Skip to content

Hurting others hurts us: Study

18-Jun-13

Although the victim is usually the focus in discussions about the impacts of social cruelty, everybody involved in it feels some pain or distress, research shows. Two recent studies offer fresh insights into the impacts on bystanders, both those who witness cruel behavior and those who feel compelled to participate. First the latter, from the University of Rochester.

“When people bend to pressure to exclude others, they also pay a steep personal cost. Their distress is different from the person excluded, but no less intense,” said Richard Ryan, psychology professor and co-author of “Hurting You Hurts Me Too: The Psychological Costs of Complying With Ostracism.” The study found that the distress comes from feelings of “shame and guilt, along with a diminished sense of autonomy,” said Nicole Legate, lead author, because “we are social animals at heart. We typically are empathetic and avoid harming others unless we feel threatened” (which says something about bullies too).

But even observing social cruelty exacts a psychological price, an earlier study at Brunel University in the UK found. “Bystanders are significantly affected by the bullying they witness or hear about, so much so that they may be at an increased risk of self-harming behavior,” wrote Prof. Ian Rivers. “The single most significant predictor of suicide risk among bystanders was found to be powerlessness [emphasis his].” He and colleagues also found “higher rates of absenteeism and substance abuse, along with depression and anxiety among school pupils who had witnessed bullying.”

All of which points to the importance of agency and community as well as empathy: empowering all school community members, especially students, with the understanding that each one is key to the well-being of each other as well as the community as a whole. The authors of the University of Rochester study wrote that their findings suggest “that the psychological costs of rejecting others is linked primarily to the thwarting of autonomy and relatedness.” How important it is, then…

  • Not to represent young people as potential victims, as has typically been done in bullying-prevention and Internet-safety messaging.
  • To give them and all involved the tools to be active contributors to their community’s well-being – social literacy tools (see “Related links”).

The powerlessness Dr. Rivers’s work turned up in bystanders points to those needs too. It’s what is mitigated by the agency of what scholars and game designers refer to in self-determination theory, which says “people across cultures have basic human needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness and meeting these hard-wired needs leads to greater happiness and psychological growth,” according to the University of Rochester researchers. Interesting: I’m seeing more and more points of intersection between social literacy, safety, school, and good game design (see the links just below).

Related links

Share
Filed in bullying, cyberbullying, Literacy & Citizenship, Risk & Safety | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0) »

Pinterest for consuming, curating, producing

18-Jun-13

I love seeing the clear distinction being made by this teacher between consuming vs. producing social media – and the learning value being placed on the producing. Seems obvious, I know, but I still see peers – including media researchers – referring to today’s media as merely consumed.

“As I looked into using Pinterest as an educator tool,” writes educator Lisa Nielsen, “I found that most people I asked were using it more as a consumption or curation tool.” Curation is great – that’s an important way to learn media literacy (basically, figuring out what’s viable and useful, based on one’s interests and goals) – but, as we learn from the research in Hanging Out, Messing Around, and Geeking Out, there’s a great deal to be learned in producing social media as well. It’s a progression that many users go through, as the title of the book suggests, from casual interaction to the trial and error of “messing around” with interests, ideas, and media to serious “geeking out” – developing a professional-level proficiency in or with media, in any craft, art, science, or profession. [Of course Pinterest is only one example of the many social media tools that can be used for curating and producing as well as consuming and socializing, including Twitter and Tumblr and mobile apps such as Intagram and Vine.]

Lisa likes that Pinterest, known as a social-scrapbooking tool (see this) can be used on any device. She lists five ways it can be used for education-related producing and sharing, though these seem geared for school-wide more than classroom use, but certainly classes can post everybody’s science fair project and teachers and students can post visual, annotated book lists. Teachers, students, parents, and grandparents can come up with lots more creative ways to use Pinterest for learning.

Related links

Share
Filed in education, education technology, School & Tech, Social Media, social media research | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (0) »

Parenting the littlest media users: Important study

13-Jun-13

Increasingly, digital media are just part of the rhythm of everyday US family life, a significant new study of parents of young children indicates. The study, “Parenting in the Age of Digital Technology,” conducted by Northwestern University’s Center on Media & Human Development, surveyed a nationally representative sample of more than 2,300 parents of children 8 and under about how media – both “traditional” and digital – inform and fit into their everyday lives and parenting. The authors found that “78% report that their children’s media use is not a source of family conflict, and 59% said they aren’t concerned their kids will become addicted to new media,” according to US News & World Report.

Table from Northwestern U. report

What’s most on parents’ minds (Source: the “Parenting in the Age of Digital Technology” report)

What does concern those parents is the impact of lots of screen time on kids’ health – “the negative impact screen time has on kids’ physical activity levels. More than 60% said video games result in less movement by their children, with similar proportions saying the same about TV, computers and mobile devices,” US News reports. The authors themselves wrote that parents “are more likely to find a positive than negative effect of media and technology on many of their children’s academic skills.”

Family media use very individual

But it’s so individual from family to family, both the report and author, professor and tech parenting expert Lynn Schofield Clark indicate. Dr. Clark, who attended the release event in Washington, had an important take-away: “We don’t all experience media in the same way.” For some families in some neighborhoods, for example, staying inside playing video games might be safer than playing outside.

In her post about the report in PsychologyToday.com, she points to what I think of as an ideal approach to parenting where media’s concerned: “an ethic of respectful connectedness,” Clark calls it. “To the extent that media can help parents and family members to stay connected and to remain respectful of who they are and where they’ve come from, media can be seen as useful and helpful in relation to family goals.”

Less is better? It depends

So far in the digital age, our society tends to believe less media is better, but “not all parents can engage in the kind of concerted cultivation activities hat tend to make media use lighter,” Clark writes. Families “may face economic, health, language, or job- or transportation-related challenges…. ‘Helicopter parenting’ and concerted cultivation are rooted in the idea that young people can achieve and improve their lives through participation in existing societal structures, whether that’s school, sports or the arts. But while families facing greater economic challenges hope that these things will help, they don’t trust that they will [emphases hers]. They look to their families, neighborhoods, friends and communities to help their children develop the resilience they will need to face the challenges of racism, prejudice, and structural inequalities.”

Clark cites the view of Prof. Vikki Katz at Rutgers University, “who has studied Latino immigrant parents and their children” and said at the conference that “it’s important not to pathologize families who have economic struggles. They have the same goals as the rest of us when it comes to wanting the best for their children and in their hopes for the ‘American dream,’ and those of us working in areas of policy, research, and industry need to seek to provide support for them on their own terms.”

Some other interesting findings

  • Tablets not babysitters: I’ve often heard it said that, when parents are busy, they just hand kids a smartphone or tablet. Not true. This study shows that they’re “more apt to turn to toys or activities (88%), books (79%) or TV (78%). Of parents with smartphones or iPads, only 37% reported being somewhat or very likely to turn to those devices.”
  • Early media independence: Lots of parents use media with young children, the authors report, “but this ‘joint media engagement’ drops off markedly for children who are six or older.”
  • Parenting no easier. These parents use digital devices a whole lot, but most (70%) “don’t think they’ve made parenting any easier.”
  • Socio-economic differences: Families with incomes of $25,000 or less are more likely than families with incomes of $100,000 or more “to turn to TV for educational purposes” – 54% vs. 31%, respectively. It may have something to do with language, I think, that the researchers found that “lower income parents are also more likely to think TV has a ‘very’ positive effect on children’s reading (23%, compared to 4% among the higher-income group) as well as their math and speaking skills.” The authors add that “similar differences are found in parents’ views about the positives and negatives of computers as well,” which makes me wonder if “computers” means the Internet.
  • Media time management. Professor Clark recommends that, instead of asking how much screen time is too much, parents might “think about teaching time management” so they can learn develop their own self-regulatory skills. And Prof. Barbara Fiese at University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, encourages “healthy habits in the whole ‘family ecology’” of which media is just one part, Clark reports.

The Northwestern researchers divvied the various kinds of media environments that parents have created for their families into three buckets based on quantity of screen time: the 39% of households that are “media-centric” (11+ hours of screen time/day, with children spending 4-5 hours a day on-screen); the 45% that are “media-moderate” (spending just under 5 hours on-screen/day, with children spending just under 3 hours); and the16% that are “media-light” (generally with higher levels of income and education and spending even lower amounts of time with screen media, with children spending under 1.5 hours/day on-screen).

What does all this say about parenting these days? To Lynn Clark, it suggests that “parents will have to prepare children for a world that requires intentional effort as we seek to maintain the bonds that matter most to us.” I’m with her on that and, if I can riff on it a little bit: Successful participation in social media (not to mention school, work and all social spaces in our kids’ futures) is conscious participation. It’s both social literacy and media literacy – a “respectful connectedness,” as Lynn put it, online and offline. It doesn’t only defeat bullying and other anti-social behavior, it develops the kind of protection that’s preventive and permanent – with our children all the time and all their lives – critical thinking and resilience. And we know from the research that it increases academic as well as social success.

[The authors of "Parenting in the Age of Digital Technology" are Ellen Wartella, PhD, Vicky Rideout, MA, Alexis R. Lauricella, PhD, and Sabrina L. Connell, MA. Dr. Lynn Schofield is author of The Parent App: Understanding Families in the Digital Age.]

Related links

Share
Filed in digital media, Digital Tech, family tech policy, Parenting, Social Media, tech parenting | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0) »

Point & counterpoint on young video gamers: 2 studies

11-Jun-13

What an interesting point and counterpoint about videogames have been turned up by two just-released studies, one from Northwestern University in the US and one by University of Victoria in Canada:

On the one hand: “Parents assess video games more negatively than television, computers, and mobile devices. More parents rate video games as having a negative effect on children’s reading, math, speaking skills, attention span, creativity, social skills, behavior, physical activity, and sleep than any other medium,” write the authors of “Parenting in the Digital Age” at Northwestern (stay tuned for more of their findings).

On the other hand: When asked by the Toronto Globe & Mail about teens’ video game play, Kathy Sanford, author of the Canadian study said:

“What we found [after following a group of 13-to-17-year-old videogamers for five years] was that what they were learning was a whole lot deeper and more profound than we had imagined, or that you can see from watching them. They are doing a lot of problem solving and strategizing. They are learning collaboration and leadership skills. But the most profound thing that got me really thinking about their civic engagement is that they are actively making ethical and moral decisions all the time. They are trying out roles through the characters in the stories. If they act badly, if they choose to be evil, they see the significant results of each of the decisions they make.”

I’ll shortly be blogging about both studies more, but I found this contrast interesting, and I hope parents concerned about frequent media reports about videogames’ negative effects might find some comfort – or at least some talking points for further discussion – in Dr. Sanford’s findings, because she also told the Globe & Mail that “educators and parents need to learn about this world if they hope to connect with kids who are comfortable moving in an alternative landscape.”

Related links

Share
Filed in Gaming, Parenting, social gaming, tech parenting, video games, videogames, videogaming | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (0) »

Undercover mom on Instagram

10-Jun-13

One of her aliases is CupcakePuppy44. That’s parent, author, and former teacher Sharon Duke Estroff’s Instagram handle. She created a join account with her 10-year-old after some stonewalling and some external investigation (with kids, fellow parents, and psychologists), not to mention a certain amount of hounding by her daughter, who – not unlike other 4th- and 5th-graders – indicated she was “the only poor, deprived soul in a school full of Ugg-wearing, iPhone-toting, whatevering children.”

Sharon – who wrote a wonderful series of guest posts here in NetFamilyNews as Undercover Mom in Club Penguin, Stardoll.com, Poptropica, and BarbieGirls.com in 2009 – is as thoughtful as ever about kids in mobile apps. Don’t miss her thorough investigation into Instagram for Scholastic, with three main points called “lessons” that a lot of parents suspect but would probably like to hear more on (she also offers four brief safety “rules” for underage Instagram use which make a lot of sense). What I love about Sharon’s approach is the balance that parents deserve: She provides both the upsides and the downsides, and she’s not out to scare anybody. That’s real child and parent advocacy.

Some how-to’s from our own Instagram guide

Our own Parents’ Guide to Instagram at ConnectSafely.org has a little more detail on what to do if stuff comes up. Sharon mentions hearing from a 9-year-old named “Hannah” that her “first follower was this weird old man” (that would be only one kind of “stranger” any user with a public account could encounter, many also being friends of friends of peers). Sharon asked her what she did, and Hannah said she “deleted him” but he “came back two days later.” In a situation like that, we tell parents in our guide, you can…

“Block someone if necessary. If someone’s harassing you, such as repeatedly tagging you in photos you don’t like, you can block them so they can’t tag you or mention you in comments. They also won’t be able to see your profile or search for your account. To block a user, go to his or her profile and select the Menu button on the top right side, then select ‘Block User.’ (Android users, go to the profile and tap the three small squares, then select ‘Block User.’)”

Relieved but conflicted

We also tell parents how people can untag themselves, manage their profiles, think about privacy, and be a good friend in the app. And we have some closing thoughts about parenting on the mobile platform at the end (page 6 of our short-and-to-the-point guide).

As for Sharon’s undercover experience (the first time I’ve known her to go in cognito in an app), sensible as always, she – probably like most of us – “was left relieved … but also conflicted. The democratic platform of social media means that the ability to censor material or share it on an age-appropriate basis
is nearly impossible.” I appreciated her wisdom in concluding that, though it’s tempting to say no altogether to social media, “as our children grow, our ability to control their interaction with technology shrinks. The best we can do, as parents, is be there, strapped in beside our kids, making the journey down this uncharted digital road together.”

Related links

Share
Filed in Parenting, Social Media, tech parenting | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (1) »

Exploring what parenting & social media are teaching us

08-Jun-13

NetFamilyNews is less and less about tech parenting and more and more about just parenting (and in every other way working with) children and young people in this networked world. That’s because – over the 15 years I’ve been on this beat, this exploration – it has become clearer and clearer that this time of discontinuity (and how we’re dealing with it) is so much more about our humanity than our technology. In social media, it’s ourselves we’re sharing; it’s not the text, photos, videos, likes, comments, and followers that matter so much as the people behind them. We just get so distracted by the newness of this user-generated media environment in which so much of us and our lives is shared. There is more sharing, certainly; there might also be more self-knowledge, self-acceptance, and social-emotional intelligence emerging, depending on how we choose to see this time and its media.

So that said, give yourself 23-and-a-half minutes to watch this profound, deeply loving talk about (non-tech) parenting by Andrew Solomon. It was posted this past week and has already been viewed, as of this writing, 249,520 times. Of particular interest to me in the context of social literacy and identity exploration by young people online and offline was what he says about self-acceptance, family acceptance, and social acceptance.

Solomon’s talking about what he learned during the years of research for his latest book, Far from the Tree: Parents, Children, and the Search for Identity. It’s about parents raising exceptional, in some cases exceptionally challenged, children. Toward the end of the years of interviews and research he put into it, he decided he wanted to start a family, Solomon says in the talk. So people would ask him, “How can you have children when you’re studying everything that could go wrong?” His answer was, “I’m not studying everything that could go wrong. What I’m studying is how much love there can be even when everything appears to be going wrong.”

Share
Filed in Parenting, Social Media, tech parenting | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (0) »

Wisdom about bullying from a former target

06-Jun-13

There’s probably no better testimony to the power of social-emotional learning than this UK student’s poem about what happens to the “bully” when victimizing someone else (don’t miss this 1:25 min. video of Garrett reading his poem). Garrett was a student at New Line Learning Academy in Maidstone, Kent, UK, when he read this poem in 2011 (he may still be, since it’s a school for students aged 11-18). His poem reflects the healing that comes from the awareness and resilience that social-literacy training develops.

Garret reading his poemHis school adopted school-wide social-emotional learning guided by an SEL program called The Ruler Approach based at Yale University’s Center for Emotional Intelligence. Staff there posted this video on YouTube, reporting that, “after reading this poem in public, [Garrett] received a standing ovation from his class, and the bullying ceased.” If educators are considering showing video for class discussion on bullying or peer victimization, consider this one rather than any video purely about victimization, which can be demoralizing and can suggest to students that social cruelty is “normal.” Social norms research shows that when people understand that negative behaviors aren’t actually something that most people or “members of our school community” engage in, whatever negative behaviors there are decrease even more.

For a quick explanation of SEL as a whole, here’s a 3:30 min. video snippet from PBS about it. In it, Yale psychologist Marc Brackett, who created RULER, explains the protective properties of SEL, which leads me to believe that it’s absolutely key to online as well as offline safety and wellbeing. The video shows how powerful it is to learn emotion detection, acknowledgment and management together – how key whole-community buy-in and support are to individual members’ social-emotional well-being, whether they’re children or adults. But about 30 seconds into this video, an elementary-school student explains better than anybody how it works.

Related links

Share
Filed in Literacy & Citizenship, school, School Policy, whole-school | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments (0) »

Social literacy up, social problems down in Chicago Schools

05-Jun-13

More than 50 Chicago schools were recommended for closure this year, but one of the four schools that won’t close isn’t closing because of its strong, successful social-emotional learning program, Education Week reports. Marcus Garvey Elementary School “is recognized for helping children develop empathy and problem-solving skills.” SEL is “problem-solving with dignity,” as teacher-songwriter Tontaneshia Jones of Chicago’s Ella Flagg Young School put it in this video about it produced by Seattle-based Committee for Children.

SELteacherIn 2004, Illinois was the first state to adopt SEL into its academic standards, and it’s clearly paying off because of this and other findings. For example, the number of kids sent to the office for discipline was down 52% in one year since SEL was integrated into classrooms at Myra Bradwell School, its staff social worker Nicole Beck reports, and Sabrina Anderson, vice-principal at Marcus Garvey reports that her school has seen “fewer misconduct reports.” “Students have learned to deal with conflict in a different way – how to talk about it,” she says in the video. What both staff and students are learning through SEL are five competencies: self-awareness, self-management, responsible decision-making, social awareness and relationship skills. These have become state education standards as important as those for reading, math or science.

“I think a lot of times people forget that our kids hurt, they have pain, they have issues beyond just school, and in order for us to be effective, we have to teach the entire child,” says kindergarten teacher Joy Price Lewis at Marcus Garvey. And we probably also forget that SEL at school goes home with the students, a benefit that I don’t believe has been measured yet. But here’s what Ella Flagg Young School has found: “Due to SEL training, we’ve seen the respect level rise, we’ve seen how a child can go home and actually change a home,” says its dean of students, Charles Dunlap.

Related links

  • The 2011 study about the benefits of SEL: “Social-emotional learning ups academic performance” <http://www.netfamilynews.org/social-emotional-learning-ups-academic-performance>
  • “Invaluable social-literacy lessons from an anti-bullying conference” <http://www.netfamilynews.org/invaluable-social-literacy-lessons-from-an-anti-bullying-conference>
  • Committee for Children’s evidence-based SEL and other programs are used in more than 25,000 schools in the US and other countries.
Share
Filed in bullying, cyberbullying, Literacy & Citizenship, Risk, Risk & Safety, School & Tech, school bullying, School Policy, schools, whole-school | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0) »

Stop using the word ‘bullying’ in school, researchers say

04-Jun-13

“Bullying” is a loaded term to say the very least, and not using it could not only defuse a lot of fear and harmful overreaction when it happens, it could save lives. I’ll get to the life-saving part in a minute, but first the problem with using the word.

Because of all the (certainly well-intended) awareness-raising and media attention lately, “bullying” has come to mean every imaginable mean behavior – from the rolling of eyeballs “to ‘not wanting to be your friend’ to sexual assault,” USATODAY reports, citing some examples from University of Illinois professor Dorothy Espelage. “The word ‘bullying’ has really obscured our ability to focus on what’s happening to children,” the paper reports.

2013 AERA reportSome of the behaviors people mistakenly call “bullying” are normative or part of being a human being (such as saying something mean when angry or making an honest mistake that one later regrets). Some are cruel and/or illegal. But calling every kind of negative behavior “bullying” is a problem because…

  1. A lot of extra unnecessary fear of tragic outcomes and/or lawsuits gets associated with behavior that isn’t serious and actionable. That deters kids from getting adults’ help in addressing any problem, whether big or small, because adult overreaction can make things worse for kids by drawing unwanted attention to them or something they report.
  2. Problems that are serious aren’t addressed fast enough (if they don’t fit the definition of “bullying” in a school policy) or addressed at all (if they go unreported).

On that second point, Espelage told USATODAY that it’s sometimes hard for teachers to address cruel behavior on the spot because they’re “often hampered by policies that require mistreatment to be repetitive.” She’s referring to the repeated aggression that’s “part of the classic definition of bullying.”

So Espelage and other researchers recommend that we just use the word “victimization” (e.g., see this) – because anytime anyone is victimized, the behavior needs to be addressed, and that word allows for about as many shades of gray as the spectrum of human interaction has.

Parents and teachers need to be able to work with kids – with the focus on them and the situation more than on a policy’s wording. Kids need to feel they can come to us when they’re hurting or seeing someone being hurt, for whatever reason and at whatever level of aggression, and they’re more likely to if we focus on them more than a policy (listening to what happened, getting multiple perspectives, and responding to the conditions of the particular incident).

As for how avoiding the term can save lives, Espelage told USATODAY that she “has served as an expert witness in legal cases in which a child committed suicide after being bullied. In several cases, she said, school staff members said in depositions that they were waiting for the alleged bullying behaviors to be repeated so they could treat them as bullying, in accordance with school policies.”

Related links

Share
Filed in bullying, cyberbullying, Law & Policy, Risk, Risk & Safety, School & Tech, school bullying, School Policy, schools, Uncategorized, whole-school | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (1) »

Less bullying & fear at school: Fresh federal data

03-Jun-13

Do people ever consider the possibility that, if they’re exposed to increased reports about a social problem, it’s the reporting that has increased rather than the problem? It’s increasingly clear that this is the case with school bullying: Only news reports about it have increased, not the behavior itself. In fact, both bullying and fear of it are down among US middle school students (the grade levels that tends to experience bullying most), Education Week reports, citing new numbers from the National Center for Educational Statistics.

This is data reflecting both physical and verbal aggression. For all students in grades 6-12, “hate-related graffiti” in school classrooms, bathrooms, hallways, etc. “dropped from about 36% in 1999 to about 28% in 2011. The rate of students who reported fearing an attack or harm at school at all has also dropped dramatically, from nearly 12% in 1995 to less than 4% in 2011. For black and Hispanic students, it’s an even more encouraging shift—from more than 20% of both groups of students worried about being attacked at school to less than 5% in 2011 [the latest figures available].”

74% decline in school violence

The decline in actual physical violence in schools is even more dramatic: It was down 74% between 1992 and 2010, according to the latest US Department of Justice data, which was cited by David Finkelhor, director of the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire, in a paper he published last January.

“The surveys that reflect change over the longest time periods, going back to the early 1990s, consistently show declines in bullying and peer victimization, some of it remarkably large. The more recent trends, since 2007, show some declines, but less consistently.” This is true internationally too. Dr. Finkelhor cited a study of bullying in the journal Social Psychology of Education showing a decrease in bullying in all nine data sets the authors reviewed.

What about cyberbullying? Online harassment increased from 6% in 2000 to 9% in 2005 to 11% in 2010 between, and it’s interesting to note that it increased less between 2005 and ’10 than in the first 5 years tracked. Because social media is very much a reflection of school social life for young people, the peer aggression seen in social media is a lot like the peer aggression seen on school bathroom walls. So once it finds its “dead level,” it will probably decline in the same way verbal and written aggression have.

So why do we so often default to worst-case scenarios where young people are concerned? Bullying is a problem but not a growing one, and far from the epidemic it’s sometimes reported to be in the news media. And there are other positive social indicators: both homicide and suicide rates are down among young people, Finkelhor reported.

Possible explanations

Besides consumer education and crime prevention at the societal level, he offers two other possible explanations for this downward trend in victimization of self and others:

  1. Psychiatric medications and better access to mental healthcare
  2. Digital media and communications on phones and the Web.

The rise of social media is another thing people don’t typically think of as a positive force in society. But consider this point from Finkelhor: “These technologies may have dampened crime and bullying by providing more ways of summoning help, more forms of social surveillance, and engrossing activities that undermine forms of alienation that lead to crime” (more on that here).

None of which is to say the problem has been solved. Parts of it – e.g., harassment and bullying of LBGT youth and students with disabilities – still need a great deal of attention and effort. But over all, Finkelhor wrote “advocates and young people should feel inspired. Change can happen and it can get better.” And I propose that, if we adults can collectively show greater acceptance that most young people are kind and respectful toward each other most of the time they will respond positively to that confidence and respect in them.

Related links

Share
Filed in bullying, cyberbullying, Risk, Risk & Safety, school bullying | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (0) »