Psychology in the Schools, Vol.

38(3), 2001
© 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

STUDENT VIOLENCE AND THE MORAL DIMENSIONS OF EDUCATION

CLIFFORD H. EDWARDS
Brigham Young University

Student violence has started to appear in schools in extreme forms. Various causes have been
suggested, including TV violence, dysfunctional families, grinding poverty, child abuse, domes-
tic violence, poor emotional and cognitive development, drugs, gangs, inequitable educational
opportunity, and latchkey homes. A number of programs have been initiated to deal with this
problem which focus on limiting the entry of weapons into the schools and managing aggres-
siveness. Unfortunately many of these programs fail to address the more fundamental causes of
violence and aggression. A more effective means of prevention involves helping children become
more responsible members of families, schools, and neighborhoods. School counselors and school
psychologists have an important leadership role in helping reduce violence by promoting the
moral dimensions of education, including the development of effective learning communities
and encouraging school experiences which help children become more resilient in meeting the
challenges they face each day without resorting to violence. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

The murder of students by their peers at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado,
reveals a new level of violence in the schools. Suggested causes for the dramatic increase in
violent crime like this among youth include TV violence, dysfunctional families, grinding pov-
erty, inequitable educational opportunity, latchkey homes, child abuse, domestic violence, family
breakups, poor emotional and cognitive development, drugs, and gangs (Arllen, Gable, & Hen-
drickson, 1994; Ascher, 1994; Gaustad, 1991). The strongest developmental predictor of a child’s
violent behavior is a history of previous violence, including having been a victim of abuse (Hus-
ton et al., 1992). Several aspects of school organization and operations also contribute to violent
behavior. These include confining too many students in too small a space and imposing behavioral
routines and academic conformity, along with such factors as large schools and teacher isolation
(Sautter, 1995). Confrontational student behavior has also been found to occur when rules are
unfair, arbitrary, or unclear, or perceived as unfairly or inconsistently enforced; when students do
not believe in the rules; when teachers and administrators disagree about the nature of the rules
and the consequences for student misconduct; when teachers are too punitive; when students feel
alienated; when schools are impersonal; when misconduct is ignored; when grades are overempha-
sized; when the curriculum is perceived by students as irrelevant; and when schools lack adequate
resources for teaching (Evans & Evans, 1985; Gaustad, 1992). Some of these problems have been
addressed by schools and communities while others have received minimal attention.
School counselors and psychologists have a critical role in diagnosing problems that contrib-
ute to student violence and helping to deal with these problems. Their expertise is needed to help
educators differentiate between actions that are truly preventive and those that focus on crisis
management only. These distinctions have subtle but distinctive psychological ramifications. School
counselors and psychologists also have a role in providing appropriately modeled training for the
development of moral learning communities in school classrooms.

Ineffective Proposed Solutions

Many violence prevention programs fail to deal with problems in a truly preventive way. For
example, it is often concluded that violence involving guns can be curtailed with more stringent
gun laws, surveillance cameras, armed policeman patrolling the halls, and metal detectors. But
those few students intent on bringing weapons into the school are inevitably a step ahead of the

Correspondence to: Clifford H. Edwards, 215 McKay Bldg., Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602–5099.

249
250 Edwards

security system (Ascher, 1994). In addition, despite legislation, students seem able to acquire guns
if they are determined to get them. Also, these intrusive strategies are likely to undermine the trust
needed to build cooperative school communities capable of really preventing violence. True pre-
vention would involve experiences that promote a disposition of nonviolence and an attitude of
caring about others in the school community.
Conflict resolution courses have consistently been recommended as a means of preventing
violence. A number of programs have been in place for several years (Gaustad, 1991; Girard &
Koch, 1996). Many of the conflict resolution programs have common characteristics, including an
emphasis on helping children deal with their hostility through anger and stress management,
impulse control, diversity awareness, active listening, creative problem solving, and peer media-
tion. Community initiatives are also encouraged, including a range of family services representing
the collaborative efforts of religious and recreational organizations, social services, public hous-
ing and health agencies, the business community, and law enforcement agencies (Schwartz, 1996).
A significant problem with conflict resolution programs is that they place the responsibility
for eliminating violence on student–student dialogue (Devine, 1996). This simplifies the process,
but overestimates the impact such dialogue can have on solving problems. In addition, educators
have very little power to modify violence-promoting conditions like extreme parental dysfunction,
neighborhood crime, and drug trafficking (Devine). Only limited success can, therefore, be
anticipated.
Other commonly suggested solutions to violence include regulating television content, sup-
pressing gang activity and involvement, regulating drugs more conscientiously, reducing poverty,
helping people find employment, providing family services of various kinds, encouraging family
involvement in school, emphasizing early identification of children who are at risk for violent
behavior, promoting antiviolence education, and reducing the size of schools (Arllen et al., 1994;
Conroy & Fox, 1994; Devine, 1996; Evans & Evans, 1985; Gaustad, 1991; Smith, 1993). All these
proposals have merit, but none is sufficiently preventive. For example, the strategies of early
identification of children who are at risk, conflict resolution, peer mediation, anger management,
and impulse control are cornerstone elements of a number of so-called prevention programs. But
they are in reality designed to deal with anger and violence once they occur, not prevent them from
developing. Better results can be achieved by determining what promotes anger and puts these
children at risk in the first place and then taking community, family, and school-based actions to
eliminate these conditions. In connection with this, schools need to create moral learning commu-
nities that encourage trust, acceptance, and group responsibility, and that enhance learning and
prevent violence.

Recommended School Changes

Traditional school learning requires memorizing and manipulating symbols and applying
them to referents that are detached from the real world (Resnick, 1987). Where such traditional
practices prevail, children are left without a real-world context within which to make proper
associations and learning applications. Consequently they may find the curriculum irrelevant.
Contention and dissension are the likely consequences. Greater relevance and more effective
learning, along with less discontent, can be achieved by allowing children to take a more active
role in directing their own learning (Osborne & Wittrock, 1983). Efforts have been made in recent
years to define teaching and learning as a constructivist process. Constructivism asserts that learn-
ing is the personal generation of meaning. Research has indicated that students do not absorb and
retain information as taught by their teachers. They create their own conceptions in connection
with knowledge and experiences that are already stored in the brain (Phillips, 2000). Educators
have sought to create pedagogical applications of constructivism. Its practical application to edu-
 Student Violence 251

cation would provide students more opportunities to direct their own learning and experience
meaningful school experiences.
Imposing unfair, arbitrary, and unclear rules that students have little role in creating promotes
conflict. No doubt rules are useful and necessary. However, students should play a significant role
in determining both the rules and the consequences for violating them. It is also good for children
to be involved in enforcing the rules. In doing so they learn how to take a responsible role in the
school community.
Serious consideration should be given to replacing traditional grades with alternatives like
portfolios. The grades children receive tend to define them as students and as human beings. For
many, failure and low motivation is the result (Covington & Beery, 1976). Faced with what they
perceive as inevitable failure, these children despair of ever doing well and are thus robbed of
self-respect (Aronson & Carlsmith, 1962). They commonly feel alienated and angry. Grading is
incorrectly thought to motivate learning. However, only students who routinely receive high grades
are motivated by them. In addition, grades tend to thwart the development of community by
making some children overly competitive and turning others off involvement in cooperative endeav-
ors (Kohn, 1992). Grading often forecloses on the hopes and aspirations of many students and
consigns them to lower academic ranks, lower social status, and reduced employment possibilities
(Kohn, 1993).
Not only does stringent grading have denigrating effects on students, providing them with
inflated grades also has negative consequences. In an effort to thwart the supposed negative effects
of grades on student self-esteem, grades have been inflated by educators for more than three
decades in colleges and universities as well as in the public schools (Gose, 1997; Levine, 1994).
The result has been lower academic standards (Basinger, 1997). Inflated grades also give students
a distorted view of their academic achievements and abilities (Baummeister, 1996) along with
making it necessary for employers to provide new employees additional training (Gose, 1997).
Finally, though inflating grades is commonly thought to encourage a better sense of well-being,
this practice fails to promote earned self-esteem (Baummeister). Earned self-esteem is achieved
when students work hard. It is a central feature of the growth of optimism.
Seligman (1995) asserts that efforts to bolster self-esteem have actually eroded optimism and
promoted negative growth of self-worth. He believes that these conditions are responsible for the
widespread pessimism that permeates the lives of children and adults, contributing significantly to
the current epidemic of depression in society. In this view, children need to encounter obstacles
and successfully solve difficult problems. When they are shielded from this endeavor their self-
esteem is weakened just as certainly as if they had been belittled, humiliated, and thwarted at
every turn (Seligman). Not only do stringent grading practices and grade inflation fail to promote
individual and community growth, they may be in part responsible for the alienation that often
leads to student misbehavior and violence.
One violence-preventing attribute that schools should foster in children is resilience. Chil-
dren with resilience are able to cope successfully with conditions in the family, school, and com-
munity that might otherwise disrupt their sense of well-being and stimulate misbehavior. A focus
on resiliency helps children develop social competence, problem-solving skills, a critical con-
sciousness, responsible autonomy, and a sense of purpose (Benard, 1995). Social competence
includes such qualities as responsiveness, especially the ability to elicit positive responses from
others; flexibility, including the ability to understand and effectively move between different cul-
tures; empathy; communication skills; and a sense of humor. Problem-solving skills include the
ability to make meaningful plans; to be resourceful in seeking help from others; and to think
critically, creatively, and reflectively. Having a critical consciousness is particularly helpful in
overcoming the potential for violence. It involves a reflective awareness of the structures of oppres-
252 Edwards

sion, such as the influence of an alcoholic parent, an insensitive teacher, the pressure of a racist
society, or a clique-controlled school environment. Autonomy refers to having a sense of personal
identity along with an ability to act independently and responsibly, and the power to exert appro-
priate control over one’s environment, including a sense of task mastery, an internal locus of
control, and a positive self-efficacy. Resilient children refuse to accept inappropriate negative
messages about themselves and distance themselves from dysfunctional situations (Benard, 1995).
They have less to feel dissatisfied and angry about.
Schools can foster resilience through genuine caring relationships. Educators must provide
for deep human relationships that help students become actively and meaningfully involved in the
school community. Like a family, the school community should be a sanctuary for growth and
development (Benard, 1997). A study by Werner and Smith (1989) found that, outside the family
circle, favorite teachers were most frequently found in this caring role. School communities should
be characterized by shared vision, participation, shared sense of purpose, caring, shared values,
trust, incorporation of diversity, teamwork, communication, and recognition (Irmsher, 1997). School
practices that support the development of learning communities include promoting questions that
encourage critical thinking and dialogue, making learning more hands-on, involving students in
curriculum planning, using participatory evaluation strategies, letting students create the govern-
ing rules of the classroom, and employing cooperative approaches such as cooperative learning,
peer helping, cross-age mentoring, and community service (Bernard, 1995).
It should be acknowledged that resilience training should not include deliberate exposure of
children to life hazards. In fact it is better that children be shielded from them. In addition, some
children may be naturally exposed to such a plethora of hazards that little can be done to equip
them with sufficient protective factors to provide resilience. The literature generally reports mea-
sures of resilience limited to single exposures to mild hazards. However, many children have to
confront multiple, severe hazards from which serious trauma can be expected. It is the responsi-
bility of homes, communities, and schools to help children avoid as many of these problems as
possible. School psychologists and others should acknowledge the extreme importance of shield-
ing children from hazards and avoid the assumption that resilience will always protect children
from difficult situations (Pianta & Walsh, 1996).
Schools as Moral Communities
According to Sirotnik (1990), the most problematic issue of our time, and of all time, is to
preserve simultaneously the interests of individuals and those of society by grounding their inter-
actions in fundamental moral principles. To develop moral principles within full community mem-
bership and involvement has great potential for helping students avoid violent feelings and attitudes.
When students are members of a community, their autonomy and social responsibility become the
focal points of social interplay.
One of the special constituents of a community is the existence of caring relationships. In a
community, members feel they are not alone, that there are others who will stand up for them and
render assistance as needed. In communities people care about caring. Love is unconditional, part
of a deliberate agenda, a significant aspect of the business of the community. The suffering of
others affects all members. This attribute of community can truly prevent school violence. When
each individual can depend on others for help and when each feels a genuine a part of the group,
feelings of rejection and isolation, which are precursors of violence, are eliminated.
Not only must communities engender a sense of caring, they must provide each individual
sufficient freedom to work out personal agendas within the context of community life. A moral
community seeks not only to preserve its own integrity, but to promote the freedom of its mem-
bers. Freedom in a social context always carries an imperative of making decisions that not only
 Student Violence 253

are personally satisfying, but are able to strengthen the quality of community life. Thus each
individual has the necessary agency for personal action and the requirement to act in ways that
support and strengthen community values and expectations. In reality, personal freedom is pro-
tected through community support. It is restricted only in the sense that it requires individuals to
treat others as they would be treated. Herein is social justice. The interests and rights of all
individuals and therefore the community are preserved, protected, and defended (Sirotnik, 1990).
A student’s most important role in a learning community is to help determine what is learned,
how, and in what sequence. To do otherwise is a breach of moral agency and community respon-
sibility (Thomas, 1990). Schools should have the same purposes as our democratic society. When
students play a significant role in directing their school experiences, they are practicing demo-
cratic living. Schools must clearly define their democratic purposes. This choice is a moral act,
which requires means-and-ends consistency. School practices must in fact achieve democratic
purposes. Democratic means must be transformed into democratic policies, which policies must
permeate school operations. Democratic purposes cannot be achieved until children act upon their
privilege of moral agency and learn how to articulate their independence with social values and
expectations. Only under these conditions will children and youth achieve a real sense of belong-
ing and take their community responsibilities seriously. When students feel they are bona fide
members of a community whose members care about one another and offer community-based
autonomy to one another, they will no longer feel they are being compelled by irrational forces
over which they have no control. Consequently they will have little reason to rebel.
As a note of caution, it should be acknowledged that there is little systematic research avail-
able from which to define learning communities properly and from which to provide guidance for
practice. Communities tend to be extremely complex and impervious to empirical research meth-
ods, careful analysis, and description. Community life is dynamic and usually a function of inven-
tion by community members over time. However, it has acquired the interest and support of
educators, for it is recognized that it holds the promise to promote more realistic and meaningful
educational experiences for children and to empower them in ways which may help reduce frus-
tration and encourage more responsible social and academic engagement (Furman-Brown, 1999).
Role of the School Psychologist
In a survey of school psychologists 73% felt unprepared to deal with school violence. Eighty-
five percent had received no specialized training in dealing with these problems. However, most
school psychologists have the preparation and many of the skills needed to promote violence
preventive strategies effectively, particularly in connection with the development of community
relationships. For example, nearly all school psychologists are knowledgeable about social skills
training, group process skills, and the assessment of students with conduct disorders (Furlong,
Babinski, Poland, Munoz, & Boles, 1996). These skills were particularly critical in carrying out
the following six components of a successful focus on community building at Serra High School
(Saunders, 1998).
First, members of a school learning community must have a shared vision. In reality most
school communities have divergent values. This is the result of children growing up with a cultural
emphasis on independence rather than on the value of community life. The result is for children to
achieve a growing sense of moral and intellectual arbitrariness (Feinberg, 1990). The school
psychologist is in a strategic position to ameliorate these conditions by helping to create cohesive
subcommunities and to moderate the development of shared values built upon basic democratic
principles. Living democratically in school is the best way to learn how to live in broader demo-
cratic communities (Thomas, 1990). When learning communities are organized around shared
beliefs they are less alienating places for learning (Strike, 1999).
254 Edwards

Second, community members need help in interpersonal relations in order to successfully

determine structures to achieve specific outcomes that involve group dynamics and change. School
psychologists can use their knowledge of group dynamics and interpersonal relationships to help
group members, including students, parents, administrators, and teachers, achieve a greater sense
of responsibility and respect along with fostering greater proficiency in accomplishing group
tasks. Schools need to change from organizations that maintain administrative control and a tra-
ditional curriculum to an orientation toward creating and sustaining relationships, inquiry, and
democratic purposes (Hackney & Henderson, 1999). School psychologists are in a position to
promote better coordination of teaching and administrative tasks and consequently more produc-
tive learning.
Third, the school psychologist has a particularly important role in helping teachers design a
thinking, meaning-centered curriculum based upon the community’s agreed-upon student out-
comes. Teachers may be inclined to be more subject-centered in their thinking and need the bal-
anced perspective that the school psychologist can provide. As part of this focus, leadership is
needed to help promote student support groups, which can in turn help culturally, linguistically,
and racially different students find meaningful connections to the curriculum and to one another.
Emphasis must be given to providing leadership training among students not ordinarily involved
in mainstream school leadership, fostering high academic achievement, promoting positive self-
esteem, encouraging community service learning, and sponsoring student portfolio exhibitions to
replace the usual grading system.
Fourth, the school psychologist is in particularly good position to help build working rela-
tionships between the schools and their public constituents. Ending school violence is a compre-
hensive task that involves not only schools, but also homes and communities-at-large. School
violence can be an outgrowth of community-wide problems. Thus youth and their parents must
play an active and a significant role in neighborhood decision making. Without this involvement,
neither parents nor their children will assume the necessary responsibility to help eliminate neigh-
borhood problems that negatively impact schools.
Dysfunctional homes are also a significant cause of children’s rebellion and violent behavior
(Evans & Evans, 1985). The principles of personal autonomy, community involvement, and com-
mitment need to permeate homes if parents are to be effective in helping their children act more
responsibly in their school communities and neighborhoods (Glasser, 1998). The leadership and
insights needed for encouraging better parent–child relationships may well come from school,
particularly school counselors and psychologists as they carry out their role as members of site
governance teams. (Epstein, 1991).
It is recommended that site governance teams be established for shared decision making.
These teams should consist of representatives from the teaching staff, administrators, school psy-
chologists, students, and other interested community members. The purpose of these teams is to
analyze problems and create various task forces composed of representatives from all interested
groups who are assigned by the site governance team to address particular problems. The involve-
ment of the school psychologist can be useful in promoting group development and cohesiveness
and providing insights into problems that require psychological expertise. They can also provide
leadership in coordinating efforts to promote the use of volunteers in the school and help to create
outreach programs that involve students in service learning in the community at large (Toussaint,
1998). Research has consistently shown service learning to promote the social, psychological, and
intellectual development of students. In service learning students develop a heightened sense of
personal and social responsibility, more positive attitudes toward adults, more active exploration
of careers, enhanced self-esteem, growth in moral and ego development, and more complex pat-
terns of thought (Sheckley & Keeton, 1997).
 Student Violence 255

Fifth, there needs to be continual assessment of school communities based on the communi-
ty’s own performance standards and benchmarks. Assessments also must be made of factors that
relate to school violence, such as the incidence of crime in the school and community, the nature
and use of school policies that promote school violence, and the effectiveness of psychological
principles that are applied to prevent student violence (Hymen & Perone, 1998). School psychol-
ogists have a central role to play in making accurate interpretations of research data. Because of
their familiarity with psychological research and theory, they also have an important role in eval-
uating research methodology, organizational change, human development, and behavior. Their
consultation skills should provide a means for systematic, proactive involvement in policy making
and informed practice regarding school violence prevention. It is recommended that school psy-
chologists become involved in a research agenda to ascertain any relationships between various
types of student victimization by educators and rates and types of school misbehavior and crime
(Hymen & Perone). Community violence and related school violence and associated problems
also needs to be investigated by school psychologists, including mental health as well as behav-
ioral and academic problems (Mozza & Overstreet, 2000).
Sixth, school psychologists have an important role in ongoing professional development. In
learning communities teaching is not performance, it is facilitative leadership. Curriculum is not
given, it is based on emergent needs and interests of learners. Assessment is not judgment, it is
documentation of progress over time (Saunders, 1998). School psychologists, with their back-
ground and training in human behavior, are in a position to provide useful insights for teachers and
administrators in accurately defining and carrying out these fundamental educational tasks.
Murray (1996) recommends that principals and school psychologists establish close working
relationships in order to more effectively assess potential problems concerning student violence.
Together they need to acquire necessary consultation from experts and data from research as well
as conduct an ongoing research program. As members of a team that includes other interested
parties, intervention programs must be planned both to prevent as well as to deal with school
violence and crime. There must be early diagnosis of potential problems and speedy intervention,
but, more importantly, programs that are truly preventive must be created and employed. All
school personnel need to be trained in community development and violence prevention. With
such wide involvement, appropriate attention can be brought to bear more quickly on particularly
difficult cases of student dysfunction with potential problems for violence.
Gun legislation and conflict resolution programs may help in dealing with the problem of
school violence. However, it is doubtful that the problem of violence can truly be solved until
actions are taken to treat this issue in a more preventive way. Changes are needed not only in the
schools, but in families and neighborhoods. These changes should help promote student autonomy
and community involvement and should end student isolation and alienation. Dysfunctional schools,
families, and communities deprive children of love and acceptance, as well as freedom and control
over their lives; they fail to provide natural, self-directed, and meaningful learning.

References
Arllen, N.L., Gable, R.A., & Hendrickson, J.M. (1994). Toward an understanding of origins of aggression. Preventing
School Failure, 38 (3), 18–23.
Aronson, E., & Carlsmith, J.M. (1962). Performance expectancy as a determinant of actual performance. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 2, 49–53.
Ascher, C. (1994). Gaining control of violence in the schools: A view from the field. ERIC Digest No. 100. New York:
ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 377 256)
Basinger, D. (1997). Fighting grade inflation: A misguided effort? College Teaching, 45, 88–91.
Baummeister, R.F. (1996, Summer). Should schools try to boost self-esteem? American Educator, 22, 14–19.
256 Edwards

Benard, B. (1995). Fostering resilience in children. ERIC Digest. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and
Childhood Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 386 327)
Benard, B. (1997). Turning it around for all youth: From risk to resilience. ERIC/CUE Digest No. 126. New York: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 412 309)
Conroy, M.A., & Fox, J.J. (1994). Setting events and challenging behaviors in the classroom: Incorporating contextual
factors into effective intervention plans. Preventing School Failure, 38, 29–34.
Covington, M.B., & Beery, R.G. (1976). Self-worth and school learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winson.
Devine, J. (1996). Maximum security. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Epstein, J.L. (1991). Paths to partnerships: What we can learn from federal, state, district, and school initiatives. Phi Delta
Kappan, 72, 345–349.
Evans, W.H., & Evans, S.S. (1985). The assessment of school violence. The Pointer, 29, 18–21.
Feinberg, W. (1990). The moral responsibility of the public schools. In J.I. Goodlad, R. Soder, & K.A. Sirotnik (Eds.), The
moral dimensions of teaching (pp. 155–187), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Furlong, M., Babinski, L., Poland, S., Munoz, J., & Boles, S. (1996). Factors associated with school psychologists per-
ception of campus violence. Psychology in the Schools, 33, 28–37.
Furman-Brown, G. (1999). Editor’s forward. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 6–12.
Gaustad, J. (1991). Schools attack the roots of violence. ERIC Digest No. 63. Eugene, OR: Clearinghouse on Educational
Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 335 806)
Gaustad, J. (1992). School discipline. ERIC Digest No. 78. Eugene, OR: Clearinghouse on Educational Management.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 350 727)
Girard, K., & Koch, S. (1996). Conflict resolution in the schools: A manual for educators. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Glasser, W. (1998). Choice theory: A new psychology of personal freedom. New York: Harper Collins.
Gose, B. (1997). Efforts to curb grade inflation get an F from many critics. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 43,
A41–A42.
Hackney, C.E., & Henderson, J.G. (1999). Educating school leaders for inquiry-based democratic learning communities.
Educational Horizons, 77, 67–73.
Huston, A.C., Donnerstein, E., Fairchild, H., Fashbach, N.D., Katz, P.A., Murray, J.P., Rubinstein, E.A., Wilcox, B.L., &
Zuckerman, D. (1992). Big world small screen: The role of television in American Society. Lincoln, NE: University
of Nebraska.
Hymen, I.A., & Perone, D.C. (1998). The other side of school violence: Educator policies and practices that may contribute
to student misbehavior. Journal of School Psychology, 36, 7–27.
Irmsher, K. (1997). Education reform and students at risk. ERIC Digest No. 112. Eugene, Oregon: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 405 642)
Kohn, A. (1992). No contest: The case against competition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kohn, A. (1993). Punished by rewards. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Levine, A. (1994, January 19). To deflate grade inflation: Simplify system. Chronicle of Higher Education, 40, B3.
Mozza, J.J., & Overstreet, S. (2000). Children and adolescents exposed to community violence: A mental health perspec-
tive for school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 29, 86–101.
Murray, B.A. (1996). The principal and the school psychologist: Partners for students. National Association of Secondary
Principals Bulletin, 80 (580), 95–99.
Osborne, R.J., & Wittrock, M.C. (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67, 489–508.
Phillips, D.C. (2000). An opinionated account of constructivist landscape. In D.C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in edu-
cation: Opinions and second opinions on controversial issues. Ninety-ninth yearbook of the National Society for the
Study of Education (pp. 1–16), Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Pianta, R.C., & Walsh, D.J. (1996). High-risk children in schools. New York: Routledge.
Resnick, L.B. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16, 13–20.
Saunders, L. (1998). Learning together. Thrust for Educational Leadership, 28, 18–21.
Sautter, R.C. (1995). Standing up to violence. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, K1–K12.
Schwartz, W. (1996). An overview of strategies to reduce school violence. ERIC/CUE Digest No. 115. New York: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 410 321)
Seligman, M.E.P. (1995). The optimistic child. New York: Harper Collins.
Sheckley, B.G., & Keeton, M.T. (1997). Service learning: A theoretical model. In J. Schine (Ed.), Service learning. Ninety-
sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 1 (pp. 32–55), Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Sirotnik, K.A. (1990). Society, schooling, teaching, and preparing to teach. In J.I. Goodlad, R. Soder, K.A. Sirotnik (Eds.),
The moral dimensions of teaching (pp. 296–327), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
 Student Violence 257

Smith, M.E. (1993). Television violence and behavior: A research summary. ERIC Digest. Syracuse: ERIC Clearinghouse
on Information and Technology. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 366 329).
Strike, K.A. (1999). Can schools be communities? The tension between shared values and inclusion. Educational Admin-
istration Quarterly, 35, 46–70.
Thomas, B.R. (1990). The school as a moral learning community. In J.I. Goodlad, R. Soder, & K.A. Sirotnik (Eds.), The
moral dimensions of teaching (pp. 266–293). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Toussaint, N. (1998). A community that values learning. Thrust for Educational Leadership, 28 (1), 26–281.
Werner, E., & Smith, R. (1989). Vulnerable but invincible: A longitudinal study of resilient children and youth. New York:
Adams, Bannister, and Cox.