Blog

We’ve been discussing the importance of school climate as it relates to bullying and cyberbullying quite a bit on this blog (see here  and here for examples). Well, we just published a whole book on the topic! School Climate 2.0: Preventing Cyberbullying and Sexting is now in print and available from the publisher, on Amazon, or many other online bookstores. This is the first book on the topic of cyberbullying and sexting that focuses primarily on what can be done to prevent the behaviors from happening in the first place. We argue that “educators who establish a nurturing and caring classroom and school climate will make great strides in preventing a whole host of problematic behaviors, both at school and online.” The book provides concrete examples of how to do just that.

Here is an excerpt from the Preface:

This book seeks to explain and promote the importance of school climate in preventing teen technology misuse. Most of books and articles in print today simply describe the nature of cyberbullying or sexting (e.g., what it looks like, how much of it is occurring, and among whom). While this is an important first step, we seek to meaningfully build on the knowledge base and more explicitly connect the high-tech behaviors of teens to the school environment.

 

Much of what you will read is based on information we have learned through our decade-long exploration of the ways teens are using and misusing technology. We have completed seven formal independent studies involving over 12,000 students from over 80 middle and high schools from different regions of the United States. To guide the discussion, this book specifically features information from our most recent study, a random sample of over 4,400 middle and high school students (11 to 18 years old) from one of the largest school districts in the United States. Surveys were administered to students in 2010, and the information gathered represents some of the most recent and comprehensive data on these topics. We will also refer to the work of many others who have labored to better understand how adolescents use, misuse, and abuse these technologies.

 

In addition to the quantitative data collected, we have also informally spoken to thousands of teens, parents, educators, law enforcement officers, and countless other adults who work directly with youth. Our observations are essentially a reflection of their experiences. During these interactions, we have been fortunate to learn from those on the front lines about what they are dealing with, what is working, and what problems they are running into. The stories we hear are largely consistent with the data we and others have collected that will be presented throughout this text. We also receive numerous emails and phone calls on a weekly basis from educators, mental health professionals, parents, and other youth-serving adults looking for help with specific issues. These conversations help us to understand and consider the problem from a variety of angles and perspectives. All of the stories included in this book are real. In some cases the language has been modified slightly to fix spelling and grammar mistakes and improve readability, but the overall messages have not been changed.

 

In Chapter 1 we begin the discussion by focusing on the intersection of teens and technology and how the inseparability of adolescents from their high-tech devices affects, and is influenced by, what is going on at school. In Chapter 2, we outline the characteristics of a positive school climate along with some of the beneficial outcomes associated with such an environment.

 

In Chapter 3 we detail the nature of bullying in the 21st century. In many ways the bullying of today is very similar to the way it was when we were growing up. But technology has enabled would-be bullies to extend their reach, resulting in many significant challenges for educators, parents, and others who are working to resolve relationship problems. Cyberbullying, which we define as willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices, typically refers to incidents in which students threaten, humiliate, or otherwise hassle their peers through malicious text messages, web pages, or postings on Facebook or YouTube. It is clear that peer harassment that occurs on school grounds is a significant threat to a positive school climate. That said, online bullying also disrupts the ability of students to feel safe and secure at school. The vast majority of the time, targets of cyberbullying know the person doing the bullying (85 percent of the time in our research), and most of the time the bully is someone from their school. If students regularly post hurtful, embarrassing, or threatening messages to a fellow classmate’s Facebook page, for example, it unquestionably affects that student’s ability to feel comfortable, free, and safe to focus on learning at school.

 

Chapter 4 describes sexting, which we define as the sending or receiving of sexually explicit or sexually suggestive nude or seminude images or video that generally occurs via cell phone (although it can also occur via the Web). Some have described this problem in dismissive ways, calling it this generation’s way of “flirting” or characterizing it as a safer way to experiment sexually and come to terms with one’s own sexuality. While this may be true in part, engaging in sexting can lead to some significant social and legal consequences. We begin to tie everything together in Chapter 5, where we explicitly link school climate to online misbehaviors. Here again we argue that schools with better climates will see fewer cyberbullying, sexting, or other online problems among students. Ancillary benefits for educators who harness the power of a positive climate at school may include better attendance, higher school achievement, and more cooperative attitudes across the student body and among staff. A school with a positive climate is definitely more enjoyable to work and learn in, and can therefore lead to many other beneficial outcomes for students and staff alike. The remaining chapters of the book focus on providing you with strategies to establish and maintain a positive climate (Chapter 6) through peer mentoring and social norming (Chapter 7), assessment (Chapter 8), and appropriate response strategies (Chapter 9).

You can learn more about the book, including a full table of contents and reviews from folks who have read it, on our companion website, www.schoolclimate20.com. You can also like us on Facebook, and follow us on twitter. Let us know what you think!

Justin and I had a great time at Lady Gaga’s Born This Way Foundation launch at Harvard University last week.  It was amazing to be surrounded by such brilliant scholars, researchers, and practitioners from across the United States, and even a few from England and Australia.  The professional event we were a part of was entitled “Symposium on Youth Meanness and Cruelty,” and this involved an all-day meeting and brainstorming session to identify priorities for the Foundation.  Afterwards, the highly-publicized launch event at Harvard’s Sanders Theatre gave Oprah Winfrey and other luminaries like Deepak Chopra and the Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius the opportunity to ask meaningful questions to Lady Gaga about the genesis, role, and goals of her new Foundation.

I should mention that Lady Gaga also gave her mom Cynthia Germanotta the opportunity to share from her heart, as this Foundation (or Movement, as they would prefer to characterize it) is their joint project.  Both were very eloquent and impressive, and we definitely appreciated what they had to say.  Most important to me was the fact that they desired to do this work against the backdrop of solid research which could properly inform them as to what can work and what will fail.  A handful of celebrities have come up with similar campaigns but have not sought the assistance of scholars in the field to let them know where and how to direct monies and other resources.  Finally, I should say that it’s somewhat unbelievable that we were just a handful of feet away from arguably the two most influential women in the entire world, in our generation.

My task at the Symposium was to help lead the School Climate/Culture stream (there were five other streams which included: Classroom-based curricula, Curricula as campaign for a networked age, Evaluation and assessment, Grassroots and peer-driven initiatives, and Law and policy—which Justin participated in).  I was particularly excited about my role in the school climate stream because of our forthcoming new book entitled “School Climate 2.0” – we’ll share more information about that in the weeks ahead.  The Foundation is dedicated to youth empowerment, and believes that: (1) all youth have the right to be safe; (2) all youth need to have the skills to be successful; and  (3) all youth need to have opportunities to be productive citizens.  Our Stream goals were to identify gaps, holes, and issues in the school climate arena, and to inform the Foundation’s agenda in this space.

Here’s basically what we came up with together, as a team (including Rick Weissbourd – my co-leader, Peggy Sheehy, Peter Smith, Arthur Horne, Gary McDaniel, Dierdre O’Connor, Lee Rush, Howard Gardner,  Deborah Temkin, Peter Wyman, Margot Strom, Larry Magid, Jeff Parotti, Ned Crowley, and Hannah Deresiewicz).

NEED TO KNOW POINTS:

1. Schools do not operate in a vacuum, but are rather embedded in a culture and society. Therefore, any focus on schools alone is limited. The shift needs to occur in culture and civil society, both from the top down (institutionally) and from the bottom-up (grassroots). That being said, schools are not powerless and have important access and resources (albeit never enough of the latter). Expecting schools to be the only site of social change, however, will fail to affect the entire environment youth inhabit.

2. In a similar vein, bullying is not an isolated youth phenomenon. Aggressive, prejudiced, and mean behavior is common among adults as well. Therefore, any solution to meanness and cruelty must confront these problems across demographics and while keeping in mind their causes (e.g. prejudice). Such a solution precludes adult-driven, vertical reflections and interventions that do not engage youth.  As such, young people can contribute to these reflections, as they offer perspective and experience not available to adults.

3. Traditionally, students in schools are often grouped as “successful,” “lost causes,” “athletes,” “geeks,” “outsiders,” and so forth. Reinforcing these often artificial categories limits both young people’s identities and our imagination when it comes to interventions. For example, zero-tolerance policies classify rule-breakers as “bad kids” incompatible with the school. Schools should encourage and build structures that lead to cross-interaction between groups and micro-cultures. For example, low-achieving students working with high-achieving peers begin to adopt better behavior. This is likewise true when it comes to social exposure (e.g. Gay-Straight Alliances).

4. Successful programs out there are diverse but share some characteristics. These include:

• youth involvement in agenda-setting, implementation, and evaluation;
• sustained and more meaningful parent involvement;
• investment by teachers, administrators, system, and community, especially in terms of funding;
• attention to students’ social success as well as academic, moving away from narrow attention to academic standards;
• direct interventions for particularly at risk groups blended with school climate initiatives (paying attention to the vast majority that are doing fine, while also “catching” the 5% at high risk through personal interventions).

ACTION ITEMS:

1. Prevention and intervention needs to begin at the youngest ages. While interventions for older young people are critical, there are diminishing returns to culture shifts once behaviors become firmly entrenched. Therefore, values and social-emotional skills should be part of core-learning goals from early education onward.

2. Training for the change-makers (teachers, students, community) should be undertaken strategically with express attention to cruelty and meanness. This is especially true for in-service and pre-service teacher training, which necessarily involves also meaningful feedback from young people. Likewise, progress toward this end should be assessed and made available to the public.

3. Supporting collaborative campaigns that harness youth collective power along with untapped resources, such as policy or even celebrity (this is where Lady Gaga can have a huge impact).

CROSS STREAM COLLABORATION:

1. Grassroots and peer-driven initiatives – school culture is created by everyone in the environment (and influenced by outside). Collaboration among all stakeholders guided by common principles will create comprehensive shifts. Relevant stakeholders include parents, law-enforcement, youth workers, mental health professionals, and others who work with and care about students.

2. Classroom-based curriculum: resources that draw on young peoples’ input and intrinsic motivation, including games, new media, social media.

3. Evaluation and assessment: Socio-emotional learning should be a core part of curriculum and mission, but standardizing it can be challenging and problematic.

BIG PICTURE IDEAS:

1. Young people have a collective intelligence that we do not have and cannot develop naturally. This is born of engagement with new media (game environments, virtual worlds, etc.). We can transcend the boundaries between youth and adults by using youth’s natural skills and intrinsic motivations.

2. Mini-documentaries can be created by youth featuring schools that are highlighting climate best practices, perhaps also tapping into the celebrity network of Lady Gaga for greater cache.

3. Collaborative efforts between youth, teachers, and other adults should be solicited and rewarded. It is important that we not create “adult solutions” to “kid problems,” but that we focus on human solutions to human problems.

As you can see, it was a pretty remarkable day.  I know that the Symposium was just the first step in what will be a long dialogue and a lot of work in this area.  We’re excited to be plugged in and will do what we can – with the help of so many other scholars and educators on the front lines – to assist Lady Gaga’s movement and make a measurable difference in emboldening students, equipping youth-serving adults, and promoting a kinder, braver world.

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.