School administrators are responsible for identifying and enforcing consequences for students involved in bullying situations. Many principals and other school administrators provide input in policies delineating consequences in schools’ codes of conduct. Given these roles, it is important to understand how these decisions are made. This paper delineates the factors that have the greatest influence on administrator’s preferred methods of responding to bullying incidents. Subjects were recruited through New Jersey professional associations comprised of principals, vice principals, supervisors, directors, assistant superintendents, superintendents, and chief school administrators. An electronic survey link was distributed to approximately 9,000 administrators. A total of 165 completed surveys were submitted. To analyze the quantitative survey data, a priori frequency counts, t-tests, and logistic regressions were performed. A posteriori tests were also performed including a one-way ANOVA, independent samples t-tests, and review of the qualitative data. Findings indicated that counseling was the most popular consequence selected in response to bullying incidents (41%). Next most popular was detention (30%), followed closely by suspension (27%). Logistic regression results reveal that participants who were presented with a physical bullying vignette were significantly more likely to respond punitively than those presented with a verbal or social bullying vignette. Findings also indicate that participants who were socially ostracized as children were significantly less likely to respond punitively. Frequency of these types of events was also a significant predictor. Based upon these findings, the investigator made training and practice recommendations for New Jersey school administrators. Training recommendations included training in response to relational aggression and effective use of non-punitive consequences. Practice implications included administrators making their decisions based on best practice and in consideration of prevention of future events rather than avoiding conflict or minimally following the code of conduct. Implications for future research in this area included looking at the decision making process of those who are in responsible for developing district-wide codes of conduct and investigating how personality characteristics influence disciplinary decision making.
Subject (authority = RUETD)
Topic
School Psychology
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Rutgers University. Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.