Project #12
Implementation of "A School Based AntiViolence Program"

November 1995
By Brenda TenoldPhillips

Topic Page

Appendices 1 20: Topic/Title

1. Statistics Canada Survey on Woman Abuse
2. A SchoolBased AntiViolence Program by London Family Court Clinic
3. Facts about Violence in our Society
4. Facts about Child Witnesses of Wife Assault
5. Brother of Mine: Transforming a violent culture CTF Video
6. The Provincial Partnership Committee on Family Violence
7. Breaking the Cycle of Violence Video conference
8. Social Skills (Day Treatment) Program
9. Report re: Breaking the Cycle of Violence Video conference
   Report re: Implementation of A SchoolBased AntiViolence Program
10. SECOND STEP Violence Prevention Curriculum
    A Family Guide to SECOND STEP
11. Bibliography of Materials from the Steward Resource Centre (STF):
    Violence and Violence Prevention
    Conflict and Conflict Management
12. Making a Pledge to End Violence Against Women cartoon
13. Facilitator's Notes for Staff Inservice plus Teacher Handout
14. The Teacher is the Key Questionnaire Responses
15. Implementation of A SchoolBased AntiViolence Program Research Grant:
    Report to Stirling McDowell Foundation for Research into Teaching, February, 1995
16. Teacher Interviews #1: Schedule, Research Questions and Responses
17. May Inservice Agenda and Facilitator's Notes, Teacher Action Plan Handout Teacher Reflections I IV
18. Letter re: Parent Meeting on Second Step program, Parent Handouts
19. Teacher Interviews #2: Schedule, Research Questions and Responses
20. Prevention Update: Committee for Children Spring 1994 & Winter 1995

The Research Question

How to implement "A Schoolbased Antiviolence Program?"

Objectives of the Research Project

The research focus is on the experiences of implementing a schoolbased antiviolence program at Prince Charles School during the 1994 1995 school year. The project documents the process of implementation, with a focus on the following questions:

• Why schools need to be involved in violence prevention?
• Who should be involved and how do you involve them?
• How do you facilitate awareness and professional development sessions for school personnel and for parents?
• What are the criteria for selection of an effective and comprehensive antiviolence program?
• What should a schoolbased antiviolence program be comprised of?
• What schoolbased and classroombased violence prevention programs or resources are available and appropriate?
• What are some of the roadblocks and how does one deal with them?
• What are some of the shortterm positive results in implementing such a program?
• What are some of the longterm positive results, according to other research?
• What are some recommendations or guidelines for other Saskatchewan teachers who wish to implement a schoolbased antiviolence program?

Rationale for the Research

There is increasing concern about the violence in society. We see evidence in the daily news that violent crimes committed by youths are occurring more often and becoming more vicious. Our problems in Saskatchewan schools seem small when compared to the weapons searches, gang fighting and schoolground violence that many teachers are facing around us, to the east, to the west, and in the south. But we know, from experience, that trends affecting the larger centres do eventually affect us, and often to the same degree, though a few years later.

Although one can debate whether increased violence is real or whether awareness and reporting have increased, the reality remains the same. The results of The Violence Against Women Survey (1993) undertaken by Statistics Canada painted a devastating picture of the violence that women are experiencing across our nation. The survey confirmed that 51 percent of women have experienced physical or sexual violence at least once in their adult lives and 29% of married or previously married women were assaulted by their husbands.

(Statistics Canada Survey on Woman Abuse, Appendix 1)

The researcher believes that we, as educators, are in a unique position in terms of influencing what happens in society. As Chief Blaine Favel was quoted as saying, in an April 7, 1995 STF Bulletin review, teachers have the opportunity to develop respect, but "you also have the immense power of doing nothing". To rephrase an old saying, if we are not part of the solution, we are part of the problem. We have the choice, here in Saskatchewan, of being reactive, developing policy and programs after we suffer a serious violent crime on our playgrounds (as happened in Calgary with the young student being killed) or being proactive, acknowledging that we have a role to play in ending violence and taking preventive action now.

On March 5, 1994, the researcher attended a oneday workshop introducing a comprehensive approach to violence prevention. This program, called A SchoolBased AntiViolence Program (A.S.A.P.) was developed by the London Family Court Clinic of Ontario in collaboration with teachers, administrators, trustees, parents and students of the Board of Education for the City of London. This project was funded by Health Canada; Health Canada's Family Violence Prevention Division also funded the introduction workshops across Canada, including the dissemination of the resulting A SchoolBased AntiViolence Program Kit to each Director of Education of every English school board in Canada.

The A.S.A.P. (an apt acronym) resource package is comprised of a threering binder containing a manual and video. The manual includes a rationale as to why schools should be involved, plus information for awareness and professional development sessions, safe school climates, strategies for elementary and secondary schools, and how to develop an action plan. Discussion guides, evaluation forms and lists of resources are also included.

The A.S.A.P. video is for teachers and administrators, offering information on violence in relationships, showing examples of successful prevention programs and illustrating possible resistant attitudes on the part of school personnel. Three teachers in the video portray different viewpoints on the issue of violence against women. The actors wrote the script and are practising teachers themselves. The video is humorous and enjoyable, but at the same time provides a good starting point for discussion. The A.S.A.P. kit is available at a cost of $75. (A.S.A.P., Appendix 2.)

The researcher was impressed with the A.S.A.P. program and an immediate concern was that this useful resource would go the way of many excellent resources, onto a shelf somewhere to collect dust. Given the tremendously difficult and demanding job that teachers now face each day, there seemed little hope that without some wider exposure, this program would not meet the same fate.

Being cognizant of the Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation for Research into Teaching grants available, the researcher saw a wonderful opportunity to attempt to address the issues of violence at the schoollevel, with the hope that the research could provide guidelines for implementation that would help other Saskatchewan teachers follow suit.

Some people feel that schools have been unfairly singled out to solve all the social problems in the world ranging from preventing AIDS, alcohol abuse, drug addiction, teen pregnancy, STD's, not to mention environmental disasters, and are very reluctant to attempt to address yet another social ill. Other people feel that schools are the only hope and must be forced to deal with these issues. The A.S.A.P. program outlines a way that "schools can be an effective partner together with their communities in addressing problems such as violence"(Canadian Teachers Federation, 1990).

"Prevention has always been synonymous with education. Education is seen as a hope to instill new awareness, knowledge and skills to a future generation of adults. School systems are seen to have an audience of young persons who need preparation for the future without the same problems that adults have caused or experienced. " (ASAP, p 3)

According to A.S.A.P. research, many factors are making it impossible for schools and education leaders to ignore violence in our society. These factors include (A.S.A.P., page 3):

1. Increasing violence in schools that endangers the wellbeing of students and staff.
2. The demands by parents to improve school discipline and the general climate for learning.
3. The integration of students with special needs and behaviour problems who traditionally had been educated in mental health or correctional facilities.
4. The increasing recognition that many students suffer from the impact of witnessing violence in their homes which can affect their learning and emotional development.
5. Reports that many girls feel unsafe in school and recount a high level of violence, harassment and sexism.
6. Schools have been identified as a crosssectional unit of society, representing small communities that foster inequality through racism and sexism. That is, schools are not neutral environments that teach reading, writing and arithmetic. Schools are part of the problem if they do not work actively to be part of the solution.

Anyone who has been teaching for ten years or more, can recognize that teaching has become significantly more demanding. Teachers often express frustration at the amount of time spent on classroom management rather than actual teaching. The study of Teacher Abuse recently completed by the STF indicates that there is a tremendous amount of stress involving student misbehaviour impacting on the quality of teachers' lives.

The Canadian Panel on Violence Against Women that so recently traversed this country, reports that:

People in Canada clearly believe the education system has an important role to play in ending violence and promoting equality. Many feel that requisite changes could be accommodated by altering current materials and courses and by equipping educators to deliver the altered content in a manner that demonstrates equality and nonviolence. This will require realignment of resources and priorities to emphasize the goals of equality and nonviolence. (The Canadian Panel on Violence Against Women, Executive Summary, 1993, p. 69)

What has violence against women got to do with teaching antiviolence programs to children, you might well ask?

Violence committed by strangers is deemed a major problem that strikes terror in the hearts of all citizens. Few people actively condone or tolerate this violence and when the issue of violence on the streets is considered, most people support violence prevention efforts. However, the true nature of violence unveils a thorny issue most violence is committed in the context of a relationship and usually involves an abuse of power, trust, or intimacy in that relationship.

Decades of research point to the painful reality that stranger violence cannot be the principal concern in violence prevention programs. Most violence takes place in homes and within relationships that should offer children safe and secure living environments. To have an effective violence prevention program, this reality must be clearly articulated. It is time to end the silence that surrounds these problems. The impact of silence has left a lengthy list of adult survivors of childhood violence that has been ignored in families and educational facilities across Canada. The recent exposure of years of sexual abuse at the hands of the Christian Brothers at Mount Cashel in Newfoundland has highlighted the need for breaking the silence. (A.S.A.P., p 5)

It is true that some women are abusive and that some boys and men suffer from the impact of that violence. It is equally clear that violence is not genderneutral. Consider these facts:

1. Over 90% of all violent criminal offenses are committed by men.
2. 43% of female assault victims are attacked by a current or estranged partner.
3. 93% of spousal assault charges are laid against men.
4. 38% of females who are murdered are killed by current or estranged partners. (A.S.A.P., P 7)
5. 2-3 women die each week in Canada at the hands of their partner or expartner.

(Facts about Violence in Our Society, Appendix 3)

This perspective is important to consider, when attempting to address violence prevention. Discussing violence without acknowledging sexism or racism would be futile. Violence involves the abuse of power. People most likely to be victimized by violence are people who are not treated equally in our society. The groups most at risk are women, children, disabled persons, elderly, visible minorities, immigrant Canadians and aboriginal persons. Ultimately, the best route to end violence is to promote equality.

What has violence against women got to do with us teaching in schools?

Research has documented a variety of detrimental effects on children who witness violence at home. The range of emotional and behavioural reactions include aggression, stealing, depression, enuresis, truancy, temper tantrums, anxiety and excess fears. Childhood exposure to wife assault has been linked to later involvement in abusive relationships. ... For boys, witnessing abuse of their mother by their father is the best predictor of who will grow up to abuse. School achievement, social skills, peer relations and involvement in extracurricular activities have all been shown to be adversely affected by violence at home. ... Schoolaged children who witness their mothers being assaulted, often show signs of lower selfesteem and higher anxiety levels than their peers. ... In Ontario alone it is estimated that between 150,000 and 250,000 schoolage children are exposed to woman abuse in their homes.

... Students, especially boys, who behave very aggressively on the school yard and show particular disrespect to female teachers, are often witnessing physical and verbal abuse toward their mothers by their male partners. The same children who show aggressive behaviour will also typically experience periods of withdrawal, inattentiveness and preoccupation, particularly during classroom activities when individual work is required. Some children, particularly girls, try to behave "perfectly". These children often believe they are responsible for their parent's fights; and if they could just behave perfectly, they could prevent or reduce the violence. Other children show very few symptoms in their behaviour. Researchers estimate that 25 to 40 per cent of children, whose mothers are abused, are also physically abused themselves (A.S.A.P., p 103).

(Facts About Child Witnesses of Wife Assault, Appendix 4)

We can no longer ignore the need to become involved in violence prevention programs. But we teachers cannot do it alone. We are not social workers or police officers. We need to base our prevention program on a concept of partnership with the community. The question is no longer "Why?" but "How ?" How do we go about implementing a schoolbased antiviolence program in partnership with our community? This research project attempts to answer that question.

Description of the Research Setting

Before beginning to describe the process of implementation that Prince Charles School went through, it is appropriate to first describe the school and surrounding community.

Prince Charles School is an elementary K6 public school with a student population of just over 200 children. Up until four years ago, Prince Charles School had a Community School status. This status reflected the demographics of the residential area surrounding Prince Charles School. The reason for loss of Community School status was partially a result of a changing population at Prince Charles School but mostly due to the increased need for Community School status at a neighbouring K9 elementary public school.

At present, the Prince Charles student population includes approximately 30 40% Aboriginal and Metis students. The area is one of lower socioeconomic status, with housing in the low to midrange value. A large percentage of our students have oneparent families. There are many families in our area on social assistance.

The teaching staff is comprised of a total of 13 people:

• one Principal that is .5 classroom teacher /.5 administrator,
• one VicePrincipal that is .9 classroom teacher /.1 administrator,
• five fulltime classroom teachers,
• one .5 classroom teacher /.5 Library Resource teacher,
• one .5 itinerant Physical Education teacher,
• one .5 itinerant Resource Room teacher,
• two .5 teachers that jobshare a Grade 1 class,
• one .2 itinerant music teacher.

The teaching staff would fit the general description of the Saskatchewan teacher, with mean age being close to 45 years of age and teaching experience ranging from 7 27 years, all teaching on permanent contracts, with one exception. Both administrators and one teacher have their Masters Degree in Education. All other teachers have their Bachelor of Education Degree.

The Principal has been administrator of this school for four years. One teacher on staff has been at this school since her first year teaching, 10 years ago. The two teachers jobsharing have had this arrangement for three years. The Kindergarten teacher was increased to fulltime in midSeptember due to the large kindergarten population. The .5 Phys. Ed. teacher is new to this school as of the fall 1994, as is the researcher.

As to gender, the staff consists of 11 female teachers and 2 males, one being the Principal and the other the .5 Physical Education teacher. Also on staff is a .5 female tutor who spends the morning with a student that has been segregated from the student population because of aggressive behaviour but is gradually being integrated into the regular school day. There is a .5 secretary in the afternoons (shared with another school) and a .5 Clerical Aid in the mornings (also shared with another school), both females. We have one fulltime male custodian and a .2 female custodian.

Prince Charles School has an active Parent Council consisting of 13 regular Council members who meet at the school once a month. The meetings are attended by both administrators. The activities of this group include fundraising, financial support for classroom and other special projects, and facilitating school activities such as an annual community lunch.

Some background information on the researcher is relevant as it affects the project. When the researcher applied for the Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation Research Grant, she was currently teaching at a Junior Highschool in Prince Albert. Shortly after applying for the grant to implement an antiviolence program at the Junior High level with permission and active support from the Principal there, she was offered a position of VicePrincipal in another school and, upon acceptance, was transferred to Prince Charles Elementary School. She is 10% Administration and 90% classroom with a Grade 45 split, teaching both grade levels for the first time.

The Research Project was transferred with the researcher. The Principal and staff of Prince Charles School had no prior involvement in the development of the research project.

The Implementation Process

The researcher will trace the process of implementation as it unfolded at Prince Charles School, using the calendar year as a form of reference.

September, 1994:

Although the researcher's new teaching assignment began in the fall, the administrative duties did not officially begin until January 1995, upon the retirement in December of the current VicePrincipal. This was actually an ideal situation.

The researcher spent the first month adjusting to a new school and a new teaching assignment, a Grade 4 5 classroom of 27 children.

Resources:

The first step the researcher took was to purchase a copy of the A SCHOOLBASED ANTIVIOLENCE PROGRAM (A.S.A.P.) resource kit (Appendix 2) as well as the CTF video BROTHER OF MINE: transforming a violent culture (Appendix 5). The A.S.A.P. manual and video provided guidance and direction as well as information and resources each step of the way. The CTF video was an excellent resource for the awareness sessions on violence in society, how we normalize and even glorify violence and how this has created a crisis on our streets, in our homes, and more recently, in our schools. The video also offers solutions based on the premise that violence is a learned response and that it's as easy to learn how to get along, as it is to fight.

Soliciting Administrative Support:

During the month, the researcher made contact with the Director of Education to discuss the project. The Director was receptive and supportive.

Late September, the researcher approached the administrative team with a request for time with the staff to present information on the antiviolence project, to facilitate an awareness session on violence, and to solicit their support of the project. It was agreed that it was not ideal to ask the staff to "stay after school" for a meeting after a busy workday, in addition to all the other time commitments most staff members have with school, family and community. It was decided that the next staff meeting would be a more positive choice of time.

October, 1994

STAFF INSERVICE #1

Goal: To Raise Awareness About Violence and Solicit Staff Support for the A.S.A.P. Project.

Methodology: Oral and Video Presentation on Violence.

At the October Staff Meeting, the researcher was given one hour to make a presentation regarding the research project to the Prince Charles Staff. Both teachers and support staff were invited to attend and most were able to. (It is important to involve as many people as possible in the project.) The researcher outlined the research project regarding the focus of the project and the amount of money the grant entailed. As to what the implementation should include and how it should unfold, the researcher indicated that no definite plans had been developed to date. Staff help and advice was actively solicited.

In general, the response was positive, although a concern was raised as to why the schoolbased antiviolence project was being implemented at Prince Charles School. A staff member voiced the opinion that there is not a significant amount of violence on the school's playground to warrant such a program. The Principal elaborated on that fact, stating the school has improved dramatically in the four years he has been there, with progressively less incidence of violence.

The researcher explained the circumstances resulting in this project being implemented at Prince Charles School, the project proposal originally being intended for the Junior Highschool where the researcher was teaching the year before and the subsequent transfer to this school. In a nutshell, they had inherited the project along with the researcher. This helped alleviate some apprehension and misconceptions about being singled out or being perceived as a school "in trouble".

After question period, the staff viewed the 24 minute A.S.A.P. Video included in the kit, followed by a discussion period. This video helped promote the concept of violence as being a societal problem based on systemic attitudes fundamental to North American culture, not a situational problem unique to this school. It allowed participants to focus on the "big picture" of violence as opposed to a narrow, more personalized viewpoint.

Following the video, the researcher distributed the questions from the video guide as discussion starting points. After about 10 minutes of small group discussion, feedback to the larger group was requested.

Before ending the session, the researcher asked for direction from the group. One teacher voiced the concern that awareness and prevention really needs to happen in the community and that the teachers are the wrong people to be talking to. Teachers can't make the necessary changes because teachers aren't the problem. Several other participants seconded this opinion. We then discussed how to involve the community and it was decided that the Prince Charles Parent Council should be approached regarding this issue.

Following the teacher inservice, two support staff spoke to the researcher of personal experiences with family violence. They voiced their support of the project's goals.

Soliciting Community Support:

Within a few days, the researcher spoke to the President of the Parent Council and asked if a presentation on Violence Prevention, could be made to that group, explaining the background to the McDowell Foundation project. The president was receptive to the idea and took the video BROTHER OF MINE home to preview.

During the next few weeks the researcher and the Parent Council President discussed the presentation. It was decided to invite someone from the city police department to speak about local violence as well as view the first 25 30 minutes of the BROTHER OF MINE video. The date was set for October 26 and a newsletter was sent home to parents through the school via the students.

COMMUNITY MEETING #1

Objective: To Raise Awareness of Violence and Solicit Community Support for the Schoolbased AntiViolence Project.

Methodology: Oral and Video Presentations in a Group Meeting.

The meeting was attended by about 22 parents, as well as several teachers and the administration team. The Director of Education also attended as did one of the Superintendents and a board member. (The researcher had made sure to invite these partners in education, following the guidelines of the A.S.A.P. manual, Section B.) The researcher facilitated the meeting, gave a brief overview of the McDowell Foundation project and grant, and showed the first part of the video BROTHER OF MINE.

A Constable from the Prince Albert City Police Department was then invited to speak about violence from a local perspective. The Constable affirmed that much of the violence in society either involves violence in the home or is a result of family violence. The presentation was followed by an open discussion.

The feedback from parents was clear they expressed deep concern for the growing violence in society and fear for the safety and wellbeing of their children. Again, a feeling of frustration was expressed that we were speaking to the wrong people and that the people perpetrating the violence would be difficult if not impossible to reach.

It was decided to hold another presentation the following month to view the second part of the video which focuses more on prevention and antiviolence programs. There was a general agreement that the community needs to be involved and that a schoolbased violence prevention initiative was welcome.

RESEARCH AND DATA COLLECTION #1

Objective: To Develop a Knowledge Base regarding the Partners in Family Violence Prevention.

Methodology: Attend The Provincial Partnership Committee on Family Violence Symposium.

Earlier in the month, the Director of Education informed the researcher of a symposium called JOINING THE JOURNEY, sponsored by The Provincial Partnership Committee on Family Violence being held in Regina on October 18, 19 and 20th, 1994. The school division had been invited to send a representative and because of the researcher's work in this area visavis this research project, the researcher was invited to attend.

The purpose of the Symposium was to bring together key people to establish a model for community and government to work together to address the issue of violence in the family. The researcher had the opportunity to meet many frontline professionals from all regions of Saskatchewan who work with both the victims and the perpetrators of violence.

Summary of Research and Data Collection #1:

A better perspective as to how the larger community is working to combat the problems of violence in our society was gained. The researcher also gained a better understanding as to the intricacies of departmentalizing resources and funding, and the frustrations inherent in that process.

It also confirmed for the researcher, once again, that schools have a fundamental role to play in violence prevention. The bulk of the other agencies are working at longterm rehabilitation for the victims of violence or longterm punishment for the perpetrators of violence. Both processes are expensive and only partially successful. It makes so much more sense to try to work with children before the damage is done.

(The Provincial Partnership on Family Violence, Appendix 6)

Towards the end of October, the Director also informed the researcher of an upcoming video conference she was organizing, in collaboration with SIAST and other community agencies. This video conference, called BREAKING THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE, was being piped in from Chicago. We were scheduled to interact with it on November 1. The Director sent out a memo inviting a teacher and community member from every school in the division to attend. The researcher invited the president of Prince Charles Parent Council to attend with her.

November, 1994

RESEARCH AND DATA COLLECTION #2

Objective: To Develop a Knowledge Base about School and Community Models for Violence Prevention.

Methodology: Attend Breaking the Cycle of Violence Video conference.

On November 1st, the Parent Council president and the researcher attended the workshop. The morning included presentations from local community agencies and residents, on different aspects of violence. The theme of the conference was to provide support in "reclaiming our youth and stemming violence".

The threehour Video conference began at 12 noon. It was live from the Chicago conference site and included speakers from different programs and professions, including Jesse Jackson and Reverend Bernice King, on such topics as Nonviolent Intervention, School Safety, Peer Mediation and Conflict Resolution, Dealing with Gangs, Identifying Children from Troubled Families, Anger Management, Teaching Peace, Parent Involvement, and Community Collaboration and Funding.

Included in the presentation was video footage of three model school and communitybased violence prevention programs. One of the classroombased programs highlighted was called SECOND STEP: A Violence Prevention Curriculum, developed by Seattle's Committee for Children, presented by the Director of Program Development Kathleen R. Beland. This program is also highly recommended in the resource section of A.S.A.P.

Summary of Research and Data Collection #2:

The message was very clear about what schools can do. Schools need to teach the prosocial and behavioural skills that tend to be lacking in highrisk children and in adult perpetrators of abuse. The premise is that violence is a learned behaviour that can be unlearned or surplanted with behaviour that is prosocial and gets better results. How can this be done? By implementing a comprehensive schoolbased antiviolence program composed of three basic components:

• Component 1: A Classroombased Antiviolence Program.

Beland emphasised three essential criteria for a classroombased antiviolence program:

1. The program must start with young children, be integrated into the curriculum and be ongoing throughout the school experience;
2. The program must teach prosocial skills in a sequential way. The three main skills to be targeted are:
   • a) empathy the ability to identify and predict the feelings of another person correctly and to provide an appropriate emotional response;
   • b) impulse control taught through a problemsolving strategy and a repertoire of appropriate social behaviours; and
   • c) anger management consisting of stressreduction techniques to help create a healthy climate for solving problems.
3. It must be a wholeschool approach involving all teaching staff, administration, support staff, parents and community members.

• Component 2: A Schoolbased Antiviolence Program.

A second program important to a safe school climate, as presented through the videoconference, is a Peer Mediation and/or Conflict Resolution program. The benefits of these types of programs include providing school and playground safety, empowering students, and educating students and staff in problemsolving and conflict resolution skills.

• Component 3: A PullOut Program for AtRisk Children.

A third program that schools can provide is a more intensive pullout program for children that have been identified as "at risk" because of their antisocial behaviour. The objective of such programs is to teach prosocial skills.

Although the Video conference was not aimed particularly at educators, there was a lot of pertinent information to be gleaned. It was excellent to have a parent representative participating, to facilitate discussion of ideas and possibilities for the school.

(BREAKING THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE Video conference, Appendix 7)

Staff Inservice #2

Objective: To Raise Awareness of Violence and Provide Information about Schoolbased Prevention Programs.

Methodology: Oral and Video Presentations and Group Discussion.

In consultation with the Principal, it was agreed that the researcher could take 30 minutes of the November staff meeting to report back the findings of the Video conference and provide information on the pullout Social Skills program for atrisk students being implemented in some local schools.

On November 8th, at our regular staff meeting, the staff viewed a 10 minute segment of the Video conference to provide them with a quick overview of schoolbased antiviolence programs. The staff received the information favourably, thought that the SECOND STEP program looked userfriendly and was interested in getting more information. The researcher offered to order the preview video and check out the cost of the program.

Concerns that emerged from discussion included the following::

• A lack of classroom time for such a program in an already over full curriculum. (Where does it fit in?)
• A lack of teacher preparation time, in light of so many other demands. (Core Curriculum implementation)
• A perception that violence on our playground is not a serious concern, unlike some other schools.

Our itinerant resource room teacher gave a short presentation about the Social Skills pullout program. It is based on a token economy where the children are taught prosocial skills and then rewarded for using them, with transfer of those skills into the classroom as the final step. The resource room teacher is involved in the implementation at her other school. The staff made positive comments about the possibilities of such a program. There was one comment about how such a program possibly rewards children for poor behaviour.Social Skills Program, APPENDIX 8)

Community Meeting #2

Objective: To Develop Violence Awareness and Provide Information on Schoolbased Prevention Programs.

Methodology: Oral and Video Presentation and Group Discussion.

On November 23rd, the Parent Council hosted a second community meeting. This meeting was not as well attended, with basically the core group of Parent Council members present, along with the researcher and the two administrators. We viewed the second part of the CTF video BROTHER OF MINE, which was more solution oriented.

The Parent Council president and the researcher then presented their learnings from the Video conference, telling about the SECOND STEP program presented at the Video conference and the importance of a wholeschool approach. The researcher reported that the staff was favourably impressed with what they had seen of the program and that the researcher was obtaining the preview video.

The possibilities of implementing the Social Skills pullout program for atrisk students at Prince Charles School was discussed. We also discussed Peer Mediation and Conflict Resolution programs.

The possibility of a school assembly focussed on violence awareness, to coincide with the December 6th Commemoration of the Montreal Massacre that takes place each year in our community, was mentioned as a possibility. It was also suggested that we try to get parents out again for another awareness session before Christmas. The NFB film TOYING WITH OUR FUTURE was suggested by the researcher as an appropriate theme for the season, as it focuses on toys and sexrole stereotyping. The Parents were excited about the possibilities and the discussion was animated.

The Principal then expressed the opinion that what Prince Charles School already had in place was working very well and that focussing on violence was detrimental to the positive atmosphere of the school. He opposed the idea of having a wholeschool assembly as a violence awareness event in early December. He expressed the opinion that this would have a negative impact on the positive school climate. Parents agreed that the school has a positive climate and that there is not a lot of violence on the playground.

The meeting ended as it was late. The researcher agreed to get the video TOYING WITH OUR FUTURE from the local library to preview (the president also agreed to preview it) and, if it was appropriate, to order in the film from NFB for community viewing on December 7th in the school gym.

During the month of November the researcher wrote a brief synopsis of the learnings from the Video conference, as well as a more detailed article for the PATA Bulletin on this McDowell Foundation project to date. (Appendix 9)

The researcher also applied to present a session at the Prince Albert Convention 1995 in February on the ASAP project and was accepted.

Later in the month, the researcher received the preview video for the SECOND STEP program and called the Committee for Children in Seattle re: prices. (SECOND STEP, Appendix 10) It was also confirmed that the McDowell Foundation grant money could NOT be used to purchase resources such as the SECOND STEP program.

During October and November, the researcher and other members of the staff previewed antiviolence programs and resources from the Stewart Resource Centre. (Bibliographies, Appendix 11)

During the last week in November, some of our staff members along with a few teachers from other schools, put together a package of antiviolence materials and white ribbons for each school in the Prince Albert Teachers' Association, on behalf of the Gender Equity Committee. This was done to support the December 6th Day of Remembrance and Mourning and the White Ribbon Campaign. Much of the material was taken directly from the A.S.A.P. manual. The package was too extensive to include in this document. (Making a Pledge to End Violence Against Women, Appendix 12)

January, 1995
Research and Data Collection #3

Objective: To Collect more Data on the Second Step Program and other Schoolbased Violence Prevention Programs.

Methodology: Personal Interviews with Key People.

In early January the researcher made arrangements to visit a local Community School to interview the Principal, VicePrincipal and a key teacher, having heard that they had used the Second Step program the previous year. What the researcher learned from them and their research validated previous findings.

The VicePrincipal was planning to attend a threeday "Train the Trainer" course in Boston in March. Next fall they plan to implement the Second Step Program in every classroom. Both administrators felt very strongly about having a classroombased violence prevention or social skills program. They also said they would not want to work in a school with Division III that did not have a Peer Mediation Program in place.

According to the Principal and VicePrincipal, Second Step was an excellent choice for a classroombased program: "Second Step is sequential, comprehensive, multilevelled, and user friendly", the criteria of a good prevention program. Other requirements they felt were important to a successful implementation of a classroombased antiviolence program are listed below.

Summary of Research and Data Collection #3:

• The teachers need to understand the importance of anger management.
• The implementation requires strong leadership and regular supervision.
• There needs to be accountability on the part of the classroom teacher, with a supervisory schedule in place. If there is no monitoring, the program slips to the side.
• The program cannot be an option. "Every classroom teacher is simply going to have to do it."
• The teachers will need a lot of support. The plan is to use staff meetings to discuss issues as they arise.
• The materials must be shared between classrooms.
• Every classroom teacher is expected to teach Second Step a minimum of 20 30 minutes per week.

The researcher then spent an hour interviewing the teacher who had actually used the Second Step program in the classroom. Two years ago, he had spent the year teaching Second Step to all Division I and II classrooms on a halftime basis. (The other half, he was in a regular classroom.) He loved the program and recommended that it be used in every classroom. But he felt very strongly about the fact that it should be taught by the classroom teacher, as it would be more effective with greater consistency and followup throughout the rest of the school day.

The following year, 1993 1994, that had been tried. Each classroom teacher was asked to schedule the Second Step program into their regular teaching routine, on a weekly basis. But he felt it was not very successful as some teachers did not follow through with consistent implementation.

According to this teacher, the pros of the program are that it is "idiotproof" ("I'm living proof," he said!), very simple to use. "The binder is sequenced, you basically show the picture and read off the back. It's all scripted. You can teach it out of the box ... it teaches itself."

He mentioned two drawbacks of the program:

It is American; all the children in the pictures are black or hispanic. "There are no aboriginal children pictured."

It is strictly a violence prevention and anger management program. It does not deal with selfesteem. "It needs to be supplemented with videos and other programs that build selfesteem."

He recommended the program as an excellent resource. Although he only taught each classroom one period per week, he said it was the students' favorite class, according to many parents he talked to. It was called "Anger Management" in that school. He feels it needs to be integrated into the classroom program in order to be really effective, especially in terms of the "transfer of training" that needs to take place, where students learn to use their new social skills in their "real" life.

The researcher also spoke to a consultant who happened to be in the school that day. He said he had had excellent feedback from parents whose children were in the program. One of the problems he cited was that it was hard to get teachers to use it. He felt the program needed to be supported and monitored. He also felt it needed strong leadership from a trained trainer.

The researcher contacted another Principal that had looked into using the Second Step program at another community school. This Principal felt the card photos could be a detriment to a good presentation, seeming rather "canned" and with no Aboriginal content. A second concern was that too much focus on violence could have a negative impact on staff and student morale. Thirdly, it might be difficult to get staff "on board".

Staff Inservice #3

Objective: To Solicit Staff Support and Commitment to a Classroombased Antiviolence Program.

Methodology: Oral and Video Presentations, Group Discussion and a Questionnaire.

In consultation with the Principal, we agreed to a noon hour inservice, providing pizza to all teaching staff and support staff that could come, to solicit support and commitment to implementation of a classroombased violence prevention [prosocial skills] program. It was decided that if the staff was in agreement, we would provide a half day inservice with school closure (therefore, at no cost) plus a second half day per classroom for further individual preparation, with a paid substitute teacher in the classroom.

In late January, the researcher took a half day leave to develop a questionnaire to survey staff support and to plan for the staff inservice, the leave again funded by the grant.

On January 27th, the short staff inservice was held during a pizza lunch. The purpose of the inservice was stated by the researcher as follows: "I need some direction from you as to where we should go with the schoolbased antiviolence project." The researcher reviewed the process to date, in terms of meetings held and feedback from community, parents and staff. The nature of violence in our society and the impact it has on us all was also reviewed. The staff was then asked to fill out a short questionnaire called TEACHER EXPERIENCES WITH VIOLENCE PREVENTION from the A.S.A.P. program (page 217) to stimulate personal awareness of violence.

The researcher believed it was important to address the issue that had been brought up on several occasions regarding the amount of violence (or lack of it) that occurs at Prince Charles school. The first point made was that because our children are still relatively young and powerless, they are still at the "victim" stage of life. The children that perhaps do not seem very violent today, in terms of the seriousness of their physical aggression on the playground, are the potential abusers or victims of tomorrow. The same acts that they commit with little consequence at present, will have much greater implications when they are older.

Having been at a Junior High the last two years, the researcher's experiences with the sexual harassment and bullying of children just a few years older than elementary were both recent and relevant. The question posed was "Do the students have the social skills they need to protect themselves from perpetrating the cycle of abuse, whether as victims or as abusers?"

A second point is that a certain amount of desensitization to violence has occurred, in that we tend to ignore or overlook a lot of what happens in order to survive.

Thirdly, it was affirmed that yes, schools are being asked once again to cure another social ill, but that at the same time, the reality is that we already spend a lot of time mediating disputes and dealing with disruptive behaviour. An effective violence prevention program should therefore make our jobs easier not harder, once successfully implemented.

A fourth point was that the parents of our community see a need for a prevention program and support us in this endeavour. In one parent meeting in the fall, the guest speaker from the City Police Department had affirmed that most violence in society stems from violence in the home. A violence prevention program at school can help the children witnessing violence at home to stop the cycle of abuse.

Finally the researcher clarified that the grant could NOT provide funding for resource materials for a classroombased antiviolence program, only release time. If the staff wanted such a program, the researcher would agree to look for funding.

The staff viewed the 10 minute preview video of the SECOND STEP program and discussed the possibilities of implementing this program.

The staff was then asked to fill out the questionnaire developed by the researcher called THE TEACHER IS THE KEY. This questionnaire basically asked for anonymous feedback as to whether the staff saw a need for a classroombased prevention program and supported piloting a program such as SECOND STEP. It was stated that the researcher needed to know if there was staff support and commitment for such a program before going ahead with a request for funding. If the staff was supportive, the researcher committed herself to the following:

(a) requesting funding for $1000 for the SECOND STEP program for Grades 16.

(b) providing one full day inservice for all staff members for orientation to the new program, broken down into 2 day for staff overview of the program as a group (school closed) and a followup 2 day per classroom for individual staff members to familiarize themselves with their portion of the program and prepare for implementation in their classroom (substitute paid by grant).

(Teacher is Key Inservice Agenda, Handout and Questionnaire, APPENDIX 13)

Community Meeting # 3

Objective: To inform the Parents of the Community about the A.S.A.P. developments and to solicit their support.

Methodology: Oral and Video Presentation.

The researcher asked to be added to the agenda of the regular Parent Council Meeting.

On January 25th, the researcher presented plans for the upcoming lunch meeting with the staff, explaining the purpose of the meeting to solicit staff support and commitment to a classroombased antiviolence program. The parents present viewed the 10 minute introduction video to the Second Step program.

The parents were also informed about the upcoming implementation of the pullout Social Skills program by the Resource Room teacher, including the evening parent component coordinated with another school.

The information was received with positive comments and approval for both programs.

February, 1995
Research and Data Collection #4

Objective: To Verify Staff Support and Commitment to a Classroombased AntiViolence Program.

Methodology: THE TEACHER IS THE KEY Questionnaire feedback and Summary.

Eight questionnaires were returned to the researcher during the following two weeks. (This was out of a possible 10, as it did not include the Resource Room teacher, Music teacher and the researcher.) The anonymity of the teacher was respected in the process, but some teachers chose to sign the questionnaire. The findings are recorded in full in Appendix 14 and are summarized below.

Summary of Research and Data Collection #4:

• 6 out of 8 teachers agreed that Family Violence is a problem in general and 8 out of 8 agreed that Family Violence is a problem in our Community, one commenting that "violence is on the upswing".
• 7 out of 8 responses indicated agreement that Family Violence affects children's learning;one person feels it does not.
• 7 teachers think that the school has a role to play in preventing violence, with the eighth responding with Somewhat : "We can do our part as role models but if it is still happening at home, the effectiveness is undermined."
• 5 teachers felt we should try to implement a schoolwide Violence Prevention Program; 1 said No and 2 responded with Somewhat, saying: "We already have this" ; "Depends on: Teacher commitment, Curriculum integration/replacement, Availability of materials, and Time (for P.D. and preparation)."
• 5 teachers said they are willing to implement a gradeappropriate program in their classroom, no one said No but two chose Somewhat for the following reasons: "Already promote at every opportunity."
• "Already a [small] part of the Health curriculum and daily behaviour discussions re:
• selfdiscipline and caring for others." The eighth person had no response, not being a classroom teacher. (He had signed the questionnaire.)
• Comments as to some of the barriers or problems teachers could foresee in implementing a Violence Prevention Program in their classroom included four mentions of having enough time, two references to program and materials, one reference to violent parents objecting,one reference to curriculum integration and one reference to teacher commitment.
• Comments as to some of the barriers or problems to implementing a violence prevention program schoolwide included four references to the need for commitment from ALL teachers, and one reference to each of the following: consistency; time to monitor;concerns about where and how parents and community are involved; and the need for integration with other agencies (i.e. Social Services).
• 7 teachers think implementing a schoolbased antiviolence program such as Second Step will make a difference. ("It certainly will make people aware that there is a problem" ; "Perhaps only at the school level but explanation of alternatives is always worthwhile.") One person chose Maybe: "Only if reinforced at home and in society in general."
• 4 people said Yes, schoolwide activities on violence awareness and violence prevention(such as assemblies, an antiviolence week of activities, speakers, fundraisers) would be effective and appropriate; 2 said No; and 2 said Maybe: "In moderation and if they are ageappropriate for the children" ; "Most effective to deal with it as the need arises."
• 6 teachers agreed we should order Second Step to preview, one said No and one said Maybe: "We need a leader to direct this implementation. Do we have one?"
• 4 teachers said they would fee comfortable teaching a program such as Second Step after one full day (or two 2 days) inservice, 1 said No and 2 said Partially, explaining: "I would like to see the materials first"; "If the program is not immediately user friendly (easy to implement) it will not succeed." The eighth person answered: "I don't know."
• 3 educators chose to add specific comments at the end of the questionnaire, as follows:

"I've liked what I've seen of Second Step and feel it would be a very teacher friendly program to implement. I feel this is a much needed step and am eager to get it going."

"I am interested in implementing such a program if it is truly "readymade" and easy to teach, use, and understand. We do a lot of talking in the class about this anyways, it might as well be formally taught!"

"There are schools that need antiviolence programs. I don't think Prince Charles has a problem. I think students have the message here about respecting one another, not only physically but verbally as well."

The responses were interpreted as being more positive than negative. There seemed to be an agreement as to the need and usefulness of a classroombased program. There was some reluctance to full commitment to a schoolwide or classroombased program, but more than half agreed. The barriers were clear: TIME and TEACHER COMMITMENT were the two main concerns.

The final three comments, quoted above, illustrate in micro the researcher's interpretation of the data as to staff readiness for a schoolbased antiviolence program. The first two comments [representing, if you will, twothirds of the teachers] are positive and indicate a readiness to go ahead with the project. The last comment indicates reluctance and/or lack of commitment to such a project, not seeing the need for it, perhaps representing the other third of the teaching staff.

The data collected was interpreted as a "go ahead" for the project. The researcher approached the Director of Education for funding for the purchase of the Second Step program. She agreed to fund the purchase of the Grades 1 3 Second Step Kit and the Grades 4 5 Kit, along with the training videos and the support video called FACING UP for Grades 2 6.

The research findings from the questionnaire were reported back to the staff at the February staff meeting, along with the conclusion that the staff was willing to support the project. The concerns voiced in the questionnaire responses that all staff be on board and committed to the project was stressed. It was also reported that the Director of Education had agreed to fund the purchase of the resources needed. The materials were ordered before the end of February.

Community Meeting #4

Objective: To inform the Parent Council regarding the results of the Staff Inservice and Questionnaire.

Methodology: Oral and Video Presentation.

The researcher requested time on the February Parent Council meeting agenda to report back regarding the February Staff Inservice and further developments to date.

At the Parent Council Meeting of February 15th, the researcher updated the parents as to the results of the staff questionnaire THE TEACHER IS THE KEY. The plan for implementation of the Second Step program was outlined. The agreement of the School Division to provide funding for the materials and resources was announced. The fact that the materials had already been ordered was shared.

A request that the Parent Council consider buying the PreSchool/ Kindergarten component to the Second Step Program was put forward by the researcher.

It was noted that there should be a special community meeting held to announce the implementation of the Second Step program. This meeting

would need to be advertised in order to attract more community members to come out to it.

During the month of February, the researcher wrote an interim report on the project to the McDowell Foundation Coordinator, Verna Gallen. This was a requirement of the grant contract. The report is included in Appendix 15.

On February 21, the researcher gave a 75minute presentation on the A.S.A.P. process at the Prince Albert Teachers' Convention. The session was attended by 22 teachers. The information created a lot of discussion and positive feedback.

March, 1995

The Second Step resource materials arrived in March. This included the Grades 1 3 Kit and the Grades 4 5 Kit with instructions as to how to expand the program to Grade 6. Both kits and videos were left in the staff room for the following weeks for staff perusal.

The Grade 4 5 Kit can be easily expanded to include Grade 6. But it is not recommended that the Grades 1 3 Program be expanded down to include Kindergarten. In talking with the Program Consultant of the Committee for Children in Seattle, the researcher became aware of this oversight.

The importance of being sequential, starting with the youngest and being ongoing over several years, cannot be overstated. When dealing with behaviour change, one is looking at a long process. One can use the analogy of trying to break a bad habit, which requires time and patience, and a lot of support, and still is not always successful. Starting at Kindergarten is important and this fact was overlooked initially. The PreSchool / Kindergarten Kit costs the same as the Grade 1 3 or Grade 4 6 Kit.

Community Meeting #5

Objective: To Update the Parents as to Developments in the A.S.A.P. implementation process.

Methodology: Oral Presentation and Perusal of Materials and Resources.

The researcher attended the March 22 Parent Council Meeting. The Second Step materials and resources were displayed for the parents' perusal. Plans for implementation were outlined.

An update on the Social Skills program in progress was also given. The five students participating were almost finished the course and seemed to display positive changes in their behaviour.

Feedback from parents of the students participating in the Social Skills program regarding the evening parent meetings was reported as being positive. Some of the parents of the five students had participated in several evening sessions and found them informative.

April, 1995

In the meantime, a Train the Trainer course for the Second Step program was offered in Regina the last week in April. Prior to this, the nearest training course was in Seattle or Boston.

It was an ideal opportunity for the researcher, in terms of location as well as timing just as we were about to plan our staff inservice. Research findings to date confirmed the need for a strong, welltrained leader to head the implementation. But the researcher did not want to take more time away from the classroom at this time. The Division's Special Education Consultant was contacted and urged to attend. She decided to do so. This was beneficial to the project as she came back from the experience informed and eager to get involved.

Upon the return of the Consultant, the researcher discussed with her the importance of the Preschool / Kindergarten program and explained the problem of lack of funding for it. The Consultant was also convinced that the program needed to start with the very young and continue over a long period of time in order to be successful. She was able to provide funding for the purchase of the PreSchool / Kindergarten Kit with the stipulation that it be available to her when needed. It was ordered immediately. (Unfortunately, it arrived too late for the PreSchool or Kindergarten teacher to be part of the May June pilot.)

Research and Data Collection #5

Objective: To Collect Data About Staff Attitudes and Expectations Regarding a Classroombased Violence Prevention Program.

Methodology: Individual Indepth Inteviews by Researchers.

It was important for this research project to conduct personal interviews with each teacher implementing the program to gather information regarding their attitudes and expectations towards the program. The difficulty was finding time in a busy school year. Given the fact that March was an extremely busy month with report cards and parent/teacher/student conferences, followed by Easter Break in April, the Research Day was scheduled for Thursday, April 27.

An Interview Schedule signup sheet was posted in the staff room a few days before the interviews, with 8 slots available. Also prior to the research day, two substitute teachers were booked to cover the researcher's classroom as well as the classroom of the teacher being interviewed.

The four research questions developed were as follows:

1. What are your expectations regarding the program?
2. What help do you need in implementing the program?
3. What problems do you foresee?
4. What will indicate to you that the program has been successful and/or worthwhile?

(Interview Questions, Appendix 16)

The interviews were scheduled for 40 minute duration, which turned out to be a good length of time. It was necessary to double up on one time slot to accommodate nine teacher interviews. This left only twenty minutes per teacher which proved to be frustrating as it was not enough time for an indepth interview. (Interview Schedule #1, Appendix 16)

The method of data collection during the interview was simply to quickly jot down as many of the comments as possible, verbatim. This was done in the role of researcher, asking questions and listening, not as the implementer or facilitator of the program. The researcher did not attempt to provide advice, information, or guidance during these interviews.

The following is an attempt to summarize the comments made by the staff members during the interviews. A complete record of the interviews is included in Appendix 16.

Summary of Research and Data Collection #5:

1. WHAT ARE YOUR EXPECTATIONS REGARDING THE PROGRAM?

• One expectation that surfaced in a number of different comments was that the program would provide a format for the whole staff to use in disciplining children:

"I think it will give the teacher some tools to use with the classroom so that when kids come in to the classroom from the playground, there's a 'recipe', a formula to use some structure and routine that we can go through rather than scrambling with each issue as it comes up. If they've got that tool, it will start carrying on into their own problemsolving."

• A second expectation was that there would be carryover in that students would learn how to solve their own problems better, as above and that they would, over time, learn how to behave better:

"In the long run, you hope that children exhibit better behaviour. Through the role plays, games not as violent, not as aggressive, more caring. But I don't think that we'll really see it in the year taught. But throughout the six years here, immersed in the program for six years those are the kids that are going to benefit from the program in the long run, not the short."

Another teacher made a similar statement:

"I am expecting that students will become aware of their behaviour, that they'll ... learn skills to teach them how to be kind, caring, respectful, ways to channel that anger instead of violence." Another teacher said: "Perhaps [the program will] offer them some constructive ways of dealing with violence when they encounter it and make constructive choices in terms of their reactions/responses to the violence they encounter."

• A third point is that there would be more consistency in the way the staff handles problems which would then allow kids to know what consequences to expect for their actions:

"If the staff is all handling situations the same way, the kids will know what to expect. It will lend some consistency to discipline."

Another teacher also thought the structure and continuity would be beneficial:

"With the Second Step being structured, we wouldn't miss a concept that's important. The students will know what is expected from all teachers from a program that continues every year. Because teachers do teach differently and have different classroom techniques for classroom management, [with Second Step] the students will recognize the continuity from the year before."

• There were two mentions of the importance of parental involvement in the program:

"I wish that somehow this [program] could go to the community, to the parents, victims of abuse, to see that this isn't the right way to live, to pass it down to their children ... a first step in a long process of changing."

One teacher response was it is good to have a program but:

"The program won't work unless everyone [even staff who aren't teaching the program] takes the zeroviolence angle and take every opportunity to push respect of other people ... the program isn't the beall and the endall it's what you do beyond the program that makes the difference ... it's how you carry it out."

• A final set of expectations:

1. " It will hopefully fit well with our current curriculum and with current school objectives.
2. We will be able to measure or observe the results of the program.
3. That there will be adequate materials and support to do a good job. (In order to implement something we need to have the easiest process both for beginning and maintaining the program in order to carry it out.)
4. That it will make a difference."

2. WHAT HELP DO YOU NEED IN IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAM?

Teachers basically voiced the needs stated in the following quote:

• "The program materials, the chance to look through it and get a good grip on it, where it starts, where you're going to go with it, to talk to people who have done it or watch it being done through videos. ... Talking with each other about how we're going to do it. How does this fit into our curriculum, our subject areas."

Another teacher put it this way:

"A general statement is: anything that would make it easier. Extra time to survey materialsand to be guided through the program; guidance as to what it will replace in the current program and whether that is acceptable to the department; materials handy, wellorganized, accessible."

• There was concern for getting help in dealing with specific scenarios:

"Some areas I might need more guidance if some sexual abuse comes up, how do you deal with it?"

• Another need voiced was for "support from staff, parents and other professionals that may already be involved in this type of program."
• Again a concern about commitment to the implementation from all teachers surfaced:

"It's important to have feedback and participation from everyone if we're implementing as a school. Things that are to be done as a school it's administration's job to make sure everyone is doing them. There needs to be effort on part of administration to provide the focus and to provide the structure to make everyone accountable, whether it's a focus group where everyone shares or something else."

• A final need expressed was for an evaluation process:

" I want to have some kind of judgment or evaluation of the program and of the results, something tangible to prove it is important."

3. WHAT PROBLEMS DO YOU FORESEE?

Problems foreseen were as follows:

1. The busy time of year:

"Timeframe, implementing math and now this. Time of year all that's going on. ... We really need to be implementing in September, there are definite constrictions on the validity of the way we're trying to assess the program, due to the research grant timelines."

2. The need for strong leadership to keep the program going:

"What seems to happen when you're trying something new is things go along, then run into a snag or plateau we need someone to keep it moving and time to reflect on what we're doing, pull together and talk about it."

3. The need for commitment from all staff:

"When you're trying to implement a school program, it's hard to have the commitment of everyone. When you're trying to implement, it's important that everyone have the same level of commitment." and "Teachers not wanting to take the time out of the regular program, not seeing the value of the program. It needs to be a whole school approach."

4. The need for consistency:

"Are there rules and expectations and consequences when something goes wrong on the playground or in the hallways, is there a consistent way to deal with it I don't know if it's in the program but it should be. We don't have violence per say but we have negative behaviour and it would be nice to have general rules that we all use. We have rules but I don't know if we follow up on them enough. I think we really have to look at that as a followup to the program or go handinhand with the program. I don't know if the program will work if we have so many loose ends and no continuity in consequence. If we're trying to implement a schoolbased antiviolence program I think we should be more unified in our way of handling situations."

5. Sharing materials:

"Dividing the materials [might be a problem] ... if people don't have the materials in their room, they won't use it. They're too busy.

6. Negative Parents:

"How we relate it to the parents, because of home situations some families might feel threatened. How do we present it to them."

7. How to involve parents:

"I'd like to see parents groups come out, maybe evenings in the fall, to view films on violence, because we're working towards antiviolence in the school, getting along in the classroom, treating each other fairly. There needs to be strong parentparticipation in order for the program to be effective."

The following quote combines #6 and #7:

"The main problem is abusive parents or parents that don't want to change their own behaviour and won't support the teachers trying to change their child's behaviour. Those that are causing the problem will deny the problem and won't be supportive, or will support their children changing but won't want to change their own behaviour. There should be a type of parenting program to go along with it."

8. Little time left in the school year to pilot the program:

"A two month deadline is not really enough time. ... It's not practical to do it for only one year. Give it a five year shot, modifying as you go, but keeping the general structure the same."

9. Problems scheduling:

"This program requires much more time in the curriculum than what the department says should be spent on healthrelated issues ... As with anything, to make it work you should be doing it for 1520 minutes a day. Slotted into the two health periods per week, replaces the health program. Is it better and is that enough time to do a good job?

One positive thinker summed it up this way:

"I don't anticipate problems. If we decided to do this, then we'll do it. And something will go by the board. We have hopefully made this a priority and so, if we don't spend as much time on something else, fine, we'll make sure that we do this program. It overlaps very nicely with the health and social studies and it is pertinent, important and easy to integrate. ... Hopefully, you've done the ground work. If anything will scuttle it, it would be people who are not committed.As far as I'm concerned, you have done the ground work."

Another teacher voiced a similar concern:

"Teacher acceptance they have to be shown the value, they have to have the program explained so that they can see it's worth the time and the effort to implement it. ... That's change theory if you're not convinced of the necessity to implement a program, your involvement will be superficial, if any."

4. WHAT WILL INDICATE TO YOU THAT THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL AND/OR WORTHWHILE?

Several indicators of success concerned positive changes in student behaviour:

"Seeing the students take some of the responsibility for their problemsolving. ... Less and less time spent in the classroom talking about these issues and more time spent instructing. More time teaching them how to help themselves and less time mediating. ... Less of a lineup at the office after recess or after lunch."

"Improved student behaviour, students being more caring and considerate of others, students being able to solve their own problems, being able to think for themselves. Less time in the classroom being spent on silly little problems. I like to teach the kids that they are responsible for their own actions and that they can solve problems for themselves. Hopefully by talking through their problems, they'll find their problems aren't so hard to solve. Maybe, in an ideal world, the whole atmosphere and climate might change. This school is a really good school, but we might see an improvement. Kids helping each other to solve problems, especially the older kids helping others to work through them, like Peer Mediation. Maybe after years of the program we wouldn't need a Peer Mediation program because they're all doing it!"

"The biggest one is student behaviour. Seeing the concepts applied in the classroom and the hallways. Like instead of saying "get out of my way " (push) it will be "excuse me". I think we'll find, if the program is working, that each new year we'll spend less time on classroom management and more time on teaching. We'll see it in the hallways, in assembly, in gym, students respecting students, and teachers as well respecting students."

"Children behaving in a kind and respectful way. And adults, too, because it's going to impact on the adults as well. We all will begin to change our attitudes and our behaviours, we'll all be impacted by the program. We have to walk the talk, otherwise it's not going to work for the kids. ... Less problems on the playground and in the classroom. ... Ideally, wouldn't we want to see them not choosing violent programs on TV, taking the learning home? But how would we measure that? ... The boys wouldn't wrestle so much, the girls wouldn't be so catty."

"Teacher comments, parent comments, any visible change in student behaviour either physical or verbal in student interactions."

Three teachers talked about the difficulty of collecting empirical data:

"It would be nice to say we had a number of incidents before [the program] and a lesser number after, then you can say the program had been successful, but I don't think you can get that kind of empirical data from incidents. We're too busy to document. And so many [incidents] occur outside the classroom, on the playground, in the hallway. Teacher observation it would be nice if after the teacher did her section on nonviolence she could say that there were fewer conflicts or confrontations that she's had to deal with. I think that would be very hard to measure."

"Very hard to measure. You can't measure what is in people's minds. There is no way we will know until we see these children grow up.

"You need to have a baseline, as in how many incidents of violence were happening objective data that can be validated otherwise you have to rely on the subjective."

One teacher felt success could be measured by the feedback received from the community:

"The response of the children, response from the community, a carryover you're not going to get a response from the community if there isn't a carryover. ... When you read a book, being able to identify in their play and show n' tell, the kind of toy and game is violent we should hear that kind of feedback if we're presenting this effectively in the classroom. It becomes part of the language in the classroom and accepted behaviour on the playground. ... We need to decide on consequences as a group, in the focus group sessions as to how it is going. All of that needs to be shared and hopefully a consistent way to handle it comes out of that. ... It has to be right for us and our community. That will take a bit of work and time to come up with."

(Interviews #1, Appendix 16)

Community Meeting #5

Objective: To Update Parents as to the A.S.A.P. process at Prince Charles School.

Methodology: Oral Presentation by researcher.

The researcher attended the April 26th Parent Council Meeting. She informed the members that the fourth Staff Inservice was to take place on May 2nd. She gave a brief summary of the data collected during the indepth interviews, summarizing the responses and concluding that most staff members have a good awareness of violence and a strong commitment to violence prevention in the classroom.

It was decided that it was important to invite all parents into the school to launch the implementation of the classroombased Second Step program. Wednesday, May 10th was chosen as the date for the meeting. It was decided to send a letter home to every family attending Prince Charles school, via the students. (Parent Letter, Appendix 18)

The meeting would be facilitated by the researcher, kept brief but informative, showing the preview video of the Second Step program, followed by a question period and open discussion.

May, 1995
Staff Inservice #4

Objective: To Provide an InDepth OverView of the Second Step Violence Prevention Curriculum.

Methodology: Oral and Video Presentations, Guest Speaker, Group Discussion and Reflective Feedback.

The researcher spent 2 day of school time (and two days of her own) preparing for the halfday inservice, knowing that the presentation would affect the way the program was implemented. The data collected through teacher comments to date, as to what help was needed, was addressed in the planning of the inservice. (See SECOND STEP INSERVICE AGENDA, Appendix 17)

Most staff members were present, including the itinerant Physical Education and Resource Room teachers, but not including the .2 Music teacher. The Principal was present for most of the afternoon. Lunch was provided for all attending, funded through the grant. (One staff member had to leave early, therefore missing out on the instructions as to expectations outlined in the Teacher Action Plan described below.)

Support staff and substitute teachers were invited to the inservice (and lunch) as well. Support staff attended the initial presentations by the researcher and the guest speaker (the consultant who attended the Train the Trainer seminar). Three substitute teachers attended the entire presentation.

The researcher had facilitated the preparation of an individual binder per classroom, copied from the original binder provided in each of the two kits. The researcher believed it was important that each teacher have their own binder for quick reference to and about the program. The lesson cards can be divided up and kept in individual classrooms with a minimal amount of sharing.

The researcher had also prepared a teacher handout called Teacher Action Plan for Second Step Implementation (Appendix 17). The action plan required regular feedback to the researcherfacilitator in the form of reflections on the classroom implementation. The first one was to be handed in at the end of the second halfday of inservice, and the next ones at the end of each of the four following weeks, to June 9th. This feedback was requested to address the issue of accountability in terms of participation in the implementation by individual teachers.

The afternoon was spent going through the three main program components: empathy, impulse control and anger management. Each segment was illustrated by a video presentation of a minimum of two lessons at different grade levels. The Second Step training videos were rather repetitive, but offered a good overview of how the program works with various age groups. The Transfer of Training and Implementation segment of the inservice had to be rescheduled for the staff meeting the following week, due to lack of time, as had been foreseen and indicated by the word optional on the inservice agenda.

There seemed to be a general acceptance of the program presentation, as indicated by the positive feedback and remarks made during the discussion periods and feedback sessions of the inservice. The afternoon ended with instructions on expectations regarding the followup inservice and the Teacher Action Plan.

Staff were requested to take their second halfday inservice before May 12, to provide a maximum of the remaining school year for the pilot. A second requirement was that this be an inschool preparation time to be taken in groups of three or more. This was to provide an opportunity to collaborate with colleagues in further review of the program and in development of individual plans for implementation. It was also to address the issue of commitment to the implementation on the part of all staff members.

The division consultant requested the opportunity to either team teach the Second Step program with one of the classroom teachers at Prince Charles School or teach the Second Step program by herself, in one of the classrooms, while the classroom teacher observed. She wanted to broaden her experience with the program by working at the classroom level on a shortterm but continuous basis. It was arranged that she would implement the program at the Grade 6 level, delivering the program to the classroom twice a week for the next three four weeks. The Principal would observe the program implementation.

Reporting Back:

On May 1st, the Prince Charles administrative team had attended a School Board Meetingfor the division. The researcher gave a brief report on the Schoolbased AntiViolence project to date. The researcher outlined the origins of the initial project proposal and the subsequent developments within Prince Charles School and Community. The Second Step program and the upcoming classroom pilot were briefly described. Also described was the Social Skills pullout program now being delivered at Prince Charles School as another component of a schoolbased violence prevention program. The report ended with a brief summary of school plans for the fall: a fullscale implementation of the Second Step Program, a continuation of the Social Skills program, perhaps a Peer Mediation program, and plans for a parent component to involve the community in the process.

On May 3rd, the division consultant that had attended the Second Step Train the Trainersession gave an enthusiastic report on the Second Step program to the administrators of the divisionwho attended the monthly Principal's meeting.

Staff Inservice #5

Objective: To provide Opportunity for Preview of Program Videos, Lesson Preparation at Grade Level and Teacher Collaboration Time in Planning for Second Step Minipilot.

Methodology: 2 day Inschool Time provided for Small Group Work.

Teacher Action Plan to be used for Guidance.

Step 2 of the Teacher Action Plan was to take a second 2 inschool lesson preparation and planning time for implementation of the Second Step Program.

On the afternoon of May 10, three classroom teachers took their second 2 day planning time. Substitute teachers were provided for each classroom. The Principal and Researcher also took some time to spend with the teachers during their planning session.

A second group of three took their 2 day planning time the following morning, May 11. Three substitute teachers were also provided for their classrooms. Again, the researcher spent some time with the group.

The groups used their time becoming more familiar with the Second Step Teacher's Guide, Videos and the Lesson Plans for their grades, as outlined in Step 2 of the Teacher Action Plan. (Appendix 17)

Research and Data Collection #6

Objective: To Collect Data on Teacher Experiences in Implementing a Classroombased Antiviolence (social skills) Program.

Methodology: Reflections on the Process, Written by the Classroom Teacher and Handed in Weekly to the Researcher.

The teachers were requested to complete a Reflections sheet, initially after the second halfday planning time, and then at the end of each of the following four weeks.

Seven classrooms were implementing the program. (Kindergarten was not included in the pilot because the materials for the Kindergarten program had not arrived.) The researcher was one of the seven classrooms but did not provide reflective feedback in order to not contaminate the findings through personal bias.

Summary of Research and Data Collection #6:

Three of the six teachers returned the Step 2 Action Plan page to the researcher.

The three classrooms who provided feedback named the time and date of their first Second Step lesson and projected the number of lessons to be completed, averaging 12 lessons per classroom. Two of the three offered observation of a Second Step lesson at the researcher's convenience. The third teacher left that part blank.

All four Reflections are recorded in full in Appendix 17. Below is a summary of the teacher reflections on the implementation of the classroombased Second Step program.

Reflections I was received from four classrooms after the Second Inservice Day.

Comments about the program were generally positive and ranged from being "excited about this program" to "it is proactive instead of reactive" to "I like the way the binder and the cards are set up ... very userfriendly" to " this program will be very good for all the students".

Comments about the planning time and inservice ranged from "were adequate perhaps a bit too much" to "the video was too long and repetitious ... could have [been reduced to] one hour at the most" to "the 2 day inservice was a very relaxing, informative session".

Some concerns were about the time of year: "how much I will cover before the end of June" and "do we do a few concepts slowly and effectively or do we rush through them just giving the students a taste of the materials?"

Another concern was about accessing library materials to supplement the Second Step program. A third concern was about lack of Aboriginal content in the program lessons and photo cards.

We addressed the concern regarding library materials by giving the resource list from the Second Step binder to the librarian with a request to locate the books we did have and to include in her book orders for next year some of the books we didn't have.

The researcher checked in with teachers, on an informal basis, at various times over the next few weeks. At one point the researcher wrote a request for Reflections to be handed in to the researcher on the Staffroom blackboard and left the request there for a week.

The researcher did not visit any classrooms to observe a Second Step lesson.

The researcher received back three of a possible six Reflections II after May 19th. Again, the comments were mostly positive. Comments on the program included:

"I like the way the lessons proceed";

"Students are responding well";

"The lessons are easy to follow. No prep time needed, really";

"We love the roleplays. The kids are eager to participate".

"Over all, we all like the lessons and transfer of training seems to take place naturally."

Some concerns that surfaced were with classroom control during lessons:

"I feel somewhat unable to keep lessons moving smoothly students off task, etc" and "I am having a little difficulty getting the children to be quiet and follow the rules".

Another concern was with teaching a program for the first time:

"I feel somewhat unsure of my ability".

A final concern was that sharing the lesson cards between classroom was proving a bit frustrating.

One teacher commented on the transfer of training as a teacher:

"Everytime a problem arises now, I think back to Second Step, either the videos we saw or some of the information we've read".

The researcher received one Reflections III after May 26th. Most statements in this reflection verified statements from other teachers in previous reflections:

"It is still early in the program no carry over from playground problems seen yet. The comfort level is good. A great deal of enjoyment seen in 'roleplaying' activities. Students have trouble settling down for discussion and questions. Could be the time of year?"

The researcher received one Reflections IV after June 2nd. This reflection brimmed with enthusiasm after experiencing a "transfer of training" with the students using the Second Step problemsolving lessons:

"Right after our lesson today we had a playground situation develop that was parallel to the lesson we had just discussed. We used the steps and reasoning from our lesson and the class applied the skills very well. I think they realized why we are spending time on Second Step! And, we solved the problem!!"

The researcher has also experienced this type of "transfer of training" where the class seems to have an "Ahaa" moment when the problemsolving steps come to life and really "fit" the situation, helping to solve an actual problem. But the greatest changes the researcher has noticed have mainly been with her own behaviour, learning to use the steps to help direct students to solve their own problems. It really works!

A few teachers mentioned to the researcher that they really had nothing new to say so they had stopped writing their Reflections. Plus it is a busy time of year and there seemed to be too many other demands on their time.

Community Meeting #6

Objective: To inform the Parents of the Prince Charles School Community about the Implementation of the Classroombased Antiviolence program called Second Step.

Methodology: Oral and Video Presentation and a Written Handout.

The Parent Meeting was held on May 10 at 7 PM as planned, in the Prince Charles School Gym. Fifteen parents plus one of the Superintendents of the School Division attended the meeting.

The researcher briefly reviewed the A.S.A.P. project being carried out at Prince Charles School. She presented information about the Second Step Program, then showed the Preview Video. She ended by giving each of the participants a copy of the Steps for ProblemSolving and Anger Management. (Appendix 18)

A discussion followed with some questions from parents regarding the program. There seemed to be a positive reaction to the presentation, with comments affirming parental approval of the implementation. The meeting lasted a little over 30 minutes.

June, 1995:

In early June, in consultation with the principal, the researcher selected dates for the final three research steps: a second interview day with a time slot for each teacher involved in the classroom pilot to reflect on the classroom pilot experience from a personal point of view; a focus group discussion with the entire staff to share personal experiences as well as to reflect on the process as a staff and to plan for the fall implementation; and an individual interview with the principal of the school for an administrative viewpoint.

Dates were suggested to the staff at the June staff meeting. It was indicated by staff members that it was important to leave the interviews and focus group to as close to the end of the school year as possible, in order to maximize the length of the pilot time. June 19th was chosen for teacher interviews and June 27th was chosen for a noon hour / bag lunch focus group session. The Principal and the researcher agreed to meet for an individual interview during the last few days of the school year as well.

Research and Data Collection #7

Objective: To Collect Data about Teacher Experiences in Implementing the Classroombased AntiViolence Program called Second Step.

Methodology: Individual Interviews with Participating Teachers by the Researcher.

The second (postpilot) Interview Day was held on Monday, June 19th, as planned. The same format was used as on the first (prepilot) Interview Day. Five teachers were interviewed on Monday and two teachers were interviewed in the days following.

This postpilot interview was to ascertain primarily the quantity and quality of teacher participation in the pilot and secondly, what teachers thought of the program now that they had tried it. A third area of questioning concerned changes in behaviour as a result of the program: had teachers noticed any positive changes in student behaviour and had they noticed any changes in their own behaviour over the last month.

The fourth group of questions addressed the implementation process itself: did teachers have enough help and preparation for implementation, and did the problems they had foreseen in the prepilot interview surface?

The fifth area of questioning concerned the value of the program: was the program worthwhile, could it be successful and are the teachers willing to implement the complete program next year?

Finally, the researcher asked the teachers what they would like to talk about or hear about at the upcoming focus meeting planned for June 27th.

Summary of Research and Data Collection #7

The teacher responses are recorded in full in Appendix 19. The following is a summary of the responses to each area of questioning.

1. How many lessons were you able to teach in the last four weeks since the inservice?
   How often did you do a lesson?
   What time of day worked well?
   
   The 7 classrooms piloting the Second Step program taught a total of 55 lessons during the 4 5 week period. The number of lessons taught ranged from 1 lesson to 17 lessons per classroom.
   
   Most teachers taught the program twice a week, but felt that once a week, with lots of emphasis on transfer of training, would be better.
   
   Teachers taught the lessons at different times of the day, but most felt it was important not to rush. Therefore it was important to choose a time that did not end abruptly with recess or dismissal. Most lessons were taught right after lunch or right after afternoon recess.
   
2. How is it working?
   Do you like the program?
   What do you like about it?
   Is there anything you don't like about it?
   
   Most teachers felt the program was working well. The program is well laid out and does not require a lot of preparation. The picture card stories and role plays capture the children's attention and enthusiasm for the most part.
   
   Other positive comments included it being "easy to do at the drop of a hat", well sequenced and repetitive, and a good fit with the curriculum.
   
   Negative comments focussed mainly on implementing the program at this time of year. One teacher mentioned having difficulty with the role plays, in terms of keeping students on task. She felt the role plays in the second part were perhaps not as good, but also the problems could be due to the restlessness of the students at this time of year. A second teacher also mentioned problems keeping the students focussed. She attributed this to the time of year, as opposed to the program being deficient. A third teacher mentioned she felt rushed, again because of the time of the year. A fourth teacher felt pressured because of the time of year and is looking forward to a fall implementation when she will be able to do it "properly" and "give it the time to develop".
   
3. a. Have you noticed any positive changes in student behaviour?
   b. Have you noticed any changes in your own behaviour?
   a. Teacher responses indicated that it was too early in the implementation to identify specific behaviour changes yet six out of seven teachers were able to give at least one example of a positive change in student behaviour attributable to the program lessons. These examples ranged from more participation in role plays to children using the problem steps when coached by a teacher.
   
   One teacher felt that as a result of the program "it is really easy to pick out the teachable moments to reinforce the lessons ... the transfer of training happens quite naturally". Another teacher said "it's more training myself than training them", a thought that was echoed by other teachers as well as the official research on Second Step implementation:
   
   "It will take us as teachers, and the children as well, a while before it becomes a formed habit as an alternate strategy to violence or uncontrolled behaviour."
   b. Most teachers felt there was not yet any change in their own behaviour in terms of the Second Step program lessons. Three teachers could recall times when they had used the problem solving steps outside the lesson time and the results had been positive. One teacher stated:
   
   "It's sure a lot easier to deal with the discipline problems when I can say: What is the Problem? What are some Solutions? and follow the steps through".
   
   A third teacher says she has started using the problemsolving steps at home with her own kids and it' s working well.
   The general feeling seems to be summed up in this teacher's statement:
   "I guess the fairest thing to say is 'not yet'. The seed is planted and in my mind, often after the fact, I realize I've missed an opportunity, but it will get better. This isn't a content kind of thing it's all about carryover and utilization on a regular basis. Using it is what it's all about."
   
4. Have you had enough help for the implementation or were some major things missing in the preparation?
   What facilitated or hindered the implementation?
   What , if anything, would you do differently next time?
   Did the problems you had foreseen surface or not? (We referred to the notes from the previous interview to recall what problems were foreseen.)
   
   Teacher responses indicated that the amount and type of in servicing and preparation time provided (one full day) had been adequate. The video presentations of actual lessons and the time provided to work with other teachers were mentioned as being very helpful.
   
   One problem that hindered the implementation was sharing the kit with another classroom, as mentioned previously. Another problem that hindered the implementation was the time of year, also as mentioned previously.
   
   As to the problems foreseen, some did surface and some did not. The concern about negative parent reaction was no longer a concern: "The program is so subtle, I don't think an abusive parent would ever come in charged up and be verbally abusive to a teacher because of the program."
   
   The concern about coming in to the school as an outsider to teach the program and the kids "not buying into it because of that" proved to be no problem, in terms of the kids participation, but with regards to the transfer of training component, being an outsider was a problem:
   
   "Being an outsider coming in ... There can't be transfer of training. And not being in the school at all, makes it even worse, it's too artificial. Even though the kids bought into the program, and they really did, they knew it was an artificial situation. I'm not sure I'll offer to do it again for somebody. ... Team teaching would maybe work. But the classroom teacher needs to be doing it."
   
   The final problem regarding teacher commitment to the implementation was mentioned by two teachers and addressed in this way:
   
   The problem I foresaw of whether teachers were committed to the implementation and would make it a priority well, I haven't seen or heard of it being a problem but that may surface at our focus group meeting. We all are busy, we all have other things we could be doing rather than implementing something new. But everybody needs to contribute and provide feedback. My reference to lack of commitment "scuttling the project" the whole team must be playing with nobody sitting on the bench. I have no reason to think that everybody isn't on board, but I would be disappointed if there was a lack of commitment and it wasn't dealt with. I don't think it's fair to the teachers or the kids either if everybody's not using the program. If the kids have had no training in the strategies to solve problems or give IMessages, for example, then it's not fair to the supervisor on the playground."
   
5. Do you think it was worthwhile to implement the program?
   Do you think the program is or can be successful?
   What are the indicators?
   Are you willing to implement the complete program next year?
   
   All teachers answered yes to the first two questions. They definitely feel it was worthwhile to pilot the program, even for such a short time, and they believe the program can be successful. The indicators for success mentioned were that the children enjoyed the program, that the program provided stepbystep problemsolving techniques and communication skills that everyone can use and that teachers and students had already started to change some of their behaviour even in such a short time.
   
   All teachers indicated they were willing to implement the complete program next year.
   
6. What would you like to hear about at the focus group meeting?
   Teachers indicated that they would like to hear about teacher participation in the program and about the problems and successes they had experienced in the implementation. Another suggestion was that the group also discuss plans for the fall implementation and how to promote it with the parents.

Research and Data Collection #8

Objective: To collect data re: teacher experience with the implementation of A SchoolBased AntiViolence Program 19941995.

Methodology: Focus Group discussion.

The focus group discussion was held on Tuesday, June 27 from 12:00 to 12:45 over lunch. Eight teachers, the principal and the researcher attended. The researcher developed the discussion stems based on teacher requests as well as project objectives.

Focus Group Discussion Stems:

1. Please share how many lessons of the Second Step Program you were able to cover, how often you taught a lesson and what time of day worked best for you.
2. Please share some experiences you had with the Second Step program, in terms of successes and/or problems.
3. How does this impact on implementation of the program this fall; i.e. what are some suggestions as to what we need to do for a successful implementation.
4. Are there any comments or suggestions as to Guidelines for other teachers/staffs/schools who decide to implement an ASAP program?

Summary of Research and Data Collection #8:

Teachers shared their individual experiences with the program in a round table discussion, each teacher in turn reporting back the number of lessons they had covered, how often they taught a lesson, what time of day worked best for them and examples of their experiences with the program, as per data recorded in Appendix 19.

The general feeling was positive. Teachers were interested in the other teachers' comments on the pilot and the sharing was useful and beneficial for that reason. It was suggested that a good time to begin implementation of the Second Step program in the fall was in October, after classroom rules, routines and guidelines for behaviour have been established.

There was some discussion as to the importance of teacher commitment that all teachers need to be using the language and the problemsolving steps in order for the program to be successful. One suggestion to address this issue was to hold regular monthly meetingsfocussed on discussion of the Second Step program and the process of implementation. These meetings would provide a time to share successes as well as problems with the program but would also help to encourage full participation by all teachers as well as to maintain enthusiasm and commitment for the project.

Other suggestions for the fall included a community meeting to introduce the program to parents; parent education meetings as per the sixsession series called A Family Guide to Second Step (Appendix 10); inservice for new classroom teachers to prepare them to teach the program; inservice for teachers not teaching Second Step to familiarize them with the problemsolving and anger management steps so they can use them effectively outside the classroom; regular newsletter blurbs regarding the program with an antiviolence focus; modelling roleplays at assemblies; and guest speakers from other schools to speak about their experience with antiviolence programs. It was suggested that each teacher be sure to communicate with the teacher of the following grade as to what they had covered this year in the program pilot, in order to facilitate that teacher's implementation.

This was as far as the discussion went, as the 45 minutes was up and the bell rang for afternoon classes. It was unfortunate that we did not have time for further discussion, to develop a more comprehensive view of the past school year, in order to gain a perspective of the whole process rather than focussing almost entirely on the Second Step pilot of the last two months. But there was no further opportunity to continue the discussion.

Research and Data Collection #9

Objective: To Collect Data regarding the Implementation Process of A SchoolBased AntiViolence Program from the Perspective of a SchoolBased Administrator.

Methodology: An Indepth Personal Interview with the Principal.

On Friday, June 30th, the Principal and researcher met for a onehour interview regarding the ASAP implementation process and school experience from September 1994 to June 1995. The questions asked were directed towards the administrator's perceptions of: the value of the project; the successes and/or problems of the project to date; teacher commitment to the project; how the project has impacted on the school over the past year; and suggestions for other schools implementing such a project.

Summary of Research and Data Collection #9:

Comments regarding the value of the program and project:

"I think it's worthwhile. It's one of those things that fits well with what we've been doing and also with the current health program. Anytime that we can do things that create a better atmosphere within the school, it's always worthwhile. The Second Step program has lots of potential. It gives a guided reference to many of the things that we need to discuss with the kids. If the program is followed and maintained consistently throughout the school, it can make a difference."

Comments regarding supporting staff and developing/ maintaining teacher commitment:

"I think we have enough staff on board to maintain the program. Those that are a little reluctant will need a little more encouragement.

There needs to be opportunities for the staff to discuss whether the program is working or not, toexchange ideas about how to make it better and to celebrate their successes. .... The idea of allowing staff time to get together to discuss the program once a month is a good idea. .... We'll have to monitor it from an administrative point of view to see if there's any problems and to help ease the staff over the trouble spots. ... We'll have to ask the teachers if they're using the program and how it's going. If teachers are communicating at the division meetings or other times, hopefully they'll ask for help.

Hopefully if things are in place and teachers see the value in it, it will be carried out. If the teachers don't have a commitment to the program and don't see the value in it, you can monitor it all you like and it still won't happen. No change every happens by edict. It cannot be topdown. I have not seen any significant or lasting change that ever happened as a result of something coming out of an administration office, just because they wanted it to happen. Unless you've done the ground work and people are committed, it won't be carried out. They might pay lip service or pretend, but the moment you leave, the program will end. ... You have to have at least 70 80 % commitment from a total staff before you can expect there will be a permanent or ongoing change. I think we have that commitment.

Even with commitment, it still needs support, for example, celebrating successes. But you have to identify the blockers and either do something about them or do an endrun to bypass them. That's where a knowledge of the staff is really important."

Comments regarding how the project impacted on the school:

"In general, there was a positive effect. It gave teachers a little different peg to hand their hat on. They can use this structure a little more easily it's open ended enough to allow for many different teaching styles and yet have the main thrust carry through."

Comments regarding community involvement:

"Other than the Parent Council, we didn't have much parent involvement. If the program is going to make any lasting change [in the community] other than what happens in the school and on the playground, it has to have a broader impact. It has to move from the school into the community. This will take leadership from outside the school. We don't really have the time to get this program into the community."

Comments regarding the Social Skills and Peer Mediation programs:

"We've had programs like those around for years, programs that allow us to do what we need to do to make the school function smoothly. The structures are good, if there's a need for them. There is no need for Peer Mediation at this school. For a Social Skills pullout program there is [a need], to learn an alternative to fights or arguments, to deal with situations that happen."

Suggestions for other ASAP projects:

"I think the way that it's been done here has been entirely appropriate, with strong staff support and lots of discussion. ... You need to assess the school and the probable support you'll receive from the staff. You need to build a strong [support] base before you implement the program. You can't force anyone to do something when they don't perceive the need for it. ... First you need knowledge of your staff. You have to be able to create group cohesiveness. You have to have trust before anyone will listen to you. You [this project] benefited from a situation where the staff already has that trust towards administration.

There is no point in trying to implement something like this if you don't have the support of the administration. If they don't support you, they're going to be blocking. You can't do an endrun past an administrator."

Limitations of the Research Project

The main limitation of this research project was the dual role required of the researcher facilitator. It was difficult to balance those two roles simultaneously. The role of researcher is defined as an observerrecorder of the process; the role of facilitator requires direct involvement and impact on the process. The dual role played by this researcher perhaps contaminated some of the data collected or impacted on the direction of the project because the participating teachers would have a difficult time separating one role from another.

The researcher becoming an administrator partway through the year could have impacted on the process as well. The question of positional power facilitating the implementation could be posed. But the researcher does not believe that her position changed the process to any great degree.

The fact that the researcher had a grant to facilitate and document the process obviously impacted on the success of the project. The attention the project received possibly helped to give it more status with administration, teaching staff and the community, resulting in increased cooperation. The funding available also facilitated the process, giving the researcher the necessary time to develop and document each step. When other schools initiate a similar project without the documentation component and the funding, greater difficulties in cooperation and collaboration could be encountered.

The final limitation of this research project was the short timeline. Any curriculum innovation requires considerable time to create lasting change, especially when it requires behavioural change. Evaluating this program implementation at the end of the first year certainly does not allow the necessary time for accurate outcome measurement. The project is therefore limited to implementation evaluation. Yet, even this type of evaluation would be rather premature in this case, as the program implementation was not complete.

According to research, evidence suggests that lesson presentation in the first year of implementing a program tends to be rather mechanical and superficial, as teachers struggle to find time for the program, learn the elements, and present it successfully to students. Teachers tend to be quite skilled by the second or third year of implementation. Therefore the option to concentrate on implementation evaluation during the first year is appropriate and can be useful. Looking at whether teachers are benefiting from adequate training, material availability, supportive colleagues and a school discipline policy that is compatible with the program strategies and objectives would be the limitations of the evaluation implementation after one year of the new program.

This project included only 4 5 weeks of program implementation. To try to assess the quality of training received by students or measure student learning would be inappropriate, but even to attempt to evaluate the implementation in the terms above could be considered premature:

"Teachers need time to learn how to effectively teach a new program, and schools need time to provide a context that supports teachers and students during the learning process." (Program Evaluation: Choosing a Direction, page 4, Appendix 20)

Summary

The purpose of this project was to document the process of implementing A SchoolBased AntiViolence Program following the guidelines outlined in the ASAP resource package published by London Family Court Clinic.

The project focussed on the following questions:

• Why do schools need to be involved in violence prevention?
• Who should be involved and how do you involve them?
• How do you facilitate awareness and professional development sessions for school personnel and for parents?
• What are the criteria for selection of an effective and comprehensive antiviolence program?
• What should a schoolbased antiviolence program be comprised of?
• What schoolbased and classroombased violence prevention programs or resources are available and appropriate?
• What are some of the roadblocks and how does one deal with them?
• What are some of the shortterm positive results in implementing such a program?
• What are some of the longterm positive results, according to other research?
• What are some recommendations or guidelines for other Saskatchewan teachers who wish to implement a schoolbased antiviolence program?

Over a period of one school year, September 1994 to June 1995, the researcher documented all activities focussed on establishing a schoolbased antiviolence program at Prince Charles School. Resources and materials were researched and recommended. Data was collected and analysed for the purpose of developing guidelines for other Saskatchewan educators who wish to implement a schoolbased antiviolence program.

Conclusions

The researcher concludes that the implementation of A SchoolBased AntiViolence Programwas a valuable experience for Prince Charles School staff, students and community for the reasons outlined below.

First, the objectives of the research project were fulfilled.

The documentation makes it clear why schools need to be involved in violence prevention: we are in an excellent position to make a difference.

The documentation outlines who needs to be involved in the process and how to involve them. All the major stakeholders in education, in terms of staff, administration, students and parents along with the broader community, need to be involved. How? Awareness sessions and in services for parents and staff, as well as a classroombased program will facilitate the process.

The criteria for selection of an effective antiviolence program is clearly outlined and the components of a comprehensive schoolbased antiviolence program are described.

Excellent resource materials are researched and recommended: the A Schoolbased Antiviolence Program produced by the London Family Court Clinic for guidance and teacher inservice; the Second Step Program with the classroombased component for students, the staff training videos for teacher inservice and the family series for parents and the community at large; the video Brother of Mine for teacher and community awareness sessions; and the Stewart Resource Centre materials for additional resources for specific needs.

Some of the roadblocks, such as lack of time, lack of teacher commitment, lack of administrative support, lack of parental and community involvement, are addressed at various times throughout the documentation.

Shortterm positive results are identified in teacher comments and data collections; longterm positive results are addressed in the Limitations of the Research and the Recommendations for Further Research sections.

Recommendations or guidelines suggested by the research data collected are recorded in the following section.

The researcher concludes that the project documentation should provide an effective resourcefor other educators implementing schoolbased antiviolence programs.

Secondly, the researcher believes that the teacher comments in the data collected indicate that the project had an empowering effect upon the teachers. Once the teachers were sure that the program fit well with the curriculum, and had the materials and were provided with time for preparation, the enthusiasm for the program began to surface.

The desire for structure and continuity in dealing with behaviour problems and discipline was clearly evident in the data collected. The need for consistency in developing and enforcing general rules, expectations and consequences in a wholeschool approach was clearly documented. The hope expressed was that the ASAP program would help the process by providing a framework for developing such rules.

After using the classroombased social skills / violence prevention program called Second Step for only a short time, teachers seemed to feel positive about the potential of the program to make a difference. Many teacher comments indicated that they could already see some positive changes in student behaviour, as well as in other teachers' behaviour, including their own. Other teacher comments indicated that they believed that they would see these behaviour changes over time, with consistent use of the program in a wholeschool approach.

When teachers feel empowered by a process, personal and professional growth is a direct result and all members of the school community are affected in a positive way. Everyone, but especially the students, gains from the process as the teaching and learning environment is enhanced by this growth.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are based on the research project called Implementation of a SchoolBased AntiViolence Program at Prince Charles School.

1. Resources:

It would be ideal to have all of the following resources but the first two are very affordable and provide a good base for beginning. Money for the third, fourth and fifth resources listed below may become available as the project unfolds and the value of the programs are recognized.

1.1 The resource considered essential for implementation of a schoolbased antiviolence program is the A SchoolBased AntiViolence Program (ASAP) resource package produced by London Family Court Clinic (Appendix 2). The information provides excellent guidance for the implementation process as well as facts and overheads for inservice and handouts. The video provides an effective introduction to the project and the manual contains 65 strategies for classroombased activities. This resource should be available free from your School Board office.

1.2 The video Brother of Mine: Transforming a violent culture is a valuable resource for Parent and Teacher inservice and awareness sessions. This resource is reasonable at $20 per video. (Appendix 5)

1.3 The SECOND STEP Violence Prevention Curriculum provides an excellent classroombased program that meets the criteria for an effective antiviolence program. This resource is rather costly, at approximately $400 (Canadian funds) for each division's kit, with Kindergarten (PreSchool) being a separate kit. (Appendix 10) Other classroombased resources are available through the Stewart Resource Centre (STF).

1.4 A Family Guide to Second Step provides a sixsession series for parents and community members to enhance the learnings of students receiving the Second Step program at school. This cost is close to $500 Canadian as well. (Appendix 10) Other resources for parent information and awareness sessions are available from Public Libraries, the Stewart Resource Centre, local Mental Health Clinics, Emergency Women's Shelters, Police and Corrections and other community organizations. Speakers on the cycle of violence and violence prevention are also available through local community organizations.

1.5 The Social Skills program known as the Day Treatment Program (Appendix 8) or a similar, intensive program for atrisk children is highly recommended. The language of the pullout program should be coordinated with the language of the classroombased program in order to enhance the positive effects of both programs on the behaviour of the students already displaying antisocial behaviour.

2. Awareness sessions for the Community:

It is recommended that parent and community information nights and awareness sessions be ongoing. It is useful to have a video component along with a community speaker as a basic format to each community meeting. A monthly meeting throughout the school year would be an appropriate goal. A structured program such as A Family Guide to Second Step is also recommended as a parent component to the classroom program.

Involve as many people as possible along the way, from all levels of administration, parent and community groups, the teaching and support staff, and other community agencies. The more people involved, the more chance you will have to find the funding you may need to purchase materials or provide inservice.

3. Teacher Inservice:

Awareness sessions for teachers, beginning with the ASAP video, should also be ongoing. These sessions should not be added on to an already demanding school day. It is ideal that these sessions be part of the monthly staff meeting and/or be included in some of the yearly staff inservice sessions, as are other curriculum innovations. Solicit administration support for these sessions.

During the awareness sessions, keep the focus on the "Big Picture" of violence. Promote a vision of violence as a societal problem based on systemic attitudes fundamental to North American culture, rather than thinking of violence as a local or school problem. Keep in mind that the best route to ending violence is to promote equality. Take every opportunity to address sexism and racism as the roots of much of the violence in society today. Address the issue of family violence and the detrimental impact it has on children caught in the cycle of abuse.

Do not let the "it's not a problem on our playground" attitude distract the staff. It is essential for the success of the program that the teaching staff see the need and value of such a program. They need to reminded that what we do in schools does make a difference. Talk about prevention and being proactive as opposed to being reactive. Using the terms prosocial or social skills program rather than an antiviolence program seems to alleviate some misapprehensions. Stress the fact that violence is a learned behaviour that can be surplanted with prosocial behaviour.

During the inservice, emphasize the necessity of a wholeschool approach, with the classroom teacher doing the implementation but all teaching staff and support staff being able to use the language with students. Develop a plan that demonstrates clear expectations of teacher responsibility and that demands accountability in using the program. Monitor the program implementation and address any lack of commitment that becomes evident.

Adequate teacher preparation time and inservice for specific programs is essential. i.e. For classroom implementation of the Second Step program, one full day seemed to be appropriate. With the pullout Social Skills program for children atrisk, special inservice sessions are required. As to implementing a Peer Mediation program, teacher, staff. and student training is necessary.

Ongoing staff focus groups, division meetings and celebrations throughout the implementation will help keep it alive. Make it an information item at each staff meeting as well and put updates in your school newsletter.

4. Strong Leadership:

Change needs to be spearheaded by change agents. It is a challenging role in an exciting process. Here are a few words of advice:

• Think big, start small.
• Develop Partnership don't try to do it alone.
• Be patient change takes time and always involves some pain. Deal with resistance as it comes, but don't take it personally. (Training Tips, Appendix 20)
• Network, involving as many people as possible in the project. (Twin with another school, perhaps?)
• Celebrate each achievement the subject can be demoralizing, especially at the beginning of the process during the awareness sessions.
• Break the process down into small goals to avoid feeling overwhelmed.
• Support the classroom implementation by modelling empathy for teacher concerns and commitment to the program, sharing successes and discussing setbacks.

If your staff decides to implement a classroombased program, it would be beneficial to get as much training as possible. (i.e. Train the Trainer sessions.) But don't feel you have to be the expert in every situation; just admit it when you don't know, ask for help and figure it out together.

Focus on the positive, stress being proactive rather than reactive and model this. Talking about developing prosocial behaviour is much more acceptable to some people than talking about implementing antiviolence programs.

Lastly, take care of yourself. This type of project can be very draining, both physically and emotionally as well as spiritually. But it is also an exciting and rewarding process, as the people involved begin to feel empowered when they see that they really can make a difference!

Recommendations for Further Research

As mentioned earlier, a oneyear research project that involves a plan for longterm change in human behaviour, cannot attempt to measure behaviour change. Even shortterm measurement is premature after only one year. This project could only attempt to evaluate implementation during the first year, and even that was somewhat premature.

Further research could involve the assessment of student knowledge and understandingabout emotions, interpersonal conflicts and problemsolving strategies after one full year of a prosocial skills program. Cognitive changes assessed through interviews, questionnaires or quizzescould be more easily observed than behaviour change.

After two to three years of the program, behaviour changes should start to be observable. Are students beginning to demonstrate problemsolving and anger management abilities? Do students use what they've learned to solve conflicts with peers, to channel anger into constructive action, and to enhance their relationships with peers and adults.

Because of the limitations and biases inherent in measurement of behaviour, research literature recommends the use of a combination of approaches. Class and playground observations by trained coders, individual student ratings provided by "experts" such as teachers and peers, comparing the disciplinary referrals to the office over time, and student selfreports of fighting, victimization, and social support can provide important and complementary sources of information. (Appendix 20) A more detailed description of choices in measurement of behaviour changes is available by writing to the Committee for Children (Appendix 10) and from the literature on behaviour change measurement.

Tracking a few aggressive students and a few passive students over a number of years, noting behaviour change on a clinical behaviour scale, could provide interesting data. Observations on acceptance by peers as well as measurement using classroom profiles of student acceptance/ rejection would add authenticity to the data collected through the behaviour scales.

It would be useful to collect data that would indicate to educators when behavioural change may be looked for. At present, we know that looking for behaviour change after only one year of a prosocial skills program is premature.

Evaluators at Committee for Children and the University of Washington have a study underway that may enable educators to design realistic implementation and evaluation plans. (Prevention Update, Appendix 20)

Implementation of A Schoolbased AntiViolence Program at the Junior High and Highschool levels would be excellent research projects, as well. The implementation could be based on a format similar to this project, but the actual process would likely unfold in different ways, because of the many variables inherent in the process. Differences in age of students, issues of violence and conflict, leadership of the project, classroombased programs available, schoolbased programs available, staff and school personnel support, administrative support, and funding available would all affect the direction of the project.

Further research in this area is a necessity as school's grapple with the problems engendered by an increasingly violent society. Each research project addressing the issues of violence brings us closer to becoming a peaceful planet. It is this researcher's hope that this project will precipitate other teachers to tackle further projects of this nature. There is so much that we as educators, in partnership with our communities, can do!