Teaching Youth - How to Communicate Effectively with Peers in a Non-Violent Environment - Research Paper Example

Conflict Resolution: Teaching Youth How to Communicate Effectively with Peers in a Non-Violent Environment Introduction At an international level, there has been an increasing concern on the incidents of violence transpiring in schools (Debarbieux and Blaya 2002). Such unfavorable occurrences have been reported by the media, which has also contributed to raising fear among the greater community and instigating overreaction and short-term solutions as responses. Moreover, society’s perceptions have been heightened on aggressive and antisocial behaviors among the youth as they become more violent and easily provoked. Youth violence has tended towards the use of more dangerous weapons; establishing gangs; and involving more females and children from younger ages, thus, becoming more powerful and destructive (Lam, 2000). The past years have witnessed to alarming concern over violent behavior of youth within educational institutions. Incidents that have been reported include minor issues such as teasing and disobedience; obscenity; physical and verbal threat; vandalism; and gang-related acts, among others (Moore, Petrie, Braga, and McLaughlin, 2002). School violence generally creates a considerable impact not merely on the victims and perpetrators, but on the student body, the school staff, and the greater community. School administrations, however, have not been capable of implementing the most effective responses to school violence which explains why such acts of aggression continue to impede academic achievement (Reddy et al, 2001). Although many families consider the school to be one of the safest places for their children when it comes to lethal violence, it is also home to bullying, intimidation, discrimination, and other subtle and sinister forms of violence (United States Department of Justice, 2001). In a Secret Service investigation, common predictors of violence included family background with which perpetrators either belonged to cohesive or broken families; academic achievement with which some were doing well in school while others had a poor performance; and peer support suggesting that some of the perpetrators were loners while others belonged to a close group of friends (Royer, 2001). Such findings may seem inconsistent, though, the underlying reason behind violent behavior indicated that they were victims of ongoing bullying. The current essay aims to examine conflict resolution among the youth, focusing in teaching young individuals how to solve conflicts through communication in a non-violent environment. Review of Related Literature School Violence The prevalence of violence among the youth, especially in schools, has been frequently reported in many countries. For instance, in Norway, bullying behavior and acts of aggression has been preponderant, with 15% of students reporting that they had an active involvement in bully-victim activities, while 7% considered themselves as bullies (Day and Golench, 1997). In Canada, two separate studies indicated a slightly higher rate of 20% of students who reported being affected by bullying (Tait, 1999). Furthermore, in the United Kingdom, 20% of students experienced bullying and 10% admitted to bullying others. Surveys conducted among students in the United States pointed out that at least 10% to 29% of these students have undergone certain forms of bullying in their schools. Meanwhile, surveys among Canadian teachers estimated the intensity and pervasiveness of violent behavior among schools through a survey in Manitoba among school teachers, which reported that 47% had experienced abuse and aggression (Addington, Ruddy, Miller, Devoe, and Chandler, 2002). Specifically, 45% of the teachers stated that they have been verbally abused while 10% experienced physical abuse. Significantly, 72% of school teachers and 42% of school administrators agreed that violence and abuse is on the rise among the youth. Similarly, a survey that was carried out in Alberta reported that teachers were aware of the increase in physical and emotional abuse among students. However, in the first survey, only 12% of teachers reported that support was readily available for teachers who have been abused through youth violence. In the second survey, 19% expressed a lack of school policies and procedures for victims of violent behavior while 62% were not aware of any forms of support. Reported rates of youth violence in US schools has provided a more comprehensive view of such unfavorable behaviors (Casella, 2001). An estimate of 28,200 students experience physical attacks in their schools every month, and that violent assaults can increase by about 14% annually. Furthermore, 21% of students, aged 12 to 19 years old, are fearful of experiencing attacks or abuse in their schools. Teachers have also become aware that they can be targets of violent behavior as it has been estimated that every year, thousands of aggravated assaults, burglaries, armed robberies, and rapes occur in schools in the United States. As a result, schools all over the world, especially those in the United States, aim to alleviate the incidence of violence among the youth and develop a non-violent, closely controlled school environment (National School Safety Center, 2003). As such, there is a need for youth violence especially among schools to be further examined, and for schools to implement effective policies as a response to violence among students. The Role of Schools for Conflict Resolution and Youth Violence Conflict resolution refers to teaching individuals ways through which disputes can be resolved without having to involve violence (Crawford and Bodine, 2001). Numerous schools as well as community groups provide conflict resolution programs, most especially for adolescents, by agreeing to collaborate and setting ground rules; listening and understanding what and why an individual desires something; finding common interests among themselves; coming up with solutions that will allow everyone to gain benefits; and reaching reasonable agreements. It goes without saying that all students should be given the right to be educated and attend their schools feeling safe from any threat or harm. This right includes the privilege to obtain education in an environment that promotes the appropriate learning process. Thus, school administrators should be responsible for ensuring that their school is conducive to such learning. School systems play a significant role in responding to youth violence, especially since they reach out to large number of young individuals and can instigate schemes for early intervention and prevention (Wilson, Lipsey, and Derzon, 2003). Teachers have also been trained and employed to identify the academic, social, and emotional issues of their students, thereby contributing to the enhanced response towards conflict. It has also been increasingly recognized that creating and implementing disciplinary policies and a codes of behavior for students is not adequate; these should be clearly communicated to students and carried out in a consistent and reasonable manner. This way, clear rules and regulations as well as attainable goals are realized, thus, a more positive school environment (Cornell, 2003). Similarly important is the role of relationships which are an underlying contributor to restorative dealing in schools. In order to respond to acts of violence, there is a need to examine the relationships which are involved in aggressive behaviors, and acting in response to these root causes (Johnson and Johnson, 1997). It primarily involves taking action to attend to the needs of those affected, the community of care for the victims and their offenders, as well as to those of the greater community. Strong communication has been frequently reported to positively influence restoring relationships. It improves individual wellbeing and assists people in being re-integrated into relationships, thus, the need to effectively teach young individuals the power and nature of communication. This process eventually fosters responsibility and resilience among those involved (Johnson and Johnson, 1997). Teachers and practitioners engaged in promoting interventions to prevent youth violence must be able to develop a value system which supports the development of both students and teachers. It will motivate staff members to make use of reliable teaching and problem-solving strategies that are not sanctioned in a book; rather, these are based on guidelines with which favorable social behaviors can be established and cultivated (Gayle, 2006). Such value system is of paramount importance in preventing youth violence among schools. However, many schools today continue to deal with this issue by adopting a control mentality to restrain negative behaviors. Research has also clearly indicated that punishment, which is used as the only intervention on violent behavior among students, is not the ultimate solution to youth violence as it results to a cycle of force and intimidation (Jull, 2000). Furthermore, it increases the likelihood of other behavioral problems. Improving conditions and implementing better disciplinary practices for students should be the main focus when handling and preventing aggression and other behavior-related problems (Morrison, 2003). Most often, schools make use of punitive consequences alone, with no effort of providing their students with learning opportunities to positively replace their behaviors. Open and communicative collaboration with other people who are involved in the development of students is also encouraged as effective schools, though recognizing their role as essential learning environments, also acknowledge that their students and their families may themselves be sources of such violent behaviors (Lam, 2001). Finally, the establishment of a stable and communicative environment as well as persistent adult supervision may significantly contribute to the development of self-control and better understanding of their emotions and behaviors. As such, the school plays a very important role in helping their students resolve conflicts and work towards positive academic and social behavior (Cornell, 2003). Methodology For the current study, the researcher has preferred to apply a mixed methods approach. It is useful to make use of such an approach to conduct a study in sufficient detail. The application of multiple methods when carrying out research supports a more extensive study, investigating a problem or process from different angles (Brannen, 2005). Furthermore, a mixed methods approach may also focus on one process and verify the reliability of the data acquired through cross validation. In short, a mixed methods research balances the results from one research approach to another and reduces the possibility of missing or misinterpreting data (Mingers & Brocklesby 1997). Moreover, Green, Caracelli, and Graham (1989) note that there are a number of ways through which the mixed method approach improves the evaluation of results. It tests the reliability of the findings which have been acquired using several techniques and allows researchers to have more control over causes that may influence the results. It also provides explanations on the findings gathered from one method using another method; consequently, the results obtained can also form and influence the next actions to be taken in the research process. The results gathered from one method can encourage new questions and challenges while conducting the research process (Mingers and Brocklesby, 1997). Because the mixed methods approach is a comprehensive procedure, it provides more detail and intensity to the study as it delves into the specific characteristics of each method and leverages on these. On the whole, the analysis of the current study will further be strengthened as different methods will be applied, which makes it more likely to end up with more comprehensive, insightful results in terms of both scope and quality (Brannen, 2005). The current study shall make use of a mixed methods approach in determining the ways with which conflict resolution can be effectively taught to students in a non-violent environment. A mixed methods research is an approach that combines the gathering and examination of both qualitative and quantitative data (Creswell 2004). In a mixed research, its quantitative portion makes use of a scientific method that is primarily based on a logical or reasonable deduction and the collection of data relies upon exact measurement along with information that has been validated with the use of a number of techniques. On the other hand, the qualitative portion utilizes narratives from interviews or texts as primary data sources. Majority of data gathering can be obtained by conducting interviews, focused group discussions, and naturalistic observations, among others. The primary aim of a mixed methods approach is to sum up all the positive traits of the two approaches (i.e. qualitative and quantitative) and gather and interpret data that are precise and accurate as a result of such combination (Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003). A descriptive-correlational design will be used, and surveys and interview methods will be carried out to describe students’ family background, their attitudes and beliefs, their involvement in violent- behaviors, as well as their attitudes toward conflict resolution and interventions for youth violence prevention. Such are analyzed to determine the relationships between the students’ family background and attributes on one hand and the effectiveness of teaching programs and interventions on the other. Purposive sampling will be employed and a sample of young individuals between the ages of 12 to 16 from public and private schools shall be used. These students should meet the inclusion criteria of being involved in violence-related behaviors. To make sure that all ethical requirements are met, the researcher will ask for formal permission from the school administration and send consent forms to the parents of the children, through the school. The school shall also be informed of the inclusion criteria used in selecting students. From the schools’ records, a purposive selection of a total of 600 participants from 2 public schools and 2 private schools will be produced, with 150 participants from each school. These shall serve as respondents to the survey questionnaire. Once accomplished, the researcher shall encode all quantitative data onto the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 15.0. The latter is a standardized software that is used for generating statistics. The methods of data analysis for the quantitative portion of the study shall include frequency and percentage distributions, means, and standard deviations. The Pearson correlation coefficient shall also be used to determine significant relationships among the variables. On the other hand, 10 students shall be selected from the original survey sample to serve as interviewees. The responses during the interviews from the 10 participants will be recorded and written down, and shall serve as bases for thematic analysis. Being able to recognize common themes that are present among all responses will allow the researcher to draw out useful conclusions from the qualitative data (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003). Moreover, using thematic analysis, substantive conclusions may be generated to address the research questions (Aronson, 1994). References Addington, L.A., Ruddy, S., Miller, A., Devoe, J., and Chandler, K. (2002). Are America’s schools safe? Students speak out: 1999 School Crime Supplement. Washington, US: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. Aronson, J. (1994). A pragmatic view of thematic analysis. The Qualitative Report, 2(1). Brannen, J. (2005). Mixing methods: the entry of qualitative and quantitative approaches into the research process. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8, 173-184. Casella, R. (2001). Being down: challenging violence in urban schools. New York: Teachers College Press. Cornell, D. (2003). Guidelines for responding to student threats of violence. Journal of Educational Administration, 41 (6), 705-719. Crawford, D.K., and Bodine, R.J. (2001). Conflict resolution: preparing youth for the future. Juvenile Justice, 8(1). Retrieved from: www.ncjrs.org/html/ojjdp/jjjournal_2001_6/jj3.html. Creswell, J. (2004). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Day, D., and Golench, C. (1997). Promoting safe schools through policy: results of a survey of Canadian school boards. Journal of Educational Administration, 35(4), 332-347. Debarbieux, E. and Blaya, C. (2002). Violence in schools and public policies, youth violence and social exclusion series. Paris: Elsevier. Denzin, N., and Lincoln, Y. (2003). The landscape of qualitative research: theories and issues. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Gayle, B. (2006). Classroom communication and instructional processes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Johnson, D., and Johnson, R. (1997). The impact of conflict resolution training on middle school students. Journal of Social Psychology, 137 (1), 11-21. Jull, S. (2001). Youth violence, schools, and the management question: A discussion of zero tolerance and equity in public schooling. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 17. Lam, Y.L. (2000). Reconceptualizing problem-solving and conflict resolution in schools: a multi-disciplinary perspective. The International Journal of Educational Management, 14 (2), 84-89. Mingers J., and Brocklesby, J. (1997). Multimethodology: towards a framework for mixing methodologies. Omega, 25 (5), 489-509. Moore, M.H., Petrie, C.V., Braga, A.A. and McLaughlin, B.L. (2002), Deadly lessons: Understanding lethal school violence, National Research Council. Morrison, B.E. (2003). Regulating safe school communities: being responsive and restorative. Journal of Educational Administration, 41 (6), 690 – 704. National School Safety Center (1998). Checklist of characteristics of youth who have caused school-associated violent deaths. Westlake Village, CA: National School Safety Center. Retrieved on November 29, 2010 from: http:// www.nssc1.org Reddy, M., Borum, R., Berglund, J., Bossekuil, B., Fein, R. and Modzeleski, W. (2001). Evaluating risk for targeted violence in schools: comparing risk assessment, threat assessment, and other approaches. Psychology in Schools, 38, 157-172. Royer, E. (2001). “The education of students with emotional and behavioral difficulties: one size does not fit all”, in Visser, J., Cole, T. and Daniels, H. (Eds), Emotional and behavioural difficulties in mainstream schools. London: Elsevier Science, 127-140. Tait, L. (1999). School violence: a critical review of Canadian and American studies. Retrieved from: http://ir.lib.sfu.ca/bitstream/1892/9021/1/b39308054.pdf Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. United States Department of Justice (2001), Promoting safety in schools: international experience and action. Bureau of Justice Assistance Monograph: Crime Prevention Series, 3. Wilson, S.J., Lipsey, M.W. and Derzon, J.H. (2003). The effects of school-based intervention programs on aggressive behavior: a meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 136-149. Outline I. Introduction The introduction provides a backdrop of the increasing concern on the incidence of violence in schools. II. Review of Related Literature A. School Violence - The prevalence of violence among the youth, especially in schools, has been frequently reported in many countries. B. School Violence in the US - Reported rates of youth violence in US schools has provided a more comprehensive view of such unfavorable behaviors. C. The Role of Schools for Conflict Resolution and Youth Violence - Numerous schools as well as community groups provide conflict resolution programs, most especially for adolescents, through several means. School systems play a significant role in responding to youth violence, especially since they reach out to large number of young individuals and can instigate schemes for early intervention and prevention Teachers and practitioners engaged in promoting interventions to prevent youth violence must be able to develop a value system which supports the development of both students and teachers. III. Methodology The use a mixed methods approach and a descriptive-correlational design are discussed in this portion. The influence of family background, their attitudes and beliefs, their involvement in violent- behaviors, as well as their attitudes toward conflict resolution and interventions for youth violence prevention shall be ascertained. Purposive sampling will be employed and a sample of young individuals between the ages of 12 to 16 from public and private schools shall be used. Thematic analysis shall be used for analysing the qualitative data. Read More