A

staeta

vcvs

mD

1d

Commentary

Education Policy Implications from the Expert Panel on ElectronicMedia and Youth Violence

Maria R. Worthen, M.S.W.*U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC

bstract The research from the Expert Panel on Electronic Media and Youth Violence makes a compellingcase for why educators and education policymakers should care about the effects of media on youthbehavior, and the growing phenomenon of Internet bullying and harassment. The ability of the U.S.education system to respond is limited not only by competing instructional priorities but also by thegovernance structure of the education system itself. The federal role is limited to a proportionallysmall amount of funding for states and schools, to raising public awareness, and to providingresearch and data. States can set priorities, make requirements, and direct funding. Districts andschools ultimately have the most control over prevention program selection and setting social andbehavioral norms. Key implications of the panel’s research for educators and education policymak-ers include:

● Internet bullying is correlated with school behavior problems.● Internet bullying behavior may peak in middle school.● Internet bullying shares common predictors with verbal and, to some extent, physical

bullying.● Media literacy programs may mitigate the negative effects of electronic media on youth.

Specific recommendations based on these conclusions are discussed, and research priorities forthe prevention and education fields are identified. © 2007 Society for Adolescent Medicine. All

Journal of Adolescent Health 41 (2007) S61–S63

rights reserved.

vth

Bt

oqSCtrbh

Electronic media and youth violence is a broad field oftudy, as demonstrated by the research of this panel. Al-hough cyberbullying has been most in the headlines latelys a new phenomenon, one thing that the research from thexpert panel makes clear is the myriad of ways that elec-ronic media affect youth—and also how youth are havingn effect on electronic media.

One area of research on electronic media and youthiolence that does have a significant body of literature is theausal relationship of exposure to violence in movies, tele-ision, video games, and the Internet on children [1,2]. Withuch a robust body of research on exposure to television and

*Address correspondence to: Maria R. Worthen, M.S.W., U.S. Depart-ent of Education, 400 Maryland Ave. SW, Room 3W225, Washington,C 20202-6200.

cE-mail address: Maria.Worthen@ed.gov

054-139X/07/$ – see front matter © 2007 Society for Adolescent Medicine. Alloi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.09.009

ideo game violence, the panel has largely focused its at-entions on the emerging study of Internet bullying andarassment.

ullying and Harassment: From the Schoolyardo Cyberspace

Educators must play many roles to meet both the needsf their students and satisfy administrative and policy re-uirements. Recent education policy (the Elementary andecondary Education Act of 1965 as amended by the Nohild Left Behind Act of 2001) has tended toward a “back-

o-basics” approach, with a greater emphasis on math andeading proficiency. Without a solid foundation for theseasic skills in their earliest years of education, students willave a difficult time acquiring the skills needed in an in-

reasingly global marketplace, and the United States will be

rights reserved.

lmndvamah

peeaaftivispi

K

Ic

Iictt

I

lPiGso

I“

fcitss

md

Me

fnreamab

I

and

T

rpuoosoTcacE(SgdaS

T

Efissclici

S62 M.R. Worthen / Journal of Adolescent Health 41 (2007) S61–S63

ess able to continue its role as a leader in the globalarketplace. Nonetheless, students bring to the classroom

ot only developing minds but also the vulnerabilities of theeveloping psyche. Unfortunately, many students face aariety of barriers to learning each day at school. Feelingnxious, unsafe, or unable to focus can be precipitated by ayriad of factors coming from home life, the environment

t school, events in the community, hunger, and mentalealth disturbances.

Instead of waiting for problems to develop, preventionrograms can stop them from occurring—or mitigate theirffects. Prevention is more cost-effective (financially andmotionally) than reacting to negative events or behaviorsfter they happen. Knowing more about the characteristicsnd predictors of Internet bullying and harassment can in-orm the approach of a prevention program. More informa-ion about the consequences of bullying and harassment onndividual lives, academic achievement, and the school en-ironment may help educators identify the cause of behav-oral or academic difficulties. Sharing this information withchool administrators, colleagues, and potential preventionrogram funding sources can help to make the case formplementing a bullying prevention program.

ey Implications for Educators and Policymakers

nternet harassment has a negative effect on victims’lassroom behavior

The finding that there may be an association betweennternet bullying, victimization, and behavior problems [3]s significant. Although more research should be done toorroborate this finding, educators should be aware of In-ernet harassment as a possible cause of classroom disrup-ions that take away from instruction time.

nternet bullying may peak during middle school

Educators should be aware of the relationship of gradeevel to bullying incidence to best target prevention efforts.reliminary evidence seems to indicate that Internet bully-

ng peaks during middle school. For example, Williams anduerra [4] found that both verbal and Internet bullying rose

harply after fifth grade, peaking in eighth grade, and fallingff a little in subsequent years.

nternet bullying shares common predictors withreal life” forms of bullying

Williams and Guerra [4] also found that three differentorms of bullying—Internet, verbal, and physical—all shareommon predictors. This is perhaps the most importantmplication for educators wishing to prevent bullying—ifhese preliminary findings show that all forms of bullyinghare the same predictors, then it may be plausible that a

ingle bullying prevention program, targeted at these com- i

on predictors, could impact the prevalence of these threeistinct forms of bullying.

edia literacy programs may mitigate the negativeffects of electronic media on youth

Wolak et al [5] make the case for media literacy trainingor students, teachers, and educators, arguing that an aware-ess of some of the pitfalls of Internet use would helpeduce distressing situations and behavior. Because mostlectronic bullying and harassment occur out of school [3],nd youth are most exposed to media violence after school,edia literacy programs [5] can give youth the knowledge

nd skills to make smart decisions about Internet use and toe critical of the violence they see in the media.

mplications for Education Policy

Before determining the role educators should play incting on the implications of the panel’s research, it isecessary to understand the capacity and limitations of theifferent levels of the U.S. education system.

he role of the federal government

The federal government must generally play a limitedole in most local education matters. In fact, the U.S. De-artment of Education (ED) is expressly prohibited by stat-te from exercising “any direction, supervision, or controlver the curriculum, program of instruction, administration,r personnel of any educational institution, school or schoolystem, or over the selection of library resources, textbooks,r other printed or published instructional materials . . .” [6].hrough the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, EDollaborates with other federal agencies to raise awarenessbout current issues, provide training to school preventionoordinators, and distribute funding for violence prevention.D provides direct support to state education agencies

SEAs) and governors through the Safe and Drug-Freechools and Communities Act (SDFSCA) State Grants pro-ram. Local education agencies (LEAs) can also receiveirect assistance from ED through the SDFSCA State Grantsnd through discretionary grant programs such as Safechools/Healthy Students.

he role of SEAs

SEAs play a key role in directing funding and priorities.ach SEA can adopt its own prevention strategy, which mayt within a broader learning supports framework. Althoughtates must collect and report data on a limited number ofchool violence indicators, SEAs have a great deal of dis-retion in determining the data elements that will be col-ected for assessment and surveillance. Therefore, if a statedentifies electronic media and youth violence as an area ofoncern, it may incorporate prevalence measures of victim-zation and perpetration of Internet bullying and harassment

nto its data collections.

oasto

T

pafbgtsitclt

sepcstI

D

bisctwwtcmsts

mssin

wbna

iivams[npFs

kbvimoamtcillaos

R

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

S63M.R. Worthen / Journal of Adolescent Health 41 (2007) S61–S63

An increasing number of states are requiring the devel-pment of antibullying policies. There is little informationbout the development, implementation, or effectiveness ofuch policies, but LEAs that are required to do so may wisho expand definitions of bullying to include the Internet andther electronic media.

he role of LEAs and schools

Within the education system, schools and districts canlay the biggest role in addressing youth violence and neg-tive behavior—electronic or otherwise. Districts can useederal, state, and local funding (as allowable) to supportullying and harassment prevention and media literacy pro-rams. Using SDFSCA funds that are subgranted to themhrough the SEA and the governor’s office, LEAs mayelect evidence-based programs that address prevention ofssues that are identified through needs assessments. Al-hough prevention programs address a variety of factors thatontribute to violent behavior, some states have also passedegislation or established regulations to regulate school In-ernet use or provide consequences for electronic violence.

Schools and districts should conduct regular needs as-essments by collecting data on youth behavior and schoolnvironment to make the case for and guide preventionrogram selection. For specific guidance on developing aomprehensive approach to school health and safety,chools may wish to look to the Centers for Disease Con-rol’s School Health Guidelines to Prevent Unintentionalnjuries, Violence, and Suicide [7].

iscussion

Educators should be aware of the effect that violence,ullying, and harassment can have on children’s well being,ncluding behavior and academic achievement. As the re-earch of this expert panel shows, educators should beoncerned about the issue of electronic media in the lives ofheir students. Electronic media play an important role in theay most youth communicate with each other—social net-orking sites, e-mail, cell phones, instant messaging, and

ext messaging can play integral roles in youth communi-ation and recreation. Television is a constant presence inost youths’ lives and not just outside of school. Most

chools use television or video programming as an instruc-ional tool, and therefore have a responsibility to guidetudents in the thoughtful consumption of electronic media.

Schools should focus on preventing bullying and harass-ent by promoting a school culture that does not tolerate

uch behavior. Schools should also promote media literacyo that youth can view the unavoidable presence of violencen the media with a critical eye. Educators themselves will

eed to become more tech-savvy, familiarizing themselves

ith the most popular means of electronic interaction usedy students. Two ways to do this include exploring socialetworking sites and establishing a dialogue with studentsbout their electronic media habits.

Given the common predictors shared by electronic andn-person forms of bullying and harassment, schools shouldmplement or continue to implement known effective pre-ention programs that acknowledge the role of technology,nd also employ the communication methods that youth areore likely to use (i.e., using text messages to send mes-

ages to program participants). However, Ybarra and Leaf’s3] finding that the majority of Internet bullying victims areot bullied at school may imply that there is an invisibleopulation of children that are at risk for victimization.urther research is needed to gauge the prevalence andignificance of this finding.

Research priorities for education should include morenowledge about best practices for preventing electronicullying/harassment, and for mitigating the effects of mediaiolence. The data presented by this panel have importantmplications for practice; therefore, it is important to keep inind the limitations of the quasi- or nonexperimental meth-

ds used in some studies. At the same time, we mustcknowledge the necessity of using quick turnaround surveyechanisms to stay informed of quickly evolving youth

echnology use. The prevention and education fields shouldommit themselves to agreeing on common definitions andnstruments—and more investigation into innovative but re-iable forms of survey methodology. Finally, the panel madeittle mention of the use of technology in courtship violence,nd gender- and sexuality-related harassment. This is an areaf concern to many youth, parents, and educators, and one thathould be addressed by prevention researchers.

eferences

1] Slaby RG. Media violence: effects and potential remedies. In: Katz-mann G, ed. Securing our Children’s Future: New Approaches toJuvenile Justice and Youth Violence. Washington, DC: The BrookingsInstitution, 2002:305–37.

2] Huesmann LR. The impact of electronic media violence: scientifictheory and research. J Adolesc Health 2007;41(suppl):S6–S13.

3] Ybarra ML, Diener-West M, Leaf PJ. Examining the overlap in inter-net harassment and school bullying: implications for school interven-tion. J Adolesc Health 2007;41(suppl):S42–S50.

4] Williams KR, Guerra NG. Prevalence and predictors of internet bul-lying. J Adolesc Health 2007;41(suppl):S14–S21.

5] Wolak J, Mitchell KJ, Finkelhor D. Does online harassment constitutebullying? An exploration of online harassment by known peers andonline-only contacts. J Adolesc Health 2007;41(suppl):S51–8.

6] The General Education Provisions Act, as amended by the ImprovingAmerica’s Schools Act: 20 U.S.C. 1232a.

7] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. School health guidelinesto prevent unintentional injuries and violence. MMWR 2001;50(No.

RR-22).