A safe school climate: a systemic approach and the school counselor.

School violence continues to plague our nation's K-12 schools (Adams, 2000; Anderson, 1998; Lockwood, 1997; Welsh, 2000). Not only does school violence create a climate of fear and emotional unrest in a school, it is also an obstacle to the learning process (Gottfredson, 1989) and to the school's educational mission (Anderson; Sherman et al., 1997; Jenkins, 1997; Lockwood). While there have been dramatic incidences of school violence such as the school massacre that occurred in Littleton, Colorado, on April 20, 1999, and the Jonesboro, Arkansas, schoolyard shooting on March 24, 1998, violence of a much more insidious and subtle nature occurs every school day. School violence is not only overt actions, such as shootings and physical fights, but is also subtly expressed in a school climate that can engender fear in any student (Dorsey, 2000). Examples are a student not speaking up in class for fear of being ridiculed; being called a "faggot" because of perceptions of a student's sexual orientation; backbiting; verbal teasing and insults; offensive touching such as throws, slaps and pushes; and racial, ethnic, and/or sexist comments that are based on a student's physical appearance. In fact, Hazier, Hoover, and Oliver (1996) reported that three-fourths of the school students they surveyed indicated that they experienced harassment and bullying to such an extent that they suffered academic, personal, and social difficulties. Thus school violence can be both obvious and insidious, and profoundly impact the school climate.

School climate consists of the related factors of attitude, feeling, and behavior of individuals within the school system. Dorsey (2000) views school climate as involving four key relationships: the relationship of a student to him or herself; a student to his or her peers; a student to his or her parents and community; and a student to his or her school workers, including teachers, administrators, and all staff. While focusing on interrelationships, Welsh (2000) also included cognitions in his definition; "The unwritten beliefs, values, and attitudes that become the style of interaction between students, teachers, and administrators. School climate sets the parameters of acceptable behavior among all school actors, and it assigns individual and institutional responsibility for school safety" (p. 89).

The climate of the school is central to the educational mission of a school (Anderson, 1998; Sherman et al., 1997; Jenkins, 1997; Lockwood, 1997). Anderson surveyed recent school safety research and found that altering a school's internal climate can have a significant positive effect on the feeling of safety in the school community. Gottfredson (1989) and Sherman et al. reviewed studies that examined school climate and concluded that how schools are run is directly related to the level of behavioral disruptions in schools. For example, schools in which administration and faculty lack communication and do not work together to problem solve have lower teacher morale and higher student disorder, and schools where rules and reward structures are unclear, and where there are ambiguous consequences (e.g., lowering of grades due to misbehaviors), experience more disorder. Further, schools in which students do not believe they belong and feel uncared for by school personnel experience higher levels of disorder (Gottfredson, Sherman et al.). Gottfredson delineated additional specific school climate factors that contribute to unsafe schools: schools that ignore misconduct; schools in which teachers and administrators have disagreement about or do not know the rules; and schools where students do not believe in the rules. Conversely, factors such as high expectations among school staff, students, and parents for student achievement, orderly school and classroom environments, high morale among school staff and students, positive treatment of students, active engagement of students, and positive social relationships among students positively impact school climate (Stockard & Mayberry, 1992). This research suggests that school violence is a reflection of the school climate.

Therefore, from a school climate perspective, school violence may be defined as "any action from or affecting youth that negatively impacts the social climate within a school" (Dorsey, 2000). This is consistent with the Center for the Prevention of School Violence's (2000) view that "any behavior that violates a school's educational mission or climate of respect or jeopardizes the intent of the school to be free of aggression against persons or property, drugs, weapons, disruptions, and disorder" (p. 2) may be characterized as school violence. Negative actions that such as mean or hurtful words and looks, signs or overt acts (e.g., slapping, hitting, tripping, hair pulling), and covert acts (e.g., ostracizing, manipulating friendships, ignoring or violating a person's wishes or rights) can be viewed as violence, according to this definition (Remboldt, 1994).

Since violence is a systemic problem, it takes a systemic effort to address school safety (Remboldt, 1994). Effective school violence prevention has to affect the complete social systemic gestalt of the school (Nims, 2000), including both written policies and procedures, and the unspoken and unwritten norms regarding values, beliefs, and the behaviors of individuals within the school. Therefore, one way to address school violence is to create a safe school climate, Because of their knowledge, skills, and education, school counselors are uniquely positioned to institute the development of safe climates in schools and can serve as advocates for school change. A systemic conceptualization of school climate is offered as one way to understand and prevent school violence.

A SYSTEMIC CONCEPTUALIZATION OF SCHOOL CLIMATE

Three components comprise a safe school (see Figure): Context, psychosocial variables and school behaviors. These components are closely related to one another.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Context

The first component, Context, refers to the school atmosphere, individual members of the school community and their relationships within the school, and societal influences such as the local community and the school board. A major element of Context is the philosophical assumptions about how school members treat each other and how the school addresses violence. These assumptions include the unspoken norms and beliefs about how school personnel (including teachers, coaches, school counselors, staff, and administrators) treat each other and students, and how students treat each other and school personnel. These norms and beliefs are embodied in school rules and policies regarding codes of conduct and how violations of these codes are addressed. Further, the local community impacts the philosophical assumptions held by the school. Finally, the school board also impacts these assumptions. Schools also function as an important socializing agent in the development of young people. Social norms and values held by society in general, and the local community in particular, are played out in the school. For example, societal attitudes about homosexuality are reflected in school policy and treatment of students who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered. Thus the school acts as a socializing agent when it chooses to actively combat, or chooses to ignore, trivialize, or tolerate homophobic comments. This can also be the case around issues of gender, race, ethnicity, ability, and other issues of difference. In essence, community members' (including parents/guardians and the school board) attitudes about behavior and violence influence children's and school personnel's actions in the halls, and in all activities.

Psychosocial Variables

There are a number of psychosocial variables that impact school climate. These include: definition of violence, behavioral and academic expectations, issues of difference, locus of control, rewards, advising, interpersonal relationships, level of communication and cooperation, perceptions of school safety, and student input into school affairs.

Definition of violence. A major factor in the development of the safe school climate is a clear definition of school violence. Remboldt (1994) asserts that it is a lack of "a clear, all-encompassing and universally acceptable definition of violence--one that all students and educators can understand, accept, and use to identify or recognize violent incidents when they occur or when they are about to occur" (p. 15)--that severely impairs the ability of the school to create a safe school climate. A consensus agreement regarding the definition of violence determines the presence or lack and degree of acceptability or unacceptability of violence (Howell & Hawkins, 1998). The responsibility of defining what parameters of behavior are acceptable falls squarely within the purview of the entire school community. That is, students, faculty, staff, administration, parents, community members, and the school board should all be involved in this process. Even support personnel such as bus drivers, lunchroom attendants, crossing guards as well as maintenance staff have a stake in the process of defining what is violence and what is acceptable behavior. This consensual definition of violence has a direct impact on behavioral expectations.

Behavioral expectations. Defining the parameters of acceptable behavior through codes of conduct and rules are also essential to the creation of a safe school climate. All members of the school community need to understand what behaviors are acceptable and which ones are not. Just as all school and community members are involved in the definition of violence, they are also involved in the creation of codes of conduct. The rules that embody these codes of conduct refer to specific standards of behavior for all members of the school community, not just students. Rules may address such areas as standards of dress, comportment, fair treatment of others, what (if any) teasing and joking is acceptable, physical touch, and what the consequences for transgressions of these behaviors are. Rules need to be clear and fair and should be enforced consistently (Adams, 2000; Furlong & Morrison, 2000; Gottfredson, 1989; Sherman et al., 1997; Remboldt, 1994; Welsh, 2000). Further, codes of student conduct should set unambiguous and high expectations for student behavior and should also specify consequences of violations of the code clearly, in writing, providing specific procedures to be followed in the case of a violation (Cloud, 1997). Typically, codes of conduct focus solely on student behavior (e.g., see Cloud). We suggest that schools adopt codes of conduct that address behavior for all members of the school community. Thus, the code of conduct should also apply to staff members as well as students. Adults need to be able to model the behavior they expect from students, and students need to see that respectful and courteous behavior is expected of the adults as well as them. In addition, emphasis tends to be placed on what is considered inappropriate behavior. While this is certainly important, it is also essential to specify what is appropriate behavior and to provide examples thereof. In many cases school officials assume that students and other members of the school community know what is acceptable behavior. This may be an erroneous assumption, and students in particular may need to be taught appropriate ways to interact with one another (Cloud).

Academic expectations. High academic expectations for students challenges students to be academically successful and also to feel more closely bonded with their school. Thus, students who are committed to their schoolwork feel more connected to their school and are therefore less likely to commit acts of violence (Furlong & Morrison, 2000). In addition, high expectations for academic achievement among school staff and parents leads to greater focus on academics and a decreased tendency towards violent acts (Griffith, 2000).

Like behavioral expectations, the academic expectations of students also must also be clearly defined. Expected competencies or knowledge content, evaluation of student work, and assessment measures must all be clearly articulated such that students understand how to accomplish their intended goals.

Issues of difference. Difference refers to individual characteristics that impact how one experiences the world and is perceived and treated by others and society, at large. This includes, but is not limited to: race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion/spirituality, ability, weight and physical size, and national origin. All members of a school have the right to feel safe regardless of difference. Thus, respect for each individual is imperative in creating a safe school climate. Cloud (1997) suggests that a comprehensive program addressing race and ethnicity should be a part of the K-12 curriculum in order to counteract bias, violence, and inter-group conflict. Although Cloud only refers to difference in terms of race and ethnicity, his proposal can be expanded to include all issues of difference.

Locus of control. Locus of control refers to "an individual's expectations of ability to control his or her experiences" (Dykeman, Daehlin, Doyle, & Flamer, 1996, p. 38). Dykeman et al. found an external locus of control, lack of empathy, and impulsivity to be antecedents to violent behavior in schools. They argue that schools need to stimulate an internal locus of control in their students. Thus student responsibility and an internal locus of control need to be encouraged (Baker, 1998) as a support of a safe school climate.

Rituals and traditions. Peterson and Deal (1998) suggest that traditions and rituals are an important part of a school's climate. The fostering of support and celebration of community ensures a positive school atmosphere. Thus school leaders need to develop and honor positive school traditions and honors. For example, ceremonies may be used to recognize successes of students and teachers during the course of school day. Additionally, schools may meet regularly with students to show support and caring for hard work. In essence, celebrating the positive helps build a positive school climate.

Taking a stand. In many schools, students may feel reluctant to share that another student is or has been violent. This may be a result of students believing that they may be bullied and/or ostracized for following the rules. A healthy school climate would reinforce students alerting administrators and/or school staff about violations that threaten school safety. In such a school, students would recognize that they have significant impact on the degree of safety within their school. Thus, students with knowledge of potential or actual violent behavior may feel more responsible and empowered to speak out to ensure a safe school.

Interpersonal relationships. Osher and Warger (1998) indicate that excessive feelings of isolation and social withdrawal are common early signs of potential violent behavior. While intimate relationships may not eliminate dangerous behaviors, they do decrease the risk (Giggans & Levy, 1997). Positive peer relationships may reduce disruptive or violent behaviors (Dykeman et al., 1996; Nims, 2000); thus, strong interpersonal relationships with peers (Griffith, 2000) and adults (Furlong & Morrison, 2000) can play a prominent role in a positive school climate.

Levels of communication and cooperation. The way schools are run influences the school climate. The administration sets the tone for the kind of communication and cooperation that occurs in schools. Fostering "an atmosphere of inclusiveness, open communication and shared decision-making on safety and other important issues with students, staff, and parents" (p. 159) is crucial to school climate (Anderson, 1998). For example, in a review of I studies that examined school climate Sherman et al. (1997) concluded that "schools in which the administration and faculty communicate and work together to plan for change and solve problems have higher teacher morale and less disorder" (p. 5). High morale among staff and students also contributes to q effective schooling (Furlong & Morrison, 2000). While the administration sets the tone, all school members have an impact on the level of communication and cooperation within the school.

Perceptions of school safety. School members' perceptions of the school climate impact school behavior (Welsh, 2000). As fear increases, confidence in the administration may diminish, and the informal social controls against violence may weaken. In response to this fear, students may bring weapons to school, retaliate more often or act out behaviorally (Welsh). Thus increasing school members' perceptions of safety is crucial to decreasing violence.

School bonding. Schools in which students feel respected, see the fairness and clarity of rules, and participate in the planning and implementation of rules, are schools in which students experience a sense of connectedness. Welsh (2000) argued that respect for students has a great influence on lowering levels of victimization. Schools that involved students in the setting of disciplinary measures were seen as far more effective at reducing instances of victimization in schools than those schools that only relied on teacher assessments of a punishments' fairness (Anderson, 1998). Additionally, the promotion of school bonding and achievement through school involvement was a proactive way to prevent school violence. For example, school pride campaigns and expanded extracurricular activities may increase a feeling of connection between student and school (Howell & Hawkins, 1998).

School behaviors and the safe school. Clearly the components of a safe school (e. g., sense of belonging, expectation of school safety, positive social relationships, mutual trust and respect, and student influence on school affairs) affect school members' behaviors. Conversely those behaviors influence the perception and the reality of a safe school. A coach who uses ridicule to motivates students may well encourage a set of student behaviors that threaten the sense of school safety. For example, calling students "sissies" as a way to increase performance may likely support students teasing other students who may not follow rigid gender roles. Thus students who know about this coach's interpersonal style may perceive the school as an unsafe place by virtue of the coach's presence in the school. Additionally, the school context also influences school behaviors. The context consists of personalities, formal and informal structures, and roles and creates formal psychosocial factors that mold school behaviors. By the same token, the perception of that context can shape the safety of the school and thus the school climate.

IMPLICATIONS FOR SCHOOL COUNSELORS

Recently, Osher & Warger (1998) stated:

Effective and safe schools are places where there is strong leadership, caging faculty, parent and community involvement--including law enforcement officials--and student participation in the design of programs and policies. Effective and safe schools are also places where prevention and intervention programs are based upon careful assessment of student problems, where community members help set measurable goals and objectives, where research-based prevention and intervention approaches are used, and where evaluations are conducted regularly to ensure that programs are meeting stated goals.... Effective schools ensure that the physical environment of the school is safe and that school-wide policies are in place to support responsible behaviors. (p. 19)

While the entire school community is responsible for the creation of a safe learning environment, school counselors may play a leadership role in encouraging the adoption of such a process for the school and community (Cunningham & Sandhu, 2000). School counselors' knowledge of counseling, classroom guidance, consultation, and coordination services position them to be effective catalysts and advocates for systemic change within their school. Research indicates that comprehensive school counseling programs impact school climate (Gysbers, Hughey, Starr, & Lapan, 1992). Examining the link between more fully implemented school counseling programs and student perceptions of a more positive school climate within their school, Lapan, Gysbers, and Sun (1997) found that students in schools with more fully implemented school counseling programs had a more positive experience, believed that the school more adequately prepared them, that their peers behaved better in school, and experienced a sense of belonging and safety. In fact, a comprehensive developmental school counseling program in every, elementary, middle, and high school is a necessary component of any effort directed at school safety (Nims, 2000). School counselors can ensure that such a program is school-wide and reaches all students (Leone, Mayer, Malmgren, & Meisel, 2000).

Since a universally acceptable definition of violence is key to the creation of a safe school climate (Remboldt, 1994), school counselors may facilitate the school community's efforts to reach a consensual agreement. School counselors' training provides them with the tools to expedite such a process.

One way that schools can address the issue of school violence is through the development of character education programs and values statements (Peterson & Skiba, 2001). Character education is a way to provide "proactive guidance for students to learn the positive behaviors and values that should be part of the education of all people" (Peterson & Skiba, p. 3). Values statements are intended to pro vide a school-wide base of intended behavior. These statements tend to be a list of positive characteristics that all faculty and students can accept as desirable behavioral goals for students.

School counselors can provide the critical leadership in measuring school climate. Hoover and Oliver (1996) provide examples of surveys and checklists that assess the perceptions of school safety by students, members of their families, and other school staff as well. This type of assessment is an important step in order to design proactive programs to address school climate.

School counselors can also support the development of school rituals and traditions (Peterson & Deal, 1998) via coordination and implementation of these activities. Such activities can promote school bonding.

School counselors need to focus on the role of schools as socializing agents of rigid gender roles. Gender role workshops can improve awareness of the effect of gender role socialization (O'Neil & Carroll, 1988) on conflict in the school. In addressing bullying behavior, Clarke and Kiselica (1997) suggest in-service training for staff on gender-role socialization in order to raise awareness regarding the perpetration of psychological maltreatment. They argue that gender-role socialization may blind people to subtle forms of violence. However, Clarke and Kiselica caution that school counselors should only do this with the express support of the administration. Additionally, Clarke and Kiselica (2000) further suggest exploring sports programs and bullying within such programs. They make a link between male role socialization and bullying, and suggest a close investigation of such socialization in the school to address the reduction of school violence. Although these suggestions are made around gender and gender-role socialization, similar workshops can be applied to address other areas of difference in the school community (see, for example, Harper & Griffin, 2000; Lowey, 1998; Strong & Callahan, 2001).

School counselors may also contribute to a safe school through their work with students, parents, teachers, school and school district officials, and the community at large (Riley & McDonald, 2000). With students, group and individual counseling address personal, career, and social needs. Counseling and classroom guidance activities can also serve to effectively help identify behavioral problems and help counselors and teachers more effectively intervene to create a safe school environment. Counselors may also coordinate mentoring programs, facilitate programs that can train students to deal with their peers and anger, and conduct regular discussion groups to address the school district's code of behavior and disciplinary policies. School counselors can teach both students and staff empathy skills and foster the modeling of trust and respect by school personnel as an effective way to address potentially violent behaviors in students (Nims, 2000). In addition, programs such as peer mediation could be used more in an effort for schools to consistently follow school policies and principles and ultimately reduce school violence (Harper & Griffin, 2000). With parents, school counselors can provide resources and training on working with strong willed and behavior problem children and serve as an important referral source.

Riley and McDonald (2000) also propose that school counselors engage with teachers and school district officials, by assisting teachers and staff" with training regarding student behavior and discipline, and in coordinating school-wide programs promoting zero tolerance for violence in the school community. Baker (2000) even suggests the development of a power base for counseling programs and for coping with the stresses associated with promoting school reforms within school environments. School counselors may also work with other student services staff to provide effective assessment and referral resources for students exhibiting troublesome behaviors, assist with program evaluation, and serve on district and school-wide crisis response teams. In addition, school counselors may work with local children and youth advocate groups, especially those that address child abuse, sexual abuse, and domestic violence issues.

Clearly, school counselors can serve as an epicenter of catalytic change not only" with individual students, but also within entire school and community systems. While changing a school climate is everyone's responsibility, school counselors can play a leadership role in this effort because of their specialized knowledge and training. As catalysts for a safe school, school counselors can oversee and coordinate the school community's efforts at programming, provide leadership in the assessment of such efforts, and play a key role in communicating with students, teachers, staff, administration, parents, and the community at large. While being an advocate for a safe school climate may appear overwhelming, serving as a catalyst in a school will help to foster programs and policies that create a climate that reflects a community that cares about all youth. Ultimately, the school counselor's leadership role in the creation of a safe school climate will result in the academic and personal success of all students and help schools achieve their educational missions.

References

Adams, T. (2000. The status of school discipline and violence. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 567, 140-156.

Anderson, D. C. (1998). Curriculum, culture and community: The challenge of school violence. In M. Tonry & M. Moore (Eds.), Youth violence (pp. 317-363). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Baker, J. (1998). Are we missing the forest for the trees? Considering the social context of school violence. Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 2944.

Baker, S. (2000). School counseling for the twenty-first century (3rd ed.). Columbus, Ohio: Prentice-Hall.

Center for the Prevention of School Violence. (2000). A vision for safer schools. Raleigh, NC: Author.

Clarke, E., & Kiselica, M. (1997). A systemic counseling approach to the problem of bullying. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 31, 310-325.

Clarke, E., & Kiselica, M. (2000). A remedy for boys who bully: A gender-equal school environment. In D. S. Sandhu (Ed.), Elementary school counseling in the new millennium, (pp. 145-1581. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Cloud, B. (1997). Solutions for youth violence for schools and communities: A resource guide. Waco, TX: Health EDCO, a division of WRS Group.

Cunningham, N. J., & Sandhu, D.S. (20007. A comprehensive approach to school-community violence prevention. Professional School Counseling, 4, 126-133.

Dorsey, J. (2000, February 8). Institute to End School Violence. (Online) In End School Violence. Retrieved May, 2002, from http://www.endschoolviolence.com/strategy/.

Dykeman, C., Daehlin, W., Doyle, S., & Flamer, H. S. (1996). Psychological predictors of school-based violence: Implications for school counselors. The School Counselor, 44, 3S-47.

Furlong, M., & Morrison, G. (2000).The school in school violence: Definitions and facts. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Disorders, 8, 71-82.

Giggans, P. O., & Levy, B. (1997). SO ways to a safer school Seattle, WA. Seal Press.

Gottfredson, D. (1989). Developing effective organizations to reduce school disorder. In O. Moles (Ed.), Strategies to reduce student misbehavior (pp. 87-104).Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 311 608).

Griffith, J. (2000). School climate as group evaluation and group consensus: Student and parent perceptions of the elementary school environment. The Elementary School Journal, 101, 35-61.

Gysbers, N., Hughey, K., Starr, M., & Lapan, R. (1992). Improving school guidance programs: A framework for program, personnel, and results evaluation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 565-570.

Harper, F. D., & Griffin, J. P. (2000). Creative and underused counseling strategies for prevention of violence in schools, in D. S. Sandhu & C. B. Aspy (Eds.), Violence in American schools: A practical guide for counselors (pp. 185-200). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Hazler, R. J., Hoover, J. H., & Oliver, R. L. (1996). Student perceptions of victimization by bullies in schools. The Journal of Humanistic Education and Development, 29, 143-150.

Hoover, J., & Oliver, R. (1996). The bullying prevention handbook: A guide for principals, teachers, and counselors. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED419273)

Howell, J. C., & Hawkins, F. D. (1998). Prevention of youth violence. In M.Torry & M. H. Moore (Eds.), Youth violence (pp. 263-315). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Lapan, R.T., Gysbers, N. C., & Sun, Y. (1997).The impact of more fully implemented guidance programs on the school experiences of high school students: A statewide evaluation study. Journal of Counseling and Development, 75, 292-302.

Jenkins, R (1997). School delinquency and the school social bond. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34, 31-35.

Leone, R E., Mayer, M. J., Malmgren, K., & Meisel, S. M. (2000). School violence and disruption: Rhetoric, reality, and reasonable balance. Focus on Exceptional Children, 33, 1-20.

Lockwood, D. (October, 1997). Violence among middle school and high school students: Analysis and implications for prevention. National institute of Justice Research in Brief, pp. 1-9.

Lowey, M. I. (1998). Suggestions for working with fat children in schools. Professional School Counseling, 1, 18-22.

Nims, D. R. (2000).Violence in our schools: A national crisis. In D. S. Sandhu & C. B. Aspy (Eds.), Violence in American Schools: A practical guide for counselors (pp. 3-20). Alexandria VA: American Counseling Association.

O'Neil, J., & Carroll, M. (1988). A gender role workshop focused on sexism, gender role conflict, and the gender role journey. Journal of Counseling and Development, 67, 193-197.

Osher, D., & Warger, C. (1998). Early warning, timely response: A guide to safe schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Peterson, K., & Deal, T. (1998). How leaders influence the culture of schools. Educational Leadership, 56, 28-30.

Peterson, R. L., & Skiba, R. (2001). Creating school climates that prevent school violence. The Clearinghouse, 74, 167-175.

Remboldt, C. (1994). Solving violence problems in your school: Why a systemic approach is necessary. Minneapolis, M N: Johnson Institute.

Riley, P., & McDaniel, J. (2000). School violence prevention, intervention, and crisis response. Professional School Counseling, 4, 120-125.

Sherman, L.W., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, R, & Bushway, S. (Eds.). (1997). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn't, what's promising. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

Stockard, J., & Mayberry, M. (1992). Effective educational environments. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.

Strong, S., & Callahan, C. J. (2001). Professional responsibility to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered (GLBT) youths and families. In D. S. Sandhu (Ed.), Elementary school counseling in the new millennium (pp. 249-260). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Welsh, W. (2000).The effects of school climate on school disorder. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 567, 88-107.

Thomas, J. Hernandez, Ed.D., is an assistant professor and

Susan R. Seem, Ph.D., is an associate professor and chairperson in the Department of Counselor Education. Both are with the State University of New York College at Brockport. E-mail: [e-mail]