short essay on violence in schools

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

How to Identify and Prevent School Violence

Sanjana is a health writer and editor. Her work spans various health-related topics, including mental health, fitness, nutrition, and wellness.

Ann-Louise T. Lockhart, PsyD, ABPP, is a board-certified pediatric psychologist, parent coach, author, speaker, and owner of A New Day Pediatric Psychology, PLLC.

Yasser Chalid / Getty Images

Recognizing the Signs of School Violence

School violence refers to violence that takes place in a school setting. This includes violence on school property, on the way to or from school, and at school trips and events. It may be committed by students, teachers, or other members of the school staff; however, violence by fellow students is the most common.

An estimated 246 million children experience school violence every year; however, girls and gender non-conforming people are disproportionately affected.

"School violence can be anything that involves a real or implied threat—it can be verbal, sexual, or physical, and perpetrated with or without weapons. If someone is deliberately harming someone or acting in a way that leaves someone feeling threatened, that‘s school violence,” says Aimee Daramus , PsyD, a licensed clinical psychologist.

This article explores the types, causes, and impact of school violence and suggests some steps that can help prevent it.

Types of School Violence

School violence can take many forms. These are some of the types of school violence:

• Physical violence , which includes any kind of physical aggression, the use of weapons, as well as criminal acts like theft or arson.
• Psychological violence , which includes emotional and verbal abuse . This may involve insulting, threatening, ignoring, isolating, rejecting, name-calling, humiliating, ridiculing, rumor-mongering, lying, or punishing another person.
• Sexual violence , which includes sexual harrassment, sexual intimidation, unwanted touching, sexual coercion, and rape .
• Bullying , which can take physical, psychological, or sexual forms and is characterized by repeated and intentional aggression toward another person.
• Cyberbullying , which includes sexual or psychological abuse by people connected through school on social media or other online platforms. This may involve posting false information, hurtful comments, malicious rumors, or embarrassing photos or videos online. Cyberbullying can also take the form of excluding someone from online groups or networks.

Causes of School Violence

There often isn’t a simple, straightforward reason why someone engages in school violence. A child may have been bullied or rejected by a peer, may be under a lot of academic pressure, or may be enacting something they’ve seen at home, in their neighborhood, on television, or in a video game.

These are some of the risk factors that can make a child more likely to commit school violence:

• Poor academic performance
• Prior history of violence
• Hyperactive or impulsive personality
• Mental health conditions
• Witnessing or being a victim of violence
• Alcohol, drug, or tobacco use
• Dysfunctional family dynamic
• Domestic violence or abuse
• Access to weapons
• Delinquent peers
• Poverty or high crime rates in the community

It’s important to note that the presence of these factors doesn’t necessarily mean that the child will engage in violent behavior.

Impact of School Violence

Below, Dr. Daramus explains how school violence can affect children who commit, experience, and witness it, as well as their parents.

Impact on Children Committing Violence

Children who have been victims of violence or exposed to it in some capacity sometimes believe that becoming violent is the only way they‘ll ever be safe.

When they commit violence, they may experience a sense of satisfaction when their emotional need for strength or safety is satisfied. That‘s short-lived however, because they start to fear punishment or retribution, which triggers anger that can sometimes lead to more violence if they’re scared of what might happen to them if they don’t protect themselves. 

Children need help to try and break the cycle; they need to understand that violence can be temporarily satisfying but that it leads to more problems.

Impact on Children Victimized by School Violence

Victims of school violence may get physically injured and experience cuts, scrapes, bruises, broken bones, gunshot wounds, concussions, physical disability, or death.

Emotionally speaking, the child might experience depression , anxiety, or rage. Their academic performance may suffer because it can be hard to focus in school when all you can think about is how to avoid being hurt again.

School violence is traumatic and can cause considerable psychological distress. Traumatic experiences can be difficult for adults too; however, when someone whose brain is not fully developed yet experiences trauma, especially if it’s over a long time, their brain can switch to survival mode, which can affect their attention, concentration, emotional control, and long-term health. 

According to a 2019 study, children who have experienced school violence are at risk for long-term mental and physical health conditions, including attachment disorders, substance abuse, obesity, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, and respiratory conditions.

The more adverse childhood experiences someone has, the greater the risk to their physical and mental health as an adult.

Impact on Children Who Witness School Violence

Children who witness school violence may feel guilty about seeing it and being too afraid to stop it. They may also feel threatened, and their brain may react in a similar way to a child who has faced school violence.

Additionally, when children experience or witness trauma , their basic beliefs about life and other people are often changed. They no longer believe that the world is safe, which can be damaging to their mental health.

For a child to be able to take care of themselves as they get older, they need to first feel safe and cared for. Learning to cope with threats is an advanced lesson that has to be built on a foundation of feeling safe and self-confident.

Children who have experienced or witnessed school violence can benefit from therapy, which can help them process the trauma, regulate their emotions, and learn coping skills to help them heal.

Impact on Parents

Parents react to school violence in all kinds of ways. Some parents encourage their children to bully others, believing that violence is strength. Some try to teach their children how to act in a way that won’t attract bullying or other violence, but that never works and it may teach the child to blame themselves for being bullied. 

Others are proactive and try to work with the school or challenge the school if necessary, to try and keep their child safe. 

It can be helpful to look out for warning signs of violence, which can include:

• Talking about or playing with weapons of any kind
• Harming pets or other animals
• Threatening or bullying others
• Talking about violence, violent movies, or violent games
• Speaking or acting aggressively

It’s important to report these signs to parents, teachers, or school authorities. The child may need help and support, and benefit from intervention .

Preventing School Violence

Dr. Daramus shares some steps that can help prevent school violence:

• Report it to the school: Report any hint of violent behavior to school authorities. Tips can be a huge help in fighting school violence. Many schools allow students to report tips anonymously.
• Inform adults: Children who witness or experience violence should keep telling adults (parents, teachers, and counselors) until someone does something. If an adult hears complaints about a specific child from multiple people, they may be able to protect other students and possibly help the child engaging in violence to learn different ways.
• Reach out to people: Reach out to children or other people at the school who seem to be angry or upset, or appear fascinated with violence. Reach out to any child, whether bullied, bullying, or neither, who seems to have anxiety, depression, or trouble managing emotions. Most of the time the child won’t be violent, but you’ll have helped them anyway by being supportive.

A Word From Verywell

School violence can be traumatic for everyone involved, particularly children. It’s important to take steps to prevent it because children who witness or experience school violence may suffer physical and mental health consequences that can persist well into adulthood.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Preventing school violence .

UNESCO. What you need to know about school violence and bullying .

UNESCO. School violence and bullying .

Nemours Foundation. School violence: what students can do .

Ehiri JE, Hitchcock LI, Ejere HO, Mytton JA. Primary prevention interventions for reducing school violence . Cochrane Database Syst Rev . 2017;2017(3):CD006347. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006347.pub2

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Understanding school violence .

Ferrara P, Franceschini G, Villani A, Corsello G. Physical, psychological and social impact of school violence on children . Italian Journal of Pediatrics . 2019;45(1):76. doi:10.1186/s13052-019-0669-z

By Sanjana Gupta Sanjana is a health writer and editor. Her work spans various health-related topics, including mental health, fitness, nutrition, and wellness.

What you need to know about school violence and bullying

Bullying in schools deprives millions of children and young people of their fundamental right to education. A recent UNESCO report revealed that more than 30% of the world's students have been victims of bullying, with devastating consequences on academic achievement, school dropout, and physical and mental health.

The world is marking the first International Day against Violence and Bullying at School Including Cyberbullying , on 5 November. Here is what you need to know about school violence and bullying.

What is school violence?

School violence refers to all forms of violence that takes place in and around schools and is experienced by students and perpetrated by other students, teachers and other school staff. This includes bullying and cyberbullying. Bullying is one of the most pervasive forms of school violence, affecting 1 in 3 young people.

What forms may school violence take?

Based on existing international surveys that collect data on violence in schools, UNESCO recognizes the following forms of school violence:

• Physical violence, which is any form of physical aggression with intention to hurt perpetrated by peers, teachers or school staff.
• Psychological violence as verbal and emotional abuse, which includes any forms of isolating, rejecting, ignoring, insults, spreading rumors, making up lies, name-calling, ridicule, humiliation and threats, and psychological punishment.
• Sexual violence, which includes intimidation of a sexual nature, sexual harassment, unwanted touching, sexual coercion and rape, and it is perpetrated by a teacher, school staff or a schoolmate or classmate.
• Physical bullying, including hitting, kicking and the destruction of property;
• Psychological bullying, such as teasing, insulting and threatening; or relational, through the spreading of rumours and exclusion from a group; and
• Sexual bullying, such as making fun of a victim with sexual jokes, comments or gestures, which may be defined as sexual ‘harassment’ in some countries.
• Cyberbullying is a form of psychological or sexual bullying that takes place online. Examples of cyberbullying include posting or sending messages, pictures or videos, aimed at harassing, threatening or targeting another person via a variety of media and social media platforms. Cyberbullying may also include spreading rumours, posting false information, hurtful messages, embarrassing comments or photos, or excluding someone from online networks or other communications.

Who perpetrates school violence?

School violence is perpetrated by students, teachers and other school staff. However, available evidence shows that violence perpetrated by peers is the most common.

What are the main reasons why children are bullied?

All children can be bullied, yet evidence shows that children who are perceived to be “different” in any way are more at risk. Key factors include physical appearance, ethnic, linguistic or cultural background, gender, including not conforming to gender norms and stereotypes; social status and disability.

What are the consequences of school violence?

Educational consequences: Being bullied undermines the sense of belonging at school and affects continued engagement in education. Children who are frequently bullied are more likely to feel like an outsider at school, and more likely to want to leave school after finishing secondary education. Children who are bullied have lower academic achievements than those who are not frequently bullied.

Health consequences: Children’s mental health and well-being can be adversely impacted by bullying. Bullying is associated with higher rates of feeling lonely and suicidal, higher rates of smoking, alcohol and cannabis use and lower rates of self-reported life satisfaction and health. School violence can also cause physical injuries and harm.

What are the linkages between school violence and bullying, school-related gender-based violence and violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression?

School violence may be perpetrated as a result of gender norms and stereotypes and enforced by unequal power dynamics and is therefore referred to as school-related gender-based violence. It includes, in particular, a specific type of gender-based violence that is linked to the actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity or expression of victims, including homophobic and transphobic bullying. School-related gender-based violence is a significant part of school violence that requires specific efforts to address.

Does school-related gender-based violence refer to sexual violence against girls only?         

No. School-related gender-based violence refers to all forms of school violence that is based on or driven by gender norms and stereotypes, which also includes violence against and between boys.

Is school violence always gender-based?           

There are many factors that drive school violence. Gender is one of the significant drivers of violence but not all school violence is based on gender. Moreover, international surveys do not systematically collect data on the gendered nature of school violence, nor on violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression. 

Based on the analysis of global data, there are no major differences in the prevalence of bullying for boys and girls. However, there are some differences between boys and girls in terms of the types of bullying they experience. Boys are much more exposed to physical bullying, and to physical violence in general, than girls. Girls are slightly more exposed to psychological bullying, particularly through cyberbullying. According to the same data, sexual bullying the same proportion of boys and girls. Data coming from different countries, however, shows that girls are increasingly exposed to sexual bullying online.

How does UNESCO help prevent and address school violence and bullying?

The best available evidence shows that responses to school violence and bullying that are effective should be comprehensive and include a combination of policies and interventions. Often this comprehensive response to school violence and bullying is referred to as a whole-school approach. Based on an extensive review of existing conceptual frameworks that describe that whole-school approach, UNESCO has identified nine key components of a response that goes beyond schools and could be better described as a whole-education system or whole-education approach.  These components are the following:

• Strong political leadership and robust legal and policy framework to address school violence and bullying;
• Training and support for teachers on school violence and bullying prevention and positive classroom management
• Curriculum, learning & teaching to promote, a caring (i.e. anti- school violence and bullying) school climate and students’ social and emotional skills
• A safe psychological and physical school and classroom environment
• Reporting mechanisms for students affected by school violence and bullying, together with support and referral services
• Involvement of all stakeholders in the school community including parents
• Student empowerment and participation
• Collaboration and partnerships between the education sector and a wide range of partners (other government sectors, NGOs, academia)
• Evidence: monitoring of school violence and bullying and evaluation of responses

More on UNESCO’s work to prevent and address school violence and bullying

Read UNESCO's publication Behind the numbers: Ending school violence and bullying

Photo: Eakachai Leesin/Shutterstock.com

More on this subject

Other recent articles

Violence in Schools Seems to Be Increasing. Why?

• Share article

Following the return of most U.S. schoolchildren to full-time, in-person learning, a raft of anecdotal reports indicate that violence may be rising in K-12 schools.

Teachers are reporting breaking up fights in schools and are raising concerns about their own safety. Students have been caught with guns or other weapons on campuses in several high-profile incidents. And school shootings in 2021, though still very rare, are on track to surpass their pre-pandemic high.

But if an actual surge is taking place, what’s causing it? Will it reshape the contours of the fractious school-safety conversation? And what do district leaders need to consider as they try to respond?

Criminologists note that the nation is in the grip of a general spike of violence probably due to the pandemic and social unrest accompanying the murder of George Floyd in 2020. Their best guess is that those trends are trickling inexorably, and tragically, down to K-12 students.

“You study these things for so long and then you throw the rule book out. No one really knows why we’ve got the trends and violence we’re seeing right now,” said James A. Densley, a professor of criminal justice at Metropolitan State University, in St. Paul, Minn., who studies gun violence. “But I think at the same time, we’re coming to the same sorts of conclusions.

“It’s a combination of the pandemic; a lack of trust in our institutions, particularly law enforcement; the presence of guns; the toxic, divisive, contentious times we live in. They’re all interacting together.”

What do we know about rates of school crime?

No recent, nationally representative data set exists to confirm that there have been more violent incidents so far in the 2021-22 school year, due to reporting lags and the generally disparate nature of the data across thousands of school systems.

The most-recent federal collection on school safety found that some types of violent crimes were on the rise as of the 2017-18 school year, though the figures still fell far below overall crime levels in schools in the 1990s and early 2000s.

Anecdotally, though, teachers, principals, and educators now say they are seeing an increase that has roughly paralleled the return of most students to in-person schooling.

In Anchorage, Alaska, fights and assaults are making up more of the suspensions issued so far this year. A brawl and stabbing in an Annapolis, Md., high school led to seven juvenile arrests. Pupils damaged elementary classrooms in Vermont, overturning furniture and supply bins. Parents in Baltimore County, Md., organized a protest in response to a perceived increase in violence. In Shreveport, La., a group of fathers are now taking shifts greeting students at the high school after 23 students were arrested in a one-week period.

The rhetoric surrounding these kinds of incidents is often red hot, with administrators and parents warning about even more-dire consequences if district leaders don’t do something now.

“Our students are sending us warning shots. Literal warning shots,” said Peter Balas, a principal at Alexandria City High School, in Alexandria Va., at a city council meeting earlier this month. Shortly after, the council voted to temporarily restore school police officers, who had been pulled from buildings last year in the wake of a wave of national protests about police violence. (A spokeswoman for the district denied a request to follow up with the principal.)

Teachers, too, have reported being victims of violence at school.

In Rochester, N.Y., high school English teacher Corrine Mundorff was in the middle of trying to break up a fight when, she says, a student sexually assaulted her , repeatedly groping her after she told the student not to.

The troubled city has long suffered from generational poverty and high crime rates. With so many kids out of school last year, some seem to have pulled into neighborhood turf squabbles, she said.

“We have some issues that we’ve been dealing with for years and years. This year, however we have brought our kids back—23,000 of them—and for some reason we’ve decided we were going to pretend the pandemic had never happened and ignore 18 months of trauma induced by the pandemic students have experienced,” Mundorff said in an interview. “And we’ve just had these arguments, these conflicts that ignited on day one. The violence that had been happening outside of the school just carried over.”

School shooting on par with pre-pandemic levels

Disparate sources of data generally support the notion that what’s happening in schools this year is actually a reflection of general trends.

National homicide rates soared in 2020 , according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, although other types of crime generally continued a steady decline. And Americans have been on a gun-buying spree during the pandemic. There are now simply more guns in desk drawers, on the streets, and in cabinets.

School shootings are also on track to outpace the figures in 2018 and 2019.

Education Week began its own tracker of school related shootings in 2018 in an attempt to cut through the morass of different definitions used by federal agencies and researchers. Our criteria are more restrictive than other collections. It includes only those incidents that take place during school hours or events, on school property, and in which at least one individual is wounded by a bullet.

According to EdWeek’s criteria, as of Monday of this week, there have been 24 incidents so far this year, resulting in 40 deaths or injuries . Two-thirds of these incidents occurred on or after Aug 1. There were also 24 incidents each in 2018 and 2019.

(The gun-control organization Everytown USA, which has more expansive criteria, also shows this year’s school shooting figures paralleling 2019’s.)

Recent Data: School Shootings

In 2018, Education Week journalists began tracking shootings on K-12 school property that resulted in firearm-related injuries or deaths. There is no single right way of calculating numbers like this, and the human toll is impossible to measure. We hope only to provide reliable information to help inform discussions, debates, and paths forward. Below, you can find big-picture data on school shootings since 2018. (This chart will be updated as new information becomes available.)

See Also: School Shootings This Year: How Many and Where

Details of the incidents are distressingly familiar. At least six began with fights or altercations between students that spilled over into gun violence. Six occurred at—or just following— football games . Three appear to have been precipitated by a pattern of bullying.

School shootings nevertheless remain exceptionally rare, and the small sample makes EdWeek’s collection a limited proxy for trying to determine overall violence trends. But the Gun Violence Archive , a nonprofit that tracks and confirms shootings from thousands of data sources, found that more children, not fewer, were harmed by gun violence in 2020, when many students were working from home, than in each of the past seven years.

Finally, children, like adults, are tired, isolated, and traumatized by the last 20 months. The numbers of children visiting emergency rooms for mental-health issues increased dramatically in a seven-month period in 2020, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, causing three children’s health organizations recently to declare a mental health state of emergency.

The nation is still in the crisis of the pandemic with no real end in sight, pointed out Margaret A. Sedor, a school psychologist and a member of the National Association of School Psychologists’ school safety and crisis response committee. And students can display a range of crisis reactions, which may include aggression, in response to the losses of the last two years.

“They’ve had almost two years of being socialized and acculturated in a different way, and we need to acknowledge and support community re-engagement,” she said.

What it all adds up to, said Densley, is this: The global pandemic has exacerbated risk factors for violence in general, like loneliness, isolation, and economic instability. Violence also tends to rise at times of uncertainty, especially when distrust in public institutions is high. And social media serves as an accelerant, whipping up anger and frenzy.

“Now you tie that together with last year’s record gun sales—and we’ve got more people carrying guns in public because of more lax laws in that regard,” he said. “And you can sort of put two and two together and say guns are just more likely to be found in the hands of juveniles.”

Some districts consider a return to school-based policing

Those sobering conclusions seem primed to restart an already searing debate over the role that school resource officers and other safety personnel play in schools.

Earlier this summer, Education Week found that a small number of U.S. school districts remove d police officers or cut their school-policing budgets in the wake of racial-justice protests in 2020. Some of those communities, like Alexandria, Va., are now beginning to have second thoughts.

In Rochester, the president of the teachers’ union and three other labor groups representing educators recently demanded that the district consider several options, including restoring SROs in high schools, increasing the number of school safety officers, and offering evening or remote learning options for disruptive students.

The district did not respond to a request for comment on its safety plans. Its superintendent has acknowledged the concerns about violence in public statements.

In other places, advocates fear that more violence could put paid to longstanding efforts there to remove school officers.

The Shelby County district, which includes Memphis, has resuscitated the idea of a “peace force” staffed by district-hired police officers in the wake of a harrowing shooting at a public K-8 school in late September, apparently prompted by bullying, that left one student in critical condition.

“I’m very concerned about the child, obviously. But my second thought is, ‘Oh no, what does this do to trying to get law enforcement out of schools?’ Because so many people think [having a police officer] is like a Band-Aid,” said Cardell Orrin, the Memphis executive director at Stand for Children Tennessee, which has pushed to remove sheriffs’ deputies from schools. “It makes people feel better rather than solving the challenges, and it potentially further criminalizes children. That is the fear, and I think that’s the fear nationally, too.”

Researchers continue to learn more about SROs and the tradeoffs that having them can mean for students. In an important study released earlier this month , a team of researchers studying federal data found that having an SRO did reduce some violent incidents in schools, mainly fights, but did not appear to reduce shootings or firearm-related incidents.

And their presence came at a high price: It meant that a higher proportion of students were suspended, arrested, or referred to the juvenile-justice systems, and the toll fell disproportionately on Black students. (The research has not yet been peer reviewed.)

Districts will need to honor the complexities

Even these new insights, though, don’t always make it clear what’s happening in the black box. For one thing, it’s ultimately principals who make the call on whether to suspend students, not officers themselves, and principals who, alongside officers, can refer students into the juvenile justice system. Put another way, the research appears to point to broader cultural problems in schools.

People want to see what you’re doing for safety, and police are very visible. Connecting kids with resources or using social workers or school psychologists—those things are not as kind of in-your-face or apparent.

The body of school safety literature invariably recommends that improved school culture and safety hinge on strong relationships between adults and students.

Getting kids back into school and back in routines and being reconnected with their peers and classmates is a critical step, said Sedor, the school psychologist. But it demands that districts think systematically about how to support students, and that they move from merely reacting to incidents to intervention and wellness-promotion efforts.

“I think it’s bringing folks together and acknowledging that things have changed and talking about fear and loss, and then problem-solving and strengthening coping strategies,” she said. “It’s about relationships and being able to listen.”

But desperate to respond to frightened communities, districts often seek out immediate, tangible improvements rather than the painstaking work of improving school culture. For good or ill, police officers and other hardening measures—fences, metal detectors, bulletproof glass—signify safety, even though, for the most part, not much evidence suggests they contribute to safer schools.

“People want to see what you’re doing for safety, and police are very visible. Connecting kids with resources or using social workers or school psychologists—those things are not as kind of in-your-face or apparent,” noted Joe McKenna, a senior research associate at WestEd’s Justice & Prevention Research Center.

Even teachers who say they’re close to their breaking points acknowledge the complex calculus.

“I know that teachers are annoyed that the focus keeps going to school resources officers because there are so many more levels to it, and everyone just focuses on them,” said Mundorff, the Rochester teacher. “Would it be helpful to have one? Sure. Does that solve all our problems? Absolutely not. We have three social workers for 952 students who are carrying tons of trauma. And now we have students who weren’t carrying trauma before the pandemic and the ones before are carrying a ton more.”

In Madison, Wis., Gloria Reyes represents the radical middle when it comes to the ongoing school safety conversation.

A former law enforcement officer, she served on the city school board when it voted in June 2020 to remove SROs. She now teaches classes, including on racism within the criminal justice system at Madison College, and runs a local nonprofit.

She strongly supports the restorative justice programs that have replaced school policing in the district, but she’s also concerned that teachers and other educators aren’t well trained to respond to incidents of violence. And while she agrees that communities have for far too long relied on police for things they shouldn’t, they’ve simultaneously neglected other critical social investments, she notes.

If rising violence is due to a simple equation—that hurt kids hurt other kids—the solution, she fears, is complex.

“We have to have professionals out in our communities, visiting with families and visiting with children and doing the outreach and support,” Reyes said. “You know, it’s going to take families, parents, teachers, social workers—it’s going to take everyone to prevent fighting.”

A version of this article appeared in the November 17, 2021 edition of Education Week as Violence in Schools Seems To Be Increasing. Why?

Sign Up for The Savvy Principal

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

• Essay Samples
• College Essay
• Writing Tools
• Writing guide

Creative samples from the experts

↑ Return to Essay Samples

Cause & Effect Essay: School Violence

School violence is a major problem around the world. The effects of school violence can lead to division and severe mental and physical trauma for both perpetrators and victims alike. The main cause of school violence is a combination of weak community relations and a lack of a firm hand within both schools and communities. To effectively deal with the issue, both of these need addressing.

The beginnings of school violence often stem from differences between teenagers. Children are natural herd creatures and will gravitate towards people who are similar in looks, mentality, and those who have the same interests. Other groups are seen as enemies, and this is where conflict begins.

A lack of education is one of the main causes of school violence. If young people aren’t taught from an early age about the consequences and wrongs of violence there’s a high chance they’ll indulge in it later. Education must occur in the home, alongside parents, and in the classroom.

Furthermore, when violence does happen, a lack of will to punish the perpetrators encourages them to participate in it again later. Teachers and law enforcement officers must stamp down on violence. It’s simple mentality. A punishment says mentally and physically violence is wrong. Allowing them to get away with it says to them they haven’t done anything wrong. This is a trend we have seen replicated in UK prisons and the high reoffending rates.

Weak community relations start school violence. Inter-racial schools where students come from different backgrounds sow the seeds of conflict. Many students haven’t come into contact with people from these backgrounds before, and this creates suspicion and wariness. It’s highly unlikely violence will occur if they have been in contact with people from these backgrounds before.

Divisive communities are more likely to suffer from violence than harmonious ones. It’s why schools in East London and international cities like Los Angeles have a reputation for violence in schools and between schools. Too often, schools act on violence within schools, but they fail to work with other schools and community representatives to tackle the problem between academic facilities.

Parental guidance in the home has a large effect on school violence. If a student’s parents are violent or prejudiced, they are likely to develop the same aggressive characteristics. Even if there’s only one person like this in a school, it can still lead to violence in the classroom.

Overall, it’s not so much the risk factors of violence which become the problem. It’s the lack of will to act on it when it does happen. It’s impossible to stamp out all types of violence. Children make mistakes and it will happen. To stop it happening again, schools and community officers must act.

Follow Us on Social Media

Get more free essays

Send via email

Most useful resources for students:.

• Free Essays Download
• Writing Tools List
• Proofreading Services
• Universities Rating

Contributors Bio

Find more useful services for students

Free plagiarism check, professional editing, online tutoring, free grammar check.

Violence and bullying affect one in three students, education experts warn

Facebook Twitter Print Email

Children face violence and bullying at school all over the world, with one in every three students subject to attacks at least once a month and one in 10, a victim of cyberbullying, the UN said on Thursday.

The warning from UNESCO , the UN organization for education, science and culture, based on 2019 data, coincides with the first  International Day against Violence and Bullying at School - Including Cyberbullying , on 5 November.

🛑 You’re entering a bullying free zone 🛑5 November, is the first ever Int'l Day against Violence & Bullying at School Including Cyberbullying. @UNESCO calls for #StopBullying https://t.co/t9gL84Qual pic.twitter.com/VApwgSpCq7 UN News UN_News_Centre

“Recent attacks on schools in Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Cameroon and Pakistan, and the assassination of teacher Samuel Paty in France, sadly underscore the critical issue of protecting our schools from all forms of violence,” said UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay, in a statement.

‘Neglected, minimised or ignored’

Tackling bullying is also key to the protection of students, Ms. Azoulay continued, describing it as a “blight” that was “neglected,  minimized  or  ignored”, even though it inflicted “physical and emotional suffering on millions of children around the world”.

Given the scale of school violence and bullying highlighted in a 2019 report by UNESCO covering 144 countries, Ms. Azoulay  insisted  on the need to raise global awareness and put a stop to both problems.

“As students, parents, members of the educational community and ordinary citizens, we have all a part to play in stopping violence and bullying in schools", she maintained.

Outside chance

The consequences of bullying can have devastating consequences on academic achievement, school dropout, and physical and mental health, the UN education agency said in a  statement .

It defined bullying as aggressive behaviour that involves unwanted, negative actions repeated over time and an imbalance of power or strength between the perpetrators and the victims.

“Children who are frequently bullied are nearly three times more likely to feel like an outsider at school and more than twice as likely to miss school as those who are not frequently bullied,” UNESCO said. “They have worse educational outcomes than their peers and are also more likely to leave formal education after finishing secondary school.”

Cyberbullying on the rise

Highlighting that cyberbullying is on the rise, the UN organization attributed this to the COVID-19 pandemic, as more students than ever were “living, learning and socializing online”. This had led to an “unprecedented increase in screen time and the merging of online and offline worlds”, heightening youngsters’ vulnerability to bullying and cyberbullying.

While bullying is most often carried out by children’s peers, in some cases teachers and other school staff are believed to be responsible. Corporal punishment is still permitted in schools in 67 countries, UNESCO noted.

Physical bullying is the most frequent type of bullying in many regions - with the exception of North America and Europe, where psychological bullying is most common.

Sexual bullying - including hostile sexual jokes, comments or gestures - is the second most common form of harassment at school in many regions.

Although school violence and bullying affect male and female students, physical bullying is more common among boys.

A person’s physical appearance is the most common cause of bullying, students reported, followed by their race, nationality or skin colour.

Psychological abuse is more common among girls, UNESCO continued, after  identifying “isolating, rejecting, ignoring, insults, spreading rumours, making up lies, name-calling, ridicule, humiliation and threats” as typical treatment.

Not a rite of passage

Dismissing the widely held belief that bullying is a rite of passage for youngsters and that little can be done to eradicate it, UNESCO insisted that dozens of countries had made great progress in addressing the problem.

A political desire for change was key, it noted, along with promoting a caring school environment, training for teachers and mechanisms to report bullying and support for affected students.

• child bullying
• cyberbullying

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Original Language Spotlight
• Alternative and Non-formal Education 
• Cognition, Emotion, and Learning
• Curriculum and Pedagogy
• Education and Society
• Education, Change, and Development
• Education, Cultures, and Ethnicities
• Education, Gender, and Sexualities
• Education, Health, and Social Services
• Educational Administration and Leadership
• Educational History
• Educational Politics and Policy
• Educational Purposes and Ideals
• Educational Systems
• Educational Theories and Philosophies
• Globalization, Economics, and Education
• Languages and Literacies
• Professional Learning and Development
• Research and Assessment Methods
• Technology and Education
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

School violence.

• Gordon Capp , Gordon Capp University of Southern California
• Hadass Moore , Hadass Moore University of Southern California
• Ronald Pitner , Ronald Pitner University of South Carolina
• Aidyn Iachini , Aidyn Iachini University of South Carolina
• Ruth Berkowitz , Ruth Berkowitz University of Haifa
• Ron Avi Astor Ron Avi Astor University of Southern California
•  and  Rami Benbenishty Rami Benbenishty Bar Ilan University, Israel
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.78
• Published online: 27 February 2017

School violence can be understood as any behavior that is intended to harm other people at schools or near school grounds. This may include bullying and victimization, or more severe forms of violence involving weapons. To respond effectively to school violence, school personnel and leaders must understand the influences on their schools that come from individuals, the surrounding community, and cultural and political spheres. Careful and ongoing assessment of the needs of any given school is also a prerequisite to effective intervention. The severity of violence, the exact location of violent acts, and how different groups on a school campus experience violence are all key details to understanding and measuring problems. With this information, schools are then able to choose intervention programs that will utilize a whole-school approach. Sometimes, existing Evidence Based Programs can address the needs of a particular school and surrounding community. Other times, schools need to either modify existing interventions or create their own to address the particular forms of violence that exist in their schools and communities.

• school violence
• victimization
• evidence-based intervention
• systematic monitoring

Introduction

Other than the home, schools are perhaps the single most important places for the overall development of children and youth. Schools promote social-emotional well-being and cognitive development necessary for success throughout the lifespan. Schools also provide opportunities for social mobility and encourage participation in a democratic society (Labaree, 1997 ). Being safe at school allows teachers, staff, and students to work together to reach academic milestones and develop social and emotional skills. Indeed, school safety is a prerequisite for staff and students to be able to engage in educational activities. A major focus of school personnel, then, is to promote safety and prevent violence in schools (Berkowitz, De Pedro, Couture, & Benbenishty, 2014 ; Cawood, 2013 ; Dupper, 2010 ; Gilreath, Astor, Estrada, Benbenishty, & Unger, 2014 ; Goodemann, Zammitt, & Hagerdorn, 2012 ; Johnson, Burke, & Gielen, 2012 ; Pitner, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2015 ; Pitner, Marachi, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2015 ).

School personnel, including teachers, administrators, counselors and social workers, can work together to shape and implement policy, interventions, and procedures that make schools safer (e.g., Astor, Capp, Moore, & Benbenishty, 2015 ; Astor, Guerra, & Van Acker, 2010 ; Benbenishty & Astor, 2005 ; Benbenishty & Astor, 2012a ; Benbenishty & Astor, 2012b ; Schiff et al., 2010 ; Schiff et al., 2012 ). School staff must therefore be aware of current empirical and theoretical issues surrounding school violence and of available effective school violence programs. This article presents an overview of a systematic approach to monitoring the needs and activities at schools that facilitate the adoption of a “whole-school” approach to school safety and the prevention of violence. Information about evidence-based programs (EBPs) or interventions is presented, along with examples of how systematic monitoring can help educators and other school personnel make school-wide decisions and changes.

School Safety, Bullying, and Violence

Recently, public attention in many countries has focused on lethal and tragic school shootings. These events dominate discussions about violence in schools and sometimes motivate drastic action relating to school safety. Events at places such as Sandy Hook and Columbine have become part of our cultural lexicon and both led to major changes in legislation and policies at many levels. Clearly, these are frightening and impactful events. However, bullying and victimization in schools are more common types of school violence. Defined as repeated psychological or physical oppression of a less powerful person by a more powerful person (Ttofi & Farrington, 2011 ), bullying has significant negative long-term and short-term effects on students, teachers, and schools. Extant literature suggests that beyond the obvious and immediate pain and suffering that accompany incidences of bullying, victims may experience psychological, behavioral, and somatic outcomes. These can include difficulty sleeping, abdominal pain, headaches, substance use, depression, loneliness, anxiety, low self-esteem, suicidal ideation, decreased academic performance, and school attendance (e.g., Espelage & Swearer, 2003 ; Schneider, O’Donnell, Stueve, & Coulter, 2012 ). The link with depression may be especially powerful, as some research suggests that the probability of being depressed long after leaving school (up to 36 years later) was much higher for children who were bullied at school compared to those who were not (Ttofi, Farrington, Losel, & Loeber, 2011 ); this effect likely occurs before students leave school as well, as students who were bullied were more likely to be depressed even after controlling for other risk factors. Cyberbulling presents equally negative results and victims of these interactions also experience multiple negative outcomes (Cassidy, Faucher, & Jackson, 2013 ).

It is important to acknowledge that students are not the only ones in schools who may experience bullying and victimization. Teachers and staff also experience victimization (Astor, Behre, Wallace, & Fravil, 1998 ; Espelage et al., 2013 ; Reddy et al., 2013 ; Ziera, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2004 ). In a recent national study of teachers, 80% reported being victimized in the last two years, and 94% of these reports indicated staff were bullied by students (McMahon et al., 2014 ). This same study indicated that teachers reported being victimized by two primary groups of perpetrators—students and parents.

School shootings and suicides are two rare, extreme, and highly publicized potential outcomes of school victimization. Teachers, administrators, social workers, school counselors, and other staff are also aware of other kinds of violence and victimization that occur in schools but do not necessarily follow the above definition of bullying, or do not result in fatalities. Many other behaviors also fall into the category of school violence or victimization and have a powerful and negative impact on students, staff, and schools, including bringing weapons to school, sexual harassment and assault, threatening students and staff, and social exclusion, either in person or through online platforms (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005 ; Benbenishty, Astor, & Estrada, 2008 ). Thus, the promotion of school safety and violence prevention needs to address a range of challenges for a variety of school stakeholders.

Definitions of school violence have varied in recent years. In this chapter, our definition reflects a consensus among researchers that school violence includes a range of intentional behaviors that aim to harm others on or around school grounds (Astor, Benbenishty, & Estrada, 2009 ; Pitner, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2015 ). We are also guided by a recent American Educational Research Association (AERA) position that bullying is “part of the larger phenomenon of violence in schools” (AERA, 2013 ). While bullying and other forms of school violence are generally results of individual behaviors, the effects of violence reach outward into schools and surrounding communities.

Socio-ecological Approach to School Violence

Programs that aim to prevent violence are largely predicated on understanding causes, risks, and protective factors that are connected to violence in schools. Bullying and violence in schools have frequently been explained by theories focused on interpersonal and intrapersonal dynamics (Hudley Britsch, Wakefield, Demorat, & Cho, 1998 ; Rocque, 2012 ). These theories depend on understanding how and why individuals engage in particular behaviors or respond in certain ways. However, other theories have emerged that utilize a socio-ecological approach to understand school violence (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005 ; Bryk, Sebring, Allensworth, Easton, & Luppescu, 2010 ; Espelage, 2014 ). These socio-ecological theories are important for understanding influences within the school and outside of the school. School organization and decision making are increasingly recognized as key factors that help schools cope with violence (e.g., Astor, Meyer, Behre, 1999 ). In some schools, readiness for change and a willingness to learn are low (Berkowitz, Bowen, Benbenishty, & Powers, 2013 , Thapa, Cohen, Guffey, & Higgins-D’Alessandro, 2013 ). In other schools, strong leadership helps to deal with external influences, including neighborhood poverty, crime, and oppression (Astor, Benbenishty, & Estrada, 2009 ).

Socio-ecological models of school violence integrate both external factors and internal characteristics and dynamics of schools. These models acknowledge that schools are nested within a community and a district, and each district is nested within a larger region, county, state, and country. Each of these ecological layers exerts some influence on the school, whether it be cultural, religious, or political influence. All of this creates a complex picture that must be understood to appropriately and effectively address school violence and victimization. This ecological understanding of a “school in context” allows school staff to consider what might be shared by schools in a particular context and what might be unique to individual schools (Benbenishty & Astor, 2012a , Benbenishty & Astor, 2012b ). This model of a school in context also assumes that the individual behaviors of students, parents, teachers and other staff members contribute to the overall safety of a school (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005 ). In addition, the surrounding community is connected to schools in this model; violence that occurs in a school, for instance, may impact the surrounding community and may also occur in the surrounding community.

Fostering an ecological perspective is especially important for school staff who are planning interventions; this allows planning an intervention to include multiple constituents (e.g., students, teachers, administrators, etc.) and to address environmental or structural changes to make schools safer. For example, knowing the times and places at a particular school that are vulnerable to violence allows school leaders and personnel to develop an intervention focusing directly on the specific challenges faced by this school. Benbenishty and Astor ( 2012b ) illustrate that interventions as simple as opening one more gate at the end of the school day, or placing a staff member at a bus station at a particular time of day, can prevent violence. In this example, the community is an important part of the school context, and interventions that address violence should not necessarily be restricted to school grounds.

Empirically Supported Prevention and Intervention Programs

This section presents examples of prevention and intervention programs that are available for schools. This is not a comprehensive list of all programs available, but we provide examples of commonly used and effective programs that help illustrate what an effective program can do for a school.

Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) Program

PATHS was designed to reduce aggression and problem behaviors and to promote social and emotional competence in grades K–5. Research and field testing has been in mainstream and special needs classes for students who are hearing-impaired, learning disabled, emotionally disturbed, mildly intellectually delayed and gifted (see Riggs, Greenberg, Kusché, & Pentz, 2006 ). PATHS focuses on five domains of student functioning: (1) friendship skills and pro-social behavior; (2) self-control; (3) emotional understanding; (4) conflict resolution and communication; and (5) problem solving skills (Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 2011 ). Teachers and counselors receive training, lesson modules, and ongoing consultation. PATHS also provides information and activities for parents to review and complete with their children.

Five conceptual models provide the foundation for PATHS (Greenberg, Kusché, & Mihalic, 1998 ). The first conceptual model, affective-behavioral-cognitive-dynamic (ABCD), informs developmentally appropriate skill building. The second model, an eco-behavioral system perspective, focuses on allowing the teacher to use these skills in building a healthy classroom atmosphere. The third model emphasizes the importance of neurobiology and brain organization for understanding development. The fourth model is influenced by developmental psychodynamic theory. Finally, the fifth model is based on psychological concepts of emotional awareness or emotional intelligence. These conceptual models are used in concert in the PATHS curriculum to create a comprehensive and developmentally appropriate program that addresses students’ cognition, emotion, and behavior.

Research from at least six groups across the nation has demonstrated that PATHS is a model or effective program for violence prevention. Results showed decreases in aggressive behavior, conduct problems, violent responses to social problems, and increases in emotionally expressive vocabulary, self-control, frustration tolerance, conflict-resolution strategies, and cognitive skills (SAMHSA Model Programs, 2003 ). These findings are based on teacher reports, student self-reports, and child assessments and interviews. PATHS is one of the highest-rated social-emotional learning programs, and is recognized internationally because of the strong evidence base, theoretical foundation and ease of implementation. Both the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention have also recognized PATHS for its effectiveness.

Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP)

OBPP is another school-wide, comprehensive program designed to reduce and prevent bullying in grades 1 through 9. This EBP has been translated into more than 12 languages, implemented in more than 15 countries, and is based on a systematic restructuring of a school environment. This restructuring redirects bullying behavior and rewards pro-social behaviors. The conceptual framework for this intervention is based on research on the development and modification of aggressive behavior, as well as positive child-rearing dimensions (Olweus & Limber, 2010a ). The goal of OBPP is to structure a school environment where adults are engaged, caring, set limits regarding unacceptable behavior and provide negative consequences for violence, and where adults act as authorities and positive role models (Limber, 2012 ).

The success of OBPP is largely due to the integration of these principles into the school environment. Students and adults participate in nearly all the program’s components, which means that the success of this program does not rest on a few individuals in the school. Through their involvement, and through assessments of the school, staff and parents should become aware of the extent that bullying is present in their school and understand the significance of bullying and resulting harm, as well as being active in enforcing rules and discouraging bullying behavior (Olweus & Limber, 2010a ). In many cultures, schools implementing this program have observed significant reductions in bullying, including fighting, vandalism, truancy, and theft. Beyond these reductions, student reports indicate improvements in order and discipline, attitudes toward school and school work, and social relationships (Limber, 2012 ; Olweus & Limber, 2010a ).

Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS)

PBIS is a comprehensive, proactive, whole-school intervention that was designed to create positive school environments, promote student success, and reduce student problem behaviors in elementary, middle, and high schools. Guided by principles from applied behavioral analysis, the PBIS model consists of teaching, modeling, and reinforcing pro-social or desired behaviors (Horner et al., 2009 ). PBIS utilizes three levels of intervention within each school: primary, secondary, and tertiary. Primary intervention includes teaching, modeling, and reinforcing behavior and expectations for all students. For example, a school-wide token system might be used to reinforce specific prosocial behaviors. Secondary level interventions are intended for either specific school settings, like a cafeteria or hallway, or for students who continue to be at risk for problem behaviors after primary level intervention. Tertiary level interventions are individualized for students with chronic behavioral problems (Pugh & Chitiyo, 2012 ). One critical aspect of PBIS involves the ongoing collection of data in order to monitor progress, solve problems, and make decisions about behavioral challenges in schools (Solomon, Tobin, & Schutte, 2015 ). Several studies show that PBIS implementation, utilizing a school-wide model and associated monitoring, is effective for reducing problem behaviors in schools (Bradshaw et al., 2012 ; Horner, Sugai, & Anderson, 2010 ; Horner et al., 2009 ; Molly, Moore, Trail, Van Epps, & Hopfer, 2013 ; Szu-Yin, 2015 ).

Characteristics of Successful Interventions

The three programs presented above provide examples of successful interventions for bullying and school violence. Some researchers posit that there are characteristics that are the foundation for effective interventions (Pitner, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2015 ). Pitner et al. ( 2015 ) examined evidence-based violence prevention/intervention programs and note that successful school-wide interventions share core characteristics: (1) they are comprehensive interventions enacted in all ecological layers of a school community; (2) they raise awareness, investment, and responsibility from students, teachers, and parents regarding the types of violence in schools (e.g., fighting, sexual harassment, weapons); (3) they establish clear expectations and rules for the whole school; (4) they increase supervision and monitoring outside of classrooms; (5) they use faculty, staff, and parents to plan, implement and sustain the intervention; (6) they often fit naturally into the flow and routines of the school; (7) they create clear expectations and procedures before, during, and after incidences of violence, and (8) they include continuous monitoring in order for schools to tailor interventions to their unique environments and thus increase the potential for success (Pitner et al., 2015 ). The complexity of these characteristics and the number of evidence-based school violence interventions available for schools to use raise important questions. Perhaps the most pressing question is: How do school staff decide which program is the best fit for their school?

Selecting the Right EBP for a School

As school leaders look for programs to address violence and bullying, it is important that they search for interventions with strong empirical support. Model programs with large-scale research studies demonstrating their effectiveness have a better chance of working in schools (Marachi, Astor, & Benbenishty, 2013 ). One important consideration, though, is to determine whether or not a particular violence prevention program will be as effective in one particular school as it was elsewhere (Shlonsky & Benbenishty, 2014 ). Thus, schools need to ensure that any intervention matches the resources, needs, and values of a school and the surrounding community.

Often, evidence-based programs that address school violence or bullying are introduced to schools through “top-down” approaches, with little or no attention to variations that exist in local school contexts (Pitner et al., 2015 ). This approach has important limitations to consider. Each school has unique sociocultural influences, a unique school climate, and may not share the same problems or the same severity of problems with other schools that are implementing the same intervention. Thus, implementing a single program to address school violence in schools that have different needs is unlikely to adequately and effectively address issues of violence. All of this indicates that any adoption of an intervention needs to be preceded by a careful assessment of a school’s problems, values, needs, and available resources. There may already be staff members, such as teachers, school social workers, school counselors, or principals who are particularly suited to assessing a school’s needs. Based on their experience and professional training, staff members may have valuable information that enables them to assess needs and problems in their schools. This preliminary assessment would indicate the suitability of implementing an EBP in a school or district. Furthermore, even though fidelity is a crucial component for effective EBP implementation, evidence suggests that programs require some adjustment to fit with local contexts (Sundell & Ferrer-Wreder, 2014 ). Thus, it is appropriate to identify these adjustments that allow a particular program to retain its effective components, while tailoring it to the needs of a school. Again, one challenge for schools is finding people that are available to do this work; schools can designate a staff member or create a multiprofessional committee of school staff to focus on this process. In addition, school social workers and school counselors may be an especially valuable resource for these activities (Franklin & Kelly, 2009 ).

One important element of choosing an intervention, then, is a careful and accurate assessment of the target school, and the identification of specific violence issues that a school may be facing. In some places, discrimination-based violence or conflict between groups may be the most salient issue, other schools may have problems with social exclusion, and still others could experience high levels of weapon use and gang activity. Along with an assessment of what problems exist, there should be consideration of what the school community views as a priority. This information becomes the foundation for choosing an EBP and making any necessary adjustments.

It is possible that after a thorough assessment is completed, and after available EBPs are examined, existing programs may not be the best fit for a school. Sometimes schools or school districts have developed “grass-roots” programs or interventions that seem promising but do not have empirical evidence. Despite this lack of evidence, these programs are still implemented and sometimes yield promising results. It is essential to document these programs and monitor their effectiveness. Whether a school implements an EBP or a locally developed grass root intervention, it is essential to assess the outcomes of such implementation. Like any other intervention, data is needed to assess whether these programs are meeting the needs of schools and communities. In the following sections, systematic monitoring is presented as a way of continually assess schools and their needs.

One additional caveat is warranted here as well. In many schools, school social workers or counselors may be available to oversee the assessment of a school and subsequent evaluation of whether a particular school safety/violence intervention is effective. This is not true in all schools though. One challenge then is who will do the work to gather this information. Given that whole-school interventions are critical, and that buy-in is important from all stakeholders, it is important for schools to collaboratively develop ways to gather this information.

Systematic Monitoring as a Method and Process

Merely implementing a violence prevention program is not enough to ensure long-term success. Using data in an ongoing and interactive manner is important for successful interventions and continuous improvement (Astor, Benbenishty, Estrada, 2009 ; Astor, Rosemond, Pitner, & Marachi, 2006 ; Benbenishty & Astor, 2007 ; Benbenishty & Astor, 2012a ; Benbenishty & Astor, 2005 ; Benbenishty, Astor, & Estrada, 2008 ). Data collected during the process of assessment and intervention can be used for many purposes: to build awareness; motivate and mobilize constituents; assess the extent of problems; monitor the implementation of interventions, and evaluate their success. School-specific data should continually be provided to various groups throughout assessment and implementation. This way, schools can identify their needs, strengths, resources, and limitations. School communities can then discuss and choose how to work toward achieving their goals.

Toward this end, systematic monitoring is a way of using data. Schools are dynamic organizations that change constantly, and systematic monitoring is a way to continually assess and share with school constituents what is happening with issues of violence or bullying. Ongoing collection and sharing of data creates a “whole school” approach to understanding and addressing a problem. Part of the assumption is that tailoring an intervention to a school requires some grassroots participation from all stakeholders, and empowers students and teachers to deal with the problem. Pitner et al. ( 2015 ) extend these ideas and argue that democracy is an important element of violence prevention and that schools should champion a “proactive vision” about violence problems. For example, school staff can work with students to create maps of their school and mark places and times that are more dangerous to particular groups of students. Students and staff can then discuss the results of this activity and explore reasons that these trouble spots exist and then collaborate to find solutions (Pitner et al., 2015 ). Given the importance of local influence, and the unique dynamics of individual schools, the implementation of interventions is expected to be slightly different at each school site.

What makes systematic monitoring valuable is the customized contextual information for any given school. For example, describing the frequency of certain behaviors at one specific point in time, and then over an extended period, can be understood as the first step in using systematic monitoring. Then, schools can compare this information within and between settings. In selecting and adopting a violence prevention/intervention program, it is necessary to determine which kinds of violence are more prevalent and problematic, as well as which grade levels experience more victimization. Recent media attention and research emphasizes the importance of understanding how different vulnerable groups experience violence. Gendered violence (Carrington, 2013 ; Oliver, Soler, & Flecha, 2009 ), racism, sexism, and homophobia continue to put particular groups of people at risk for increased violence (Peguero & Williams, 2013 ). There are many vulnerable groups in any school, and issues of gender, race, and religion are key areas of study and are the focus of research around the world (Benbenishty & Astor, 2012a ; DeBarbieux, Blaya, & Vidal, 2003 ; Oliver et al., 2009 ; Smith, 2004 ). These considerations may seem like common sense, but systematic information often remains elusive for schools. In the United States, schools frequently purchase and implement expensive violence programs without understanding the nature of problems in their schools. This can lead to difficulties in implementation and subsequent evaluation. For instance, if the problem was not clearly established, it will be difficult to determine whether an intervention was effective.

Much of the discussion in this article has addressed the importance of monitoring for school-based decisions. There are many advantages when monitoring is conducted similarly and consistently across levels (e.g., districts, regions, and even states). Schools that are part of a multilevel system can compare themselves to other schools. This perspective is important both for assessing the presence of violence and in evaluating changes that may come from an intervention. Further, resources and experiences can be easily shared between schools within a particular system, including locally developed interventions or adjustments made to existing EBPs. Multilevel monitoring is also an important tool for generating policy and research. These systems allow researchers and educators to identify schools and particular student groups that may be doing better or worse than others and then to consider reasons for these discrepancies and adjust practices and policies accordingly. As data accumulates over time, research can examine longitudinal trends and changes that help schools understand and address changes in populations, identify trends related to violence and bullying, and lead to better interventions.

Applications of Systematic Monitoring

Using monitoring to address bullying, school safety, and weapon use.

Previous research from the United States, Israel, France, and other countries describes in detail how systematic monitoring can be used to collect and interpret data from multiple ecological layers (see Benbenishty & Astor, 2012b ; Astor, Benbenishty, Wong, & Jacobson, 2014 ), and to quantify and explore issues of concern in particular communities or regions (Astor, 2013a ; Astor, 2013b ; Astor & Benbenishty, 2014 ; Berkowitz et al., 2014 ; Cederbaum et al., 2013 ; Cederbaum et al., 2014 ; De Pedro, Esqueda, Cederbaum, & Astor, 2014 ; Esqueda et al., 2014 ; Gilreath, Astor, Cederbaum, Atuel, & Benbenishty, 2013 ; Gilreath, Cederbaum et al., 2013 ; Gilreath, Estrada et al., 2014 ; Gilreath, Astor et al., 2014 ). In the United States, for example, 145 schools used monitoring data and identified the following areas of concern that required intervention: bullying, school safety, weapon use, and substance use (Astor, Benbenishty, Wong, & Jacobson, 2014 ). Data collected from students were provided to each principal and vice principal, along with members of the teaching staff for each school. These data included comparisons to other student reports from their districts, regions, and the state. Each school then chose various EBPs to implement for their particular school needs. Among the interventions chosen and implemented were: the OBPP, Second Step, Student-to-Student, Safe School Ambassadors, and Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools (CBITS) (Astor, Benbenishty, Wong, & Jacobson, 2014 ). Other schools implemented grassroots interventions developed with the surrounding community. As schools were part of a multilevel monitoring system, many school sites shared successful programing and interventions. In addition, schools were able to support the sustained implementation of programs by utilizing military, community, and university resources.

Systematic Monitoring to Address Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors

One area where systematic monitoring has been applied to address widespread concerns is suicide. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that in 2013 , 17% of 9th to 12th grade students seriously considered suicide, and that nearly 14% of 9th to 12th graders made a plan about how they would attempt suicide (CDC, 2015 ). In a research project in California, secondary schools received information containing student reports of depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation (Astor, Benbenishty, Wong, & Jacobson, 2014 ; Benbenishty, 2014 ; Benbenishty & Astor, 2012a ; Benbenishty & Astor, 2012b ; Gilreath Estrada et al., 2014 ; Gilreath et al., 2015 ). Consistent with principles of systematic monitoring, schools received information about their own students and comparisons with other schools in their district and across the state. The rates of suicidal ideation surprised some administrators and teachers, but the ability to compare their schools to other schools in the region allowed them to see that students in nearby schools were reporting similar experiences. Additionally, when administrators examined subgroups of students, they discovered that military-connected students (those with siblings and/or parents serving in the military) had higher rates of suicidal ideation than other groups of students (Astor, Benbenishty, Wong, & Jacobson, 2014 ; Benbenishty, 2014 ; Cederbaum et al., 2013 ). Educators could use such information to seek interventions that would address general concerns about suicidal ideation in students and to hone interventions in specific regions to target military-connected students.

Current concerns about school accountability systems that may penalize rather than support schools can lead to a reluctance to participate in monitoring. These examples about suicidal ideation and violence provide a potent alternative viewpoint to the positive and empowering use of data and monitoring systems. The same principles and ideas are applicable to concerns about school violence. When school communities are given the opportunity to see information about their students, they can take meaningful action. School district personnel, county organizations, and parent groups can organize and share resources to find ways to provide needed supports for schools and their students. The ability to understand the scope of the problem and the relevance to specific schools is necessary to build coalitions and expand a school’s capacity to deal with various challenges.

Implications for Schools and Educators

School violence remains a pervasive concern for schools around the world, and coordinated efforts are necessary to make meaningful changes in how school communities address violence and other problems. While concerns about violence are pervasive, every school is different. Some of these differences are obvious, including schools in different countries and on different continents. Culture, religion, socioeconomic status and ethnicity also influence the dynamics within a school, and may vary within a country, city, district or even a school. The socio-ecological model addressed in this chapter helps to frame the importance of understanding the influences that surround a school (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005 ). A school’s surrounding community, including the influence of culture and religion or socioeconomic status, is a key influence on the behaviors of individuals who attend the school. Thus, interventions to address dynamics and interactions within a school necessarily must consider the surrounding community and influences.

Whole-school interventions are powerful and effective ways to address violence and victimization, and require the participation of all people who work in any given school. The EBPs presented in this article require different behaviors from everyone involved in these interventions, meaning that it is not merely one act of violence that is targeted but that the school’s mission in general is shifted. This kind of large-scale change is difficult and complicated by the already rigorous demands for teachers and school staff.

Given the complexity of school communities, the nature of violence, and the demands of interventions, it is even more important that decision makers understand the nature of problems in their schools, and the relevant context. Just responding to violence in a school is not enough. Instead, school leaders and stakeholders must have access to data that allows them to hone in on specific problems experienced by specific groups of people in their schools. It is then possible to assess whether violence and victimization have decreased.

When everyone in a school—including administrators, teachers, staff, parents, and students—clearly understand the scope and severity of violence and other problems, they can work together to find solutions. This requires a conceptual and practical shift and the adaptation to “whole-school” approaches for all staff members and stakeholders. This process will allow for the understanding of the different strengths and possible contributions of each member, while also encompassing the nested nature of schools in districts and regions. Using systematic monitoring to gather and share data allows a school community to pursue a shared mission of a nonviolent, safe environment where social, emotional, and academic progress are fostered.

Bibliography

• American Educational Research Association . (2013). Prevention of bullying in schools, colleges, and universities: Research report and recommendations. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association
• Astor, R.A. , Cornell, D.G. , Espelage, D.L. , Furlong, M.J. , Jimerson, S.R. , Mayer, M.G. et al. (2013). A call for more effective prevention of violence. The School Psychologist , 67 (2), 40–43.
• Astor, R.A. , Guerra, N. , & Van Acker, R. (2010). How can we improve school safety research? Educational Researcher, 39 , 69–78.
• Benbenishty, R. , & Astor, R. A. (2005). School violence in context: Culture, neighborhood, family, school, and gender . New York: Oxford University Press.
• Benbenishty, R. , & Astor, R. A. (2007). Monitoring indicators of children’s victimization in school: Linking national-, regional-, and site-level indicators. Social Indicators , 84 , 333–348.
• Benbenishty, R. , & Astor, R. A. (2012b). Monitoring school violence in Israel, National studies and beyond: Implications for theory, practice, and policy. In S. R. Jimerson , A.B. Nickerson , M.J. Mayer & M. J. Furlong (Eds). Handbook of school violence and school safety: International research and practice (2d ed., pp. 191–202). New York: Routledge.
• Interdisciplinary Group on Preventing School and Community Violence (2013). December 2012 Connecticut School Shooting Position Statement. Journal of School Violence , 12 (2), 119–133.
• Jimerson, S. R. , Nickerson, A. B. , Mayer, M. J , & Furlong, M. J. (Eds). (2012). Handbook of school violence and school safety: International research and practice (2d ed.). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
• Kena, G. , Musu-Gillette, L. , Robinson, J. , Wang, X. , Rathbun, A. , Zhang, J. , et al. (2015). The Condition of Education 2015 (NCES 2015-144). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved [February 21, 2016] from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch .
• American Educational Research Association . (2013). Prevention of bullying in schools, colleges, and universities: Research report and recommendations. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
• Astor, R.A. Educational opportunity for military children. (March 2012). Huffington Post. Editorial . Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-avi-astor/military-children-education_b_1386074.html .
• Astor, R.A. Creating the schools we want for our children. (December 2013a). Education Week . Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/op_education/2013/12/creating_the_schools_we_want_f.html .
• Astor, R.A. Military kids at higher risk of suicidal thoughts. (December 2013b). Huffington Post . Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-avi-stor/military_kids_b_4318573.html .
• Astor, R. A. , Behre, W. J. , Wallace, J. M. , & Fravil, K. A. (1998). School social workers and school violence: Personal safety, training, and violence programs . Social Work , 43 (3), 223–232.
• Astor, R. A. and Benbenishty R. (2014). Supporting military-connected students: The role of school social work. Children and Schools , 36 , 5–7.
• Astor, R.A. , Benbenishty, R. & Estrada, J. (2009). School violence and theoretically atypical schools: The principal’s centrality in orchestrating safe schools. American Educational Research Journal , 46 , 423–461.
• Astor, R. A. , Benbenishty, R. , Wong, M. , & Jacobson, L (2014). Building capacity in military-connected schools: Annual Report Year 4, Los Angeles, CA: USC School of Social Work. Building Capacity_2013-2014 Annual Report 4.
• Astor, R. A. , Capp, G. Moore, H. , & Benbenishty, R. (2015). Lessons from monitoring social emotional learning in Israel and California schools. In Shute, R. H. , & Slee, P. T. (Eds.), Mental health through schools: The way forward . Hove, UK: Routledge.
• Astor, R.A. , Guerra, N. , & Van Acker, R. (2010). How can we improve school safety research? Educational Researcher , 39, 69–78.
• Astor, R. A. , Jacobson, L. , Benbenishty, R. , Atuel, H. , Gilreath, T. , and Wong, M. , et al. (2012a). A school administrator’s guide to creating supportive schools for military students . New York: Columbia University, Teachers College Press.
• Astor, R. A. , Jacobson, L. , Benbenishty, R. , Atuel, H. , Gilreath, T. , and Wong, M. , et al. (2012b). A teacher’s guide to supporting military students in the classroom . New York: Columbia University, Teachers College Press.
• Astor, R. A. , Jacobson, L. , Benbenishty, R. , Cederbaum, J. , Atuel, H. , Gilreath, T. , and Wong , et al. (2012c). A military parent’s guide to supporting their children in School . New York: Columbia University Teachers College Press.
• Astor, R. A. , Jacobson, L. , Benbenishty, R. , Pineda, D. , Atuel, H. , Gilreath, T. , and Wong, M. , et al. (2012d). A pupil personnel guide to creating supportive schools for military students . New York: Columbia University Teachers College Press.
• Astor, R. A. , Meyer, H. A. , & Behre, W. J. (1999). Unowned places and times: Maps and interviews about violence in high schools. American educational research journal , 36 (1), 3–42.
• Astor, R. A. , Rosemond, M. , Pitner, R. O. , & Marachi, R. (2006). An overview of best violence prevention practices in schools. In C. Franklin , M. B. Harris , & P. Allen-Meares (Eds.). School social work and mental health worker’s training and resource manual (chapter 43). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Benbenishty, R. (2014). Building capacity in military schools: Final technical evaluation report. Los Angeles, CA: USC School of Social Work.
• Benbenishty, R. , & Astor, R. A. (2012a). Making the case for an international perspective on school violence: Implications for theory, research, policy, and assessment. In S. R. Jimerson , A.B. Nickerson , M.J. Mayer & M. J. Furlong (Eds). Handbook of school violence and school safety: International research and practice, second edition (pp. 15–26). New York: Routledge.
• Benbenishty, R. , & Astor, R. A. (2012b). Monitoring school violence in Israel, National studies and beyond: Implications for theory, practice, and policy. In S. R. Jimerson , A. B. Nicker son , M. J. Mayer & M. J. Furlong (Eds). Handbook of school violence and school safety: International research and practice (2d ed.) (pp. 191–202). New York: Routledge.
• Benbenishty, R. , Astor, R. A. , & Estrada, J. N. (2008). School violence assessment: A conceptual framework, instruments and methods. Children & Schools , 30 (2), 71–81.
• Benbenishty, R. , Astor, R. A. & Zeira, A. (2003). Monitoring school violence: Linking, national-, district-, and school-level data over time. Journal of School Violence , 2 , 29–50.
• Berkowitz, R. , Bowen, G. , Benbenishty, R. , & Powers, J. (2013). A cross-cultural validity study of the school success profile learning organization measure in Israel. Children & Schools , 35 , 137–146.
• Berkowitz, R. , De Pedro, K.T. , Couture, J. , & Benbenishty, R. (2014). Military parents’ perceptions of public school supports for their children . Children and Schools, 36, e1–e8 ,
• Bradshaw, C. Pas , E., Bloom, J. , Barrett, S. , Hershefeldt, P. , Alexander, A. , McKenna, M. Chafin, A. , & Leaf, P. (2012). A statewide partnership to promote safe and supportive schools: The PBIS Maryland Initiative. Administration and Policy in Mental Health Services Research , 39 , 225–237.
• Bryk, A. S. , Sebring, P. B. , Allensworth, E. , Easton, J. Q. , & Luppescu, S. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Carrington, K. (2013). Girls and violence: The case for a feminist theory of female violence. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy , 2 (2), 63–79.
• Cassidy, W. , Faucher, C. , & Jackson, M. (2013). Cyberbullying among youth: A comprehensive review of current international research and its implications and application to policy and practice. School Psychology International , 34 (6), 575–612.
• Cawood, N. D. (2013). Addressing interpersonal violence in the school context: Awareness and use of evidence-supported programs. Children & Schools , 35 , 41–52.
• Cederbaum, J. A. , Gilreath, T. D. , Benbenishty, R. , Astor, R. A. , & Pineda, D. , & De Pedro, K. T. , et al. (2013). Wellbeing and suicidal ideation of public middle/high school students by military-connectedness . Journal of Adolescent Health , 54 (6), 672–677.
• Cederbaum, J.A , Malchi, K. , Esqueda, M. C. , Benbenishty. R. , Atuel, H.R ., & Astor, R. A. (2014). Student-instructor assessments: Examining the skills and competencies of social work students placed in military-connected schools. Children and Schools , 36 , 51–59.
• Centers for Disease Control, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Division of Violence Prevention (2015). Suicide. Facts at a glance . Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/suicide-datasheet-a.pdf .
• Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group . (2011). The effects of the Fast Track preventive intervention on the development of conduct disorder across childhood. Child Development 82 , 331–345.
• De Pedro, K.T. , Atuel, H. , Malchi, K. , Esqueda, M. C. , Benbenishty, R. , & Astor, R. A. (2014). Responding to the needs of military students and military-connected schools: The perceptions and actions of school administrators. Children and Schools , 36 , e18–e25.
• De Pedro, K.T. , Esqueda, M.C. , Cederbaum, J.A. , & Astor, R.A. (November 2014). District, school, and community stakeholder perspectives on the experiences of military-connected students. Teachers’ College Record , 116 , 1–32.
• Debarbieux, E. , Blaya, C. , & Vidal, D. (2003). Tackling violence in schools. A report from France. In P. K. Smith (Ed.) (2004). Violence in schools: The response in Europe . London: Routledge.
• Dupper, D. R. (2010). A new model of school discipline: Engaging students and preventing behavior problems. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Espelage, D. , Anderman, E. M. , Brown, V. E. , Jones, A. , Lane, K. L. , McMahon, S. D. et al. (2013). Understanding and preventing violence directed against teachers: Recommendations for a national research, practice, and policy agenda . American Psychologist , 68 (2), 75–87.
• Espelage, D. L. (2014). Ecological theory: Preventing youth bullying, aggression, & victimization. Theory into Practice , 53 , 257–264.
• Espelage, D. L. , & Swearer, S. (2003). Research on school bullying and victimization: What have we learned and where do we go from here? School Psychology Review , 32 , 365–383.
• Esqueda, M. C. , Cederbaum, J. A. , Malchi, K. , Pineda, D. , Benbenishty, R. , & Astor, R. (2014). The military social work fieldwork placement: An analysis of the time and activities graduate student interns provide military-connected schools. Children and Schools , 36 , 41–50.
• Franklin, C. , & Kelly, M. S. (2009). Becoming evidence-informed in the real world of school social work practice. Children & Schools , 31 , 46.
• Gilreath, T. D. , Astor, R. A. , Cederbaum, J. A. , Atuel, H. , & Benbenishty, R. (2013). Prevalence and correlates of victimization and weapon carrying among military-and nonmilitary-connected youth in Southern California . Preventive Medicine , 60 , 21–26.
• Gilreath, T. D. , Astor, R. A. , Estrada, J. N. , Benbenishty, R. , & Unger, J. B. (2014). School victimization and substance use among adolescents in California . Prevention Science , 15 (6), 897–906.
• Gilreath, T.D. , Cederbaum, J.A. , Astor, R.A. , Benbenishty, R. , Pineda, D. , & Atuel, H. (2013). Substance use among military-connected youth: The California Healthy Kids Survey. American Journal of Preventive Medicine , 44 , 150–153.
• Gilreath, T. D. , Estrada, J. N. , Pineda, D. , Benbenishty, R. , & Astor, R. (2014). Development and use of the California Healthy Kids Survey Military Module to support students in military-connected schools. Children and Schools , 36 , 23–29.
• Gilreath, T. D. , Wrabel, S. L. , Sullivan, K. S. , Capp, G. P. , Roziner, I. , Benbenishty, R. , & Astor, R. A. (2015). Suicidality among military-connected adolescents in California schools. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry , 25 (1), 61–66.
• Goodemann, C. , Zammitt, K. , & Hagerdorn, M. (2012). The wolf in sheep’s clothing: Student harassment veiled as bullying. Children & Schools , 34 , 124–127.
• Greenberg, M. T. , Kusché, C. & Mihalic, S. F. (1998). Blueprints for violence prevention, book ten: Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) . Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence.
• Horner, R. H. , Sugai, G. , & Anderson, C.M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptional Children , 42 , 1–14.
• Horner, R. H. , Sugai, G. , Smolkowski, K. , Eber, L. , Nakasato, J. , Todd, A.W. , Esperanza, J. (2009). A randomized, waitlist controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions , 11 , 133–144.
• Hudley, C. , Britsch, B. , Wakefield, T. , Demorat, M. , & Cho, S. (1998). An attribution retraining program to reduce aggression in elementary school students. Psychology in the Schools , 35 , 271–282.
• Johnson, S. , Burke, J. , & Gielen, A. (2012). Urban students’ perceptions of school environment’s influence on school violence. Children & Schools , 34 , 92–102.
• Labaree, D. F. (1997). Public goods, private goods: The American struggle over educational goals. American Educational Research Journal , 34 (1), 39–81.
• Limber, S. (2012). The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: An overview of its implementation and research basis. In S. Jimerson , A. Nickerson , M. Mayer , & M. Furlong (Eds). (2d ed.). Handbook of school violence and school safety: International research and practice (pp. 369–381). New York: Routledge.
• Marachi, R. , Astor, R.A. , & Benbenishty, R. (2013). Evidence-based violence prevention programs and best implementation practices (pp. 253–472). In C. Franklin , M. B. Harris , & P. Allen-Meares (Eds.). The school services sourcebook: A guide for school-based professionals. New York: Oxford University Press.
• McMahon, S. D. , Martinez, A. , Espelage, D. , Rose, C. , Reddy, L. A. , Lane, K. , et al. (2014). Violence directed against teachers: Results from a national survey. Psychology in the Schools , 51 (7), 753–766.
• Molly, L. , Moore, J. , Trail, J. , Van Epps, J. , & Hopfer, S. (2013). Understanding real-world implementation quality and “active ingredients” of PBIS. Prevention Science , 14 , 593–605.
• National School Climate Council (2015). School Climate and Prosocial Educational Improvement: Essential Goals and Processes that Support Student Success for All. Teachers College Record, Date Published: May 05, 2015 http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 17954, Date Accessed: August 04, 2016.
• Oliver, E. , Soler, M. , & Flecha, R. (2009). Opening schools to all (women): efforts to overcome gender violence in Spain. British Journal of Sociology of Education , 30 (2), 207–218.
• Olweus, D. , & Limber, S. (2010a). Bullying in school: Evaluation and dissemination of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 80 , 124–134.
• Peguero, A. A. , & Williams, L. M. (2013). Racial and ethnic stereotypes and bullying victimization . Youth & Society , 45 , 545–564.
• Pitner, R. , Astor, R. , & Benbenishty, R. (2015). Violence in schools. In P. Allen-Meares (Ed.) Social work services in school (7th ed., pp. 265–296). Boston: Pearson.
• Pitner, R. , Marachi, R. , Astor, R. , & Benbenishty, R. , (2015). Evidence-based violence prevention programs and best implementation practices. In K. Corcoran (Ed.) Social Workers’ Desk Reference (3d ed., pp. 1050–1068). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Pugh, R. , & Chitiyo, M. (2012). The problem of bullying in schools and the promise of positive behavior supports. Journal of Research in Special Education Needs , 12 , 47–53.
• Reddy, L. A. , Espelage, D. , McMahon, S. D. , Anderman, E. M. , Lane, K. L. , and Brown, V. E. , et al. (2013). Violence against teachers: Case studies from the APA Task Force . International Journal of School & Educational Psychology , 1 (4), 231–245.
• Riggs, N. R. , Greenberg, M. T. , Kusche, C. A. , & Pentz, M. A. (2006). The mediational role of neurocognition in the behavioral outcomes of a social-emotional prevention program in elementary school students: Effects of the PATHS curriculum. Prevention Science , 7 , 91–102.
• Rocque, M. (2012). Exploring school rampage shootings: Research, theory, and policy. Social Science Journal , 49 , 304–313.
• Schiff, M. , Pat-Horenczyk, R. , Benbenishty, R. , Brom, D. , Baum, N. , & Astor, R.A. (2010). Do adolescents know that they need help in the aftermath of war? Journal of Traumatic Stress , 23 , 657–660.
• Schiff, M. , Pat-Horenczyk, R. , Benbenishty, R. , Brom, D. , Baum, N. , & Astor, R.A. (2012). School students’ posttraumatic symptoms, substance use and violence perpetration in the aftermath of war. Social Science and Medicine , 75 , 1321–1328.
• Schneider, S. K. , O’Donnell, L. , Stueve, A. , & Coulter, R. W. (2012). Cyberbullying, school bullying, and psychological distress: A regional census of high school students. American Journal of Public Health , 102 , 171–177.
• Shlonsky, A. , & Benbenishty, R. (2014). From evidence to outcomes in child welfare. In A. Shlonsky & R. Benbenishty (Eds.), From evidence to outcomes in child welfare: An international reader (pp. 3–23). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Smith, P. K. (Ed.). (2004). Violence in schools: The response in Europe . London: Routledge.
• Solomon, B. G. , Tobin, K. G. , & Schutter, G. M. (2015). Examining the reliability and validity of the effective behavior support self-assessment survey. Education and Treatment of Children , 38 , 175–192.
• Sundrell, K. , & Ferrer-Wreder, L. (2014). The transportability of empirically supported interventions. In A. Shlonsky & R. Benbenisty (Eds.), From evidence to outcomes in child welfare: An international reader (pp. xx). New York: Oxford University Press
• Szu-Yin, C. (2015). An investigation of the effectiveness of family-centered positive behavior support of young children with disabilities. International Journal of Early Years Education , 23 , 172–191.
• Tfoti, M. , & Farrington, D. (2011). Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology , 7 , 27–56.
• Thapa, A. , Cohen, J. , Guffey, S. , & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2013). A review of school climate research. Review of Educational Research , 83 , 357–385.
• Ttofi, M. , Farrington, D. , Losel, F. , & Loeber, R. (2011). Do the victims of school bullies tend to become depressed later in life? A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research , 3 , 63–73.
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://nrepp.samhsa.gov .
• Zeira, A. , Astor, R. A. , & Benbenishty, R. (2004). School Violence in Israel: Perceptions of Homeroom Teachers . School Psychology International , 25 (2), 149–166.

Related Articles

• School Climate
• School Climate and Academic Performance
• School Crisis Prevention and Intervention
• School-Based Family Counseling

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Education. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 01 April 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|185.39.149.46]
• 185.39.149.46

Character limit 500 /500

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Youth Violence — School violence, causes and solution

How to Prevent School Violence: Analysis of Causes and Solutions

• Categories: Bullying Youth Violence

About this sample

Words: 1017 |

Published: Mar 1, 2019

Words: 1017 | Pages: 2 | 6 min read

Table of contents

Primary causes of school violence, potential solutions, works cited:.

• Alpher, R. A., Bethe, H. A., & Gamow, G. (1948). The Origin of Chemical Elements. Physical Review, 73(7), 803-804.
• Hawking, S. (1988). A Brief History of Time. Bantam.
• Hubble, E. (1929). A Relation between Distance and Radial Velocity among Extra-Galactic Nebulae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 15(3), 168–173.
• Liddle, A. R. (2003). An Introduction to Modern Cosmology. Wiley.
• Penrose, R. (1965). Gravitational collapse and space-time singularities. Physical Review Letters, 14(3), 57–59.
• Planck Collaboration, Ade, P. A. R., Aghanim, N., Armitage-Caplan, C., Arnaud, M., Ashdown, M., ... & Zonca, A. (2015). Planck 2015 results—XIII. Cosmological parameters. Astronomy & Astrophysics, 594, A13.
• Rees, M. J. (2003). Our Cosmic Habitat. Princeton University Press.
• Riess, A. G., Filippenko, A. V., Challis, P., Clocchiatti, A., Diercks, A., Garnavich, P. M., ... & Tonry, J. (1998). Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant. The Astronomical Journal, 116(3), 1009-1038.
• Silk, J. (2001). The Big Bang. W. H. Freeman.
• Weinberg, S. (1972). Gravitation and cosmology: principles and applications of the general theory of relativity. Wiley.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

4 pages / 1794 words

4 pages / 1610 words

6 pages / 2740 words

2 pages / 858 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Youth Violence

Violence has been around forever now. It’s everywhere. So what is violence? Violence is 'the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy.' Most will assume there is only one type of violence that people use, [...]

Violence has been a pervasive presence in various aspects of my life, leaving lasting impacts on my emotions, perspectives, and relationships. This essay delves into my personal experiences with violence, exploring how [...]

Acland, C. (1995) Youth, Murder, Spectacle: The Cultural Politics of ‘Youth in crisis’, Boulder: Westview Press.Cohen, S. (1972/2002) Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of the Mods and Rockers, London: Routledge.Travis, [...]

School bullies represent a persistent and troubling issue in educational institutions worldwide. The negative consequences of bullying extend beyond the classroom, affecting the well-being and academic performance of both [...]

School violence is a pervasive issue affecting students, teachers, and the larger community. The cause and effect of school violence essay aims to explore the factors that contribute to violent behavior in schools, [...]

This research assignment is for the analysis and expansion in understanding cause and effect of Bullying in adolescence, and how this topic relates to the many stages of development. It is critical for the further understanding [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Fast Fact: Preventing School Violence

School violence is violence that occurs in the school setting. It describes violent acts that disrupt learning and have a negative effect on students, schools, and the broader community. School is the location where the violence occurs, not a type of violence.

Examples of school violence include:

• Bullying and cyberbullying
• Fighting (e.g., punching, slapping, kicking)
• Gang violence
• Sexual violence

Places school violence occurs:

• On school property
• On the way to or from school
• During a school-sponsored event
• On the way to or from a school-sponsored event

In 2019, CDC’s nationwide Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) was administered to high school students across the United States. According to YRBS results  from 13, 677 students:

• About 1 in 5 high school students reported being bullied on school property in the last year.
• 8% of high school students had been in a physical fight on school property one or more times during the 12 months before the survey.
• More than 7% of high school students had been threatened or injured with a weapon (for example, a gun, knife, or club) on school property one or more times during the 12 months before the survey.
• Almost 9% of high school students had not gone to school at least 1 day during the 30 days before the survey because they felt they would be unsafe at school or on their way to or from school.

All students have the right to learn in a safe school environment. The good news is school violence can be prevented. Many factors contribute to school violence. Preventing school violence requires addressing the factors that put people at risk for or protect them from violence. Research shows that prevention efforts by teachers, administrators, parents, community members, and even students can reduce violence and improve the school environment.

CDC developed Resources for Action , formerly known as, “technical packages,” to help communities and states prioritize prevention strategies based on the best available evidence. The strategies and approaches in the Resources for Action are intended to shape individual behaviors as well as the relationship, family, school, community, and societal factors that influence risk and protective factors for violence. They are meant to work together and to be used in combination in a multi-level, multi-sector effort to prevent violence.

See  Youth Violence Resources  for articles, publications, data sources, and prevention resources for school violence.

To receive email updates about this page, enter your email address:

• Data & Statistics (WISQARS)
• Opioid Overdose Prevention
• Traumatic Brain Injury
• Motor Vehicle Safety

Exit Notification / Disclaimer Policy

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
• Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
• You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
• CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website.

clock This article was published more than  2 years ago

Back to school has brought guns, fighting and acting out

A Pennsylvania high school reverted to virtual classes last week, but it wasn’t because of coronavirus fears. It was because of “credible threats” after student fights.

In a Waldorf, Md., high school, a school resource officer was assaulted as three separate fights unfolded in the hallways and one spilled into the student parking lot. And in a large fight at a high school outside Columbus, Ohio, nine teachers were injured and seven students were charged with aggravated riot.

Much of the attention around the return to school after months of remote learning has focused on academic losses, but educators also feared emotional damage and behavioral unrest as students who have seen their lives upended by the pandemic adjust to being in school buildings again.

Those fears now appear to be materializing, in big ways and small. The National Association of School Resource Officers reports that from Aug. 1 to Oct. 1 this year, there were 97 reported gun-related incidents in schools. During the same span in 2019, there were 29.

Similarly, Everytown for Gun Safety, a lobby group for gun restrictions, tallies 56 instances of gunfire on school grounds in August and September of 2021. That is higher for those two months than any year since the group began tracking incidents in 2013, and more than double the previous high of 22 in 2019. It also found record numbers of deaths, at eight, and injuries, with 35.

“School violence has risen to levels that we haven’t seen quite frankly,” said Mo Canady, executive director of the National Association of School Resource Officers. “I don’t think it took a genius to see this coming.”

A D.C. teen was killed outside of school. The city is working to prevent violence as more students return to classrooms.

There is no national data on less-serious instances of violence in schools, but teachers and school administrators across the country say they are seeing a rise in everything from minor misbehaviors to fighting in the hallways.

“The toxic stress of everything going on during the pandemic, it’s building up with kids — and adults. Now that they’re around each other again, they need to relearn how to do school again,” said Christina Conolly, director of Psychological Services for Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland, who recently chaired the School Safety and Crisis Response Committee of the National Association of School Psychologists.

Stress levels are also high among adults when it comes to schools, with loud fights over whether masks should be mandatory and over how to teach about race in schools. Some school board members have been shouted down and even threatened by parents angry over school policies.

More worrisome for students, experts say, is the social isolation wrought by the pandemic. Isolation is among the risk factors for students who commit violent acts in schools, the Department of Homeland Security warned in a May bulletin . The agency noted that the pandemic also denied many students access to mental health professionals and put financial strains on many families.

“The reduced access to services coupled with the exposure to additional risk factors suggests schools — and the communities in which they are located — will need to increase support services to help students adjust to in-person learning as they cope with the potential trauma associated with the pandemic response,” the Homeland Security bulletin said.

Anecdotally, teachers and even some students say the level of disturbance this fall has gone far beyond years past. In some cases, students are unaccustomed to following the rules that govern a school building. They don’t grasp the expectations for their ages, teachers say, because the last time some were in school was two grades ago.

Dawn Neely-Randall, a fifth-grade teacher in Elyria, Ohio, has taught for more than 30 years and said she has never seen “so much defiance” from students, including children pushing each other and lobbing verbal attacks.

“I’m not just talking about immature behaviors,” she said. “On the first day of school, when students are usually on their best behavior, they came roaring in, jumping onto and over the furniture.”

She said she has managed to get her classes under control but she has to be stricter than usual, and was pushed to seek anti-anxiety medication for the first time in her life and has begun contemplating early retirement.

“Hardest year in 32 years of teaching,” she wrote in a Facebook post. “I know I’m not alone. It’s being felt all across the nation.”

In dramatic 1 a.m. reversal, Alexandria City Council votes to put police back in schools temporarily

Leo Cavinder, 17, sees it too, at La Porte High School in La Porte, Ind.

“I have seen and heard a lot more violence … than in previous years,” he said. “There have been fights break out that result in blood on the floor and lockers and broken or bruised faces.”

He blames the extended period of remote school, where students didn’t have to deal with peers. “Students are adjusting back to normal,” he said.

At Westlake High School in Waldorf, Md., the principal wrote families this month about multiple fights in a single day. The first was after lunch in the hallway, then came a second after sixth period, outside the library. As the halls were being cleared, another fight was unfolding upstairs that resulted in a physical assault on a school resource officer.

Then, as school dismissed, a fourth altercation occurred in the student parking lot.

“Please talk with your child about using supports in place at school, and consequences for behavior that violates school policies and rules,” Principal Diane Roberts wrote.

In Lysa Mullady’s elementary school in Suffolk County on Long Island, the behavior problems are small things: “No one can get along on the playground.”

“The remote-learning kids who are coming back into the classroom have forgotten what it’s like to be with other children,” she said. “There’s a skill set that you need to problem-solve.” Those skills include talking it out and walking away, she said. “They haven’t had to navigate outside their homes for so long they’ve really forgotten how to do it.”

Mullady, vice president for elementary for the New York State School Counselor Association, said she advises teachers to go over difficult moments with the whole class, so everyone can learn how to better solve problems. Schools need to examine data and teachers need to consult with each other to identify students who are having trouble. And, she said, teachers need to take time to check in and connect with individual children.

“It’s relationship building, it’s creating safe spaces so you build a relationship by really seeing each child,” she said. “Teachers are feeling the stress of the gap they have to make up academically, but we cannot make up any gap until a child is emotionally ready to learn.”

At a recent meeting of the school board in the Addison Central School District in Vermont, Fawnda Buttolph said she has never seen such poor student behavior in some 20 years of teaching. This fall, she has worked as a substitute in four district schools.

“The kids are in charge and they know it,” she said during a long speech in which she broke into tears. She described disrespectful students refusing to do classwork and “chaotic” hallways.

One day a student threw a bag of grapes into her classroom, making a mess that he refused to clean up. Students in one of her classrooms were so “out of control” and disrespectful that she had to call in the principal, who came with the assistant principal and removed four students. “For the first time ever, I raised my voice and yelled at my students. I’ve never done that,” she said.

In Farmington, N.M., two high school students were arrested for planning a school shooting, after officials found a map and written plans. Separately, Superintendent Gene Schmidt said there was some damage done to a couple of school bathrooms, the result of a TikTok challenge. Other than that, though, he says students have mostly been excited to be back in school.

“After kids had been out of school for so long, when they first came back we had, if anything, less behavioral problems than before because they just wanted to be back in school,” he said.

Other educators say the year began on a joyful note but behavior problems emerged after students were back for a bit.

At Woodland Hills High School outside Pittsburgh, the district shifted to remote schooling for two days in hopes of calming things down after fights rolled through the school last week.

It began with two girls fighting at lunch, said Superintendent James Harris. Later that day, two boys fought over a girl, prompting friends to jump in. By the time it was over, 30 students had attacked other students, he said.

“That adrenaline just started flowing through them and they couldn’t control it,” Harris said.

Harris said he is not excusing the behavior, but has little doubt the mayhem can be traced to students needing to relearn how to be in school after so many months away from it.

“The freshmen were seventh-graders last time they were in school,” he said. “They went from recess and cartwheels to ‘what do you want to be when you grow up?’ and ‘where do you want to go to college?’ Their bodies have grown but their minds haven’t. They’re still seeing themselves as young students who want recess, who want to play.”

At the same time, many students have lost loved ones in the pandemic, and there have been recent shootings in the area, leaving students with added trauma.

“A lot of it comes down to socialization, expectations and I think deep down inside there’s a lot of sadness from the trauma that students experienced,” Harris said.

He decided to move to remote school last Thursday and Friday after administrators picked up comments on social media threatening to continue the fight. After two days of remote learning, he said, Friday night’s football game and Saturday’s homecoming dance went on as scheduled and unfolded without any trouble.

Harris said the two-day break was made possible by technology bought for remote school during the pandemic. He had imagined the schools might also use it on snow days, or for a student who was out of town.

“It’s a tool that we have at our disposal,” he said. “We never thought we [would have to] shut down the school because of kids fighting.”

School principals faced with machetes, spears and knives as report reveals soaring classroom violence

School principals have suffered the worst levels of physical violence, threats and bullying in the history of a long-running national survey measuring wellbeing among school leaders.

Forty-eight per cent of the 2,300 principals who took part in the Australian Catholic University's (ACU) annual principal safety survey, reported experiencing or witnessing physical violence and about 54 per cent were threatened with violence.

Report author and former principal Paul Kidson said he had been inundated with stories about violence in schools.

"I've had one story that came to me of a child with some significant needs who grabbed the hair of a teacher and literally pulled a clump of hair out," he said.

Dr Kidson said the violence could include direct attacks on the principal or other staff by students or parents, or injuries sustained breaking up fights between pupils.

More than half of principals — 56 per cent — agreed or strongly agreed with a suggestion they were likely to retire early or leave the profession.

Violence, increasing administrative workloads and unreasonable demands from parents outside of school hours were contributing to high levels of stress, the report found.

Principals faced "threats" from parents over emails and text messages as well as face to face, Dr Kidson said.

"If I get an email at 11:30pm at night and then by 7:50am in the morning I've got a cranky parent on the phone saying, 'Why haven't you responded to what I sent you last night?', that's a fundamentally unreasonable expectation," he said.

"I've had principals who have had parents poke their fingers in their chest, demanding that they ought to do things, standing over them in public environments."

Principals also reported that parents were increasingly failing to believe concerns raised about their children and instead were threatening schools with litigation.

"I can tell you stories of teachers who have said, 'You know what — in the old days I would've been terrified of it, but frankly if I've got to wear a body camera like the police do, bring it on,'" Dr Kidson said.

Dr Kidson said with an existing projected 4,000-strong teacher shortage, a large number of principals resigning would be bad for the nation and its children.

Machetes, spears and knives

Principals in the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory reported the highest levels of physical violence at about 65 per cent.

"Unfortunately and sadly, at times people are faced with machetes, with spears, with knives — which is quite concerning," Northern Territory Principals Association president Robyn Thorpe said.

"I wonder how many other people in their day-to-day jobs get exposed to that level of violence."

Ms Thorpe helps her fellow principals deal with these challenges and said while more than 95 per cent of interactions with parents were good, there were some shocking exceptions.

"We can put the school into a lockdown, call the police, but sometimes in our communities the police aren't on duty so you have that feeling of a bit more vulnerability," Ms Thorpe said.

Anti-violence policies 'not working'

Ms Thorpe, who is also on the board of the Australian Secondary Principals Association (ASPA), said violent behaviour was a problem in all jurisdictions.

"Problems become magnified when an issue becomes persistent," Ms Thorpe said.

"It's accumulative, its ongoing and that's what really tips the mental health and the wellbeing of a principal over the edge."

The next highest level of violence at schools was in Western Australia where 55 per cent of principals reported experiencing physical violence.

"I am disturbed by the 2023 principal wellbeing survey results," Western Australian Secondary School Executives Association president Melissa Gillett said.

"It is simply unacceptable that over half of WA principals have been physically assaulted in the course of their work."

Like school leaders in other jurisdictions, Ms Gillett would like to see education departments better enforce policies to take a zero-tolerance approach to violence.

"Successive governments and bureaucracies will report implementing initiatives to reduce violence in schools, but the ACU results indicate that the initiatives are not working," Ms Gillett said.

In a statement to ABC News, Federal Education Minister Jason Clare said all school leaders and teachers should be safe at work.

"We are working closely with state and territory governments, principal groups, unions and experts to continue to tackle the teacher shortage crisis, which has been 10 years in the making," Mr Clare said.

"The next National School Reform Agreement we strike this year will also prioritise reforms that support teacher wellbeing and work to attract and retain more teachers."

• X (formerly Twitter)

Related Stories

Three in four school principals in canberra experience violence and abuse, survey finds.

• Public Schools
• Secondary Schools