Running Head: A Student Leadership Model, A Response to School Bullying

Student Leadership

A Response to School Bullying

Brad VanBeek

Central Michigan University

Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 2

Introduction

Bullying has been a part of the school experience for many years. People viewed it as a
normal part of school. A former school counselor and now a college professor commented that
people considered it kids being kids. They did not think there was anything they could do. He
went on to say that the administration in the school where he was a school counselor had a
perception problem. They felt that there was not a problem with bullying. However, because he
dealt directly with students the reality was quite different. There were incidents of bullying
everyday (personal communication, March 29, 2017).

It is no longer be viewed that way. In research done by the NEA (2010), 43% of school
employees surveyed reported that bullying is a moderate or major problem at their school. 62%
of employees reported witnessing a bullying event at their school.

Description of Bullying

Bullying occurs when there is a power difference between students. This can be related
to age difference, sex, race, economic status, or popularity. Often times those who are bullied are
different from others. They may wear glasses, may be over- or under- weight they may be gay.
Students who are bullied often times physically weak, have low self-esteem or are hyperactive
(DEsposito, 2011).

Bullying can take many forms. It can be physical such as hitting, kicking or damaging
personal belongings. It can be verbal by the use of threats or insults. There can be relational
bullying such as when someone is excluded from a group or false rumors are spread about
someone. There is also sexual bullying which may be in the form of inappropriate touching or
inappropriate comments of a sexual nature. Lately, there has been a rise in cyber or electronic
bullying where students use social media to bully other students (Roberge, 2012).

Those who bully often times come from dysfunctional homes. They have a need for
power and want to be in control. Many times bullying behavior is rewarded through attention,
popularity and by having others afraid of them.

Cost of Bullying

According to the National Education Associations Bullying Prevention in Public

School policy analysis report, 160,000 students will miss school because of a fear of being
bullied. It goes on to say that 8% of middle school students missed class due to bullying and that
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 3

1 in 4 students reported taking other actions such as skipping class or going home sick in order to
avoid a bully. This can have a financial cost to schools. One report showed that public schools
lose over $2 million in funding due to lower attendance and disciplinary actions taken due to
bullying at their schools (Phillips, 2011).

Students who are bullied experience a wide range of effects both short term and long
term. Some of these are psychological. Students become depressed. They experience anxiety.
They may have trouble sleeping. Victims of bullying experience academic difficulties and social
isolation. Extreme cases may even lead to suicidal thoughts and suicide (Effects of Bullying,
2017). Research has shown that bullied students can have an academic impact on students. One
study has shown that bulling cause up to a 1.5 letter grade decrease for middle school students.

Fowler writes about liberty or rights of students at school. One is the right is to not have
their right to learn infringed by other students. Clearly when a student misses school due to a
fear of being bullied, their right is being infringed upon. Later on he describes equal opportunity
as being one where everyone has the right to a good education regardless of such things as race,
sex, and handicap. Often bullies choose their victims on these characteristics (2013).

Bullies experience a number of negative consequences as well. First, those who were
bullies are more likely to drop out of school. They are also at an increased risk of suffering
psychological problems such as depression. They are more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol
(Effects of Bullying, 2017).

The good news is that researchers are finding a positive correlation between anti-bullying
programs and academic success. A preliminary study by the American Educational Research
Association (2013) has shown that lower rates and bullying was predictive of higher graduation
rates 4 years later.

Politics of Bullying Policies

In 2011, the Michigan Legislature passed Matts law. This law requires all school
districts to adopt policies that address bullying in their schools. This law included many
provisions related to bullying. It states that all students are protected under this law. Each
school must have a way to investigate each incident of bullying as well as a process to inform
parents. It encourages schools to have in place an anti-bullying task force and educational
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 4

programs for students and parents to help prevent bullying. However, the state did not tell
schools how to implement these measures (Matt Epling Safe School Law, 2011).

For the past four years, I have been a teacher at Santiago Christian School in the
Dominican Republic. We are a cross-cultural school. Both North American teachers and
Dominican teachers teach here. We are accredited through ACSI, an accrediting agency in the
United States so there are policies from the United States that we need to follow. However,
because we are located in the Dominican Republic we also need to abide by Dominican laws.

The Dominican teacher coordinator on staff told me that until recently, the Ministry of
Education had no policies related to bullying at school. (personal communication, March 20,
2017). The policies they followed were under the area of the Protection of Children and
Adolescents. The law was called Normas del Sistema Educativo Dominicano para la convivencia y la
disciplina escolar en los centros educativos pblicos y privados ( The Norms Education System for
Interaction and Discipline for Centers of Education) (2011). One article of this law addressed
bullying. It called for all schools to have in place consequences of bullying. It also said schools
to create an environment where all children feel safe.

For 2016-2017 school year the Ministry of Education created a document called
Protocolo Para la Promocion De La Cultura de Paz y Buen Trato en Los Centro Educativos
(Protocol for the Promotion of a Culture of Peace in Centers of Education). This document is
very similar to the Matt Epling Safe School Law. It states that schools need to be a place where
all students feel safe and can learn. Schools need to work hard to create a positive school
environment. There is a section specifically for bullying. That section outlines the steps that
schools should follow when bullying occurs including a process of reporting the event,
investigating what happened, contacting parents and different ways to deal with both the bully
and the victim (Protocolo Para la Promocion De La Cultura de Paz, 2016).

Even though Michigan has had a law in place since 2011, it has not been successful in
preventing bullying. According to research done by Wallet Hub Michigan ranked last of 46
states surveyed in its response to bullying (2016). Bullying and its consequences are import ant
to all involved in the education of our kids.

Laws have been passed concerning the need to have bullying policies in place, however,
schools and school districts are allowed to choose that best course of action for their school or
district. Schools have tried many different approaches to address bullying in schools. The three
I will discuss in this paper are Zero Tolerance, Early Intervention and Student Engagement.
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 5

Zero Tolerance Policies

Bullying in schools was first studied in the 1970s and schools started adopting anti-
bullying policies in the 1980s. May of the first policies were zero-tolerance policies. A zero
tolerance policy is one that has a main characteristic that all students who commit a given
offense receive the same treatment. Holloway (2002) defines zero tolerance as a set of
prescribed consequences and punishments that are required for dealing with all student-bullying
behaviors in school. It imposed an external locus of control. If you misbehave, you will be
punished. Under zero tolerance policies, all students are to be treated equally. According to
Daniel and Bondy (2008), the appeal of zero tolerance comes from the fact that all bullying is
addressed once school administrators are made aware of the issue. The belief was that once
students were made aware of the strict guidelines they would refrain from engaging in bullying
activities or they would face severe consequences.

With increased media stories of young people committing suicide because of bullying
many parents and government officials are advocates of zero tolerance policy. It is a one size fits
all approach to dealing with school violence. People view school as a safe place where students
should be free to learn away from fears of violence and specifically, bullying.

There are some assumptions associated with zero tolerance policies. The first is that zero
tolerance policies will create a consistency of discipline within schools. However, research has
shown that rates of suspension and expulsions vary greatly among schools. They tend to be
much higher for students of color and with disabilities (American Psychological Association
Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008). This then becomes as issue of equality if this policy is being
used more with minority students or students with disabilities.

Another assumption is that these policies will create school climate more conducive to
learning. According to the Zero Tolerance Task Force schools that had higher incidences of
school suspensions have less satisfactory ratings of school climates, they spend more time on
issues of discipline and shows there is a negative relationship between the use of suspensions and
expulsions and academic achievement.

Research has shown other serious drawbacks. The first issue, according the National
Education Association Bullying Study (Gulemetova 2011), is that incidents of bullying regularly
occur outside the classroom and away from presence of the teaching staff. This creates a
situation where it can be difficult for staff to assess the situation and fairly administer appropriate
consequences. According to the Zero Tolerance Task Force (American Psychological
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 6

Association, 2008), schools are extending the scope of zero tolerance policies beyond incidents
of bullying. Schools are applying these policies to a wide range of disruptive behavior. As
schools rely on these policies has led to the increase of referrals of students to the juvenile justice
system often times for infractions that previously would not have be considered dangerous or
threatening.

One more factor needs to be considered with zero tolerance policies and that is the
developmental readiness of students. According to Daniel and Bondy (2008) school-aged
children need guidance and support in order to learn how to function in society. Instead of
helping students become contributing members of society, using a zero tolerance policy leaves
children on their own and leaves no room for intervention from the school.

There has been much news about how students who have committed seemingly minor
infractions are being suspended or expelled because they have fallen under zero tolerance
policies. Because of that there have been many groups advocating for changes in zero tolerance
policies. These include parent groups, legislators and mental health organization including the
American Psychological Association.

Early Intervention

Schools are now adopting more intervention type policies and programs to help prevent
bullying. There are a wide variety of these models but they are classified by Roberge (2012) as
early or primary intervention models.

There are usually three parts to these models. The first are strategies targeted to all
students where teachers work to create a culture where all students are valued. Staff then receive
training in how to diffuse situations and how to counsel both victim and the aggressor in the
bullying situation. Lastly, there are strategies in place to deal with the bullying incident once it
has happened. Staff work to bring both the victim and aggressor together in a restorative justice
exercise.

These types of approaches are much fairer and more equitable. It gives the school the
ability to evaluate the situation and find out all the factors before deciding how to deal with the
situation. It gives all parties a voice to express their point of view as opposed to a zero tolerance
policy where schools are forced to simply address behaviors in one way (Roberge 2012).

There are some problems associated with these types of programs. The first is
accountability of schools and school districts. According to the NEA Bullying study
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 7

(Gulemetova, 2011), 93% of school employees reported their district had some sort of anti-
bullying policy in place. Furthermore, most school employees reported that they were willing to
intervene in situations where bullying was occurring. However, less than 50% of school
employees reported that they had received any training in districts anti-bullying policies nor were
there any anti-bullying activities taking place in their school.

There were other barriers present in intervention policies. According to Marshall (2005),
teachers reported that even though there were policies in place the school lacked the funding to
ensure proper implementation of the program. Teachers also reported that they were unsure how
to respond to indirect or non-physical bullying because there were no specific policies or
guidelines related to this type of behavior (as opposed to physical bullying such as hitting or
pushing).

Schools may also work with students to help stop bullying. They may use a curriculum
that incorporates role playing, self-esteem building activities. Ken Rigby (2002) determined that
these types of programs seem to be more successful at teaching kids to protect themselves from
bullying than getting the bullies to stop their behavior. He went on to say, Clearly we need to
redouble our efforts in dealing more effectively to discourage the behaviour of those who bully
others in schools, if only because these children are more likely than others to become aggressive
and violent adults.

It is also important to remember that that much of the bullying that takes place happens
away from the presence of school employees. (Roberge 2012). A school counselor (personal
communication, March 22) commented that teachers often mentioned that they had difficulty
differentiating between simple teasing and bullying. Furthermore, when asked about an incident
students will not always report incidents of bullying to a teacher, instead they will refer it the
incident as teasing (Kennedy-Moore, 2014). Even if a staff person is trained in the how to
diffuse a bullying situation they will not be able to stop a bullying situation that they do not
witness or when it is not reported.

A great deal of research has been done that links positive school climate with a reduction
in bullying. When there is a poor school climate students are less likely to inform a teacher when
bullying is happening. However, when a student feels confident that a teacher will respond in a
positive way to bullying they will report it (Smith, 2012).
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 8

One way to improve the school climate and to create an atmosphere where bullying will
be reported is through the use of restorative justice. Restorative Justice is a way to respond to
some kind of wrong action with the intention of repairing the harm that was done. The student
involved in the incident may be asked some of the following questions. What happened? Who
did it impact? How do you make it right? These practices provide opportunities for students to
share their feelings, build relationships and solve problems, and when there is wrongdoing, to
play an active role in addressing the wrong and making things right (Watchel, 2016).

Though restorative justice works to repair the damage that was done when bullying
occurs, one high school principal I interviewed who used a form of restorative justice cautioned
me on the use of it. He stated that it is important the offender (bully) is truly sorry for the
offense and not simply going through the motions to get out of any serious consequences. He
has seen the process manipulated by the aggressor to continue to bully his victim. Often times
bullies are individuals who are able to control social settings better than their victims and without
care restorative justice practices provide another setting for the bully to manipulate for their own
gain (personal communication, 2017).

There do need to be consequences to bullying when reported or witnessed and staff need
to be trained in how to deal with bullying in their school. However, in light of the existing
research it appears that the current prevailing approaches are not going far enough in dealing
with student bullying.

Student Engagement

As we have already seen, a positive school climate leads to a reduction in incidence of

bullying. Schools are starting to use student leadership to help improve the school climate.
Schools are working to create a model that not only stops bullying once it happens but also
prevent incidents of bullying from even occurring. As schools are developing student leaders,
researchers are starting to study the effect on school cultures student leadership development has.
Pederson (2012) has shown that leadership roles held by students help create a positive school
environment, a positive emotional growth in student leaders and a positive influence on other
students. He goes on to say that student leaders are challenged by their peers to help create a
positive learning environment

A former school counselor commented that for many years he worked to create anti-
bullying programs at the school he worked at but had trouble with student buy-in. He felt it was
always an us and them mentality. Students always deferred to adults to solve their problems.
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 9

A school model becomes a shared leadership model in which the administration shares their
leadership with staff and students. They all work together to make decisions that affect the
whole school. One thing emphasized in this type of model is trust between staff and students.
Pederson talked about the willingness of the principal to distribute leadership roles and to be a
part of the decision making process was key to the success of this type of program (2012).

In his guide Meaningful Student Involvement Adam Fletcher talks about how
educators are showing that they value students by involving them in meaningful ways in school.
These teachers and administrators say that it is not about making students happy or allowing
students to run the school. Their experience shows that when educators collaborate with students
to improve learning, teaching and leadership in schools, school change is positive and effective
(2003). When students and staff work together, they can come up with creative solutions to
problems that might appear unilateral or arbitrary (Pasi, 2001).

One important aspect of the student engagement model is preventative outlook. Students
become the ones that will to identify those students that may be vulnerable to bullying. Schools
with positive school climates are ones in which all students have friends. (Doll 2010).
According to DEsposito (2011) positive social groups help protect against peer aggression and
help reduce the chances of being a victim of bullying.

A school counselor I interviewed is using this sort of approach in the school he works at.
He stated that because much of bullying happens away from adults he sees the students as the
eyes and ears among the students. He encourages his student leaders to identify socially isolated
students and then befriend them and include them in different social groups of the school
(personal communication, March, 2017).

A model in which schools work to empower students brings equity to the school. All
students are valued and the underlying goal is that the school will become a safe place where all
students will be successful.

Bullying has been a part of schools for a long time. It creates an environment where
students are not able to achieve their best. Schools need to continue to look at best policies for
combating and ending this problem.

Policy Report and Recommendation

Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 10

Bullying is a very complex issue that can have such a negative effect on not only
individual students but on a whole school. Schools have worked hard to stop bullying and there
have been results. According to the U.S. Department of Justice (2013) bullying has dropped over
the past 10 years. The percentage of students who reported being bullied dropped from 32% in
2007 to 22% in 2013. Whereas the incidence of bullying at school has dropped, the incidence of
bullying off school premises and cyber-bulling has increased from 14% to 21 %. This still shows
that bullying is a major issue both at school and away from school.

The policy proposal I am advocating for be one that will need to implemented on a local
level. This is due to the fact that state governments have already passed a number of laws
addressing the issue of bullying. However, these laws have given the power to the local school
districts to implement the policy they feel is best for their districts. It is very important that
schools look at their bullying policies because even though this has been an issue for many years
and schools have addressed it in many ways there still is a bullying problem in schools.

Schools have used many approaches to deal with bullying. One approach was a zero
tolerance policy that is a punitive model. Use the threat of punishment to change or stop a
behavior. Research has shown that simply punitive system to stop bullying has not worked.

Another approach was an early intervention approach. In this model, teachers and staff
are trained to in ways to identify when bullying is occurring and then who to intervene in these
situations. Even though this type of training is extremely important and needed, it is not enough.
Even if staff are trained in how to identify and intervene in situations where bullying is occurring
if it is happening in unsupervised times it will not stop bullying from occurring.

Policy Recommendation: Students Leadership Development

The approach I am advocating for uses elements from both zero tolerance and early
intervention approach. Schools need to have very specific guidelines as to how they are going to
address bullying when it happens. That being said, administrators need to have some flexibility
in how they handle the situation. Staff need training to know how to recognize bullying, the best
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 11

way to intervene in situations where there is bullying and how to respond to both victim and the
bully. They should also work hard with their students to create an atmosphere of respect where
everyone is valued.

However, these policies do not go far enough. The previous approaches are more
reactive. They respond to bullying once it happens. My approach is more proactive, trying to
prevent the bullying from happening and in order to accomplish that there needs to be one more
piece in place and that is the development of student leaders. These students will work directly
with the staff in implementing a school wide program that will create a positive school climate.

Ultimately, bullying happens because of lack of a strong community where everyone

belongs (Dillon, 2013). We need to pour more of our time and resources into those individuals
who know the school community better than anyone- the students. As Pederson says in his paper
Student Leadership Distribution, (2012) The more responsibility placed on the students the
better. I think they begin to see the school as theirs instead of one where teachers or
administrators set the tone. Shirley Sternberg, in her paper Empowering Students as Leaders in
Alberta (2014) shows that with a leadership program which works to develop leadership skills
in students helps to create a better climate in the school. She says, By establishing a proactive
approach to dealing with bullying behaviors, the whole school community becomes more
positive.

Policy Instruments

There are three policy instruments involved in the Student Leadership approach. They
are hortatory, capacity building and systems change.

Hortatory

The first is Hortatory. The administration has to create an environment where students
are excited about this program and want to be involved in it. Pederson studied one program in
his research called the Students Ambassadorship program. The title Ambassador tells people
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 12

know that they have a very important role to fill. Anyone who is an Ambassador will be held to
high standards. The title gives the impression that this is an important program and the school
puts a lot of value into it. It was organized in such a way that younger students wanted to be a
part of the program when they got older. Fowler describes hortatory policies as written in such a
way that people will behave in a certain way (2013).

Capacity Building

The second instrument involved in this solution is capacity building. Fowler talked about
talked about how capacity building is well suited to situations in which the currently employed
staff and existing institutions cannot carry out desired policies because they are incapable of
doing so (2013). Research has shown that a great deal of bullying happens away from adult
supervision of students. Because of that reality, teachers and other staff are unable to carry out
anti-bullying policies. By working with students, we are empowering them to implement these
policies. Teachers and administration are building the students capacity to be leaders in schools.
One drawback that Fowler talks about is the huge financial costs involved in capacity. By
working with students, schools will not bear that cost. Furthermore, student leadership programs
are great for the students involved.

Systems Change

Systems change is a policy instrument that transfers authority among individuals. The
result of a system change is a situation where the institution is able to meet the new demands
placed on it. (Fowler, 2013). In the case of The Students Leadership model, staff and
administration are giving authority to the student leaders to make decisions that will improve the
climate of the school and ultimately lead to less bullying. They are the ones who truly
understand the climate of the school and giving the tools can help change the social dynamics of
school and can help lead to a safer more inclusive environment where everyone is valued and
where everyone is able to succeed. It is important to remember that students do not have the
authority to deal with bullying once it happens. The transfer of authority is one in which
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 13

students have the authority to implement programs that may stop or impede bullying from
happening.

Criticisms

One criticism people may have with this program is the feeling that there need to be
consequences for any type of bullying behavior. Within this program there will be specific
policies built into any program. Students will face consequences. However, solely relying on
punitive measures are not enough deterrent to stop bullying.

Another criticism would be the time it would take to train the Student Leaders. This is a
legitimate criticism because it would take considerable time and effort on the part of the staff
implementing this program. To bring around real change in a school climate does take a long
time but once it is implemented, it perpetuates itself. A program called Leadership in Training
run by a high school counselor is a yearlong program. However, this year the training is being
facilitated by himself and a student who went through the training the year before. In the Student
Ambassadorship program evaluated by Pederson he found that most students at that school felt
the Student Ambassadors had made a Significant, positive impact on character development of
all students. He went on to say that younger students were looking forward to take on
leadership roles when they get older. (2012).

Implementation

It is important for the the students to know that the school to has a clear policy statement
that no bullying will be accepted at school and that there will be consequences in place for when
it happens. Then the administration needs to create an awareness among the student body that
the school is working on creating a student leadership team. They need to understand that these
students will be working directly with staff to create and implement programs that will benefit
the school climate. Student leaders need to understand that this kind of leadership program is not
just about focused on bullying. It is about creating a school environment where everyone is
valued. This will lead to less bullying. They will have a real voice in changing the school
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 14

environment. This will create ownership on the part of the students and would generate interests
to be involved.

The first step would be to identify who should be involved. Anyone who wants to be in
any kind of leadership position such as student council, team captain or any other school specific
role needs to be involved in the Student Leadership Training. However, it would be open to all
students. The staff will need to be intentional as to who should be involved. They should
identify students they feel could affect positive change in the school environment. According to
research, it should be more than just the best students academically. They need to be students
who demonstrate leadership potential and students who will be able to interact with a wide range
of individuals. As one school counselor said, It should be students who have social capital.
(persona communication, 2017).

The students need to be trained leadership development. They will be required to meet
on a regular basis. Staff will support and facilitate these meeting but the students will be given
the responsibility to go out and learn about the school environment, identify the problems related
to school climate they see and then work together as a team to identify the best ways to address
those problems. This will look different for each school because each school will have their own
specific culture and their own set of issues and struggles.

Once those students have identified the struggles for their school, they will develop
strategies to address these issues. When they have developed what they think is a good
intervention, it will be their responsibility to implement it. As these leaders meet they will
evaluate their intervention and they will decide to either continue what they started, fine tune
what they are doing, or if they feel it is not working they will try something new.

Students should be encouraged to think outside the box for creative solutions to problems
they see in their school. This process can be messy. Staff may have the desire to step in and
move the students in a direction they feel they should go. However, for a program like this to be
successful and for our students to really grow in the leadership potential it will be important for
them to be given the freedom to do what they think is best.
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 15

Conclusion

Students need a place where they feel safe and one that is conducive to learning. The
elimination of bullying in schools is one way to create that environment. To do that the school
needs to be a community of people where everyone is valued and accepted. Staff and
administrators cannot being the only ones making the decisions. For real change to happen
students need to be included. They are the ones who understand the social dynamics that create
situations where bullying happens. They are present when these incidents occur. They can be
the ones to implement a proactive program that can change the school culture where these
actions do not happen anymore.
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 16

References
American Psychological Zero Tolerance Task Force (2008). Are Zero Tolerance Policies
Effective in
Schools? American Psychologist, 63.9
Daniel, Y., & Bondy, K. (2008). Safe Schools and zero Tolerance: policy, program, and practice
in Ontario. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 70, 1-20
Doll, Beth. (2010). "Positive School Climate." Principal Leadership 11.4, 12-16
Dillon, Jim (2013). The Best Antidote to Bullying? Community Building. Education Week.
33.14, 28-29
Fowler, F.C. (2013). Policy Studies for Educational Leaders. (4th Ed.). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall
Fletcher, Adam (2002). Meaningful Student Involvement: A Guide to Inclusive School Change.
Available at:
https://soundout.org/wp-
content/uploads/2015/07/MSI_Guide_to_Inclusive_School_Change.pdf
Gulemetova, Michaela; Drury, Darrel; and Bradshaw, Catherine P (2011). "National Education

Association Bullying Study," Colleagues: 6.2. Available at:

http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/colleagues/vol6/iss2/11

Holloway, J. (2002). The dilemma of Zero Tolerance. Educational Leadership, 59.4, 84-86

Marshall, Megan L (2012). "Teachers' Perceived Barriers to Effective Bullying Intervention."

Dissertation, Georgia State University. Available at:

http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cps_diss/70

Normas del Sistema Educativo Dominicano para la convivencia y la disciplina escolar en los

centros educativos pblicos y privado (2011). ey 136-03, Articulos 48-49. Available at:

http://www.minerd.gob.do/sgce/base%20legal
%20manual/normas_sistema_educativo_dDominicano.pdf
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 17

National Education Association (2012). Bullying Prevention in Public Schools (Policy Brief 43)

National Education Association (2010). Bullying Survey Available at:

http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/Bullying__Research_Report_Summary_12-2011.pdf

National Education Association (2012). Bullying Prevention in Public Schools (Policy Brief 43)

Pasi, Raymond. A Climate for Achievement Principal Leadership. 2.4, 17-20

Pederson, J., Yager, S., Yager, R. (2012). Student Leadership Distribution: Effects of a
Student-led

Leadership Program on School Climate and Community. International Journal of

Educational Leadership Preparation. 7.2.

Phillips, Rick. (2011). The Financial Cost of Bullying, Violence and Vandalism. Slate

Available at:

http://community-matters.org/downloads/SLATE%20magazine.%20Financial%20Cost
%20of%20Bullying,%20Violence%20and%20Vandalism%20Feb%202011.pdf

Protocolo Para la Promocion De La Cultura de Paz y Buen Trato en Los Centro Educativos,

(2016). Available at:

http://www.minerd.gob.do/sitios/oci/Licitaciones/Contenido%20(4).pdf?
Mobile=1&Source=%2Fsitios%2Foci%2F_layouts%2Fmobile%2Fview.aspx%3FList
%3D41c4909f%252Df221%252D4375%252D9e8f%252D08b4be7e4f76%26View
%3D3ef076e5%252Ddf72%252D4484%252Db4f3%252Dded6a751c0f7%26CurrentPag
e%3D1

Public Act 241 of 2011, Matt Epling Safe School Law. Available at:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(2rlesle0vfx4ans3bq3p2ezs))/mileg.aspx?
page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-380-1310b

Rigby, Ken. (2002) How Successful are Anti-Bullying Programs for Schools. Role of Schools

In Crime Prevention Conference. Melbourne Australia.

Roberge, Ginette D (2012). From Zero Tolerance to Early Intervention: The Evolution of
Student Leadership, A Response to School Bullying 18

School Anti-Bullying Policy. Available at:

https://nau.edu/uploadedFiles/Academic/COE/About/Projects/From%20Zero
%20Tolerance%20to%20Early%20Intervention.pdf

Smith, David (2012). Improving School Climate to Reduce Bullying. Education Canada,

52.3, 39-42

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, School Crime Supplement (SCS) to the

National Crime Victimization Survey, 2005 through 2013.

Watchel, Ted (2016). Defining Restorative. International Institute for Restorative Practices.

Available at:

http://www.iirp.edu/images/pdf/Defining-Restorative_Nov-2016.pdf