This paper explores current literature on the issue of conflict in schools and the use of intervention programs. The first part examines a number of studies in the area of adolescent conflict. The second part suggests principles to use in forming or choosing an intervention program. The final part of the paper gives three potential programs and their basic principles.
In this writer’s experience, the most violent confrontations in school occur in the high school years. But, reacting with violence to solve a conflict is not learned in high school. Many conflict resolution programs are aimed at teaching high school students how to deal with conflict in a non-violent way. Although these programs are needed, they do not address the problem where it begins. Where does a student first begin to learn to use violence as a way to settle disputes? When is the best time to teach students how to solve conflicts without the use of violence? And what are the risk factors that a teacher can look for that might suggest a child could become violent in the future? Finally, what steps might be taken to reduce the likely-hood of students engaging in violence?
There have been a number of studies that show that students that display aggressive behavior in middle school or earlier will continue to use violence in the future. Harachi, et al. (2006) studied predictors that would indicate whether a student would be violent later in life. They found that young students diagnosed with a conduct disorder were more likely to associate themselves with peers having the same problems and eventually use violence as a means to settle conflict. They also found that girls that experienced depression as early as second grade were more likely to be aggressive in later years. In addition, membership in a group of other students who also display some of the same risk factors (attention problems, family conflict, etc.) for aggression were more likely to be substance abusers, use violence, and be delinquent.
Ballard, et al. (2004) studied dispositional aggression and administrative discipline reports for middle school boys. They found that boys exhibiting a greater disposition of aggression were more likely to use violence at school. They also found that the majority of aggressive behavior reported at school was by a minority of students.
There are two important implications drawn from this research. First, if educators can determine what factors put students most at risk then educators can actively work with those students to veer them in a more positive direction. Secondly, educators should attempt to keep at-risk students out of groups of like students which would reduce the possibility of future problems. This could be done by assigned seating where potentially violent students were separated or offering after school programs for students to participate in instead of grouping together during after-school hours.
In another similar study, O’Donnell, et al., (2006) found that students that had been reported as aggressive in middle school were more likely to become victims and perpetrators of domestic violence. This study raises the bar for finding a method that will teach students at a young age how to deal with conflict in a non-violent manner. Not only do educators need to consider ways to reduce violence in schools, but since violence in schools indicates a propensity for violence in life, finding a solution to redirecting students toward more peaceful means of conflict resolution becomes a more serious matter.
Other studies show that many students learn to be violent from watching their parents be violent or from their environment, not necessarily school (Ehrensaft et al., 2003; Widom, 1989). This begs the question: who should really be educated, the parents or the students? The answer is both. Parents are likely the most influential factor in a student’s growth as a person. Unfortunately schools cannot educate all parents to be perfect parents. Therefore, educating parents on the correct ways to raise a child and how to react to conflict as well as teaching children before they enter high school may be the best method of intervention for students. In addition, data from the U. S. Census Bureau (2006) indicates that there is more crime committed by those age twelve to twenty than any other group. Therefore, if schools want to reduce violent crime in this juvenile age group then schools must seek to intervene before students reach this age group.
Shulman (1996) suggests using developmental principles to teach students conflict resolution as young as elementary school. The two methods that Shulman believes would be most beneficial are role playing and peer mediation. Students would be guided in each method based upon their developmental stages in order to mature the students’ thinking in the area of conflict resolution. Other methods, such as mentoring and teaching a value-system to young students could also be used to help them avoid using violence to solve conflict when they are older.
The following is a list of suggestions for incorporating and finding good intervention programs. Teaching students as early as preschool or elementary will help students to resolve conflict better in the future. As Harachi et al., (2006) pointed out potentially aggressive and violent students could be identified as early as second grade. If the indicators are present this early in a students’ life, then schools need to intervene early also. Shulman (1996) reports that developmentally appropriate intervention programs can begin in both elementary and middle school. Why wait until conflict becomes violent and serious in high school before something is done to control the problem?
In addition, schools may want to consider the following:
There are a lot of intervention programs to choose from. It can be difficult to narrow the field down to a few that are good. The three programs listed below have been used and researched for their effectiveness. They also begin intervention early in elementary and preschool.
The first program is called PeaceBuilders. The program begins to teach students about the conflict resolution process in kindergarten. Flannery, et al., (2003) determined that the program was successful in reducing school conflict. The program teaches students the following six principles: 1. praise people, 2. notice hurts, 3. give up put-downs, 4. right wrongs, 5. seek wise people, and 6. help others. The program uses a simple yet effective system to teach young students.
The Perry Preschool Program is aimed at preschool-aged children. The program is based on the belief that if intervention is early enough, problems can be avoided in the future. The program uses developmentally appropriate curriculum and small classroom sizes to reach students better. In addition, the staff are trained in early childhood development and meet with parents and caregivers on a regular basis. The program also stresses to its’ staff that they be sensitive to non-educational needs of the children and families in the program.
The Resolving Conflicts Creatively Program has been proven to effectively reduce violence in New York schools (Aber & Brown, 2003). The program teaches students in first through sixth grade how to resolve conflict using the following principles:
These three programs all begin to intervene in the lives of students at an early stage (preschool, kindergarten, and first grade). They all use developmentally appropriate curriculum and use simple steps to encourage students to resolve conflicts properly. Although each school and each situation is different, using the research in this paper and the suggestions given should be able to help schools develop or choose a conflict resolution program that will stop the violence before it becomes a problem.
Aber, J. L. & Brown, J. L. (2003). Developmental Trajectories Toward Violence in Middle Childhood: Course, Demographic Differences and Response to School-Based Intervention.. Developmental Psychology, 39, 324-348.
Ballard, M. E., Rattley, K. T., Fleming, W. C., & Kidder-Ashley, P. (2004). School Aggression and Dispositional Aggression among Middle School Boys. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 27, 2-19.
Ehrensaft, M. K., Cohen, P., Brown, J. Smailes, E., Chen, H., & Johnson, J. G. (2003). Intergenerational transmission of partner violence: a 20-year prospective study. Clinical Psychology, 71, 741-753.
Flannery, D. J., Liau, A. K., Powell, K. E., Vesterdal, W., Vazsonyi, A. T., Guo, S., Atha, H., & Embry, D. (2003). Initial Behavior Outcomes for the PeaceBuilders Universal School-Basked Violence Prevention Program. Developmental Psychology, 39, 292-308.
O’Donnell, L., Stueve, A., Myint-U, A., Duran, R., Agronick, G., & Wilson-Simmons, R. (2006). Middles School Aggression and Subsequent Intimate Partner Physical Violence. J Youth Adolescence, 35, 693-703.
Harachi, T. W., Fleming, C. B., White. H. R., Ensminger, M. E., Abbott, R. D., Catalano, R. F., & Haggerty, K. P. (2006). Aggressive Behavior Among Girls and Boys During Middle Childhood: Predictors and Sequelae of Trajectory Group Membership. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 279-293.
Institute of Behavior Science (2004). Perry Preschool Program. Retrieved December 13, 2006 from: http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/promising/programs/BPP11.html.
Learning Point Associates (2004). Resolving Conflicts Creatively Program. Retrieved December 13, 2006 from: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/drugfree/sa2lk16.htm.
Peace Partners Inc. (2007). PeaceBuilders. Retrieved December 13, 2006 from: http://www.peacebuilders.com/index.html.
Shulman, H. A. (1996). Using Developmental Principles in Violence Prevention. Elementary School Guidance & Counseling, 30, 170-180.
U. S. Census Bureau. (2006). Monthly postcensal resident population (1/1/2003-6/1/2003). Washington, DC.
Widom, C. S. (1989). The Cycle of Violence. Science, 244, 160-166.