This process includes teaching them skills as well as how to take responsibility for their hurtful actions. As an adult leader, you can strengthen your ability to guide young people by considering how the perspective you choose to take, including the words you use to describe problems, can affect your own effectiveness, creativity, and leadership.
Do you gossip or speak in ways that would likely be hurtful to the person you are talking about — and do you do this where young people can hear your words or read your posts? Kids notice when their adults talk about other people — and they notice how they talk. At Kidpower, we advise children, teens, and adults to Think First before saying or sending words, images, or videos online: would you feel okay if it was published for all your friends and family to see tomorrow?
Finally, we need to be kind to ourselves as well as others. We can all remember that mistakes are part of learning — and, we can adjust our behavior to be more consistent with our own goals and values. Are you a member? Sign-up or Login for direct downloads and free access to hundreds more Kidpower resources.
Published: May 4, Last Updated: September 20, Subscribe to our eNewsletter. Get Kidpower's latest 'People Safety' and self-defense tips and tools direct to your inbox! By completing this form, you agree to receive emails from Kidpower and understand that you can unsubscribe at any time. Can Kidpower help with that? Acknowledge and Name the Problem Kidpower students of all ages often seem to let out a sigh of relief when we tell them that this kind of behavior is real, recognized, and named.
Those core messages so powerful for young people to hear from their adult leaders include: I care about you, even when you have done something hurtful. Mistakes are part of learning. Making mistakes with power, including aggression, is a normal part of learning. As children progress through elementary and early middle school, relationally aggressive actions can be direct or indirect and begin to manifest in a more complex manner.
For example, exclusionary behaviors are often seen at this age. Also, the importance of the peer group and specifically of peer reputations takes on increasing salience during these years Leff et al. As youngsters approach adolescence, relationally aggressive actions continue to become more complex and subtle. In addition, with the increased use of electronic media e. For instance, Ellis and colleagues found that girls who were relationally aggressive in both their peer and dating relationships were much more likely to display delinquent behaviors than girls who display relational aggression in only the peer context.
Thus, prevention and intervention programs designed for adolescents may need to include ways in which to address the effect of electronic media on the expression of aggression and to potentially address the romantic relationship as another important aspect of the social-ecological context. While recognizing the salience and meaning of relationally aggressive behaviors among girls, it has become clear that relational aggression also affects boys and the broader context in which it occurs.
For example, research indicates that relational aggression occurs quite frequently among boys Card et al. Given that relational aggression occurs quite often among both boys and girls and has an effect on the school environment, it appears that school-based programming for relational aggression is needed for both girls and boys. The scientific literature has been relatively slow to inform relational aggression interventions; however, several researchers have begun to use this burgeoning literature base to update ongoing interventions that did not include relational aggression in prior trials, as well as to develop new programs with a concentrated focus on relational aggression.
These searches identified separate articles. The two reviewers agreed about the inclusion of relational aggression programming in almost all articles The remaining 16 programs were reviewed for inclusion using a slightly adapted version of the new standards to establish efficacy defined by the Society for Prevention Research In this manner, the authors agreed that 8 of the 16 programs met the above criteria.
A ninth program, which was not part of the original literature search likely because the use of the term social exclusion instead of relational , social , or indirect aggression , was also included for review as it was cited in several of the included programs and met the criteria previously discussed. Table 1 provides descriptive features of each program and Table 2 summarizes research findings from the primary research studies related to each program.
A preliminary trial of the program was implemented in 18 classrooms of socioeconomically and ethnically diverse samples across both urban and suburban contexts Ostrov et al. Classrooms were randomly assigned, resulting in nine intervention and nine control classrooms.
The adapted teacher measure demonstrated adequate internal consistency and parallel-form reliability for the current sample. See Table 2 for lists of outcome measures. Key content and process implementation fidelity were rated as being extremely strong based on observations, and teachers evaluated the program very positively on an acceptability measure.
Strengths of the program include the following: the outcome measures have demonstrated adequate reliability and validity across several prior samples and studies; both content and process implementation were monitored and found to be extremely high; and teacher acceptability for the program was rated favorably.
A limitation is that although observers were blind to intervention status, observations of program implementation appear to have been conducted by program implementers who were not blind to study hypotheses. Another limitation is that the study was underpowered and was only able to be evaluated at the classroom level.
Thus, the program should be replicated with a larger randomized trial in which children nested within classrooms can be taken into account and effects can be studied both at an individual and classroom level. Fidelity was examined by the research team through informal meetings with the teachers once a week. The study produced mixed results. There were no changes in rates of observed social rejection or teacher reports of social exclusion. Given research indicating the importance of the school climate and that witnessing higher levels of relational aggression can affect feelings of safety Kuppens et al.
Therefore, this program requires a considerably more systematic trial in the future to ensure that it is evaluated thoroughly. The program also may be strengthened by adding a parent or family component. Finally, it may be helpful to combine this program with other developmentally appropriate activities or programs that address other aspects of relational aggression in addition to social exclusion.
It is intended to reduce aggressive behavior and increase prosocial behavior Shure, Teachers received initial training, an ICPS manual, and one booster training a year.
The program was evaluated for implementation fidelity through observations twice per year and interviews with teachers implementing the program. Outcomes were assessed using teacher-report measures that have demonstrated prior reliability and validity and most illustrated adequate reliability across the current 2-year study alpha values ranged from.
Strengths of the ICPS Program include its long history of use within varied schools and school districts, especially for preschoolers and kindergarteners. Although the program does not appear to have problem-solving components specific to relational aggression, results suggest that the general problem-solving skill set taught by the program may be reasonably effective in reducing relational aggression.
Limitations of the overall program are that it is extremely long 83 sessions and intensive, as it is recommended to be implemented by teachers several times per week. Thus, the program requires strong buy-in and committed teachers and school communities, as well as the ability to provide supports to teachers to monitor and guide implementation. Another limitation is that those evaluating implementation fidelity in the current study were not blind to condition.
A further limitation of the study was that it was conducted in only one urban school district with a predominately Hispanic population of kindergarteners and first-graders, and that the two experimental groups were larger than the control group.
It is suggested that the program be systematically evaluated using equivalent groups across more school districts and diverse samples. Seventeen schools from urban, western Canada were used to assess program feasibility and effectiveness through a quasi-experimental matched-control design Lead-beater et al. Schools that previously demonstrated high fidelity with program implementation 5 were matched to control schools with no prior involvement with the intervention.
As such, twelve intervention schools were matched with five schools in the same district who agreed to be control schools. A strength of WITS is that it integrates diverse school and community members into the program implementation. Also, it is akin to implementing a school-wide framework and policy that guides students to adopt a new philosophy or outlook on problem solving, thereby being easy to implement and relatively inexpensive.
WITS is one of the few programs that focuses primarily on relational victimization as opposed to perpetration. Further, WITS includes a family and sibling component, which is important given the research demonstrating the importance of sibling and parent relationships and relational aggression among young children. A limitation of the program includes the significant methodological concerns of the preliminary study that made it difficult to have confidence in findings e.
Thus, despite being extremely innovative and publically available, WITS requires a more systematic trial to better understand its potential effect. Two studies have examined the effectiveness of MC on relationally aggressive behaviors. The first study Fraser et al. Program specialists staff members at each site with education, school psychology, and social work backgrounds completed treatment integrity forms to track program implementation.
The second study Fraser et al. A total of third-graders from two schools participated in a cohort design with a comparison group intervention. Program implementation was monitored by recording the number of classroom sessions completed, the length of each session, and individual student attendance, as well as teacher logs and observations of the classroom Fraser et al.
Teacher-and research staff-report measures with demonstrated prior reliability and validity were used. A limitation of the program evaluations is that the intervention conditions for both studies reviewed contain a combination of MC plus additional family or classroom components, making it difficult to understand which components may be more responsible for findings. Another limitation is that one of the measures used to measure hostile intent in the later study had low internal consistency Fraser et al.
The goal of the school-based F2F program Leff, Gullan et al. Relational aggressors were identified using an unlimited peer nomination process, and girls from classrooms with two or more relational aggressors were randomly assigned to F2F or a treatment-as-usual control group.
Finally, the program was rated as quite acceptable by participating students and teachers. One strength of F2F is that the program and materials were developed using a participatory action research framework by adapting best practice social cognitive violence prevention programs for urban physically aggressive youth through feedback from urban girls, parents, teachers, and community members Leff et al. The program was judged to be culturally sensitive and highly acceptable by participants and their teachers.
Also, F2F can be implemented with high levels of both content and procedural integrity Leff, Gullan et al. Finally, groups are comprised of both high-risk relationally aggressive girls and prosocial role models, thereby reducing the potential deleterious effects of grouping aggressive youth Dishion et al.
A limitation is that this study was underpowered with an unequal number of youth in the treatment versus control conditions. Therefore, replication across more urban schools through a clinical trial is an important next step for the research. An additional limitation is that F2F was designed for urban, predominately African American girls, and thus the program is likely not generalizable beyond this target population.
Although several specific lessons targeting relational aggression have been added to the curriculum, only one study has evaluated variables related to relational aggression Van Schoiack-Edstrom et al. This 3-year study was conducted with sixth- through eighth-grade students from five schools in the United States and Canada.
The curriculum developer met regularly with teachers and observed sessions to ensure treatment fidelity. Outcomes were assessed using self-report measures with established reliability and validity; most measures demonstrated adequate reliability in the current study alpha values ranged from.
There were three groups of students compared in the study two intervention groups and one control group. Youth in intervention Group 1 were in the lowest grade within their middle sixth grade or junior high seventh grade school and were taught Level 1 curriculum e. Youth in intervention Group 2 were in the second year of middle seventh grade or junior high eighth grade school and received the Level 2 curriculum 8 lessons related to empathy, anger management, problem solving, and skill application, which were intended to supplement the Level 1 curriculum.
Second Step is a well-known and widely used program that has previously demonstrated effects on social competence and physically aggressive behaviors. Management and control of aggressive tendencies can thus be possible through writing therapy.
Daily diary writing is a kind of writing therapy. That is why o said diary writing is maintained by mentally ill persons. By this technique hostile feeling can be relieved without target of aggression. Aggression of children can be relieved through displacement or transfer of aggression to some objects like toy, doll or any non living object. So children are given toys and big dolls to express their aggression on these objects, instead of expressing, suppressing and repressing it.
Various observations and experimental studies do indicate that when children are given the chance to express their anger and aggression in course of their growth, they become less hostile afterwards. Non aggression can be possible through displacement of anger.
Fishback conducted an experiment on some college student who was subjected to derogatory remarks and insults. Among them one group was allowed to express his pent up emotions through T. T cards and the second group through writing stories on some T. These subjects showed less hostility and aggression compared to the third group which was administered with an aptitude test and hence did not get the chance to release his aggressive feeling.
Similar evidences are found in many other studies which indicate that catharsis can be very useful in reducing and controlling the feelings of hostility and control. Aggressive behaviour can be prevented to some extent by judicious early childhood training, proper parental care, and adequate parenting style.
By trying to fulfill the basic needs of the child, the child can be exposed to less frustration inducing situations. The child should not be harashed on allowed to cry for a continuous period. He should be given the training from the early child to face frustration in an adoptive instead of mal adoptive manner. His training should be flexible rather than rigid. Sep Social Aggression is a range of behaviors that is related to bullying but which are different in type and cause.
Like bullying, socially aggressive behavior contributes to physical or emotional harm to targets. Individuals who are social aggressive may be irritable, impulsive, angry and even violent. Like bullying, aggressive behavior is intentional and done to inflict harm or pain, violates the norms of society, and contributes to the breakdown in an interpersonal relationship or a group.
0コメント