. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 9, 321-329.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2009). Bullying Beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Responding to Cyberbullying. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications (Corwin Press).

Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among U.S. youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285(16), 2094-2100.

Rigby, K. (1996). Bullying in schools: And what to do about it. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Stover, D. (2005). Climate and Culture: Why your board should pay attention to the attitudes of students and staff. American School Board Journal, 192(12).

Welsh, W. N. (2000). The effects of school climate on school disorder. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 567, 88-107.

I have recently been chatting with Dr. Linda Young – whose work I greatly respect – about the topic of “humor limits.” In our trainings to youth-serving professionals, Justin and I discuss how teaching adolescents when comments made cross over a line and no longer are “funny” but are “abusive” and harmful. For example, the term “food baby” is currently used among teenagers to reference their slightly enlarged or bloated stomach after eating way too much. This is generally funny when a person points out their own food baby to others, but can cross a line and be intepreted as mean-spirited, embarrassing, or otherwise rude when a person points it out in someone else who may be self-conscious about their weight.

Additionally, many things are described by youth as “retarded” or “gay” – a practice which we do not condone in the slightest. While we wish that adolescents would not use these terms at all, those who do should be very careful as it may offend one or more persons in their social audience. Those words can easily exceed a standard of acceptability in conversations, and be perceived as prejudicial, hateful, and harassing.

Due to the anonymity, pseudonymity, and freedom that online communication allows as compared to face-to-face interactions, humor limits are easily crossed – and many statements made on Facebook walls and comment threads in an attempt to be sarcastic or humorous end up inflicting harm. This can at times be considered cyberbullying, and often leads to hurt feelings and broken friendships. We would do well to share various examples of this phenomenon with kids – and discuss them in detail – so that they more readily think about their audience and how their words might be interpreted before posting or sending potentially inflammatory content.