The Critical Role of School Climate in Effective Bullying Prevention

Abstract

Research has shown a negative association between positive school climate and bullying behavior. This article reviews research on school climate and bullying behavior and proposes that an unhealthy and unsupportive school climate (e.g., negative relationship between teachers and students, positive attitudes towards bullying) provides a social context that allows bullying behavior to occur. We provide information on how to evaluate the school climate and intervene to promote a more positive school climate and to reduce bullying behavior. Although there has been an increased interest among school personnel, parents, and students to reduce bullying behavior, the issue of how to assess the myriad of factors that may cause and maintain bullying behaviors, and to select evidence-based prevention and intervention programs, remains a challenge for many educators. This article seeks to address these two issues by highlighting the importance of school climate in bullying prevention and reviewing some school climate evaluations and intervention programs.

Full text

This article was downloaded by: [98.169.154.13]
On: 28 August 2015, At: 18:32
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG
Theory Into Practice
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/htip20
The Critical Role of School Climate in
Effective Bullying Prevention
Cixin Wang a , Brandi Berry b & Susan M. Swearer c
a University of California Riverside
b University of Nebraska
c University of Nebraska–Lincoln
Published online: 04 Oct 2013.
To cite this article: Cixin Wang , Brandi Berry & Susan M. Swearer (2013) The Critical Role
of School Climate in Effective Bullying Prevention, Theory Into Practice, 52:4, 296-302, DOI:
10.1080/00405841.2013.829735
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.829735
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions

Theory Into Practice, 52:296–302, 2013
Copyright © The College of Education and Human Ecology, The Ohio State University
ISSN: 0040-5841 print/1543-0421 online
DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2013.829735
Cixin Wang
Brandi Berry
Susan M. Swearer
The Critical Role of School Climate
in Effective Bullying Prevention
Research has shown a negative association be-
tween positive school climate and bullying be-
havior. This article reviews research on school
climate and bullying behavior and proposes that
an unhealthy and unsupportive school climate
(e.g., negative relationship between teachers and
students, positive attitudes towards bullying) pro-
vides a social context that allows bullying be-
havior to occur. We provide information on how
to evaluate the school climate and intervene to
promote a more positive school climate and to re-
duce bullying behavior. Although there has been
an increased interest among school personnel,
Cixin Wang is an assistant professor at the University
of California Riverside; Brandi Berry is a doctoral
candidate at the University of Nebraska; Susan M.
Swearer is a professor at the University of Nebraska–
Lincoln.
Correspondence should be addressed to Susan
M. Swearer, 40 Teachers College Hall, Department
of Educational Psychology, University of Nebraska–
Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68588-0345. E-mail: sswearer@
unl.edu.
parents, and students to reduce bullying behavior,
the issue of how to assess the myriad of factors
that may cause and maintain bullying behav-
iors, and to select evidence-based prevention and
intervention programs, remains a challenge for
many educators. This article seeks to address
these two issues by highlighting the importance
of school climate in bullying prevention and
reviewing some school climate evaluations and
intervention programs.
Relationship Between Bullying and
School Climate
ALTHO UG H T HE RE HA S B EE N an increased
interest in studying school climate, its def-
inition is still murky among researchers and
educators. Among the researchers who defined
school climate in their studies, Emmons’s (1993)
definition of school climate as “the quality and
frequency of interactions among and between
296
Downloaded by [98.169.154.13] at 18:32 28 August 2015

Wang, Berry, Swearer The Critical Role of School Climate in Effective Bullying Prevention
adults and students” at school (Kuperminc, Lead-
beater, Emmons, & Blatt, 1997, p. 77) has been
accepted as an important component of school
climate. Similarly, the National School Climate
Council (NSCC, 2012) referred to school climate
as “the quality and character of school life”
and “is based on patterns of students’, parents’,
and school personnel’s experience of school life
and reflects norms, goals, values, interpersonal
relationships, teaching and learning practices,
and organizational structures” (How do we define
school climate section, para. 1). How to measure
school climate is also unclear. Researchers have
identified multiple dimensions of school climate,
such as school organizational structure and ex-
ternal environment (e.g., class and school size,
utilization of resources, and physical surround-
ings), social milieu (background characteristics
of the students, teachers, and staff, and physical
location of the school), cultural variables (e.g.,
beliefs, values, attitudes, rules, and whether staff
are caring, supportive, and fair), and relationships
(NSCC, 2012; Stewart, 2003). In this article,
we define school climate as the milieu created
by interactions among and between adults and
students and individuals’ beliefs and attitudes
(e.g., feelings about school, approval/disapproval
of bullying). Using this definition, we discuss the
links between bullying prevention programs and
the aforementioned elements of school climate
(e.g., relationship, beliefs, and attitudes) and
specific programs to improve school climate and
prevent bullying.
Two social theories can be used to conceptual-
ize the relationship between bullying and school
climate. Social disorganization theory (Shaw &
McKay, 1942) suggests that youths acquire delin-
quent behaviors (e.g., bullying) because the eco-
nomic difficulties and social environment limit
the community’s (e.g., parents’, school’s) ability
to control or supervise adolescent behavior (Es-
pelage & Swearer, 2009). Social control theory
(Hirschi, 1969) suggests that “delinquent acts
occur when an individual’s bond to society is
weak or broken” (p. 16), meaning that weak
bonds with important people and institutions in
adolescents’ lives put them at-risk for engaging in
delinquent behaviors (Friedman & Rosenbaum,
1998). According to these theories, bullying be-
haviors are discouraged when social organization
and control are present in a school. Thus, these
theories support the need to improve school
climate in order to effectively prevent bullying
behaviors.
Research has shown that students are more
likely to participate in bullying when the school
climate is unhealthy. For example, when students
perceive their school environment as high in
conflict, unfair, unfriendly, and nonsupportive
(Gendron, Williams, & Guerra, 2011) and when
positive attitudes supporting aggression and bul-
lying become the norm at school (Unnever &
Cornell, 2003). On the other hand, students are
more likely to have a positive attitude toward
help-seeking behavior for bullying when they
perceive the school staff and teachers as support-
ive and caring (Eliot, Cornell, Gregory, & Fan,
2010). It is likely that when students perceive
their school as unfriendly and nonsupportive,
their bond to school is weak or broken, and, as a
result, they are less likely to follow school rules
(e.g., rules against bullying). In addition, when
students perceive bullying behavior as normally
approved by peers and teachers, they tend to be-
lieve that school’s ability to control or supervise
their behavior is diminished, and they are more
likely to engage in bullying behavior and less
likely to engage in helpful bystanding behavior.
In general, these findings suggest that an un-
healthy school climate (e.g., negative relationship
between teachers and students, positive attitude
towards bullying) provides a social context that
allows bullying behavior to occur. Thus, it is
critical to evaluate school climate and, in cases in
which the school climate is negative, effectively
improve the school climate as an important strat-
egy to preventing bullying behaviors.
School Climate Evaluation
A key first step toward improving school
climate is to assess the school climate (Cohen,
2006). Although many measures of school cli-
mate have been developed, only a few (e.g., The
Comprehensive School Climate Inventory, Co-
297
Downloaded by [98.169.154.13] at 18:32 28 August 2015

Emerging Issues in School Bullying Research and Prevention Science
hen, 2006; The ClassMaps Survey or CMS, Doll
& Spies, 2007) have proven to be scientifically
sound and seek to gain information from stu-
dents, staff members, and parents to yield a more
comprehensive picture of the school/classroom
climate.
The Comprehensive School Climate Inventory
(CSCI; Center for Social and Emotional Edu-
cation, 2003) assesses students’, parents’, and
school staff members’ perceptions of various as-
pects of school climate. Specifically, it measures
four constructs: safety (i.e., rules and norms,
sense of physical security, and sense of social-
emotional security), teaching and learning (i.e.,
support for learners and social and civic learn-
ing), interpersonal relationships (i.e., respect for
diversity, social support from adults, and social
support for students), and institutional environ-
ment (i.e., school connectedness/engagement and
physical surroundings; Haggerty, Elgin, & Wool-
ley, 2010). Additionally, school staff members
assess two additional constructs: leadership and
professional relationships. There are four ver-
sions of the student survey: lower elementary, up-
per elementary, middle, and high school versions.
All items are positively worded and students
answer each statement on a 5-point Likert scale
where 1 means strongly disagree and 5 means
strongly agree. The CSCI can be completed via
paper survey or online and results can be con-
solidated for school improvement purposes. The
CSCI has shown strong internal consistency and
good construct validity across the various stu-
dent, parent, and school personnel forms (Guo,
Choe, & Higgins-D’Alessandro, 2011).
The CMS (Doll & Spies, 2007) is an
assessment that queries students about teacher–
student relationships, peer friendships, peer
conflicts, worries about peer aggression, home–
school relationships, academic self-efficacy,
self-determination, and behavioral self-control.
Together, these subscales yield a wealth of infor-
mation on students’ perceptions of the classroom
and are meant to shed light on classroom supports
for students’ autonomy and interpersonal
relationships (Doll, Spies, LeClair, Kurien, &
Foley, 2010). Each subscale contains five to eight
items with the full survey of 47 items. Students
respond to each item using a 4-point Likert scale
where 0 means never and 3 means always. The
CMS has been studied using samples of upper
elementary and middle school students, and has
been found to be psychometrically sound in
terms of factor structure, internal consistency,
and construct validity (Doll et al., 2010).
School Climate and
Bullying Interventions
To improve school climate, researchers have
suggested that it is important to incorporate inter-
ventions into the school curriculum, involve the
entire school community in the intervention, and
focus on building positive relationships among
everyone in the school community (Cohen &
Geier, 2010). For example, schools can improve
relationships by reducing school size, build-
ing smaller learning communities within larger
schools, and implementing schoolwide violence-
prevention programs (e.g., Cotton, 2001; Loukas,
2007). In addition, providing students with a
social, emotional, ethical, and academic educa-
tion, as well as safe, caring school environments,
helps to build a positive school climate (Cohen,
2006).
During the past 2 decades, several programs
have been developed to shift the school climate
from less supportive to warm/caring in an ef-
fort to decrease school bullying. Research has
shown some evidence for the following programs
in the United States: Bully Busters (Newman,
Horne, & Bartolomucci, 2000), Bully-Proofing
Your School (BPYS; Garrity, Jens, Porter, Sager,
& Short-Camilli, 1994), Creating a Peaceful
School Learning Environment (CAPSLE; Fonagy
et al., 2009), Cooperative Learning Community
(CLC, Johnson & Johnson, 1981; 1991), Second
Step (Committee for Children, 2002), Shifting
Boundaries (Taylor, Stein, Woods, & Mumford,
2011), and Steps to Respect (Committee for
Children, 2001). Most of those programs (e.g.,
CAPSLE) theorize that all individuals within a
school, including teachers, students, and other
staff members, played a role in causing and/or
maintaining bullying behaviors (Fonagy et al.,
298
Downloaded by [98.169.154.13] at 18:32 28 August 2015

Wang, Berry, Swearer The Critical Role of School Climate in Effective Bullying Prevention
2009). Thus, by helping individuals to empathize
with others and involving all members of the
school community in changing the school cli-
mate, students are less prone to bullying and/or to
support bullying. The aforementioned programs
share similar common elements, including (a) de-
veloping a caring school climate by fostering
empathy and kindness among students; (b) pro-
moting students’ and staff’s awareness and
knowledge of bullying; (c) using consistent
language to enforce school wide rules and
consequence for bullying; (d) increasing su-
pervision; (e) providing training to promote
skills/competences for students (e.g., conflict
resolution, self-regulation, problem solving) and
teachers (e.g., how to handle bullying behavior);
(f) increasing adults’ role modeling of appropri-
ate and prosocial behavior; and (g) encouraging
bystanders to intervene in bullying situations.
Some programs also include a parent training
component and group work that can be tailored
to classwork. Those elements are consistent with
the important elements of bullying interventions
identified by Ttofi and Farrington in their meta-
analysis study (2011), including parent train-
ing/meetings, playground supervision, intensity
and duration of the program for both children
and teachers, classroom management, teacher
training, classroom rules, whole-school policy,
school conferences, information for parents, and
cooperative group work.
Research has shown that these programs have
been successful in several key areas. First, several
programs decrease bullying and other aggressive
behaviors at school (Bully Busters, Newman-
Carlson & Horne, 2004; BPYS, Epstein, Plog,
& Porter, 2002; CAPSLE, Fonagy et al., 2009;
Second Step, Taub, 2001; Shifting Boundaries,
Taylor et al., 2011; Steps to Respect, Frey,
Hirschstein, Edstrom, & Snell, 2009). Second,
many of the programs promote positive school
climate (e.g., perception of school safety, de-
creased acceptance of bull ying, perceived respon-
sibility to intervene in bullying situations, and
positive teacher-student relationship) including
Bully Busters, Bell, Raczynski, & Horne, 2010;
BPYS, Menard, Grotpeter, Gianola, & O’Neal,
2008; CAPSLE, Twemlow, Fonagy, & Sacco,
2001; CLC, Johnson & Johnson, 1983; Second
Step, Cooke et al., 2007; Shifting Boundaries,
Taylor et al., 2011; Steps to Respect, Frey
et al., 2005). Finally, several programs address
students’ and teachers’ knowledge and skills
in handling bullying situations (Bully Busters,
Newman-Carlson & Horne, 2004; Second Step,
Cooke et al., 2007; Shifting Boundaries, Taylor
et al., 2011).
Following the Positive Behavior Interventions
and Supports (PBiS) framework, school person-
nel can create primary (schoolwide), secondary
(classroom or group level), and tertiary (indi-
vidual) systems of support to improve school
safety and prevent bullying behavior by mak-
ing bullying behaviors less effective, efficient,
and relevant, and making prosocial behavior
more rewarding (Sugai, Horner, & Algozzine,
2011). Taking a prevention and responsive-
to-intervention approach, Sugai and colleagues
(2011) suggested that Tier I (primary level,
schoolwide prevention) programs should focus
on teaching and encouraging appropriate behav-
iors, positive social skills, and prosocial traits
among all students. Almost all students respond
to the Tier I supports, impacting close to 80% of a
typical student body. Tier II supports (secondary
level, small group prevention and intervention)
are directed toward the 15% of students who do
not respond to Tier I supports (possibly due to
other risk factors), such as more specific social
skills training, more adult supervision and posi-
tive attention, and specific behavioral feedback.
Tier III supports (tertiary, individual intervention)
are directed toward the approximate 5% of stu-
dents who do not respond to Tier I and Tier II
supports. Tier III supports include individualized
behavior intervention planning, mental health
supports, and other comprehensive, individual-
ized interventions. While implementing PBiS for
bullying prevention and school climate, it is
important for school personnel to collect data and
make decisions based on their data, implement
the program with high fidelity, monitor the on-
going progress, and receive on-going training
and support from the school systems in order
to make the bullying prevention more effective
(Sugai et al., 2011).
299
Downloaded by [98.169.154.13] at 18:32 28 August 2015

Emerging Issues in School Bullying Research and Prevention Science
Summary
A positive school climate is necessary to ef-
fectively prevent bullying behaviors. Therefore, it
is critical that educators (a) understand what con-
stitutes a positive school climate, (b) use reliable
measures to evaluate school climates, and (c) use
effective prevention and intervention programs
to improve the climates in schools. Positive
relationships among students and teachers, and
negative attitudes toward inappropriate behavior
(e.g., bullying), are two key elements of a positive
school climate. In addition to evaluating school
climate and implementing evidence-based pre-
vention and intervention programs (such as the
ones mentioned above), a positive school com-
munity exists only when all the students, parents,
and school staff members work collaboratively to
improve school climate (Lodge & Frydenberg,
2005). To promote a positive relationship, teach-
ers and other adults (e.g., supportive staff, vol-
unteers) need to promote and model appropriate
attitudes and behaviors, such as caring, empathy,
and appropriate interactions among and between
teachers and students. To foster attitudes against
bullying, in addition to promoting knowledge
and awareness of bullying, teachers need to take
reports of any bullying incident seriously and
intervene consistently according to school wide
rules instead of ignoring/minimizing bullying
behavior.
Adult behavior is a critical foundation for
healthy school climate. Adults should refrain
from bullying students and other adults (i.e., col-
leagues, parents) at school (Graham & Bellmore,
2007). In addition, teachers also need to incorpo-
rate school climate interventions into the regular
curriculum and use teachable moments to openly
discuss difficult topics (e.g., popularity, power,
social ostracism) related to bullying (Cohen &
Geier, 2010; Graham & Bellmore, 2007). Last but
not least, bullying is not only a behavior problem,
but also a mental health problem. Research has
shown that students involved in bullying expe-
rience more mental health difficulties (such as
depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation) and display
higher levels of cognitive distortions (Swearer,
Wang, Collins, Strawhun, & Fluke, in press).
Thus, it is important for educators to seek pro-
fessional help from psychologists, mental health
practitioners, and counselors for students who
are involved in bullying and experiencing mental
health difficulties.
Future Directions
Future research should rigorously examine the
relationship between school climate and bullying
behaviors, given that a positive school climate
may be a necessary, but not sufficient, factor
for effective bullying prevention and intervention.
Other factors like positive leadership, healthy
teacher functioning, school-based mental health
programs, and effective home-school communi-
cation are all factors that contribute to a healthy
school climate. Therefore, future research should
include component studies where the different
elements of school climate and bullying preven-
tion and intervention programs are tested to better
understand which elements are robust and affect
positive, lasting change.
References
Bell, C. D., Raczynski, K. A., & Horne, A. M. (2010).
Bully Busters abbreviated: Evaluation of a group-
based bully intervention and prevention program.
Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice,
14, 257–267.
Center for Social and Emotional Education. (2003).
Developmental milestones. Retrieved December 11,
2012, from www.csee.net/school/milestones.aspx.
Cohen, J. (2006). Social, emotional, ethical, and aca-
demic education: Creating a climate for learning,
participation in democracy, and well-being. Har-
vard Educational Review, 76, 201–237.
Cohen, J. & Geier, V. K. (2010). School climate
research summary: January 2010. New York, NY:
Center for Social and Emotional Education. Re-
trieved March 27, 2013 from www.schoolclimate.
org/climate/research.php.
Committee for Children. (2001). Steps to Respect: A
bullying prevention program. Seattle, WA: Author.
Committee for Children. (2002). Second Step:
A violence prevention curriculum. Preschool/
300
Downloaded by [98.169.154.13] at 18:32 28 August 2015

Wang, Berry, Swearer The Critical Role of School Climate in Effective Bullying Prevention
kindergarten–grade 9 trainer’s manual (3rd ed.).
Seattle, WA: Author.
Cooke, M. B., Ford, J., Levine, J., Bourke, C., Newell,
L., & Lapidus, G. (2007). The effects of city-wide
implementation of ‘Second Step’ on elementary
school students’ prosocial and aggressive behav-
iors. Journal of Primary Prevention, 28, 93–115.
Cotton, K. (2001). New small learning communi-
ties: Findings from recent literature. Portland, OR:
Northwest Regional Education Laboratory.
Doll, B., & Spies, R. A. (2007, March). The CMS.
Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the
National Association of School Psychologists, New
York, NY.
Doll, B., Spies, R. A., LeClair, C. M., Kurien, S. A.,
& Foley, B. P. (2010). Student perceptions of
classroom learning environments: Development of
the ClassMaps Survey. School Psychology Review,
39, 203–218.
Eliot, M., Cornell, D., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2010).
Supportive school climate and student willingness
to seek help for bullying and threats of violence.
Journal of School Psychology, 48, 533–553.
Emmons, C. L. (1993). School development in an
inner city: An analysis of factors selected from
Comer’s program using latent variable structural
equations modeling. Dissertation Abstracts Inter-
national, 54(A), 1287A.
Epstein, L., Plog, A. E., & Porter, W. (2002). Bully-
Proofing Your School: Results of a four-year in-
tervention. Report on Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders in Youth, 2, 55–56, 73–77.
Espelage, D., & Swearer, S. M. (2009). Contributions
of three social theories to understanding bullying
perpetration and victimization among school-aged
youth. In M. J. Harris (Ed.), Bullying, rejection,
and peer victimization: A social cognitive neuro-
science perspective (pp. 151–170). New York, NY:
Springer.
Fonagy, P., Twemlow, S. W., Vernberg, E. M., Nelson,
J. M., Dill, E. J., Little, T. D., & Sargent, J. A.
(2009). A cluster randomized controlled trial of
child-focused psychiatric consultation and a school
systems-focused intervention to reduce aggression.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50,
607–616.
Frey, K. S., Hirschstein, M. K., Edstrom, L. V.,
& Snell, J. L. (2009). Observed reductions in
school bullying, nonbullying aggression, and de-
structive bystander behavior: A longitudinal evalua-
tion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 466–
481.
Frey, K. S., Hirschstein, M. K., Snell, J. L., Edstrom,
L.V.S., MacKenzie, E. P., & Broderick, C. J.
(2005). Reducing playground bullying and support-
ing beliefs: An experimental trial of the Steps to
Respect Program. Developmental Psychology, 41,
479–491.
Friedman, J., & Rosenbaum, D. P. (1998). Social
control theory: The salience of components by age,
gender, and type of crime. Journal of Quantitative
Criminology, 4, 363–380.
Garrity, C., Jens, K., Porter, W., Sager, N., & Short-
Camilli, C. (1994). Bully-Proofing Your School:
A comprehensive approach for elementary school.
Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
Gendron, B. P., Williams, K. R., & Guerra, N. G.
(2011). An analysis of bullying among students
within schools: Estimating the effects of individual
normative beliefs, self-esteem, and school climate.
Journal of School Violence, 10, 150–164.
Graham, S., & Bellmore, A. (2007). Peer victimization
and mental health during early adolescence. Theory
into Practice, 46, 138–146.
Guo, P., Choe, J., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A.
(2011). Report on construct validity and internal
consistency findings for the Comprehensive School
Climate Inventory. Retrieved December 11, 2012,
from http://www.schoolclimate.org/climate/docu
ments/Fordham _Univ_CSCI_development _ review
_2011.pdf.
Haggerty, K., Elgin, J., & Woolley, A. (2010).
Social-emotional learning assessment measures for
middle school youth. Retrieved December 11,
2012, from http://www.schoolclimate.org/climate/
documents/RaikesReportFinalOct.pdf.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1981). The integra-
tion of the handicapped into the regular classroom:
Effects of cooperative and individualistic instruc-
tion. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 6,
344–353.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1983). Social
interdependence and perceived academic and per-
sonal support in the classroom. Journal of Social
Psychology, 120, 77–82.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Cooperative
learning and classroom and school climate. In B. J.
Fraser & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Educational environ-
ments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences
(pp. 55–74). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
Kuperminc, G. P., Leadbeater, B. J., Emmons, C.,
& Blatt, S. J. (1997). Perceived school climate
301
Downloaded by [98.169.154.13] at 18:32 28 August 2015

Emerging Issues in School Bullying Research and Prevention Science
and difficulties in the social adjustment of middle
school students. Applied Developmental Science,1,
76–88.
Lodge, J., & Frydenberg, E. (2005). The role of peer
bystanders in school bullying: Pos itive steps toward
promoting peaceful school. Theory into Practice,
44, 329–336.
Loukas, A. (2007). What is school climate? Leadership
Compass, 5, 1–3.
Menard, S., Grotpeter, J., Gianola, D., & O’Neal,
M. (2008). Evaluation of Bully-Proofing Your
School: Final report. Retrieved December 11, 2012
from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/221
078.pdf.
National School Climate Council. (2012). School cli-
mate. Retrieved December 11, 2012 from http://
www.schoolclimate.org/climate/.
Newman, D. A., Horne, A. M., & Bartolomucci, C. L.
(2000). Bully busters: A teacher’s manual for help-
ing bullies, victims, and bystanders. Champaign,
IL: Research Press.
Newman-Carlson, D. A., & Horne, A. M. (2004).
Bully Busters: A psychoeducational intervention
for reducing bullying behavior in middle school
students. Journal of Counseling & Development,
82, 259–267.
Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. (1942). Juvenile delin-
quency and urban areas. Chicago, IL: University
of Chicago Press.
Stewart, E. A., (2003). School social bounds, school
climate, and school misbehavior: A multilevel anal-
ysis. Justice Quarterly, 20, 575–602.
Sugai, G., Horner, R., & Algozzine, B. (2011).
Reducing the effectiveness of bullying behavior
in schools. OSEP Center on Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports. Retrieved September
10, 2013 from http://www.pbis.org/common/pbis
resources /publications /PBIS_Bullying_ Behavior_
Apr19_2011.pdf.
Swearer, S. M., Wang, C., Collins, A., Strawhun, J., &
Fluke, S. (in press). The prevention of bullying: A
school mental health perspective. In M. Weist, N.
Lever, C. Bradshaw, & J. Owens (Eds.). Handbook
of school mental health (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Springer.
Taub, J. (2001). Evaluation of the Second Step Vi-
olence Prevention Program at a rural elemen-
tary school. School Psychology Review, 31, 186–
200.
Taylor, B., Stein, N. D., Woods, D., & Mumford,
E. (2011). Shifting boundaries: Final report on
an experimental evaluation of a youth dating vio-
lence prevention program in New York City middle
schools. Washington, DC: Police Execute Research
Forum.
Ttofi, M., & Farrington, D. P. (2011). Effectiveness
of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A
systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of
Experimental Criminology, 7, 27–56. doi: 10.1007/
s11292-010-9109-1.
Twemlow, S. W., Fonagy, P., & Sacco, F. C. (2001).
An innovative psychodynamically influenced in-
tervention to reduce school violence. Journal of
the American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry, 40, 377–379.
Unnever, J. D., & Cornell, D. G. (2003). The culture
of bullying in middle school. Journal of School
Violence, 2, 5–27.
302
Downloaded by [98.169.154.13] at 18:32 28 August 2015