School Violence: An Overview · 2005-02-11 · School Violence: An Overview by Margaret Small and Kellie Dressler Tetrick C rime and violence in schools are matters of significant

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Volume VIII • Number 1

School Violence: An Overview

Also◆ Creating Safe Schools

◆ Conflict Resolution Education

Although school remains one of the safest places for children, recentshootings on school campuses have heightened public concern. The victimization ofstudents by acts of violence is simply intolerable. This issue of Juvenile Justice exam-ines the extent and nature of school violence and reviews promising approaches tocreating safe schools and resolving conflicts peacefully.

Many factors go into assessing school safety, as Margaret Small and Kellie DresslerTetrick note in their overview of “School Violence.” The authors draw on data fromthe 2000 Annual Report on School Safety and Indicators of School Crime and Safety,2000 to answer questions such as the following: How much crime is occurring in theNation’s schools? Are schools more or less safe than in the past? Do students feel safeat school? What kinds of crimes are occurring?

Fortunately, communities across America are taking action to reduce school violence.“Creating Safe Schools” will require a comprehensive approach, such as those de-scribed and illustrated by Ira Pollack and Carlos Sundermann of OJJDP’s NationalResource Center for Safe Schools. While comprehensive safe school planning willnot eliminate all campus violence, if properly conceived and implemented, it willfoster a safer environment for students and their teachers.

“Conflict Resolution Education” offers a way of preparing youth for a less violentfuture—or rather, as Donna Crawford and Richard Bodine point out, it offers fourapproaches: process curriculum, mediation program, peaceable classroom, and peace-able school. An accompanying sidebar reports on “Peaceable Schools Tennessee,” aparticularly promising example of the last approach.

Publications and other resources designed to help prevent school violence and pro-mote safe schools are described in this issue’s In Brief section. It is hoped that theinformation provided throughout these pages will help make our Nation’s schoolsthe havens from violence they are meant to be.

A Message From OJJDP

FEATURES

School Violence: An Overviewby Margaret Small and Kellie Dressler Tetrick .............................................................. 3

Although schools have been quite successful in keeping students and staff safe fromharm, schools still face serious challenges. It is necessary to understand the nature ofthese challenges if we are to devise effective strategies to prevent school violenceand promote school safety.

Creating Safe Schools: A Comprehensive Approachby Ira Pollack and Carlos Sundermann ........................................................................ 13

Schools that understand the complexity of youth violence and the activities neededto prevent it are developing comprehensive safe school plans that require collabora-tion with the community. Schools that engage in such planning and implementtheir plans effectively are more likely to foster safe environments for their studentsand teachers.

Conflict Resolution Education: Preparing Youth for the Futureby Donna K. Crawford and Richard J. Bodine ............................................................ 21

Physical aggression and intimidation are often a youth’s first response to conflict.Conflict resolution education can contribute to making schools safer and preparingstudents to participate in society.

IN BRIEF

Justice MattersSchool Violence Resources.................................................................................. 30

PublicationsThe Appropriate and Effective Use of Security Technologies in U.S. Schools ........................................................................................................ 32Federal Activities Addressing Violence in Schools ............................................ 32Indicators of School Crime and Safety, 2000 .................................................... 332000 Annual Report on School Safety .............................................................. 33Safeguarding Our Children: An Action Guide .................................................. 34

ORDER FORM ......................................................................................................35

Volume VIII • Number 1 June 2001

810 Seventh Street NW.Washington, DC 20531

(202) 307–5911

Editorial Advisory Board

John J. Wilson, ChairActing Administrator

Betty ChemersDeputy Administrator

Discretionary Programsand

Acting DirectorResearch and Program Development Division

Eileen M. GarryActing Deputy Administrator

State, Local, and Tribal Programsand Child Protection

andDirector

Information Dissemination and Planning Unit

Kimberly J. Budnick, DirectorConcentration of Federal

Efforts Program

James H. Burch, DirectorSpecial Emphasis Division

Roberta Dorn, DirectorState and Tribal

Assistance Division

Ronald Laney, Director Child Protection Division

Emily Martin, Director Training and Technical

Assistance Division

Executive EditorEileen M. Garry

Managing EditorCatherine Doyle

Senior EditorEarl E. Appleby, Jr.

Production EditorEllen McLaughlin

Juvenile Justice (ISSN 1524–6647)is published by the Office of Juve-nile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention (OJJDP) to advanceits mandate to disseminate infor-mation regarding juvenile delin-quency and prevention programs(42 U.S.C. 5652).

Points of view or opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarilyrepresent the official position or policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is a component of the Office of JusticePrograms, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, theNational Institute of Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

School Violence: An Overviewby Margaret Small and Kellie Dressler Tetrick

Crime and violence in schools are matters of significant publicconcern, particularly after the spate of tragic school shootings in recentyears. The perception of risk is often greater than the reality, as schoolshave been largely successful in keeping students and staff safe from harm.However, many schools face serious problems, and it is important todevelop an understanding of these problems so that effective strategiescan be devised to prevent school violence and increase school safety.

Margaret Small, Ph.D., worksas a consultant with the U.S.Department of Education.Kellie Dressler Tetrick is SafeSchools/Healthy StudentsProgram Coordinator at theOffice of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention(OJJDP).

Many factors enter into an assessment ofschool safety. Professionals in diverse dis-ciplines have made considerable progressin sharing knowledge and resources toprevent school violence. As researchersand practitioners refine violence preven-tion efforts so that the resultant strate-gies become more effective and widelyimplemented, the confusion surroundingschool violence must also be addressed.

The terms “school violence” and “schoolsafety,” while frequently used within jus-tice, education, and public health arenas,have yet to be commonly defined. Re-searchers and practitioners use theseterms to describe a range of practices,events, and behaviors; however, theyhave not attained consensus on thenature and scope of the school violenceproblem. Multiple approaches can provebeneficial as each discipline brings tobear the full force of its knowledge andexperience, but they complicate thetask of summarizing the state of schoolviolence. For instance, should school vio-lence be considered a subset of youth

violence? Should measures of school vio-lence and school safety include all ag-gressive behavior or only behaviors thatresult in arrest or injury? What are thebest indicators of school violence andschool safety? Who should be responsiblefor measuring those indicators?

While researchers and practitioners candisagree on terms and approaches, thepotential for eliminating school violencelies in using their collective wisdom andenergy.

National Data onSchool SafetyAlthough progress has been made inmonitoring issues related to schoolviolence, providing a comprehensiveoverview of the state of school violenceis difficult. First, no standard set of indi-cators exists to describe school violence,and the indicators that are availablehave limitations. For example, datafrom the National Crime VictimizationSurvey, which is conducted by the


Volume VIII • Number 1 3

Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office ofJustice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, describe the extent to which students have been victims of crime atschool. These data, however, do not yieldschool-level information that would pro-vide a better understanding of whichtypes of schools are experiencing thehighest levels of crime. Second, severalself-report student surveys provide infor-mation only about high school students.Third, schools do not use the same defini-tions for incidents; consequently, aggre-gating data across schools is difficult.

Government agencies, research organiza-tions, universities, and schools are work-ing diligently to address these limitationsand have identified data that provide amore comprehensive picture of schoolviolence. Some of the studies from whichthese data are derived have been con-ducted for several years. Such long-termdata are helpful in determining trends forspecific indicators of school violence.The indicators presented in this articleare not the only indicators availablerelated to school violence. They wereselected to represent the breadth ofevents and behaviors that contribute toschool violence. Other publications, suchas the 2000 Annual Report on School Safe-ty (U.S. Department of Education andU.S. Department of Justice, 2000) andIndicators of School Crime and Safety, 2000(Kaufman et al., 2000) contain addition-al indicators and State and local data.1

School-Associated ViolentDeathsSchool-associated violent deaths arerare. Preliminary data from the School-Associated Violent Deaths Study, fundedby the Centers for Disease Control andPrevention (CDC) and the U.S. Depart-ments of Justice and Education, indicatethat less than 1 percent of the morethan 1,350 children who were murdered

in the first half of the 1998–99 schoolyear (July 1, 1998, through December31, 1998) were killed at school (i.e.,killed on school property, at a school-sponsored event, or on the way to orfrom school).

In the entire school year (July 1, 1998,through June 30, 1999), 34 incidentsoccurred in which a child or adult wasmurdered or committed suicide while atschool, resulting in the deaths of 50 indi-viduals. Homicide accounted for 38 ofthese deaths (including 34 students), sui-cide accounted for 9, and an uninten-tional shooting accounted for 1. A lawenforcement officer in the course of dutykilled two adults. Only two of these inci-dents involved multiple victims.

The total number of incidents in which a child or adult was murdered or com-mitted suicide at school declined from49 during the 1995–96 school year to34 during the 1998–99 school year (seefigure 1, page 5). The number of stu-dents murdered at school has fluctuatedbetween 30 and 35 during the 1994–95and 1997–98 school years (see figure 2,page 5).

It is also important to note that thenumber of multiple-victim homicides atschool has declined from six incidents inthe 1997–98 school year to two in the1998–99 school year (see figure 3, page6). Since the 1992–93 school year, atleast one multiple-victim homicide hasbeen committed each year (except forthe 1993–94 school year).

Nonfatal Crimes Against StudentsNonfatal crimes (e.g., theft, rape, sexualassault, robbery, aggravated assault, andsimple assault) against students at schooldeclined from 144 per 1,000 students in1992 to 101 per 1,000 students in 1998(see figure 4, page 6). This reflects a

Juvenile Justice

4



decline in the number of nonfatal crimesfrom 3.4 million in 1992 to 2.7 millionin 1998.

Students are less likely to be victims ofserious violent crimes (e.g., rape, sexualassault, robbery, and aggravated assault)and nonfatal violent crimes (serious vio-lent crime plus simple assault) at schoolthan away from school. In 1998, 12-through 18-year-old students were vic-tims of 1.2 million nonfatal violent

crimes at school. This represents adecline from 48 per 1,000 students in1992 to 43 per 1,000 students in 1998(see figure 5, page 7).

However, the rate of serious violentcrimes against students at school stayedfairly consistent from 1992 to 1998 (seefigure 6, page 7). In 1998, 9 out of every1,000 students were victims of seriousviolent crimes while at school or goingto and from school, whereas 21 out of

Figure 1: School-Associated Violent Death Incidents

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Num

ber

of In

cide

nts

1998–991997–981996–971995–961994–95

School Year

Note: Violent deaths include homicide and suicide.

Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Education, U.S.Department of Justice, and National School Safety Center, The School-Associated ViolentDeaths Study, 1994–99.

Figure 2: School-Associated Student Homicides

Num

ber

of

Hom

icid

es

1998–991997–981996–971995–961994–950

10

20

30

40

School Year


against 12- to 18-year-old students havedeclined dramatically since 1992. In1992, 95 thefts per 1,000 students oc-curred; in 1998, this number declinedto 58 per 1,000 students (see figure 7,page 8). In 1998, 58 percent of all crimeat school was theft.

every 1,000 students were victims ofserious violent crimes while away fromschool.

Although more students have been vic-tims of theft at school than away fromschool, thefts committed at school

Juvenile Justice

6

Figure 3: School-Associated Multiple-Victim HomicideEvents

Num

ber

of E

vent

s

1997–98 1998–991996–971995–961993–94 1994–951992–930

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

School Year


Note: Total crimes include theft and violent crimes. Violent crimes include rape, sexual assault,robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime VictimizationSurvey, 1992–98.

Figure 4: Nonfatal Crimes Against Students Ages 12Through 18 At and Away From School

Num

ber

per

1,00

0 S

tude

nts

19981997199619951993 19941992

0

50

100

150

200

Away from school

At school

Year



Figure 5: Violent Crimes Against Students Ages 12Through 18 At and Away From School

Num

ber

per

1,00

0 S

tude

nts

19981997199619951993 19941992

Away from school

At school

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Year

Note: Violent crimes include rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault.


Figure 6: Serious Violent Crimes Against Students Ages 12Through 18 At and Away From School

Num

ber

per

1,00

0 S

tude

nts

19981997199619951993 19941992

Away from school

At school

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Year

Note: Serious violent crimes include rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault.


Juvenile Justice

8

Figure 7: Thefts Against Students Ages 12 Through 18 At and Away From School

Num

ber

per

1,00

0 S

tude

nts

19981997199619951993 19941992

Away from school

At school

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Year


Nonfatal Crimes AgainstTeachersTeachers are also victims of crime atschool. As with crimes against students,most crimes against teachers involvetheft. Teachers in urban schools aremore vulnerable to crime at schoolthan are those in suburban schools.

Each year from 1994 through 1998, anaverage of 133,700 violent crimes and217,400 thefts were committed againstteachers at school, as reported by teach-ers from public and private schools. Thistranslates into an annual rate of 31 vio-lent crimes and 51 thefts for every 1,000teachers.

Teachers in urban schools were morelikely to be the victims of violentcrimes (40 out of every 1,000) than

were teachers in suburban or ruralschools (24 out of every 1,000).

Carrying a Weapon andFightingPhysical fighting and carrying weaponsat school are dangerous and disruptive tothe learning environment. Contrary topublic perception, however, fighting andcarrying weapons at school have declinedsteadily in recent years. Between 1993and 1999, the percentage of students ingrades 9 through 12 who reported carry-ing a weapon to school on one or moredays during the previous month declinedfrom 12 to 7 percent. During this sametime period, the percentage of studentswho reported being involved in a fighton school property during the previousyear also declined, from 16 to 14 percent(see figure 8, page 9).



Students’ Perception of School SafetyNo matter how infrequently they occur,crimes involving students and teacherscontribute to a climate of fear thatundermines the learning environment.Since 1995, there has been a welcomedecline in students’ fears of attack andharm at school and in their reports ofgang presence at school.

Students from all ethnic groups reportedfearing attack or harm at school less oftenin 1999 than they did in 1995; however,racial and ethnic groups differ in theirperceptions of how safe they are atschool. In both 1995 and 1999, largerpercentages of African American andHispanic students feared attacks than didwhite students (see figure 9, page 10).

Similar trends can be seen in students’reports of avoiding certain areas inschool—presumably for safety reasons.Between 1995 and 1999, the percentageof students who reported avoiding suchplaces decreased. In 1995 and 1999,African American and Hispanic

students were more likely to avoid cer-tain areas in schools than were whitestudents (see figure 10, page 10).

Classroom DisruptionSchools continue to experience minorcrimes and disorder. Student disruptionthat interferes with teaching remainsa significant problem in many class-rooms. As other situations improve(e.g., carrying weapons and physicalfighting), student behavior that leadsto classroom disruption remains at un-acceptably high levels. Student mis-behavior has, at one point or another,interrupted teaching in most 8th gradeclassrooms and in more than half of all12th grade classrooms (see figure 11,page 11).

State and Local DataAlthough national data contribute to anunderstanding of school safety, they maynot be the most useful source of informa-tion for States, districts, or schools inassessing the frequency and scope of

Figure 8: Students in Grades 9 Through 12 Who ReportedCarrying a Weapon or Fighting on School Property

Per

cent

age

of S

tude

nts

199919971993 1995

Carried a weapon at least once during the past 30 days

Fought at least once during the past 12 months

0

5

10

15

20

Year

Note: Examples of weapons are knives, guns, and clubs. “On school property” was not defined forthe questionnaire.

Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System,1993, 1995, 1997, 1999.

Juvenile Justice

10

Figure 10: Students Ages 12 Through 18 Who ReportedAvoiding One or More Places in School

Per

cent

age

of S

tude

nts

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

199919951989

White, non-Hispanic

Total Black, non-Hispanic

Year

Hispanic

Note: “Places” refers to anywhere in the school building, including hallways, stairs, cafeterias,and restrooms.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, School Crime Supplement tothe National Crime Victimization Survey, 1989, 1995, and 1999.

Figure 9: Students Ages 12 Through 18 Who Said TheyFeared Being Attacked or Harmed at School

Per

cent

age

of

Stu

dent

s

White, non-Hispanic

Total

Black, non-Hispanic

0

5

10

15

20

199919951989

Year

Hispanic

Other, non-Hispanic

Note: Includes students who reported that they sometimes or most of the time feared being victim-ized in this way. “At school” means in the school building, on school grounds, or on a school bus.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, School Crime Supplement to theNational Crime Victimization Survey, 1989, 1995, and 1999.



school-related crime, identifying theirschool safety needs, and developingstrategies that address those needs. Datacollected at the State and local levels aremore useful in identifying problems andmonitoring the progress of interventions.Most State and local data related toschool safety rely on student risk behav-ior data (such as self-reported weaponscarrying).

Many children and adolescents behavein ways that put them at risk for injury.Reducing these risk behaviors is a criticalstep in preventing injury and promotingschool safety. To monitor student riskbehaviors, many States, territories, and

cities conduct the Youth Risk BehaviorSurvey (YRBS),2 developed by CDC.YRBS, which includes questions aboutcarrying weapons, physical fighting, andvictimization on school property, is ad-ministered to students in grades 9–12.States that conduct YRBS benefit fromhaving information about their students’health risk behaviors to use in planningand monitoring programs.

YRBS data are collected every 2 years.Ten States and six cities have data thatcan be used to compare 1993 and 1999results to determine whether student behaviors have changed. Between1993 and 1999, several States and cities

Figure 11: Students Who Reported That Their TeachersInterrupted Class To Deal With StudentMisbehavior at Least Once During anAverage Week

Per

cent

age

of S

tude

nts

12th grade8th grade

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1998199619941992

Year

Note: Standard errors for these data were not available. Tests of statistical significance were notconducted.

Source: University of Michigan, Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, Monitor-ing the Future Study, 1992–98.

Juvenile Justice

12

experienced significant decreases in somestudent risk behaviors. For example, in7 of the 10 States and 4 of the 6 cities,the percentage of students who carried aweapon on school property was signifi-cantly lower in 1999 than in 1993. Thesechanges are similar to the national trendsdescribed above.3 CDC provides techni-cal assistance to States interested in con-ducting YRBS.4

ConclusionThis article has attempted to addressthose questions at the heart of theschool safety issue: How much crime isoccurring in the Nation’s schools? Areschools more safe or less safe than in thepast? Do all students feel safe at school?What kinds of crimes are occurring?

Most of the indicators (except for seriousviolent crimes and classroom disruption)suggest that progress is being made inreducing crime and violence in schools.However, these indicators represent awide range of events and behaviors thatare not always easily interpreted. Forexample, although school-associatedviolent deaths are extremely tragic, theyare also rare. Classroom disruption onthe other hand, although significantlyless serious, is prevalent and erodes theeducational opportunities of many stu-dents. As more is learned about theantecedents of violence and effectiveprevention strategies, additional indi-cators will play significant roles inenhancing our understanding of schoolviolence.

Gaps exist in data about school violence,and schools and communities shouldaddress those gaps. Monitoring the fullrange of violent, criminal, and delin-quent incidents can help schools andcommunities better understand theirschool safety needs. Uniform data

collection is critical for monitoring prob-lems across locations and determiningwhere the greatest need for resourcesexists. In addition, monitoring incidentscan help schools identify troubled youthand provide them with services beforetheir problems overwhelm them and,perhaps, erupt in violence.

ReferencesKaufman, P., Chen, X., Choy, S.P., Ruddy,S.A., Miller, A.K., Fleury, J.K., Chandler,K.A., Rand, M.R., Klaus, P., and Planty,M.G. 2000. Indicators of School Crime andSafety, 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Depart-ment of Education, Office of EducationalResearch and Improvement, National Cen-ter for Education Statistics, and U.S. Depart-ment of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,Bureau of Justice Statistics.

U.S. Department of Education and U.S.Department of Justice. 2000. 2000 AnnualReport on School Safety. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education and U.S.Department of Justice.

Notes1. The data presented in this article are drawnfrom the 2000 Annual Report on School Safety,published by the U.S. Departments of Justiceand Education. The 2000 Annual Report onSchool Safety relies on data from several differ-ent studies conducted by the Bureau of Jus-tice Statistics, the Centers for Disease Con-trol and Prevention, the National Center forEducation Statistics, and the Survey ResearchCenter of the University of Michigan.

2. In 1999, 42 States conducted the survey.

3. The national data are collected independ-ently and are not a compilation of State andcity data.

4. For more information about YRBS, con-tact CDC’s Division of Adolescent andSchool Health at 770–488–3257 or visit the Division’s Web site at www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dash.

Efforts to enhance school safety mustinvolve students at an early age and bereinforced throughout their education.Many communities have reduced schoolcrime, violence, and substance abuse bydeveloping comprehensive safe schoolplans that are integrated into the overallschool improvement process.

As noted in Safeguarding Our Children:An Action Guide (Dwyer and Osher,2000:2):

Schools that have comprehensiveviolence prevention and responseplans in place, plus teams to designand implement those plans, reportthe following positive results:

◆ Improved academics.

Creating Safe Schools: A Comprehensive Approach


Creating Safe Schools:A ComprehensiveApproachby Ira Pollack and Carlos Sundermann

M ore than anything else, the school shootings of recent yearshave taught us that school safety is not about any one method of con-trol: metal detectors, surveillance systems, or swift punishment. Nor is it about any single risk factor such as dysfunctional homes and inade-quate schools. We have learned that we cannot identify with certaintythose students who, for reasons clear only to themselves, will assaulttheir teachers and peers. We now understand that safe schools requirebroad-based efforts on the part of the entire community, including edu-cators, students, parents, law enforcement agencies, businesses, andfaith-based organizations.

◆ Reduced disciplinary referralsand suspensions.

◆ Improved school climate thatis more conducive to learning.

◆ Better staff morale.

◆ More efficient use of humanand financial resources.

◆ Enhanced safety.

Assumptions UnderlyingSafe School PlanningNumerous risk factors beyond the con-trol of educators affect school safety. Achild’s home environment, for example,has a profound influence on the manner

Ira Pollack is Resource Librarianand Carlos Sundermann isProgram Director for theNational Resource Centerfor Safe Schools, which wasestablished with funding by theU.S. Departments of Justiceand Education.

Juvenile Justice

14

in which he or she interacts with thesurrounding world.

Although certain risk factors for vio-lence exist outside the purview ofschools, schools can lessen their impactand avoid exacerbating them. Whenschools foster resilience, students areempowered to overcome risk factors thatcould lead them into making dangerouschoices. And when schools enhanceprotective factors, they offer youth theability and opportunity to redirect theirenergies toward achieving success.1

Essential Componentsof Safe School PlanningAlthough some may perceive schools asdangerous, schools remain the safestplace for a child to be (U.S. Departmentof Education and U.S. Department ofJustice, 2000). Schools must ensure thesafety and security of students by adopt-ing a comprehensive approach to ad-dressing school safety that focuses on

prevention, intervention, and responseplanning. Staff, students, and parentsmust be able to better identify the earlywarning signs of violence and respond ina timely manner to protect students andteachers from potential danger.

Isolating individual factors that contrib-ute to school safety can be a difficultchallenge for even the most skilled ana-lyst. Safe schools are typically the resultof numerous interrelated and collabora-tive efforts guided by a variety of stake-holders. The National Resource Centerfor Safe Schools has identified severalcomponents that are essential for creatingsafe schools.2 When effectively imple-mented, these components provide aschool with the foundation and buildingblocks needed to ensure a safe learningenvironment. The following are 10 essen-tial components of safe school planning:

◆ Creating schoolwide prevention andintervention strategies.

◆ Developing emergency responseplanning.

◆ Developing school policies andunderstanding legal considerations.

◆ Creating a positive school climateand culture.

◆ Implementing ongoing staffdevelopment.

◆ Ensuring quality facilities andtechnology.

◆ Fostering school/law enforcementpartnerships.

◆ Instituting links with mentalhealth/social services.

◆ Fostering family and communityinvolvement.

◆ Acquiring and utilizing resources.

While it is critical that these componentsbe addressed, it is equally important thatschools follow a strategic process in C

opyr

ight

©20

01 C

orbi

s



designing and implementing a com-prehensive plan (see figure). The stepsinvolved in this process are detailedbelow.

Developing School/CommunityPartnershipsSchool/community partnerships are thekey to building safe schools and commu-nities. Students, teachers, parents, lawenforcement officials, and civic andbusiness leaders have important roles toplay in reducing school violence andimproving the learning environment.The ways in which schools and commu-nities can collaborate are limitless, andthey should be tailored to respond to theneeds of each partner.

The following examples are school/community partnerships that involveSafe Schools/Healthy Students grants:

◆ In Colorado, Denver public schoolshave hired school safety officers andpromoted effective communicationbetween the school district and theDenver Police Department. They haveestablished community/school assistanceteams and hired quadrant liaisons whoprovide training and technical assistanceto schools, families, community mem-bers, and collaborating agency staff. Thetraining and technical assistance addressthe mental health and social behaviorneeds of students and their families. Inaddition, a council—comprising repre-sentatives from Denver public schools,the Mental Health Corporation of

Strategic Process in Designing a Safe School

1. Develop school/community partnerships.

2. Conduct comprehensive needs assessment.

3. Develop comprehensive school plan.

4. Identify strategies and implement programs.

5. Conduct evaluation.

6. Share outcomes and make adjustments.

Juvenile Justice

16

Denver, the Denver Police Department,two parent representatives, the Mayor’sOffice, the Denver Juvenile ProbationDepartment, and other organizations—is responsible for coordinating the initiative.

◆ Polk County, Iowa, developed anaction plan designed to enhance thequality of life of its youth. The plan wascreated by 100 individuals representingmore than 50 organizations. Throughthis initiative, violence and the use ofalcohol, tobacco, and other drugs will betargeted by developing a comprehensivedrug and violence prevention curriculumand by increasing parental involvement.Comprehensive mental health and socialservices to parents and families are pro-vided through school-based intensivecase management services, mentalhealth clinician services, drug and vio-lence prevention programming, a schooltransitioning program, and Parents asTeachers programming.3

Conducting a ComprehensiveNeeds AssessmentOnce effective community collaborationhas been established, schools can begin acomprehensive needs assessment to gath-er the data necessary to make informeddecisions and institute change. Becausemost schools have limited resources, pri-oritizing needs is essential. A needs assess-ment will point out the nature and extentof problems, identify existing efforts andactivities, and help establish the school’spriorities. Crucial steps in conducting aneeds assessment include the following:

◆ Creating a planning team. The teamshould include all the stakeholders:administrators, teachers, staff, parents,students, and community members.

◆ Collecting data. Schools can collectdata using a variety of means, includingcommunity forums, surveys, and question-naires. Social indicators are another im-portant source of data and are typicallydrawn from descriptive statistics found inpublic records and reports. At the schoollevel, this type of data usually includesincidence reports, suspensions or expul-sions for violence, substance abuse statis-tics, and possession of weapons. At thecommunity level, indicators are socio-demographic characteristics of a commu-nity’s population and social behavior asrelated to crime, substance abuse, andother factors. Often, much of this datahas already been collected.

◆ Developing a school/communityprofile. A school/community profiledescribes a school’s community, facility,staff, students, programs, policies, culture,and milieu. A profile will also point outthe strengths and challenges of a particu-lar school and substitute facts for hy-potheses. Profiles give educators a meansto assess the value of their activities andto identify necessary changes. Throughthe profiling process, diverse viewpointsheld by school and community membersare shared, acknowledged, and under-stood. Finally, profiles establish a baselinefor improvement efforts. Schools andcommunities that use data to informdecisions are more likely to use theirresources effectively.

Developing a ComprehensiveSchool PlanAfter the school/community profile has been completed and the challengesfacing a school have been identifiedthrough data analysis, the planning team

A school/community profile will substitute facts for hypotheses.

and their families. A program’s populari-ty or the availability of funds to imple-ment it is an inadequate criterion forselecting a program. Educators shouldtake sufficient time to adequately re-search proposed initiatives, visitingschools implementing similar efforts andthoroughly familiarizing themselves withnew strategies. Slow, steady progress isthe recipe for sustained success. Staffbuy-in is another essential ingredient,for if teachers are not in favor of pro-posed change, success will be unlikely.Buy-in can be advanced by involvingstaff in the planning and implementa-tion of the comprehensive safe schoolplan. In addition, throughout the selec-tion, training, and implementationprocess, schools must monitor andevaluate a program’s effectiveness,modifying it as needed to better ad-dress their particular needs.

Comprehensive plans need to be devel-oped at all levels of implementation.Schoolwide primary prevention strat-egies promote academic success andemotional/social skills development ina positive climate. Dispute resolutionis an example of such a strategy. Trainingstaff and students to identify and resolvedisputes often results in a reduction infighting.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

1999

Pho

toD

isc,

Inc.



can begin to prioritize problems and des-ignate goals and measurable objectivesthat address the school’s needs. In priori-tizing the problems the plan will address,the planning team should focus onschoolwide prevention and interven-tions, especially those for targeted stu-dents. This comprehensive safe schoolplan must become an integral part of theschool improvement process. For exam-ple, after looking at the data and schoolprofile, the team may determine thatbullying and harassment are problems.In addition, data may show that disci-pline problems in the school are moreprevalent among boys than among girls,and surveys could indicate that parentsunderestimate the degree of violence atschool.

After the planning team has identifiedthe problems, it should draft a generalgoal statement to serve as a focal pointfor prevention and intervention efforts:for example, “For the next 3 years, Gold-en Valley Elementary School will createa respectful, peaceful, and disciplinedenvironment.” Once the goal has beenestablished, the team must determinemeasurable objectives. An objectivecould be measured by using data cap-tured in the school profile as bench-marks. In the example above, a meas-urable objective could be to reduce theincidence of bullying and harassmentover the next year by 25 percent asdetermined by school-administeredstudent surveys. Goals and objectivesshould incorporate the 10 essentialcomponents of a comprehensive safeschool plan previously noted.

Identifying Strategies andImplementing ProgramsThe next step in the process is to identi-fy strategies and programs that effective-ly address the specific needs of students

18

Targeted early interventions shouldcreate services that address risk factorsand build protective factors for studentsat risk of developing academic and be-havior difficulties. Such interventionscan include tutoring, instruction inproblem solving, and conflict resolutionprovided by counseling and mentalhealth staff. Another potential interven-tion is mentoring, which has been iden-tified as effective in preventing problembehaviors and has a positive effect onmost youth (e.g., improving their aca-demic performance and their sense ofself-worth).

Intensive interventions provide child-and family-focused services that are coor-dinated, comprehensive, sustained, andculturally appropriate. These services caninclude home visits, mental health serv-ices, and social services. The Multisys-temic Therapy Program, for example, isan intensive family- and community-based treatment effort that addresses themultiple determinants of serious antiso-cial behavior in juvenile offenders(Henggeler, 1997). The multisystemicapproach views individuals as beingnested within a complex network ofinterconnected systems that encompassindividual, family, and extrafamilial(peer, school, neighborhood) factors.Intervention may be required in anyone or a combination of these systems.

Evaluating the Program andSharing OutcomesOnce a program or strategy has been im-plemented, the process of comprehensive

safe school planning is still not complete.Evaluating program results should be acrucial component of every plan. Evalua-tion consists of five steps:

◆ Focusing the evaluation.

◆ Designing the evaluation.

◆ Collecting the information.

◆ Analyzing the information.

◆ Reporting the findings.

Evaluation begins with determiningwhat is to be evaluated, how it is tobe evaluated, and what is to be donewith the information amassed throughevaluation.

The goals of evaluation are to informschools about what is and is not workingso that they modify their plans accord-ingly. Once the goals of the evaluationhave been established, the planningteam must determine what questionsshould be addressed and which perform-ance indicators should be used. Theteam must also decide who will managethe evaluation and how the data willbe collected, analyzed, and interpreted.The data must then be collected andanalyzed and the findings reported in amanner that will facilitate their use.Upon completion of the evaluation, thecomprehensive safe school plan shouldbe reviewed in light of its findings andmodified accordingly.

Evaluation helps foster accountability,determine whether programs have madea difference, and provide personnel withthe information necessary to improveservice delivery. Most important, evalu-ation can identify whether the imple-mented program has had any impact onparticipants’ knowledge, attitudes, andactions regarding violence, anger, andother targeted behavior. When inte-grated into the fabric of a program,evaluation can be an important toolin improving the program’s quality.

The goals of evaluation are to informschools about what is and is not workingso that they modify their plans accordingly.

Juvenile Justice



The two principal types of evaluationare process and outcome evaluations:

◆ Process evaluation analyzes programimplementation, describing the interac-tion of components and their relationshipto outcomes. For example, program staffmight systemically review the curriculumto determine whether it adequately ad-dresses the behaviors that the program

seeks to influence. A program adminis-trator might observe prevention special-ists using the program, write a descrip-tive account of how the students respond,and provide feedback to instructors.

Evaluating the progress of a program’simplementation assists the planningteam in determining if program goals arebeing met. For example, after a new safeschool policy has been adopted, how is itenforced? If the policy mandates parentconferences for all first infractions andsuspensions for subsequent infractions, isthe policy effective? If not, why? Whatwould be one way to achieve betterenforcement? Establishing the natureand extent of program implementationis an important first step in studyingprogram outcomes.

◆ Outcome evaluation studies thedirect effects of the program on itsparticipants. For example, after attend-ing a 10-session program aimed atteaching anger management, can theparticipants demonstrate the skills suc-cessfully? The scope of an outcome eval-uation can extend beyond knowledgeand attitudes. It also examines theimpact of the program on reducingaggressive behavior.

ConclusionCommunities across the Nation arebeginning to take proactive approachesto reducing youth violence in schools.While many school districts are mandat-ing the formulation of safe school plans,schools must go beyond merely creatingcrisis response plans, which do little toprevent violence. Schools that under-stand the complexity of youth violenceand the steps necessary to address iteffectively are developing comprehen-sive safe school plans that require col-laboration among community agencies.

Characteristics of a Safe School1

◆ Focuses on academicachievement.

◆ Involves families in meaning-ful ways.

◆ Develops links to the community.

◆ Emphasizes positive relation-ships among students and staff.

◆ Discusses safety issues openly.

◆ Treats students with respect.

◆ Creates ways for students to share their concerns.

◆ Helps children feel safe express-ing their feelings.

◆ Has a system to refer childrenwho have been abused orneglected.

◆ Offers extended day programsfor children.

◆ Promotes good citizenship and character.

◆ Identifies problems and assessesprogress toward resolving them.

◆ Supports students in making thetransition to adult life and work.

1 Adapted from Dwyer and Osher, 2000.

Juvenile Justice

20

They are gathering data and using thatdata to shape planning and implemen-tation decisions to target specific needs.Recognizing the need to go beyondsingle-focus responses, they are develop-ing primary prevention plans that beginin kindergarten and are reinforced acrossgrade levels. Comprehensive safe schoolplans support the development of socialskills (e.g., conflict resolution) and aschool environment that helps studentsmanage anger, solve problems, and treatothers with respect. Such plans also pro-vide the intensive interventions neededby youth at particular risk for violence.

Unfortunately, comprehensive safeschool planning will not ensure theelimination of every act of violence onevery school campus. Schools that en-gage in such planning and implementtheir plans effectively, however, are morelikely to foster safe environments fortheir students and teachers.

ResourcesACCESS ERIC. 2000. School Safety: A Collaborative Effort (Special Issue). The ERIC Review (7)1. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Education, Office ofEducational Research and Improvement.

Hamilton Fish Institute. 2000. Effective Violence Prevention Programs. Washington,DC: Hamilton Fish Institute.

McGill, D.E. 1997. Big Brothers Big Sisters of America. Boulder, CO: Center for theStudy and Prevention of Violence, Univer-sity of Colorado at Boulder, Institute ofBehavioral Science.

Office of Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention. 1996. Creating Safe and Drug-FreeSchools: An Action Guide. Report. Washing-ton, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Officeof Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justiceand Delinquency Prevention.

Notes1. Protective factors include caring and sup-port (especially the presence of a caringadult), positive expectations, opportunitiesfor involvement and participation in schooland community life, and respect for culture,language, and heritage.

2. Funded by OJJDP, the National ResourceCenter for Safe Schools at Northwest Region-al Educational Laboratory in Portland, OR,assists schools and communities in creatingand maintaining safe learning environmentsfree of crime and violence. The Center sup-ports the development of comprehensive safeschool plans within the context of schoolimprovement efforts. For further information,visit the Center’s Web site at www.safetyzone.org or call 800–268–2275.

3. For additional examples of school/community partnerships, see U.S. De-partment of Education and U.S. Depart-ment of Justice, 2000.

ReferencesDwyer, K., and Osher, D. 2000. SafeguardingOur Children: An Action Guide. Washington,DC: U.S. Department of Education, U.S.Department of Justice, and American Insti-tutes for Research.

Henggeler, S.W. 1997. Treating Serious Anti-Social Behavior in Youth: The MSTApproach. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention.

U.S. Department of Education and U.S.Department of Justice. 2000. 2000 AnnualReport on School Safety. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education and U.S.Department of Justice.

Students learn to manage anger, solveproblems, and treat others with respect.

Conflict Resolution Education: Preparing Youth for the Future


Physical aggression and intimidationare often the first responses to such situa-tions. In his study of violence amongmiddle and high school students, Lock-wood (1997) reports three key findings,concluding that reducing the occurrenceof the first move toward violence appearsto be the most promising approach topreventing it:

◆ In the largest portion of violent inci-dents, the opening move (e.g., unpro-voked contact, interference with anoth-er youth’s possession) was a relativelyminor affront, but the conflict escalatedfrom there. Few initiating actions werepredatory in nature.

◆ Most incidents began in the school orhome with the largest number occurringbetween youth who knew one another.

◆ The most common goal of violentacts was retribution, and the justificationsoffered by the youth involved indicated

that their impulses stemmed not from anabsence of values but from a value systemin which violence is acceptable.

Other research reinforces the significanceof Lockwood’s findings. In a study con-ducted by the Search Institute, 41 per-cent of youth surveyed reported thatwhen provoked, they could not controlanger and would fight (Search Institute,1997).

The excuses for violence offered byyouth support the contention that youthwho observe adults accepting violenceas a solution to problems are apt toemulate that violence. If youth lack asupportive environment that is disdain-ful of violence, schools must developeffective ways to compensate.

Currently, schools rely almost exclusive-ly on arbitration to resolve disputesbetween youth. In the arbitrationprocess, an adult who is not directly

Conflict ResolutionEducation: PreparingYouth for the Futureby Donna K. Crawford and Richard J. Bodine

Adults are often out of touch with what is important to youth,who worry about things that would not even occur to adults as beingproblems, let alone problems to be addressed by violence. The teasingin the shower, the insults, the pressure to act a particular way—theseare the problems students must live with every day and the situationsthat often set them off (Bodine and Crawford, 1999).

Donna K. Crawford, ExecutiveDirector of the National Centerfor Conflict Resolution Educa-tion (NCCRE), and Richard J.Bodine, NCCRE’s TrainingDirector, have coauthored sev-eral works on conflict resolu-tion education, training, andimplementation.

Juvenile Justice

22

involved in the dispute determines asolution, and the disputing youth areexpected to comply. Students often per-ceive this process as coercive—someoneis telling them what to do—even if theyrecognize that the directive may be intheir best interests. Conflict resolutionoffers an alternative approach thatbrings the parties of the dispute together,provides them with the skills to resolvethe dispute, and expects them to do so.In the conflict resolution process, thosewith ownership of the problem partici-pate directly in crafting a solution.

The report Conflict Resolution Education:A Guide to Implementing Programs inSchools, Youth-Serving Organizations, andCommunity and Juvenile Justice Settings,which was published by OJJDP and theU.S. Department of Education’s Safe andDrug-Free Schools Program, identifiesfour basic approaches to conflict resolu-tion education: process curriculum, medi-ation program, peaceable classroom, andpeaceable school (Crawford and Bodine,1996). Although the lines dividing theseapproaches can be difficult to draw inpractice, the following descriptions out-line their focus:

◆ The process curriculum approach isused to teach the components of conflictresolution education. Students receiveinstruction in a separate course, distinctcurriculum, or daily/weekly lesson plan.

◆ The mediation program approachinvolves training selected individuals(adults and/or students) to act as neutralthird parties who help disputing youthreach resolutions.

◆ The peaceable classroom approach is a whole-classroom methodology thatincorporates conflict resolution educa-tion into the core subjects of the curricu-lum and into classroom managementstrategies. Peaceable classrooms are thebuilding blocks of the peaceable school.

◆ The peaceable school approach is acomprehensive whole-school methodolo-gy that builds on the peaceable classroomapproach by using conflict resolution as asystem of operation for managing the en-tire school. In this approach, adults andyouth involved with the school learn anduse conflict resolution principles and pro-cesses (see page 26 for a case example).

The authors contend that only thepeaceable school approach, which incor-porates the other three approaches, hasthe potential to effect long-term change.Whichever approach is used, however,the authors believe that schools’ ulti-mate mission is to prepare their studentsto participate fully and responsibly insociety.

Components of a Conflict ResolutionEducation ProgramAn authentic conflict resolution educa-tion program—which should be taughtto all students, not just those with dis-ruptive behaviors—incorporates a set ofproblem-solving principles, a structuredprocess of problem-solving strategies,and a set of foundational abilities thatyouth need to resolve conflicts effective-ly (Filner and Zimmer, 1996).

Problem-Solving PrinciplesThe problem-solving principles—or“principled negotiation elements”described in Getting To Yes (Fisher, Ury,and Patton, 1991)—provide the founda-tion for teaching students and adults

Conflict resolution education should betaught to all students, not just thosewith disruptive behaviors.



conflict resolution strategies. These prin-ciples are requisite for any conflict reso-lution program.1

Separate the people from the problem.Every conflict involves both a substan-tive problem and relationship issues.Unfortunately, the relationship betweenparties tends to become involved in thesubstance of the problem. Relationshipissues fall into three categories:

◆ Perceptions. Every conflict involvesdiffering points of view and, thus, differ-ing notions of what is true, what is false,and to what degree facts are important.

◆ Emotions. Students may be morewilling to fight than to work togethercooperatively. In conflict resolution,sharing feelings and emotions is asimportant as sharing perceptions.

◆ Communication. Given the diversi-ty of backgrounds and values amongindividuals, poor communication is notsurprising. Individuals often fail to com-municate what they intended, and whatthey communicate is frequently misun-derstood or misinterpreted by others.

Focus on interests, not positions.The focus of conflict resolution shouldbe not on what people decide theywant (their positions) but on what ledto that decision (their interests). Inter-ests, not positions, define the problem.In nearly every conflict, multiple inter-ests must be taken into account. Onlyby talking about and acknowledginginterests explicitly can people uncovermutual or compatible interests andresolve conflicting interests. Everyinterest usually has several possiblesatisfactory solutions, and opposingpositions may actually reflect moreshared and compatible interests thanconflicts. Thus, focusing on interestsinstead of positions makes it possibleto develop solutions.

Invent options for mutual gain. Beforeattempting to reach agreement, disput-ants should brainstorm to consider a widerange of options that advance shared in-terests and reconcile differing interests.In this process, disputing youth shouldstrive to avoid four major obstacles:“(1) premature judgment, (2) searchingfor the single answer, (3) the assumptionsof a fixed pie, and (4) thinking that‘solving their problem is their problem’ ”(Fisher, Ury, and Patton, 1991:57).

Use objective criteria. The agreementshould reflect a fair standard instead ofthe arbitrary will of either side; that is,it should be based on objective criteria.Disputing youth should frame each issueas a mutual search for objective criteria.They should reason and be open to rea-son as to which criteria are most suitableand how they should be applied, recallingwhich criterion they have used in pastdisputes and determining which criterionis more widely applied. In their negotia-tions, they should yield only to principle,not pressure (e.g., bribes, threats, manip-ulative appeals to trust, or simple refusalto budge).

Cop

yrig

ht ©

1997

Pho

toD

isc,

Inc.

Students may be more willing to fightthan to work together cooperatively.

Structured ProcessConflict resolution is based on a struc-tured problem-solving process that usesthe following steps: (1) set the stage,(2) gather perspectives, (3) identify in-terests, (4) create options, (5) evaluateoptions, and (6) generate agreement.Each of the following strategies isamenable to this process:

◆ Negotiation occurs when two dis-puting parties work together, unassisted,to resolve their dispute.

◆ Mediation occurs when two disput-ing parties work together, assisted by aneutral third party called the mediator,to resolve their dispute.

◆ Consensus decisionmaking is a groupproblem-solving strategy in which all par-ties affected by the conflict collaborate to

Juvenile Justice

24

Behavior Management

Conflict resolution education is an integral compo-nent of an effective behavior management system fora school or classroom. Much of what is perceived inschools as misbehavior is actually unresolved conflict.Because the essence of conflict resolution is planningalternate future behaviors, a noncoercive behaviormanagement plan would be incomplete without aneducational component that enables youth to resolveconflicts constructively.

Teachers, administrators, and other staff chargedwith managing student behavior in schools are alltoo aware of interpersonal and intergroup conflict.Schools do manage behavior arising from conflict,but their methods often do not resolve the conflictthat created the behavior in the first place. Focusingbehavior management efforts on occurrences of phys-ical violence is merely treating a symptom. Teachingstudents alternatives to violence offers hope thatthose alternatives will become the students’ behaviorsof choice. Such education demands more than tellingyouth to “just say no” to violence.

Many of the violence prevention efforts in schools,particularly measures enacted in response to the spateof tragic school shootings, are compliance driven,focusing on external rather than internal methods ofbehavior control. A compliant individual chooses tobehave in a certain manner in response to externalforces, conditions, or influences; a responsible indi-vidual chooses to behave according to reasonable and

acceptable standards in response to internal needsand concern for self and others.

Responsible behavior—the hallmark of an emotional-ly intelligent individual—depends above all else onthe absence of coercion. Coercive managementdeprives the individual of innate motivation, self-esteem, and dignity, while cultivating fear and defen-siveness. Teachers need to abandon as counterpro-ductive the inclination to exercise forceful authorityover students, without abandoning the responsibilityto maintain order. Because they remain ultimatelyresponsible for promoting acceptable and successfulbehaviors in students, teachers need to transfer tostudents responsibility for choosing behaviors thatfit within established acceptable standards.

Unfortunately, many youth have personal experiencesand models that limit their repertoire for respondingto conflict to the often dysfunctional approaches of“fight or flight.” For these youth, meeting their ownbasic needs often involves choosing behaviors thatvictimize others. Conflict resolution education pro-vides these youth with behavioral alternatives to“fight or flight,” teaching them how to select fromtheir past experiences those responses that are mostappropriate in resolving new conflicts.

Conflict resolution education strategies provide stu-dents with the “life skills” they need to assimilateperceptions of an unknown circumstance into aframework of known responses and to generatesocially acceptable behaviors.


craft a plan of action, with or without theassistance of a neutral party.

Foundational AbilitiesIn conflict resolution, particular attitudes,understandings, and skills are important.For problem solving in conflict situationsto be effective, these attitudes, under-standings, and skills ultimately must betranslated into behaviors, which togetherform foundational abilities. Althoughconsiderable overlap exists, foundationalabilities involve the clusters of behaviordescribed below. Because most of thesefoundational abilities are also centralto learning in general, they can be devel-oped in schools through various applica-tions and need not be limited to thecontext of conflict.

Orientation. Abilities involving orienta-tion encompass values, beliefs, attitudes,and propensities that can be developedthrough teaching activities that promotecooperation and reduce prejudicialbehavior. They include the following:

◆ Nonviolence.

◆ Compassion and empathy.

◆ Fairness.

◆ Trust.

◆ Justice.

◆ Tolerance.

◆ Self-respect and respect for others.

◆ Celebration of diversity.

◆ Appreciation for controversy, whichhelps youth think, learn, and grow.

Perception. Abilities involving per-ception enable youth to develop self-awareness, assess the limitations oftheir own perceptions, and work tounderstand each other’s points of view.They include the following:

◆ Empathizing to see the situation asthe other person sees it.

◆ Self-evaluating to recognize personalfears and assumptions.

◆ Suspending judgment and blame tofacilitate a free exchange of views.

◆ Reframing solutions to help theother person “save face,” preserving self-respect and self-image.

Emotion. Abilities involving emotionhelp youth manage anger, frustration,fear, and other strong feelings. Youthlearn to acknowledge that emotionsare present in conflict, understand thatemotions sometimes are not expressed,and understand that emotional respon-ses by one party may trigger problem-atic responses from another. Theseabilities, which enable youth to gainself-confidence and self-control, includethe following:

◆ Learning the words necessary toidentify emotions verbally and developingthe courage to make emotions explicit.

◆ Expressing emotions in nonaggres-sive, noninflammatory ways.

◆ Controlling reactions to theemotional outbursts of others.

Communication. Abilities involvingcommunication allow youth to listen,speak, and exchange facts and feelingseffectively:

◆ Listening to understand. Havingactive listening skills allows a youth toattend to another person and that per-son’s message, summarize the message,and ask open-ended, nonleading ques-tions to solicit additional informationthat might clarify the conflict.

Emotional responses by one party maytrigger problematic responses from another.


Juvenile Justice

26

Peaceable Schools Tennessee: A Case Exampleby Katy Woodworth and Richard J. Bodine

The Peaceable Schools Tennessee (PST) initiative,which has been under way since 1996, is designed toput into practice conflict resolution skills in schools,grades K–12, throughout Tennessee.1

Project developers conducted a needs assessmentamong selected teachers, counselors, and administra-tors. Results indicated that Tennessee schools neededand wanted to address conflict in a positive way andwanted guidance in doing so. Based on assessmentfeedback, available research, and Tennessee Depart-ment of Education expectations, the following goalswere set forth:

◆ Decrease the number of disciplinary officereferrals.

◆ Enhance students’ critical thinking skills.

◆ Provide a safe school environment that isnot authoritarian.

◆ Build community/school partnerships.

The Training Institute

The PST initiative is offered through a 3-day insti-tute; most of the institute’s trainers are teachers andschool administrators. Teams of school personnel,including teachers, counselors, administrators, andschool resource officers, attend to learn how to teachgroup problem solving, mediation, and negotiationskills. Attendees practice conflict resolution skillsthrough role-playing, learn effective classroom strat-egies, create action plans to implement in theirschools,2 and are provided with a forum for questionsand answers. Creating the Peaceable School: A Com-prehensive Program for Teaching Conflict Resolution(Bodine, Crawford, and Schrumpf, 1994), which

provides a framework for noncoercive discipline anda cooperative school context, is the primary text forthe institute.

After the teams attend the institute, participatingschools receive onsite technical assistance and areable to attend advanced training institutes. TheNational Center for Conflict Resolution Education(NCCRE) provides the advanced training.

Implementation

PST developers began by constructing a basic frame-work for the initiative. They appointed an initiativedirector and identified the Tennessee Legal Commu-nity Foundation (TLCF) as the organization that wasto provide the training and coordination services.TLCF conducted a pilot training institute in May1997, in which 15 middle school teams of admin-istrators, teachers, and counselors participated.

In the summer of 1997, PST conducted nine 3-dayinstitutes. Teams from 92 schools participated anddeveloped action plans for use in the fall (see table).PST staff provided followup technical assistance toall 92 teams. In addition, 45 school teams requestedonsite technical assistance in conducting overviewworkshops for local staff, training for student peermediators, and focus group sessions for students,staff, and parents to expand the implementationof the peaceable school concepts.

After training and technical assistance were providedto the first round of schools, the initiative was re-fined and PST’s infrastructure was developed. TLCFevaluated data sent in by participating schools todetermine whether program objectives, as outlinedby the teams in their action plans, were being met.



The information provided also was used to modifythe institute’s training agenda. Overall, data showedthat the initial training design was workable.

During the 1997–98 school year, PST trainers con-ducted two 3-day institutes for whole school districts.Further, because PST planned to expand the numberof summer institutes it offered, NCCRE assisted intraining additional trainers in June 1998. PST alsosent three trainers to NCCRE headquarters to ex-pand their knowledge of peer mediation programs,group problem solving, and behavior managementprinciples and to help them use this knowledge totrain other PST trainers.

Schools Participating in PST Institutes

Year of Training Number of schools

July 1997 to June 1998 92

July 1998 to June 1999 125

July 1999 to June 2000 100

June 2000 to present 150

Total 467

Since the 1998–99 school year, PST has offeredadvanced peaceable school training to more than70 school teams. This advanced training has beenprovided in partnership with NCCRE.

Initial Assessments

Since June 1997, nearly 2,000 classroom teachers,staff members, and administrators, representing 75percent of the State’s school districts, have attendedPST’s 3-day institutes. Almost all of the schoolteams from the 1999 summer institute conducted aninservice presentation to introduce their colleaguesto the concepts they had learned. Nearly 60 percent

of the schools have requested and received technicalassistance.

From 1997 to 2000, Tennessee experienced a 14-percent decrease in suspension rates overall. Schooldistricts that sent representatives from 50 percent ormore of their schools to a PST institute experiencedon average a 39-percent decrease in suspension ratesin that same time period. Of the school districts thatreceived technical assistance and showed a decreasein suspension rates, more than half experienced atleast a 20-percent decrease in their suspension rates(the highest drop was 83 percent). Information fromprincipals indicates that disciplinary referrals aredown in PST classrooms compared with other class-rooms in the same school.

The PST initiative is beginning to show positiveeffects on students. Teachers and counselors whohave responded to recent PST surveys have indicat-ed that students who learn peaceable skills exhibitimproved cooperation and communication. Theyalso have exhibited improved problem-solving abilityand better overall academic performance as a resultof enhanced critical thinking skills. These gains insocial competence and other resilience skills willserve these students for a lifetime.

For further information regarding the PST initiative,contact Suzanne Stampley, Director of Law-RelatedEducation, TLCF, at 615–889–3381 [email protected].

1. This initiative is supported through a collaborative arrange-ment among the Tennessee Department of Education’s Safe andDrug-Free Schools Program, its School Safety Center, TennesseeLegal Community Foundation (TLCF), and Tennessee legal andmediation communities. The Safe and Drug-Free Schools Pro-gram provides funding support, while TLCF has been responsiblefor the design and implementation of this initiative. TLCF is thenonprofit arm of the Tennessee Bar Association.

2. Examples of action plans that teams have implementedinclude providing introductory PST workshops for the entireschool staff and establishing peer mediation programs.

Juvenile Justice

28

◆ Speaking to be understood. Ratherthan speaking to debate or impress,speaking to be understood involvesdescribing the problem in terms of itspersonal impact, speaking with clarityand concision to convey purpose, andspeaking in a style that makes it as easyas possible for the other party to under-stand what is being said.

◆ Reframing emotionally chargedstatements in neutral, less emotionalterms. The skill of reframing, coupledwith acknowledging strong emotions, ishighly useful in conflict resolution.

Creative thinking. Abilities involvingcreative thinking enable youth to beinnovative in defining problems andmaking decisions:

◆ Contemplating the problem fromvarious perspectives. Disputing youthcan reveal their differing interests byquestioning each other to identify whatthey want and to understand why theywant what they want.

◆ Approaching the problem-solvingtask as a mutual pursuit of possibilities.The skill of problem definition involvesdescribing the problem, and thus theproblem-solving task, as a pursuit ofoptions to satisfy the interests of eachparty.

◆ Brainstorming to create, elaborateon, and enhance a variety of options.Flexibility in responding to situationsand in accepting various choices andpotential solutions is an essential skill indecisionmaking. Brainstorming separatesthe process of generating ideas from theact of judging them.

Critical thinking. Abilities involvingcritical thinking enable youth to analyze,hypothesize, predict, strategize, compareand contrast, and evaluate options. Inthe conflict resolution process, theseabilities help youth to recognize and

make explicit existing criteria, establishobjective criteria, apply criteria as thebasis for choosing options, and planfuture behaviors.

The Peaceable SchoolSchools need to pay attention—not reac-tively, but proactively—to developingyouth’s social and emotional competen-cies, that is, their ability to understand,manage, and express the social and emo-tional aspects of their lives in ways thatenable them to learn, form relationships,solve everyday problems, and adapt tothe complex demands of growing up.

Creating a future generation of responsi-ble and compassionate citizens requires aconsistent, comprehensive, sustainedeffort. That goal will not be realized ifstudents never or only occasionally par-ticipate in conflict resolution educationduring their school experience. Althoughthe peaceable classroom is the vehicle forpromoting social-emotional intelligence,all classrooms must be united in the

Cop

yrig

ht ©

2001

Pho

toD

isc,

Inc.



effort. The peaceable school is a collec-tive of peaceable classrooms united by amanagement system that promotes coop-eration and eliminates coercion.

In peaceable schools, students and teach-ers approach conflicts, including thoseconflicts labeled misbehavior, as an op-portunity for growth. In the process ofcreating the peaceable school, both edu-cators and students gain life skills thatbenefit them not just in the school, butalso at home and in the community.Peaceable schools support and expect in-tellectual development—emotional andcognitive (Bodine and Crawford, 1999).

ConclusionSchool-based violence preventionprograms must begin in early educationto allow young students to internalize apattern of peacemaking behaviors priorto becoming adolescents. The best pro-grams seek to do more than reach theindividual child. They attempt to im-prove the entire school environment—to create a safe community whosemembers embrace nonviolence and multi-cultural appreciation (DeJong, 1994).

Peace is often regarded as a goal ratherthan a behavior. Thus peace becomesthe end and not the means of preventingviolence. Safe, peaceable schools cannotbe created without improving what andhow teachers teach, changing how schoolrules are administered, and working to-ward a shared vision. Making schoolssafe will not eliminate violence in socie-ty, but that should not deter communi-ties from carrying out the effort (Haber-man and Schreiber Dill, 1995).

Note1. Techniques used to address these princi-ples are the foundational abilities describedon page 25.

ReferencesBodine, R.J., and Crawford, D.K. 1999.Developing Emotional Intelligence: A Guide toBehavior and Conflict Resolution in Schools.Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Bodine, R.J., Crawford, D.K., and Schrumpf,F. 1994. Creating the Peaceable School: AComprehensive Program for Teaching ConflictResolution. Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Crawford, D.K., and Bodine, R.J. 1996. Con-flict Resolution Education: A Guide to Imple-menting Programs in Schools, Youth-ServingOrganizations, and Community and JuvenileJustice Settings. Washington, DC: U.S. De-partment of Justice, Office of Justice Pro-grams, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delin-quency Prevention, and U.S. Department ofEducation, Office of Elementary and Secon-dary Education, Safe and Drug-Free SchoolsProgram.

DeJong, W. 1994. School-based violenceprevention: From peaceable school to thepeaceable neighborhood. National Institutefor Dispute Resolution Forum (Spring):8–14.

Filner, J., and Zimmer, J. 1996. Understand-ing conflict resolution: School programs forcreative cooperation. Update on Law-RelatedEducation 20(2):4–6.

Fisher, R., Ury, W., and Patton, B. 1991.Getting To Yes: Negotiating Agreement WithoutGiving In. New York, NY: Penguin.

Haberman, M., and Schreiber Dill, V. 1995.Commitment to violence among teenagersin poverty. Kappa Delta Pi Record (Spring):149–154.

Lockwood, D. 1997. Violence Among MiddleSchool and High School Students: Analysis andImplications for Prevention. Research in Brief.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Jus-tice, Office of Justice Programs, NationalInstitute of Justice.

Search Institute. 1997. The Asset Approach:Giving Kids What They Need To Succeed.Minneapolis, MN: Search Institute.

JUSTICE MATTERS

30

School Violence ResourcesSafe and Drug-FreeSchools ProgramThe U.S. Department of Educa-tion’s Safe and Drug-Free SchoolsProgram supports strategies to pre-vent violence and the illegal use ofalcohol, tobacco, and drugs throughthe State Grants for Drug and Vio-lence Prevention Programs andNational Programs. State Grants isa formula grant program that pro-vides funds to State and local edu-cation agencies and to Governorsfor school- and community-basededucation and prevention activi-ties. National Programs carries outvarious discretionary initiativessuch as direct grants to school dis-tricts and communities with severedrug and violence problems, pro-gram evaluation, and informationdevelopment and dissemination.

U.S. Department of Educationefforts are coordinated with otherFederal agencies, including OJJDP,Center for Substance Abuse Pre-vention, Administration for Chil-dren and Families, National High-way Traffic Safety Administration,and Office of National Drug Con-trol Policy. A searchable databaseof publications produced or fundedby the U.S. Department of Educa-tion is available online at www.ed.gov/pubs/pubdb.html. For furtherinformation about Safe and Drug-Free Schools, visit www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS or call202–260–3954.

Office of Community Oriented Policing ServicesThe U.S. Department of Justice’sOffice of Community OrientedPolicing Services (COPS) supportsseveral initiatives related to schoolviolence. In February 2001, COPSawarded $70 million in grants underthe COPS in Schools program tohire 640 new school resource officersto work in the Nation’s schools.The grants were awarded to 348law enforcement agencies represent-ing cities and towns in 47 States.School resource officers act as men-tors and role models and performvarious school functions, includingteaching crime prevention and sub-stance abuse classes, monitoringtroubled students, and buildingrespect between law enforcementand students. Since COPS inSchools began in 1998, COPS hasawarded $420 million to fund andtrain more than 3,800 schoolresource officers.

COPS is conducting a nationalassessment of its School-BasedPartnerships grant program. Thegrants provide law enforcementagencies with the opportunity towork with schools and community-based organizations to address per-sistent school-related crime prob-lems. The assessment will showhow problem analysis, a key em-phasis of the program, is being im-plemented in grantee sites and willexamine the program’s effective-ness. Evaluators are currently

IN BRIEF

collecting data from the sites aboutthe final aspects of program imple-mentation and are conductingquasi-experiments at five of thesites to determine program effec-tiveness. For additional details,visit the COPS Web site, www.usdoj.gov/cops, or call 202–514–2058.

Hamilton Fish Institute onSchool and CommunityViolenceThe Hamilton Fish Institute wasfounded in 1997 as a nationalresource for testing the effective-ness of school violence preventionmethods and developing moreeffective strategies to reduce vio-lence in the Nation’s schools andcommunities. Funded by OJJDP,the Institute works with a consor-tium of seven universities withexpertise in adolescent violence,criminology, law enforcement, sub-stance abuse, juvenile justice, gangs,public health, education, behaviordisorders, social skills development,and prevention programs.

Drawing on school violence re-search and on the expertise ofleading violence prevention au-thorities, teachers, school admin-istrators, and others, the Instituteidentifies promising preventionstrategies and tests them in localschools. As those strategies areidentified, tested, and refined, theInstitute disseminates its findings toassist policymakers, States, schools,

IN BRIEF

JUSTICE MATTERSAdditional Resources

American Association ofSchool AdministratorsArlington, VA 703–528–0700www.aasa.org

National Alliance for Safe SchoolsSlanesville, WV888–510–6500www.safeschools.org

National Association ofElementary School PrincipalsAlexandria, VA800–386–2377www.naesp.org

National Association of SchoolPsychologistsBethesda, MD301–657–0270www.naspweb.org

National Association of SchoolSafety and Law EnforcementOfficersRichmond, VA804–780–8550www.nassleo.org

National Association ofSecondary School PrincipalsReston, VA 703–860–0200www.nassp.org

National Association of StateBoards of EducationAlexandria, VA 703–684–4000www.nasbe.org

National Center for Schoolsand CommunitiesNew York, NY 212–636–6558www.ncscatFordham.org

National Community EducationAssociationFairfax, VA703–359–8973www.ncea.com

National Education AssociationWashington, DC202–833–4000www.nea.org

National PTA (Parent TeacherAssociation)Chicago, IL800–307–4782www.pta.org

National School BoardsAssociationAlexandria, VA703–838–6722www.nsba.org

National School Safety CenterWestlake Village, CA805–373–9977www.nssc1.org

police departments, teachers, par-ents, and youth in adopting success-ful strategies. For further informa-tion, visit www.hamfish.org, call202–496–2200, or e-mail [email protected].

National Resource Centerfor Safe SchoolsFunded by the U.S. Departments ofJustice and Education, the NationalResource Center for Safe Schoolsworks with schools, communities,State and local education agencies,and others to create safe learningenvironments and prevent schoolviolence. The Center helps schoolsdevelop and implement compre-hensive safe school plans, providesonsite training and consultation toschools and communities, createsand distributes resource materialsand tools, provides Web-basedinformation services, and partnerswith State-level agencies to in-crease State capacity to assist localeducation agencies. For furtherinformation about the Center, visitits Web site, www.safetyzone.org,call 800–268–2275, or [email protected].


IN BRIEF

32

Publishedby theNationalInstituteof Justice,The Ap-propriate

and Effective Use of Security Tech-nologies in U.S. Schools providesguidelines that will assist schooladministrators and law enforcement

officials in analyzing a school’s vul-nerability to violence, theft, andvandalism and in considering secu-rity technologies to address theseproblems.

Based on a 7-year study of morethan 100 schools, the report offerspractical information on diverseaspects of security and describescommercially available technologies

and the potential safety benefitsthat may accrue from their use.

The Appropriate and Effective Use ofSecurity Technologies in U.S. Schools(NCJ 178265) is available at nocharge online at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/178265.htm or for $3by contacting the Juvenile JusticeClearinghouse at 800–638–8736 orvisiting www.puborder.ncjrs.org.

Federal Activities Addressing Violencein Schools

This onlinereport, pro-duced by theDivision ofAdolescent andSchool Health,NationalCenter forChronic

Disease Prevention and HealthPromotion, Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, is de-signed to facilitate the coordina-tion of Federal activities focusedon school violence prevention.

The inventory of Federal activitiespresented in Federal Activities Ad-dressing Violence in Schools willbe updated semiannually.

The inventory identifies all ongo-ing and recently completed projectsthat either directly address theproblem of violence that occurs onschool property, around school, orat school-associated events or indi-rectly address the problem of schoolviolence by focusing on precursorsof violence, factors associated withviolence, or mechanisms for pre-venting violent behavior.

The Appropriate and EffectiveUse of Security Technologies inU.S. Schools

For each project, the inventory pro-vides information on the lead orfunding agency and collaboratingFederal agencies and non-Federalpartners and provides contact infor-mation for Federal agency staff.

Federal Activities Addressing Violencein Schools is available online atwww.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dash/violence or by contacting theDivision of Adolescent andSchool Health at 888–231–6405or [email protected].

IN BRIEF


Indicators of School Crime and Safety, 2000

The third edi-tion of Indica-tors of SchoolCrime and Safe-ty, a joint pub-lication ofthe Bureauof Justice Sta-tistics and the

National Center for EducationStatistics, is a companion documentto the 2000 Annual Report on SchoolSafety (see below). The publicationswere developed in response to a

1998 Presidential request for anannual report card on schoolviolence.

Indicators provides data on crimeoccurring in and around schools,presented from the perspectives ofstudents, teachers, principals, andthe general population. It alsoincludes data on crime away fromschool to provide a context inwhich to assess school crime. Thereport is organized as a series ofindicators that provide data on vio-lent deaths at school, nonfatal stu-

2000 Annual Report on School SafetyPublishedby theU.S. De-partmentsof Justiceand Edu-cation,

the 2000 Annual Report on SchoolSafety highlights the nature andscope of school violence by exam-ining data on issues such as homi-cides and suicides at school, crimesagainst students and teachers, stu-dent perceptions of school safety,and school discipline.

The report also details the work ofgrantees under the Safe Schools/Healthy Students Initiative, which isadministered jointly by OJJDP, theSafe and Drug-Free Schools Program,and the Center for Mental HealthService, Substance Abuse and Men-tal Health Services Administration,U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services. The Initiative pro-motes comprehensive strategies thatprovide students, schools, and com-munities with coordinated educa-tional, mental health, social service,

law enforcement, and juvenile justicesystem services under communitypartnerships.

The 2000 Annual Report on SchoolSafety is available online atwww.ojjdp.ncjrs.org/pubs/violvict.html or at www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS/annrept00.pdf or bycontacting the U.S. Department ofEducation at 877–433–7827.

dent victimization, violence andcrime at school, nonfatal teachervictimization, and school environ-ment. Individual indicators areupdated online as new data becomeavailable throughout the year.

Indicators of School Crime and Safety,2000 (NCJ 184176) is availableonline at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/iscs00.htm or by contact-ing the Bureau of Justice StatisticsClearinghouse at 800–732–3277 orthe Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse(see the order form).

IN BRIEF

34

Safeguarding Our Children: An Action Guide

Published bythe U.S. De-partments ofJustice andEducation,SafeguardingOur Children:An ActionGuide provides

a comprehensive model for makingschools safer and offers practicalsteps that schools can take todesign and implement comprehen-sive school safety plans, reduce vio-lence, and help children gain accessto needed services.

The model’s three stages includeprevention, early intervention, andintensive intervention. The servicesencompassed in these stages canreduce violence and other trou-bling behaviors in schools and helpschools improve long-term academ-ic, behavioral, social, and emotion-al outcomes for students and theirfamilies.

Safeguarding Our Children explainshow to implement schoolwide teamsand student support teams, describeshow these teams can improve schoolsafety, provides information abouttechnical assistance centers andother resources that schools can use

to build upon their strengths andthe strengths of their community,and emphasizes the importance ofstrategic planning, capacity building,comprehensive approaches, team-work, and community involvementin successful schools.

Safeguarding Our Children: AnAction Guide (NCJ 182606) isavailable online at www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/OSEP/ActionGuide or by contactingthe U.S. Department of Educationat 877–433–7827 or visiting theEd Pubs Web site, www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html.

Alternatives in Education

The teleconference sought to describe historical andmodern practices in alternative education; illustratethe benefits of alternative education to students,teachers, and communities; and showcase the Insti-tute’s efforts through the demonstration programsto reduce violence in schools and communities.

Of interest to educators, law enforcement agencies,policymakers, youth services organizations, commu-nity agencies, and others concerned with effectiveimplementation of alternative education programs,this broadcast is available on videotape from theJuvenile Justice Clearinghouse (see the order form).Visit the “Calendar of Events” section of the OJJDPWeb site (www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org) for a list of past andupcoming teleconferences.

Since 1992, OJJDP has funded the Juvenile JusticeTelecommunications Assistance Project at EasternKentucky University to train and inform a geographi-cally diverse juvenile justice constituency throughsatellite teleconferencing. This technology has be-come an integral part of OJJDP’s continuing effortsto promptly disseminate new information to profes-sionals across the Nation.

The most recent teleconference, Alternatives in Edu-cation for Safety and Learning, was held May 8, 2001.Presented by the Hamilton Fish Institute and itspartners in the Hamilton Fish Consortium, thebroadcast featured four ongoing demonstrations ofalternative education programs in Eugene, OR; Fred-ricksburg, VA; Jacksonville, FL; and Syracuse, NY.

✄

Juvenile Justice Order FormVolume VIII • Number 1 June 2001

To order other publications listed on the inside backcover, please complete the following:

Qty. NCJ No. Title Price

____ ________ __________________ ____

____ ________ __________________ ____

____ ________ __________________ ____

____ ________ __________________ ____

____ ________ __________________ ____

International Subscribers Airmail Postage ScheduleAll documents ordered by international users are sent airmail.Postage is included in the cost of fee items but must be paidseparately for free items. Use the schedule below to computethe postage cost for your free items.

No. of free items International rate

1–2 $ 21.343–4 28.285–6 31.057–8 33.86

9–10 39.4511–12 42.2613–14 45.0715–16 47.8517–18 50.2519–20 51.45

For more than 20 items, write JJC, P.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD20849–6000, or call 301–519–5500.

Total $_____________

Enclose payment or provide account number.

All payments must be in U.S. dollars and drawn ona U.S. bank.

❑ Check or money order enclosed, payable to JuvenileJustice Clearinghouse.

❑ Deduct the total from my NCJRS Deposit Account.

Acct. No. ____________________________________

Charge my ❑ MasterCard ❑ VISA

Card No. ____________________________________

Exp. Date ____________________________________

Signature ____________________________________

PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE FREE.

Single copies are available free. There is a nominal feefor bulk orders to cover postage and handling. Contactthe Clearinghouse for specific information.

❑ Combating Fear and Restoring Safety in Schools(Bulletin). NCJ 167888.

❑ Crime in the Schools: Reducing Conflict With StudentProblem Solving (Research in Brief). NCJ 177618.

❑ Families and Schools Together: Building Relationships(Bulletin). NCJ 173423.

❑ A Guide to the Family Educational Rights and PrivacyAct (Fact Sheet). FS 009878.

❑ NEW Increasing School Safety Through JuvenileAccountability Programs (Bulletin). NCJ 179283.

❑ Indicators of School Crime and Safety, 2000 (Report).NCJ 184176.

❑ Keeping Young People in School: Community ProgramsThat Work (Bulletin). NCJ 162783.

❑ School and Community Interventions To Prevent Seriousand Violent Offending (Bulletin). NCJ 177624.

❑ Special Education and the Juvenile Justice System(Bulletin). NCJ 179359.

❑ Stand Up and Start a School Crime Watch! (Bulletin).NCJ 171123.

❑ Truancy: First Step to a Lifetime of Problems(Bulletin). NCJ 161958.

❑ Violence After School (Bulletin). NCJ 178992.

❑ Want To Resolve a Dispute? Try Mediation (Bulletin).NCJ 178999.

❑ Youth Out of the Education Mainstream: A NorthCarolina Profile (Bulletin). NCJ 176343.

PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE FOR A FEE.

❑ Alternatives in Education for Safety and Learning(Teleconference Video, VHS format). NCJ 188013.$28 (U.S.), $30 (Canada and other countries).

❑ Comprehensive Framework for School Violence Prevention(Teleconference Video, VHS format). NCJ 184177.$28 (U.S.), $30 (Canada and other countries).

❑ Employment and Training for Court-Involved Youth(Teleconference Video, VHS format). NCJ 186403.$28 (U.S.), $30 (Canada and other countries).

❑ Promising Practices for Safe and Effective Schools(Teleconference Video, VHS format). NCJ 178908.$28 (U.S.), $30 (Canada and other countries).

Allow 6 to 9 weeks for delivery. You will be notified by mail within 30 days if your paid order cannot be filled.

Fee orders are shipped UPS. Because UPS cannot deliver to post office boxes, please provide a street address for shipment of orders requiring payment.

PLACE FIRST-CLASS

STAMP HERE

FOLD, TAPE, BUT DO NOT STAPLE

Juvenile JusticeJuvenile Justice ClearinghouseP.O. Box 6000Rockville, MD 20849–6000

______________________

______________________

______________________

Please print your name and mailing address or affix your mailinglabel here.

Name _________________________________________________

Address _______________________________________________

City _______________________ State _________ ZIP _________

Phone ( ) _________________________________________

❑ Check this box if the information onyour address label isincorrect and makecorrections on yourmailing label.

Publications From OJJDPOJJDP produces a wide variety of materials,including Bulletins, Fact Sheets, Reports, Sum-maries, videotapes, CD–ROM’s, and the Juve-nile Justice journal. These materials and otherresources are available through OJJDP’s Juve-nile Justice Clearinghouse (JJC), as describedat the end of this list.

The following list of publications highlights thelatest and most popular information publishedby OJJDP, grouped by topical areas:

Corrections and DetentionConstruction, Operations, and Staff Trainingfor Juvenile Confinement Facilities. 2000,NCJ 178928 (28 pp.).

Disproportionate Minority Confinement: 1997Update. 1998, NCJ 170606 (12 pp.).

Implementation of the Intensive Community-Based Aftercare Program. 2000, NCJ 181464(20 pp.).

Juvenile Arrests 1999. 2000, NCJ 185236(12 pp.).

Reintegration, Supervised Release, and Inten-sive Aftercare. 1999, NCJ 175715 (24 pp.).

State Custody Rates, 1997. 2000, NCJ 183108(4 pp.).

CourtsEmployment and Training for Court-InvolvedYouth. 2000, NCJ 182787 (112 pp.).

Focus on Accountability: Best Practices for Juvenile Court and Probation. 1999,NCJ 177611 (12 pp.).

From the Courthouse to the Schoolhouse:Making Successful Transitions. 2000,NCJ 178900 (16 pp.).

Juvenile Court Statistics 1997. 2000,NCJ 180864 (120 pp.).

Juvenile Justice (Juvenile Court Issue), VolumeVI, Number 2. 1999, NCJ 178255 (40 pp.).

Juveniles and the Death Penalty. 2000,NCJ 184748 (16 pp.).

Juvenile Transfers to Criminal Court in the1990’s: Lessons Learned From Four Studies.2000, NCJ 181301 (68 pp.).

Juveniles Facing Criminal Sanctions: ThreeStates That Changed the Rules. 2000,NCJ 181203 (66 pp.).

Offenders in Juvenile Court, 1997. 2000,NCJ 181204 (16 pp.).

Teen Courts: A Focus on Research. 2000,NCJ 183472 (16 pp.).

Delinquency Prevention1999 Report to Congress: Title V IncentiveGrants for Local Delinquency PreventionPrograms. 2000, NCJ 182677 (60 pp.).

Competency Training—The StrengtheningFamilies Program: For Parents and Youth10–14. 2000, NCJ 182208 (12 pp.).

Comprehensive Responses to Youth at Risk:Interim Findings From the SafeFutures Initia-tive. 2000. NCJ 183841 (96 pp.).

Co-occurrence of Delinquency and Other Prob-lem Behaviors. 2000, NCJ 182211 (8 pp.).

High/Scope Perry Preschool Project. 2000,NCJ 181725 (8 pp.).

The Incredible Years Training Series. 2000,NCJ 173422 (24 pp.).

Juvenile Mentoring Program: A ProgressReview. 2000, NCJ 182209 (8 pp.).

Law Enforcement Referral of At-Risk Youth:The SHIELD Program. 2000, NCJ 184579(8 pp.).

The Nurturing Parenting Programs. 2000,NCJ 172848 (12 pp.).

Prevention of Serious and Violent JuvenileOffending. 2000, NCJ 178898 (16 pp.).

Gangs1998 National Youth Gang Survey. 2000,NCJ 183109 (92 pp.).

Preventing Adolescent Gang Involvement.2000, NCJ 182210 (12 pp.).

Youth Gang Programs and Strategies. 2000,NCJ 171154 (96 pp.).

The Youth Gangs, Drugs, and ViolenceConnection. 1999, NCJ 171152 (12 pp.).

Youth Gangs in Schools. 2000, NCJ 183015(8 pp.).

General Juvenile JusticeThe Community Assessment Center Concept.2000, NCJ 178942 (12 pp.).

Increasing School Safety Through JuvenileAccountability Programs. 2000, NCJ 179283(16 pp.).

Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block GrantsStrategic Planning Guide. 1999, NCJ 172846(62 pp.).

Juvenile Justice (Mental Health Issue), VolumeVII, Number 1. 2000, NCJ 178256 (40 pp.).

Juvenile Justice. (American Indian Issue). Vol-ume VII, Number 2. 2000, NCJ 184747 (40 pp.).

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 NationalReport. 1999, NCJ 178257 (232 pp.). Alsoavailable on CD–ROM. 2000, NCJ 178991.

OJJDP Research: Making a Difference forJuveniles. 1999, NCJ 177602 (52 pp.).

Special Education and the Juvenile JusticeSystem. 2000, NCJ 179359 (16 pp.).

Teenage Fatherhood and Delinquent Behavior.2000, NCJ 178899 (8 pp.).

Missing and Exploited ChildrenKidnaping of Juveniles: Patterns From NIBRS.2000, NCJ 181161 (8 pp.).

Overview of the Portable Guides to Investi-gating Child Abuse: Update 2000. 2000,NCJ 178893 (12 pp.).

Parents AnonymousSM: Strengthening America’sFamilies. 1999, NCJ 171120 (12 pp.).

When Your Child Is Missing: A Family SurvivalGuide. 1998, NCJ 170022 (96 pp.). Also avail-able in Spanish. 2000, NCJ 178902.

Substance AbuseThe Coach’s Playbook Against Drugs. 1998,NCJ 173393 (20 pp.).

Developing a Policy for Controlled SubstanceTesting of Juveniles. 2000, NCJ 178896 (12 pp.).

Family Skills Training for Parents and Children.2000, NCJ 180140 (12 pp.).

Violence and VictimizationCharacteristics of Crimes Against Juveniles.2000, NCJ 179034 (12 pp.).

Children as Victims. 2000, NCJ 180753 (24 pp.).

The Comprehensive Strategy: Lessons LearnedFrom the Pilot Sites. 2000, NCJ 178258 (12 pp.).

Fighting Juvenile Gun Violence. 2000,NCJ 182679 (12 pp.).

Kids and Guns. 2000, NCJ 178994 (12 pp.).

Predictors of Youth Violence. 2000, NCJ 179065(12 pp.).

Promising Strategies To Reduce Gun Violence.1999, NCJ 173950 (276 pp.).

Race, Ethnicity, and Serious and Violent Juve-nile Offending. 2000, NCJ 181202 (8 pp.).

Safe From the Start: Taking Action on ChildrenExposed to Violence. 2000, NCJ 182789(76 pp.).

The materials listed on this page and manyother OJJDP publications and resources canbe accessed through the following methods:

Online:To view or download materials, visit OJJDP’s home page: www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org.

To order materials online, visit JJC’s 24-hour online store: www.puborder.ncjrs.org.

To ask questions about materials, e-mailJJC: [email protected].

To subscribe to JUVJUST, OJJDP’s elec-tronic mailing list, e-mail to [email protected],leave the subject line blank, and type sub-scribe juvjust your name.

Phone:800–638–8736(Monday–Friday, 8:30 a.m.–7 p.m. ET)

Fax:410–792–4358 (to order publications)301–519–5600 (to ask questions)800–638–8736 (fax-on-demand, Fact Sheets and Bulletins only)

Mail:Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse/NCJRSP.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849–6000

JJC, through the National Criminal JusticeReference Service (NCJRS), is the re-pository for tens of thousands of criminaland juvenile justice publications and re-sources from around the world. An ab-stract for each publication or resource isplaced in a database that you can searchonline: www.ncjrs.org/database.htm.

Revised 1/19/2001

PRESORTED STANDARDPOSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/OJJDPPERMIT NO. G–91

NCJ 188158

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Washington, DC 20531

Official BusinessPenalty for Private Use $300

OJJDP Satellite Teleconference SeriesThe Satellite Teleconference Series is an innovative,convenient, and cost-effective way to provide information to diverse juvenile justice profes-sionals throughout the Nation. OJJDP, throughEastern Kentucky University, hosts these liveteleconferences on issues affecting youthsuch as mental health, school violence, andunderage drinking.

To learn how to register or participate, e-mail your name, agencyaffiliation, and e-mail address to Jenny McWilliams at EasternKentucky University, [email protected], or call 859–622–6671.

Documents

School Violence: An Overview · 2005-02-11 · School Violence: An Overview by Margaret Small and Kellie Dressler Tetrick C rime and violence in schools are matters of significant