"the effects of bullying among middle school gifted and talented children"

Gifted Children and Bullying 1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION


Chapter I

“Never be bullied into silence. Never allow yourself to be made a victim.

Accept no one's definition of your life, but define yourself” (page 6).

Harvey S. Firestone (2001)

Introduction

The link between bullying and school violence has drawn increased attention ever since

the Columbine High School massacre which occurred on Tuesday, April 20, 1999. This massacre

at the Jefferson County, Colorado high school left twelve students and one teacher dead, with

twenty-one other students injured directly, and three more injured while trying to escape. The

two gun-wielding high school seniors, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, were both identified as

gifted and were bullied for most of their formative years due to this identification of academic

success. An analysis by officials of the U.S. Secret Service found that “this bullying caused the

premeditated shooting, ending with Harris and Klebold committing suicide following the direct

act” (Newman, et al. 2004, p. 380).

Gifted children who are bullied and tormented often turn their rage on others, and in

some situations, they suffer silently and turn the despair inwards. In 2002, J. Daniel Scruggs was

a slight-built twelve-year-old boy with an IQ of 139 and attended Washington Middle School in

Meriden, Connecticut where he excelled in their gifted program, particularly in science and

mathematics. However, Scruggs was a lonely kid who was tormented at school because he often

wore mismatched clothes, acted ‘nerdy’ and was told that he smelled by his classmates. Very

often during the course of his school day, Scruggs was hit, punched, kicked, spit on and laughed

at, and ‘Kick Me’ signs were often affixed to his back; he had been thrown down a flight of stairs

several times, and sometimes made to eat his lunch off the cafeteria floor. Many of the teachers

http://thinkexist.com/quotes/harvey_s._firestone/


and administrators were aware of the abuse but failed to intervene because they felt this was

normal middle school behavior amongst peers, in essence “innocent rights of passage”

(McIntosh, 2006, p. 4). On January 2, 2002, Scruggs walked into his bedroom closet and hung

himself.

Statement of the Problem

All children are vulnerable to the effects of bullying, but gifted children differ from other

children in several significant ways. Most gifted children are already very intense and anxious, as

well as highly sensitive due to their own and others’ high expectations of them. Gifted children

consider social justice issues very important to them, and “with their own hyper-sensitivity to

self-criticism and perfectionalism, they struggle to make sense of this cruelty and aggression;

many times blaming themselves and withdrawing socially in order to hide from bullies” (Clark,

2008, p. 151). These gifted and talented children are “more susceptible to the severe emotional

damage that bullying can inflict” (Bosworth, 2009, p. 342). Take into consideration that gifted

students “tend to strive towards perfectionalism and consider their lives less fulfilling without the

pursuit of high goals, some impossibly high” (Lumsden, 2002, p. 346). Due to these tendencies,

“gifted students possess a multitude of behaviors ranging from healthy to dysfunctional”

(Lumsden, 2002, p. 346).

Attributes of ‘healthy’ behavior among gifted children include “an intense need for order

and organization, time-management skills, self-acceptance of mistakes and efficiency in

correcting, meeting high parental expectations, and great pleasure in achievement” (Bosworth,

2009, p. 343). “They have a use of positive coping strategies within a structured gifted climate

and they view personal efforts as an important part of success and happiness” (Clark, 2008, p.

187-188).


Attributes of ‘dysfunctional’ behavior among gifted children consist of “anxiety about

making errors, extremely high standards for oneself which are sometimes unachievable, and

perceived excessive expectations and criticism from others” (Clark, 2008, p. 188). This causes

the “questioning of one’s own judgment, the lack of effective coping strategies, and the need for

constant approval and acceptance” (Clark, 2008, p. 189). Bullying children within the gifted and

talented population is “an overlooked problem that leaves many of these students emotionally

shattered, which creates additional issues such as extreme depression and anxiety that may

manifest itself into violence or suicide” (Romain, 1997, p. 16).

Research Method and Questions

Researchers have been actively seeking answers to many commonly asked questions

involving adolescent bullying and victimization; however, “posttraumatic stress and dissociation

are limited areas of study in relationship to bullying, particularly among gifted children” (Rigby,

2003, p. 16).

The Reynolds Bully Victimization Scale for Schools (BVS) is designed to assess bullying

behavior and bully-victimization experiences in children and adolescents. This assessment is

used to identify students who are bullied as well as those who are doing the bullying. Measured

through the Reynolds Bully Victimization Distress Scale (BVDS), the scale “evaluates

internalized symptoms such as depression, anxiety and fear, as well as externalized symptoms

such as anger, acting-out, and defiance” (Reynolds, 2009, p. 8).

The BVS and BVDS are the most commonly used standardized instruments to form a

comprehensive picture of a child’s experience of peer-related threat, level of distress, and anxiety

related to school safety. These benchmarks are used to identify a child in need of intervention, or

for identifying what students perceive as a threatening or unsafe aspect of their school


environment. The limitations of both the BVS and the BVDS are that neither is specific to the

needs of gifted children. Therefore, “an interdisciplinary approach for assessment has been

formulated to assess the wide scale psychological impacts associated with bullying to include

intrapersonal and interpersonal difficulties associated specifically to gifted children” (Reynolds,

2009, p. 3).

In order to understand the research methods for this study, take an opportunity to review

the categories of questions which will be presented in order to formulate the data regarding the

bullying of gifted and talented children in the middle school environment. Category One

questions will pertain to how safe gifted and talented students feel about bullying. Questions will

include how safe do they feel in their general and elective classrooms, as opposed to their gifted

classrooms; as well as areas such as the gymnasium and athletic fields, cafeteria, and hallways.

These questions will extend the safety issue out to walking to and from school, as well as taking

the school bus with all the other students of the school. Category Two will allow them to discuss

how others treat them, with questions such as how often do other students bully them by laying

their hands on them, including incidents of hitting, kicking, pushing, or hurting their body

otherwise. Questions will ask how often do other students bully them by saying mean things to

them, things which hurt their feelings, how often do other students bully them by spreading mean

rumors about them, and how often do other students bully them by leaving them out of their

activities. Further insight will be acquired by asking in what grade is the student or students

which bully them, and have they ever told or asked for help when being bullied.

Category Three will question what they have seen or heard, such as how often

they have seen another student bully others by laying their hands on them or by saying mean

things to them, things which hurt their feelings. Also, how often have they seen another student


bully others by spreading mean rumors about them, and how often have they seen another

student bully others by leaving them out of their activities. Category Four questions will ask how

they reacted, such as what have they done when they have seen a student being hit, kicked,

pushed, punched or otherwise physically hurt in school or on the school bus; and if they helped a

student in a bully situation, what was the outcome, and whether it was positive or negative.

Category Five pertains specifically to gangs due to the demographics of the subjects, such as do

they know of students in their school who are members of a gang, or are wanna-be’s of a gang;

and exactly how much of a problem do they think gangs are in their school. Category Six will

complete the questionnaire with an essay question asking how much of a problem do they think

bullying is in their school. Participants will be asked to give some examples and specific

situations, and no names are to be included.

Rationale for the Study

The significance of this study is not to review bullying in gifted and talented children

versus common classroom children; however, it is to study the prevalence and impact that

bullying has on gifted and talented children specifically. The most common type of bullying

during the middle school years is “name-calling, teasing about appearance, pushing and shoving,

and insults regarding their intelligence and grades” (Smith, et al. 2008, p. 3). Regular children

get bullied too but gifted children are most often bullied based on their school performance,

which “turns their strength into a weakness and a source of shame” (Smith, et al. 2008, p. 7).

Certain challenges due to emotional immaturity come automatically with exceptional intellectual

abilities, therefore, gifted children are extremely sensitive to bullying.

Take into consideration the general traits exhibited within the gifted community, such as

what gifted children say. Statements such as “If I can’t do it perfectly, what’s the point? I should


excel at everything I do. The task should be done before anything else and every detail should be

perfect” (Clark, 2008, p. 57). These statements manifest themselves into more intense and

depressed reactions, such as “I’d better not make a mistake or people will think I’m stupid.

Everything should be clearly black or white. Gray is a sign of confused thinking” (Clark, 2008,

p. 57-58). Also, take into consideration other general traits exhibited within the gifted

community, such as what gifted children think and feel. Mostly they are “deeply embarrassed

about mistakes that they make and disgusted with themselves when criticized, anxious when

stating an opinion rather than a fact and afraid of rejection, and afraid of appearing incompetent

or stupid” (Clark, 2008, p. 59). Therefore, plagued by self-hate when feeling guilty about letting

others down, these attributes lead to them being “discouraged, anxious and exhausted due to

being unable to ever relax, and stressed when their routine is interrupted” (Clark, 2008, p. 59).

In essence, they are accustomed to easy success and praised for work requiring modest

effort, and they often do not develop a work ethic or learn to meet a challenge. When these

children grow up, they seek applause constantly without knowing how to get it. Children held to

impossibly high standards and deprived of praise may get “caught in a cycle of hopeless,

misdirected perfectionism, trying to please parents, teachers, or bosses who never can be

satisfied” (Delisle, et al. 2002, p.14). “The words that are put on them when they’re young are

likely to stay with them the rest of their lives” (McIntosh, 2006, p. 5). It is important to

remember that although gifted children are cognitively advanced, the same cannot be said of

them physically, socially and emotionally. In actuality, their emotional maturity is even less

developed due to their excelled anxieties and stress-levels. Teachers, administrators, parents, and

even counselors usually miss the indicators of stress; and “the lack of opportunity for gifted

students to discuss these social and emotional issues contributes to their vulnerability to bullying


(McIntosh, 2006, p. 5).

Bullying creates a sense of fear that disrupts the learning environment, and we must

actively address the impact of bullies on school climate and academic success of students.

Administration, educators, parents, coaches and even trained counselors may miss the indicators

of their distress, and the lack of these opportunities for gifted students to discuss concerns related

to social and emotional development potentially contributes to vulnerability A student that has

bullied can have far-reaching effects in a school and “create a climate of fear and intimidation

not only in his or her victims, but in fellow students” as well; therefore, students who bully, their

victims and bystanders are all affected (Milsom, et al. 2006, p. 38). Bullying sets a tense

environment in a school and as addressed earlier, can lead to violence towards others or suicide

by the victims. Although freedom from the fear and shame of bullying does not necessarily

ensure academic success for all students, it is indeed “a necessary condition to promote effective

learning in a positive classroom culture” (Bosworth, et al. 2009, p. 363).

Anticipated Outcome

Once scores and summaries have been created, this study intends to reflect different

approaches to bullying issues among the gifted and talented population of middle school

children, providing information intended for positive intervention programs. Approaches will

include “the responsibility to the victim by assisting in developing the skills and capacity to

resist bullying,” and intervention techniques to deter it from occurring or re-occurring (Reynolds,

2009, p. 12). Administrators, teachers, counselors, and school personnel have a responsibility to

the bullies as well, to treat them with consequences and a firm manner in order to deter their

behavior. Providing these problem solving skills to school staff and administrators, they would

have the tools required to “reach constructive outcomes and develop programs to support


emotional and social rehabilitation for the bully and the victim” (Reynolds, 2009, p. 12).

Being bullied has already been “recognized as a health problem for children because of

their association and adjustment problems in adolescence, and leads to poor mental health and

even violent and suicidal tendencies” (Delisle, et al. 2002, p. 77). It is therefore important to

assess how these children are affected, reflect on the outcome of this study and those within the

literature review, and create pro-active programs and classroom environments to nurture the

specific needs for these gifted and talented children, considering that their needs have shown to

be more pronounced and profound.

Definition of Terms

Gifted and Talented

Gifted and talented students are those who give “evidence of high achievement capability

in such areas as intellectual, creative or artistic, or in specific academic fields; and who need

services or activities provided on the gifted and talented curriculum in order to fully develop

those capabilities” (Delisle, et al. 2002, p. 19). Children capable of high performance include

those with demonstrated achievement or potential ability in any of the following areas, including

“general intellectual ability, specific academic aptitude, creative or productive thinking,

leadership ability, visual and performing arts, and psychomotor ability” (Milsom, et al. 2006, p.

37).

Bullying

When using the term bullying, it is used to describe a child being “teased, terrorized or

systematically victimized by his or her peers” (Burrill, 2006, p. 85). Further descriptions include

the concept that there is a difference in power between peers in this bullying dynamic in which

“one imposes negative consequences towards another individual” (Burrill, 2006, p. 87). Bullying


has also often been defined as “a behavior that occurs repeatedly over time as well as behavior

that can occur as an isolated incident” (Juvonen, et al.2003, p. 1233). For the purposes of this

study, bullying will refer to “one or more perpetrators, directly or indirectly; and attacking a

victim or a group of victims, one time only or repeatedly over time” (McIntosh, 2006, p. 4).

Organization of the Study

This study has been organized within five chapters. Chapter 1 includes an introduction to

the study, statement of the problem, the research method and questions, the rationale for the

study, the anticipated outcome, the definitions of terms, and the organization of the study.

Chapter 2 is comprised of a literature review, dealing with studies previously done on the effects

of bullying on gifted and talented middle school children; as well as the instruments of measure

used to conduct these studies. Chapter 3 provides an introduction to the methodology of the

study, as well as the purpose of the study, and research questions. Within the methodology

section are also descriptions of the setting, participants, measures, instruments, and procedure

used for the study, as well as the rationale for the study. Chapter 4 includes the purpose of the

study and the research questions implemented, as well as the presentation of the data and results.

Chapter 5 concludes this study with the findings and a summary of the findings, the implications

of the study, and recommendations for further studies.


CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW


Chapter II

“We are not all the same, we do not all have the same kinds of minds;

education works most effectively for most individuals if these differences

are taken into account rather than denied or ignored” (p. 36).

H. Gardner (1995)

Introduction

Research began in the early 1970’s in the areas of bullying and victimization, and

researchers have been actively seeking answers to many commonly asked questions such as

“which children bully, who are the targeted victims, where does it happen, why does it happen,

how can we prevent it, how can we identify it, what causes it, what are the effects, and is it

getting worse?” (Peterson, 2004, p. 135). Existing literature agrees that bullying is “a complex

process that involves multiple facets on many levels” and studies conducted over the last 40

years provide evidence that there is some consistency pertaining to certain patterns and trends

(Bosworth, et al. 2009, p. 341). This literature review will provide an overall perspective on the

effects of bullying on middle school gifted and talented children, including what constitutes a

gifted and talented child, as well as the definition of bullying, bullying and school climate,

psychiatric and psychological factors, meeting the social and emotional needs of bullies and their

victims, bullying intervention, and bully victimization instruments of measure.

Defining Giftedness and Talent

In order to fully understand the effects of bullying on gifted and talented children, it is

most important to be able to identify these children first. Through this identification process and

understanding of their unique makeup, we can further delve into why bullying impacts them

differently than the children in the common or traditional classroom settings or school


environments. Gifted children are those considered by educational systems to have significantly

higher than normal levels of one or more forms of intelligence. During the 20 th century, these

children were often classified by the use of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) Tests but recent

developments in theories of intelligence have thrown doubt on the use of such tests exclusively.

The fact remains that “these students are beyond their peers and often feel they are alienated or

limited by those around them,” including but not limited to teachers, coaches, and administrators

(Bradshaw, et al. 2007, p. 362). Many schools in the United States now attempt to sort out these

students, and offer additional or specialized education and counseling in the hopes of nurturing

their giftedness and their talents.

Gifted and talented children are capable of high performance, and include those children

which demonstrate achievement or potential in such categories as general intellectual ability,

specific academic aptitude, and creative or productive thinking. Over the years, these categories

have been expanded to include leadership ability, psychomotor skills, and visual and performing

arts. Using these categories, “a school system could expect to identify 10%-15% of its student

population as gifted or talented” (Clark, 2008, p. 28). Understanding each of these categories

allows for a better understanding of giftedness as a concept more meaningfully with parents,

administrators, school board members, gifted advisory committees, researchers, and anyone who

needs to understand the dynamics of the term.

Identification of Gifted and Talented Children

The process of identifying students for gifted and talented programs must be based on

measurable practices, and in recent years there has been a focus on identifying those students that

are typically under-represented. This includes “culturally and linguistically diverse and low-

income students, and the use of alternative assessments such as verbal ability tests and creativity


profiles” (Lane, et al. 2006, p. 391). The assessments referenced below are aimed to be inclusive

of students from different cultures, races, and economic circumstances. In addition, the use of

multiple assessments in the identification process is done not only to identify those students that

are in need of instruction beyond the regular curriculum, but also “those students who display the

potential for high-level learning beyond their current accessibility” (Lane, et al. 2006, p. 394).

General intellectual ability or talent is usually defined in terms of “a high

intelligence test score or a series of test scores, and in which the student has measured two

standard deviations above the mean” (Reynolds, 2009, p. 2). These children are often recognized

by their “wide-ranging knowledge of general information as well as high levels of vocabulary,

abstract word knowledge, abstract reasoning, and memory” (Schuler, 2002, p. 3). Additionally,

they tend to have longer attention spans, they understand directions and complete tasks

independently as well as do more than is expected on an assignment, and they use complex,

normally compound sentences. Since they grasp new concepts quite easily, they ask probing

questions and apply information to formulate solutions. Specific academic aptitude or talent

applies to students identified by their outstanding performance on an achievement or aptitude test

in one particular area such as language arts, mathematics, science, history or social studies, or

foreign language. In their particular area, they are self-motivated and risk-takers, and able to

recognize relationships between concepts and comprehend their meanings. Furthermore, they

“analyze and reason out complicated theories and apply their knowledge to reason things out”

(Schuler, 2002, p. 3). These students “normally score on the 97th percentile or higher on standard

achievement tests” such as the Virginia Standards of Learning, and later on higher education

tests such as the PSAT and the SAT (Reynolds, 2009, p. 3).

Creative and productive thinking is “the ability to produce new


ideas by bringing together elements usually thought of as independent or dissimilar, and the

aptitude for developing new meanings that have real-life relevance and social conscious value”

(Piechowski, 1999, p. 218). Characteristics of creative and productive students include

“openness to experience, setting personal standards for evaluation, ability to play with ideas,

willingness to take risks, preference for complexity, tolerance for ambiguity, positive self-image,

and the ability to become submerged in a task” (Piechowski, 1999, p. 218). Creative and

productive students are identified through the use of tests such as the Torrance Test of Creative

Thinking (TTCT) or through demonstrated creative performance. Recently, the Minnesota Tests

of Creative Thinking (MTCT) have been used in order to assess verbal and nonverbal tasks, and

uses techniques outside the norm to scale these tasks such as taking common problems and

applying an impossibilities task, or develop a just-suppose theory. Gifted students with talent in

the arts demonstrate special aptitude in visual arts, music, dance, drama, or other related studies.

These students can be assessed and identified by using task descriptions such as the Creative

Products Scales (CPS). Indicators of these tests include the inclusive assessment of particular

cognitive abilities as well as “problem-solving skills, perseverance, and high levels of

motivation” (Cukierkorn, 2008, p. 27).

Leadership ability is identified as the ability to direct individuals or groups to a common

decision or action, and students “who demonstrate giftedness in leadership ability use group

skills and negotiation techniques in difficult or controversial situations” (Polgar, 2007, p. 78).

These skills are normally recognized through “a student’s keen interest in problem solving, and

some of the characteristics include self-confidence, responsibility, cooperation, a tendency to

dominate, and the ability to adapt readily to new situations” (Polgar, 2007, p. 78). These students

can normally be identified through using instruments such as the Fundamental Interpersonal


Relations Orientation Behavior Assessment (FIRO-B).

Psychomotor ability involves kinesthetic motor skills such as practical, spatial,

mechanical, and physical skills; however, it is seldom used as a criterion in acceptance into a

gifted program. Updated criterion now includes classroom observations of students’ behaviors,

collected by the use of Gifted Rating Scales (GRS) designed to assess “student characteristics

and behaviors, and student interviews provide useful supplemental data” (Lane, 2006, p. 418).

Teachers and administrators use GRS in the identification process because they are “based on a

multidimensional model of giftedness” (Pfeiffer, 2006, p. 107). The levels of achievement

possible for each demonstration or performance are defined by the use of rubrics. Rubrics are

often developed within these scales with the quality of achievement defined, and “rated from 1 to

6, with 6 being high, and there can be as few as three levels of achievement: minimum,

competent, and exemplary” (Koth, et al. 2008, p. 101). When these rubrics are developed, there

is an understanding of the expectations and quality of the demonstration or performance that

must be met for each level of evaluation. This knowledge of expectations and quality allows for

a fair and meaningful evaluation, and “observing the various levels of proficiency provides better

information on the strengths and weaknesses of the student” (Koth, et al. 2008, p. 101).

These gifted and talented children are not only different from the general adolescent

population, but they are different among themselves in personality types, usually measured by

the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Personality dimensions have also shown to be

associated with academic achievement, intelligence, and talent development; and normally fall

into two categories, attitude-related types and function-related types. Using the indicator scales,

these children exhibit either extraversion or introversion traits. The extraverted types normally

develop “a strong awareness of their environment and have a strong propensity to influence


others, but are highly unlikely to be influenced by others” (Sak, 2004, p. 72). These children

usually seem “confident, accessible, and expansive in their manner” but harbor a need for

acceptance and praise” (Sak, 2004, p. 72). Introverts, on the contrary, are somewhat “more

independent and idea-oriented than extraverts, as they usually get their excitement from the inner

world” (Sak, 2004, p. 73). They may sometimes seem “lost in thought or inaccessible

emotionally” but they too harbor a need for acceptance and praise (Sak, 2004, p. 73). Using these

two dimensions of extraversion and introversion, indicators provide data between two different

types of judgment used by gifted children. Feeling types usually “value harmony and human

relationships, and make decisions subjectively with a consideration of society’s values” (Sak,

2004, p. 75). In contrast, thinking types emphasize logic and objectivity in reasoning, and “this

preference suppresses values and uses impersonal feelings in making objective decisions” (Sak,

2004, p. 77).

Using these categories as a guideline, “gifted and talented children are those identified by

professionally qualified persons who by virtue of outstanding abilities are capable of high

performance” (Schuler, 2002, p. 4). Gifted and talented children are usually not the first group

that comes to mind when educators think of diverse populations or differentiated instruction,

however, “these students constitute a distinct group of individuals who, as a result of their gifts,

share common experiences and have unique needs” (Shepard, 2008, p. 11). In accordance with

these unique needs, many gifted programs have developed their own multidimensional screening

processes, such as the one referenced below. These are the children who require differentiated

educational programs and counseling services beyond those normally provided by the regular

school program in order to realize their contribution to self and society.


Table 1: Multidimensional Screening Process

Step One: 1. Nominations - teacher, principal, counselor, parents, peer, self

2. Teacher report on student functioning

3. Family history and student background

4. Peer identification

5. Student inventory of works, achievements, and interests

6. Variety of tests

Step Two: Development of Profile (done by Coordinator)

Step Three: Coordinator decision to refer to committee and parental consent to refer

Step Four: Development of Case Study (Coordinator)

1. Screening data 2. Parent interviews 3. Test protocols

a. Individual intelligence b. Content area c. Creativity (tests)

Step Five: Committee meeting for consideration

Committee decision to identify and place in appropriate program

Parental decision to place

Step Six: Placement in Gifted Program

Step Seven: Assessment for Individual Educational Plan (IEP)

1. Case study material

2. Functional assessment

Step Eight: Assessment of Appropriate Educational Program and IEP Plan

Growing Up Gifted: Part II: Educating the Gifted Student, Chapter 6: Assessment and

Identification of Gifted Students, by B. Clark, Columbus: Pearson Publishing, Seventh Edition,

Copyright 2008, p. 203.


Mental Self-Management and Multiple Intelligences

Robert Sternberg (1982) had suggested that giftedness is a type of mental-self

management, and “the mental management of one’s life in a constructive, purposeful way

normally possesses three basic elements which include adapting to environments, selecting new

environments, and shaping new environments” (Clark, 2008, p. 66). According to Sternberg, “the

key psychological basis of intellectual giftedness resides in insight skills that include separating

relevant information from irrelevant, combining isolated pieces of information into a unified

whole, and relating newly acquired information to information acquired in the past, as well as

activating prior knowledge” (Clark, 2008, p. 67). Sternberg emphasized problem-solving abilities

and viewed the gifted student as one who processes information rapidly and uses insight abilities.

Researchers continue to challenge the traditional definitions of intelligence, and Sternberg

developed the Triarchic Theory of Intelligence which suggests there are actually three

dimensions to intelligence, thus three components to consider when testing for giftedness.

Compotential intelligence consists of mental mechanisms for processing information,

experiential intelligence involves dealing with new tasks or situations, and the ability to use

mental processes automatically, and contextual intelligence as the ability to adapt to, select, and

shape the environment (Clark, 2008, p. 37-38).

Howard Gardner (1983) suggested a concept of multiple intelligences, stating that there

are “several ways of viewing the world including linguistic, logical or mathematical, musical,

bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal intelligence” (Gagne, et al. 2003, p. 69).

Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences is more widely known among educators because it

reflects what teachers already know, which is there are many different ways of being smart.

Gardner developed his theory by combining studies of the brain with research on the contextual


aspects of intelligence. He believed that “only if we expand and reformulate our view of what

counts as human intellect, we will be able to devise more appropriate ways of assessing it and

more effective ways of educating it” (Clark, 2008, p. 37). These processes resulted in three types

of giftedness, according to Gardner, and modified the concept of intelligence. The first type of

giftedness being analytic giftedness, which is “the academic type of reasoning, measured by

intelligence tests” (Clark, 2008, p. 38). The second type as synthetic giftedness, which refers to

creative and intuitive thinking; and the third as practical giftedness, which is “the ability to apply

analytical and synthetic abilities to everyday problems and issues successfully” (Clark, 2008, p.

38). In the process of formulating his original theory, Gardner drew from a wide range of studies

on subjects including prodigies, gifted individuals, brain-damaged patients, normal children and

adults, and individuals of diverse cultures; and developed the seven steps to optimizing learning.

Gardner’s theory addresses many areas that had not previously been seen as a part of

intelligence, and “he brings additional clarity to the critical importance of the interaction of both

genetics and environment in its development” (Clark, 2008, p. 37).

Table 2: The Seven Steps to Optimizing Learning

Step 1: Understand brain development as a basis for learning Integrative Standards

Step 2: Create a responsive learning environment * Intuitive

Step 3: Integrate the intellectual process * Cognitive

Step 4: Establish the continuum for learning * Affective

Step 5: Assess the student's level of mastery * Physical

Step 6: Differentiated and individualize teaching and learning * Sensing

Step 7: Evaluate teaching and learning, reflect and reform


Growing Up Gifted: Part II: Educating the Gifted Student, Chapter 7: Optimizing Learning:

Using Brain Research in Elementary and Secondary Classrooms, by B. Clark, Columbus:

Pearson Publishing, Seventh Edition, Copyright 2008, p. 227.

Joseph Renzulli (1986) stated that gifted behavior reflects “an interaction among the

basic clusters of human straits which include above-average general or specific abilities, high

levels of task commitment and motivation, and high levels of creativity” (Gagne, et al. 2003, p.

71). Gifted and talented children are those who possess or are capable of developing these

composite of traits and applying them to any potentially valuable area of human performance.

While a few students will demonstrate these behaviors consistently and across the disciplines,

other students may demonstrate them in specific activities and interest areas. Renzulli contends

that the most effective approach to educating high-ability students is for teachers to choose

content, instruction, activities, and opportunities according to a student’s learning needs and

challenges. “Higher-order thinking, investigations, innovative learning links, and creativity are

all essential teaching techniques in order to empower learners and inspire teachers” (Evans,

2008, p. 85). The recent growth of charter schools have become a more promising environment

for gifted and talented children as well due to their ability to “provide varied instructional

programs and employ recommended practices, such as acceleration and project-based learning”

(Buchanan, et al. 2006, p. 128).

Differentiating Between Giftedness and Talent

The definitions of giftedness and talent “designate the possession and use of superior

natural abilities, aptitudes or gifts, in at least one ability domain, to a degree that places an

individual at least among the top 10% of his or her peers” (Delisle, et al. 2002, p. 31-32).

Francoys Gagne’s Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT) proposes that there


are four aptitude domains, which are intellectual, creative, socioaffective, and sensorimotor.

These natural abilities “whose development and level of expression is partially controlled by the

individual’s genetic endowment, can be observed in every task children are confronted with in

the course of their schooling” (Delisle, et al. 2002, p. 41). The intellectual domain consists of

fluid reasoning, including inductive and deductive; as well as memory, a keen sense of

observation, and judgment skills. The creative domain is mostly inventiveness and imagination,

with skills in retrieval fluency and problem-solving. Within the socioaffective domain lies

perceptiveness, and empathy and tact within the communication skills; with a strength in

influence due to advanced leadership and persuasion skills. Finally, the sensorimotor domain are

advanced visual, auditory, and olfactory skills, with an aptitude for strength, endurance, and

coordination. The developmental process is dependent on the learning, training, and practice of

these aptitude domains, and supports Gagne’s theory that “giftedness designates the possession

and use of untrained and spontaneously expressed natural abilities, called aptitudes or gifts, in at

least one ability domain, to a degree that places an individual at least among the top 10% of age

peers” (Delisle, et al. 2002, p. 44).

If this model which supports multiple intelligences is applied to educational curriculum,

by providing lesson plans and programs “in a way that all students are encouraged to develop

their stronger area, and at the same time educators provide opportunities to enhance the learning

process in the less strong areas, academic success may be attainable for all children in our school

system” (Delisle, et al. 2002, 45-46). For instance, the intellectual abilities needed to learn to

read, speak a foreign language, or understand a new mathematical concept, the creative abilities

needed to solve many different kinds of problems and produce original work, or the social

abilities that children use daily with classmates, teachers, administrators, coaches, and parents.


Table 3: Gagne’s Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent

Catalysts (Positive/Negative Impacts)

GIFTEDNESS MOTIVATION TEMPERMENT TALENT

Aptitude

Domains

PERSONALITY Field

Domains

Intellectual Initiative Adaptability Academics

reasoning, verbal,

spatial, judgment,

needs,

interests,

attitude,

values,

English, History,

Math, Science,

memory perseverance competitiveness, Foreign Language

Creative

self-esteem Games of Strategy

originality, humor, chess, puzzles, video

interpretive DEVELOPMENTAL PROCESS Technology

Socioaffective Learning - Training - Practicing mechanic, model

leadership, empathy, Arts

self-awareness ENVIRONMENT PERSONS visual, drama, music

Sensorimotor home, school, parents, peers, Social Action

strength, endurance, relatives, church teachers, coaches tutoring, politics

flexibility UNDERTAKINGS EVENTS Business

Others activities, sports, encounters, trips, sales, manufacturing

ESP, gift of healing community events vacations Athletics / Sports

When Gifted Children Don’t Have All The Answers, Chapter 2: Identifying Gifted Children, by

J. Delisle and J. Galbraith, Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing, Inc., Copyright 2002, p. 45.


High aptitudes or gifts can be observed more easily and directly in young children

because “environmental influences and systematic learning have exerted their moderating

influence in a limited way only” (Piechowski, 1999, p. 221). However, “they still show

themselves in older children and even in adults through the facility and speed with which

individuals acquire new skills in any given field of human activity” (Piechowski, 1999, p. 223).

The easier or faster the learning process, the greater the natural abilities and achievements

through aptitude, and “talents progressively emerge from the transformation of these high

aptitudes onto the well-trained and systematically developed skills characteristic of a particular

field of human activity or performance” (Piechowski, 1999, p. 223). These fields can be

extremely diverse and given natural ability can express itself in many different ways, depending

on the field of activity preferred and adopted by the individual. For example, manual dexterity as

a natural physical ability can be modeled into the particular skills or talents of a painter, a pianist,

a jewelry maker, or a video-game designer. Similarly, intelligence as a natural ability can be

modeled into the figurative language of a poet, the scientific reasoning of a chemist, the

mechanics of an architect, or the strategic planning of an athlete.

Defining Intelligence

The attempts to define giftedness in one way or another are reliant on intelligence and to

better understand giftedness, a closer look will be taken on the concept of intelligence.

Significant efforts have been made to measure intelligence but since the concept is elusive, test

constructors aim at testing what they feel are typical manifestations of intelligence in behaviors.

Often these tests of intelligence create other terms in defining a child, and educators become

confused regarding the actual intellectual ability of their students. The term ‘genius’ used to be

widely employed but now is reserved for reference only to the “phenomenally or profoundly


gifted person” (Evans, 2008, p. 84). The term ‘talented’ tends to be used when referring to a

particular strength or ability of a person” (Evans, 2008, p. 85). However, thought should be given

to whether the talent is truly a gift or is it rather an ability that has become a highly developed

skill through practice. Terms such as ‘prodigy’ or ‘precocious’ are more commonly used when a

child shows a “decidedly advanced degree of skill in a particular endeavor at an early age, as

well as a very disciplined type of motivation” (Evans, 2008, p. 84).

‘Superior’ is a comparative term, meaning that when the term is used, it should be

“referenced in accordance to whom or what group is the student superior to and to what degree”

(Evans, 2008, p. 84). A child may be “markedly superior to the majority of children in a specific

mental ability such as verbal comprehension, and at the same time be equally inferior in another

specific mental ability such as psychomotor” (Evans, 2008, p. 84). ‘Rapid learner’ is a helpful

term in understanding giftedness because it is “a distinct characteristic manifested by the

identified gifted child” and the term ‘exceptional’ is appropriate when referring to the gifted

children being different in their characteristics of intelligence (Evans, 2008, p. 85). The term

which is used often in referencing gifted children is ‘elitism,’ which means the choice, best, or

superior part or class of persons. However, the misunderstanding of this word has given the

negative connotation of implying snobbishness, selectivity, and unfair special attention or

treatment. The fact is that gifted and talented children are elite in the same way someone is a

record champion holder or a leader in their field, and the negative connotations of the word need

not apply since they are not accurate in their definition, thus they are not credible.

The levels of giftedness are measured by intelligence tests and although most IQ tests do

not have the capacity to discriminate accurately at higher levels, they are able to provide a range

to distinguish levels of aptitude. “The Stanford-Binet is the only test that has a sufficient ceiling


to identify the basic bright child from the profoundly gifted; and teamed with the use of the

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, they provide the guidelines for the assessment of the

gifted population” (Parker, 2008, p. 102). As of 2008, the ranges are as follows:

Bright: 115+, or 1 in 6 (84th percentile)

Moderately Gifted: 130+, or 1 in 50 (97.9th percentile)

Highly Gifted: 145+, or 1 in 1,000 (99.9th percentile)

Exceptionally Gifted: 160+, or 1 in 30,000 (pp.997th percentile)

Profoundly Gifted: 15+, or 1 in 3 million (99.99997th percentile)

David Perkins (1995) synthesized much of the research and theories of intelligence and

grouped them into three strands. Neural intelligence is “rooted in a biological system and

determined by neural efficiency, which is the brain’s physical process” (Peterson, 2003, p. 66).

Experiential intelligence involves know-how or knowledge of typical patterns and situations and

as a result, “intelligence is a matter of experience with thinking in particular contexts” (Peterson,

2003, p. 66). Reflective intelligence is “based on knowledge of thinking strategies” which

means knowing how to think (Peterson, 2003, p. 67). This includes how to monitor one’s

thinking and how to persist, and Perkins contends that “not one, but all three strands contribute to

intelligence and behavior” (Peterson, 2003, p. 68-69).

As the concept of intelligence becomes more multidimensional, the concept of giftedness

also evolves; and if intelligence is not a single quality, there cannot be a single definition of

giftedness. Schools are becoming more specific about identifying abilities and areas of strength

rather than giving students the generic gifted label. If intelligence is not static and can be learned,

then the assumption is that giftedness and talent can be developed. This further supports the need

for the use of multiple assessments in the identification process, as well as the need to be able to


identify the characteristics of gifted students. Therefore, you not only identify those students that

are in need of instruction beyond the regular curriculum, but also “those students who display the

potential for high-level learning beyond their current accessibility” (Lane, 2006, p. 394).

Table 4: Characteristics for Helping to Identify Gifted Students

Positive

Characteristics

Negative

Characteristics

able to generate many ideas

to solutions and problems

FLUENCY many dominate others, may

have difficulty closing task

has high tolerance for

ambiguity

FLEXIBILITY may be impatient with details

or restrictions, unproductive

able to express ideas in

unique ways, fantasy, fun

ORIGINALITY

CREATIVITY

may be considered unusual or

silly, may refuse authority

interested in a wide variety of

things, asks many questions

CURIOSITY may ignore activities in order

to pursue individual interests

has knowledge which is

unusually advanced for age,

progress at a more rapid pace

KNOWLEDGE

SKILLS

may be intolerant of others,

may dominate, bored with

routine

relates positively to peers and

adults

SOCIAL

RELATIONSHIPS

may have difficulty relating

to peers and adults

persistent, self-motivated and

able to stay on task

TASK COMMITMENT may have difficulty bringing

task to closure

Adapted from Challenge: Reading and Teaching The Gifted Child, by Judy Luker, Good Apple

Press, www.sengifted.com, Copyright February 2002, Volume 48, p. 21.


Special Needs of Gifted Children

In order to understand the true meaning of giftedness, it is necessary that we separate the

concept of giftedness from academic or talented achievement. High achievers are those who are

motivated to do well in school, and gifted students may be high achievers or they may be high

school dropouts. They have learning needs that differ from other students, just as

developmentally delayed students have different learning needs as well. “When giftedness is

seen as the ‘mirror image of retardation,’ it becomes clear that there is a responsibility to meet

their needs, whether or not they are high achievers” (Lind, 2001, p. 4). In the past, the concept of

giftedness was associated primarily with a high IQ and it was assumed that gifted students were

born with high intelligence which was identified by their grades and test scores, and were

capable of excelling in all areas of school and life. These assumptions are still prevalent, but

there have been a lot changes due to “cognitive science, developmental psychology, and new

understandings of how learning takes place” which are influencing the way gifted is defined and

how the special needs are conceptualized (Polgar, 2007, p. 79).

Many students who are achieving A’s may be severely underachieving and by the same

token for gifted children, achieving an A may not be a goal. The real purpose of education is to

learn new information, and students who achieve A’s based on what they have already learned

are gaining daily practice in underachievement. All students have a right to struggle and

struggling is essential to growth, and it means that the student is stretching to attain new power in

learning. “Gifted students actually enjoy struggling to master new material and when not

pressured about their grades, they welcome the challenge” (Polgar, 2007, p. 79). Teachers have

an enormous impact on the lives of their gifted students, and underachieving students have been

salvaged by one or more teachers who took an interest in them. The investment of time and


energy in differentiating the curriculum for gifted students can inspire them to have higher

aspirations, to win scholarships, to choose demanding and fulfilling careers, and to use their gifts

for the betterment of society.

Defining Bullying

Now that the identification process for gifted and talented children has been presented,

we can further explore the research on why bullying impacts these children differently than the

children in the common or traditional classroom settings or school environments. When using the

term bullying, it is often used to describe a child being “teased, terrorized or systematically

victimized by his or her peers” (Burrill, 2006, p. 85). Further descriptions include the concept

that there is a difference in power between peers in this bullying dynamic in which “one imposes

negative consequences towards another individual” (Burrill, 2006, p. 87). Bullying has also often

been defined as “a behavior that occurs repeatedly over time as well as behavior that can occur

as an isolated incident” (Juvonen, et al. 2003, p. 1233). Berthold and Hoover (1987) argued that

bullying exists when students are “exposed repeatedly or over time to a negative action on the

part of one or more students” (Berthold, et al. 2008, p. 65). Bullying is invoked when

“aggression is directed on purpose to one student by another student that enjoys physical or

psychological power over a victim” (Berthold, et al. 2008, p. 65). Mobbing occurs when “an

individual is bullied collectively by several bullies” and these behaviors range from

psychological abuse to physical altercations (Burrill, 2006, p. 89). Victims tend to worry, dislike

themselves and “desire to stay home from school for the sake of their physical safety” (Berthold,

et al. 2008, p. 72).

Relational aggression is also considered a form of bullying, which is essentially “non-

physical aggression but deeply psychological” (Peterson, et al. 2007, p. 149). This form uses


peer and social relationships as the weapon to harm someone, meaning that the bully threatens to

destroy a victim’s relationship with the few peers and friends they presently have, thus

destroying their social life. Examples of this type of bullying include spreading rumors, ignoring

the victim completely, and telling others to specifically ignore the victim. Burrill’s study (1990)

shows that “relational aggression is more common in girls than in boys, as girls have a tendency

to place a higher value on friendships and social status than boys” (Burrill, 2006, p. 88). Burrill

suggests that “boys are more likely to use physical means of aggression on their victims which

gains them social power, ultimately rewarding them for their negative behavior” (Burrill, 2006,

p. 89). Bullies are more likely than other students to spend time at home without adult

supervision; they drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes, cheat on tests, and bring weapons to school.

Bullies also fare poorly as adults, and they are “more likely to receive attention from law

enforcement officials, as well as seek mental health services from early adolescence into their

adulthood” (Bosworth, et al. 2009, p. 359). The aggression they exhibit from their childhood

tends to become a lifestyle as they grow older, and “these types of antisocial behavior lead to

failure in school, failure in the work force, and failure in their interpersonal relationships”

(Bosworth, et al. 2009, p. 360).

The primary purpose of the Berthold and Hoover (1987) study was to examine the

relationship between bullying and risk factors among 591 fourth through sixth grade students in a

mid-sized Midwestern town in the U.S. They found that “more than one-third of the respondents

reportedly experienced bullying, while one-fifth reported that they themselves did the bullying”

(Berthold, et al. 2008, p. 73). Implications of this study were outlined including various bullying

intervention strategies and suggestions for assessment and therapeutic approaches of addressing

the presence of psychological symptoms, such as posttraumatic stress and dissociation.


Additionally, technology has brought us a new type of problem called cyberbullying, and

this social cruelty is widespread, growing, and children are often not telling anyone.

Cyberbullying can include sending mean or threatening messages or images, pretending to be

someone else to make a person look bad, or sharing private information about another person.

Cyberbullying is the sending or posting of harmful or cruel texts or images using the Internet or

other digital communication devices such as e-mail, instant messaging (IM), text messages or

digital images sent on mobile phones, social networking sites such as FaceBook and MySpace,

web pages, blogs, virtual worlds, chat rooms or discussion groups, and interactive game sites

such as Xbox. “The biggest problem with this type of bullying is that it can be difficult to trace,

can happen at any time, day or night; and the messages can be sent out quickly to a large group

of people” (Kirk, 2009, p. 24). Cyberbullying can be conducted 24 hours a day and 7 days a

week, making the victim a perpetual target at any moment in time. The harassment can be

anonymous, and a single message posted online or sent to a mobile phone can be spread and

circulated to a wide audience quickly and efficiently. Hurtful or embarrassing messages or

images can remain online indefinitely to damage the child's reputation, social life and

friendships, and possibly their self-image.

Many researchers agree that the duration of bullying, the number of bullies, and

the profile of the victims are all very integral factors in the bullying victimization process. There

are also different types of bullying dynamics, “such as direct bullying as an open verbal or

physical attack on an individual, and indirect bullying which indicates that much of the bullying

is proactive aggression” (McIntosh, 2006, p. 5). Proactive aggression, as described by McIntosh,

is aggressive behavior that usually occurs “without any apparent provocation or threat on the part

of the victim” (McIntosh, 2006, p. 5). For the purposes of this study, bullying will refer to “one


or more perpetrators, directly or indirectly; and attacking a victim or a group of victims, one time

only or repeatedly over time” (McIntosh, 2006, p. 4).

Bullying and School Climate

In the Bosworth and Simon study (2001), bullying was examined as a “continuum of

mild to extreme behaviors” in order to improve identification and targeting of those individuals

most at risk for bullying (Bosworth, et al. 2009 p. 342). “Demographic, behavioral, and

psychosocial correlates were tested on a continuous measure of bullying behaviors, and were

rated according to the number and frequency of the behaviors” (Bosworth, et al. 2009, p. 342).

Among the 558 middle school students surveyed in the study, only 20% reported no bullying

behavior and in multiple regression analysis, it was found that misconduct, anger, and beliefs

supported in violence encouraged bullying behavior. However, confidence in using non-violent

strategies, and intentions of using non-violence or alternative strategies were associated with the

lowering of the levels of bullying behavior. Although boys reported more bullying behavior than

did girls, “gender was not a significant predictor in the multiple regression analysis” (Bosworth,

et al. 2009, p. 361). These studies were inconsistent with the perspective that early adolescents

were either bullies or non-bullies, and indicated the need for a comprehensive approach to

preventing bullying behavior.

Peterson found that the actual school climate leads to the vulnerability of gifted children

to bullying, with one student subject stating “our classes are different, so the other students don’t

even know us” (Peterson, et al. 2006, p. 258). Furthermore, another student subject of the study

stated that “there are groups that are protected, such as you don’t say bad things about different

races; but there are other groups, if something’s said, nobody does anything – like smart or gay

people, or groups that people are uncomfortable thinking about. The administration may say they


do something about it, but they don’t” (Peterson, et al. 2006, p. 258). Since many gifted children

are perfectionistic, they feel that telling an adult what is happening is “a reflection on their ability

to control their lives” (Schuler, 2002, p. 3). To their detriment, however, many adults tell these

children that this is a form of tattling, snitching, or story-telling, therefore, leading these children

to distrust all adults and withdraw into themselves, often causing them to suffer silently as

situations escalate from their tormentors.

Some studies in the past have challenged the myth that gifted children do not have unique

social and emotional concerns, and when the myth prevails, “pertinent concerns are not

recognized and addressed formally or informally, proactively or reactively” (Milsom, et al. 2006,

p. 36). Administration, educators, parents, coaches, and even trained counselors may miss the

indicators of their distress, and “the lack of these opportunities for gifted students to discuss

concerns related to social and emotional development potentially contributes to vulnerability”

(Milsom, et al. 2006, p. 38). A student that has bullied can have far-reaching effects in a school

and “create a climate of fear and intimidation not only in his or her victims, but in fellow

students” as well; therefore, students who bully, their victims, and bystanders are all affected

(Branson, et al. 2009, p. 8). When asked the number one reason for not returning to school, “10%

of high school dropouts reported fear of being harassed, teased, or attacked” (Walker, 2009, p.

7). Similarly, more than one-third of middle students felt unsafe at school because of bullying

and did not report such behaviors to school personnel because they were “scared, lacked the

confidence or parental support to make a report, and felt that adults would not be supportive of

their dilemma” (Walker, 2009, p. 8).

Teachers and administrators working with gifted children should be aware that these

students can and do drop out, and individual case studies need to be taken into account when


researching this trend. Although many drop out for the same general reasons that regular students

do, such as disinterest, a need to find employment, or they are underachievers; teachers and

administrators should be “particularly sensitive to gifted students who show attendance

problems, discipline problems, or academic problems” (Matthews, 2006, p. 220). Gifted

programs continue to strive to “identify and serve an even greater proportion of students from

non-mainstream cultural and economic backgrounds,” however, with this also comes the issues

of discrimination and harassment, thus raising the probability that these students will be bullied

due to their academic and environmental makeup (Branson, et al. 2009, p. 15). It is becoming

increasingly important to “understand how giftedness or talent may interact with socioeconomic

and cultural factors to influence students’ educational decisions” (Matthews, 2006, p. 220).

Improving understanding will hopefully lead to more effective bullying interventions and

reduced dropout rates.

Peterson and Ray (2006) surveyed 432 gifted and talented eighth graders in eleven states

regarding bullying during their school years and used structured interviews to explore the lived

experiences of being bullied or being a bully. Using both quantitative and qualitative methods,

they researched “bullying as related to giftedness by examining prevalence and the effects of

bullying among gifted individuals specifically” (Peterson, et al. 2007, p. 149). They found that

“67% had experienced bullying by the eighth grade, 16% defined themselves as bullies, and 29%

had violent thoughts” with the vast majority expressing depression, hopelessness, unexpressed

rage, and most often school absenteeism as responses to their bullying experiences (Peterson, et

al. 2007, p. 152). Further analysis of the interview information and data found that even just one

incident was distressing for some. “All children are affected adversely by bullying, but gifted

children differ from other children in significant ways, and what they experience may be


qualitatively different,” said Peterson, whose study was conducted at the time with doctoral

candidate Karen Ray (Peterson, et al. 2006, pg. 149). “It is important to remember that although

cognitively these children are advanced; physically, socially and emotionally, they may not be”

(Peterson, et al. 2006, p. 259). “The most disturbing thing about this study is that we do not

know what those violent thoughts are,” was Peterson’s major concern upon completion of the

study (Peterson, et al. 2007, p. 167). Peterson states that they could be anything from kicking a

trash can to blowing up the school but they have no concrete evidence. However, just the fact

that there are violent thoughts should be enough to make everyone stand up and pay attention,

and Peterson calls for further studies to identify these perpetrators and their level of aggression.

Although most studies have found that gifted children, especially those with high verbal

aptitude, are more sensitive than their less-gifted peers and worry more about their social

standing, we must remember than most regular kids get bullied as well. The issue is that “gifted

kids are bullied based on their superior school performance, which makes the child’s strength

into a weakness” (Peterson, 2003, p. 65). Inevitably, their advanced academic or talent

performance turns into a source of shame for the child and unable to cope with this shame, they

turn to violence to deal with their frustrations. Due to the fact that bullying behaviors arouse a

sense of fear and can lead to major physical altercations that disrupt the learning cycle,

“educators are urged to address actively the impact of bullies on their school culture and on the

academic success of all students” (Bosworth, et al. 2009, p. 362). Bosworth and Simon (2001)

concluded that freedom from fear of bullying is not enough to ensure successful learning, but it

is “a necessary condition for effective learning” (Bosworth, et al. 2009, p. 363).

In the last decade, “Columbine-style plots involving students as young as twelve have

been erupted in more than half a dozen American communities” (Peterson, 2009, p. 282).


Bullying has been cited as the motive in the majority of these incidents, all because “the

conspirators were considered different due to their academic precocious” (Peterson, 2009, p.

282). In 2003, sixteen-year-old Jaysen Kettl was sentenced to four years in prison plus ten years

of probation for conspiracy to commit capital murder by killing twenty fellow high school

students plus four of his teachers. Kettl acknowledged that he first started having problems in

school when he was about nine due to his high grades and good relationships with his teachers,

but all took a turn for the worse when he entered Vidor High School in Orange, Texas. The same

students he had attended intermediate school with took to “name-calling, mocking, stealing his

school books, and pushing him down the stairs” (Walker, 2009, p. 8). After confiding in what

Kettl considered the few friends he had that he was a homosexual, the bullying became more

violent when his sexuality was made public. He turned to the school administration and even

security and asked for help and protection, and he attested that they did nothing. Through this

process, he met three other students all going through similar experiences in the high school, and

“a strong bond was formed based on mutual misery” (Walker, 2009, p. 8). Kettl and the four

other students created a book which named all the students that bullied them over the years and

named the teachers that did nothing to stop the bullying, and the book went into detail on how

they planned to kill these individuals. Although the plot was foiled three days prior to taking

effect due to one girl in Kettl’s group turning them in after confiding to her parents, Kettl attested

that he just wanted the people in his book to get off his back and there was nothing he could do

to change it besides the plan he came up with; and even if he could go back and change things,

he said “high school is nothing but hell nowadays anyway” (Walker, 2009, p. 8).

Statistics show that “up to 85% of bullying happens in front of a large group, and a

playground or classroom makes a great theater” (Schuler, 2002, p. 3). During the school years


there are many physical and emotional changes in girls and “many girls will go along with

bullying or not intervene because they just want to ‘fit in’ themselves” (Phoenix, et al. 2003, p.

162). In addition to the behavioral and psychosocial measures in these studies, many participants

answered questions which led to the revelation that they “perceived access to guns as a relevant

correlate” (Walker, 2009, p. 8). Immediate access to firearms brings an increased risk for

homicide, suicide, and even unintentional firearm deaths through horseplay or carelessness.

Psychiatric and Psychological Factors

Previous research suggests various psychiatric and psychological factors contribute to

bully victimization, however, posttraumatic stress and dissociation are presently limited areas of

study in relation to bullying. The overall purpose of the Burrill study (1990) was to address the

socially relevant issue of bullying in schools across grade level, age, and gender. A correlation

study was conducted with 147 middle school children using a bully index and a victimization

index, and the measures included anxiety, depression, anger, stress, and dissociation. However,

these measures did not note differences across the original factors measured, they were actually

noticed between regular classroom children, special education children, and talented and gifted

children, “with the talented and gifted children scoring highest among the bullying victimization

scale” (Burrill, 2006, p. 87). Research related to giftedness has not focused on the inner life of

gifted children and adolescents until recently, and “the inability to respond to negative behaviors

from others is related to the vulnerability to bullying” (Robinson, et al. 2006, p. xi). Robinson

noted that the most highly gifted and talented, because of their normally poor fit to school

programs, are the most vulnerable to poor peer relations. The issue precipitates itself in the

situation that they are “unable in finding compatible friends, especially when they are young and

their social sphere is restricted to a particular classroom, school, neighborhood, or small town”


(Robinson, et al. 2006, p. xii). Due to these dynamics, they are “likely to be less socially adept,

more introverted, and more inhibited than other gifted children” (Robinson, et al. 2006, p. xxiv).

There are two categories of self-concept that help identify gifted students, “the academic

self-concept, which most often they rate quite highly in; and the social-self concept, an area that

receives a very low rating” (Pittinsky, et al. 2008, p. 134). All children need positive responses

from others, starting with their home and school environment, in order to “experience well-being

and self-satisfaction” (Pittinsky, et al. 2008, p. 134). Responses received by gifted children from

those outside of the family are often less than positive and can lower their views of themselves,

usually from statements such as “if you are so gifted, figure it out; you seem to know everything”

(Clark, 2008, p. 146). This gifted label can create problems within itself, as these children feel

different and alienated, and unable to find a group to belong. Unfortunately, many teachers do

not relate to these children in ways other than their levels of achievement, and these children

have “a need to feel valued for some reason other than their giftedness” (Clark, 2008, p. 148).

Most gifted and talented children are already very intense and anxious, as well as highly

sensitive due to their own and others’ high expectations of them. They consider social justice

issues very important, and with their own hyper-sensitivity to self-criticism and perfectionalism,

they struggle to make sense of this cruelty and aggression. They develop low self-esteem which

results in even higher levels of anxiety, less effectiveness, and even destructive behavior; and

begin to believe themselves to be powerless and even unworthy of love or attention. Many times

they blame themselves for the lack of adult support, and respond by withdrawing socially in

order to hide from bullies. In essence, their vulnerable areas have been attacked, and “gifted

children become more susceptible to the severe emotional damage that bullying can inflict”

(Schuler, 2002, p. 3).


Table 5: Vulnerable Areas for Gifted Children

Personal Characteristics Motivation School Conditions

Perfectionism leads to self- Too easy or difficult a task If individuality is not valued,

criticism, competition, and/or limits the student's possibility then social isolation occurs

unrealistic expectations for success

Supersensitivity to social The student feels fear from Teachers have unrealistic

feedback leads to withdrawal high expectations expectations of high success

in all areas consistently

Desire for independence leads Desires and abilities may not Teachers are uncomfortable

to attempts to control the match opportunities, no with differentness, they fear

situation positive image of the future superior student knowledge

Given an intense desire to Unable to control emotions,

School activities are not

satisfy curiosity, the student easily frustrated, ashamed, differentiated or challenging,

feels restricted in analyzing the angry at obstacles offer no depth or complexity

problem in the time allocated

Using advanced problem The student doesn't have

The school district does not

solving, student manipulates accurate self-knowledge provide any appropriate

peers and adults about his or her ability educational provisions

Desiring complexity, the The student doesn't have the No positive role model is

student is not interested in energy to persist to the present

memorization or repetition completion of a goal

Adapted from Giftedness, Conflict, and Underachievement, by J.R. Whitmore, Boston: Allyn

and Bacon, Copyright 1980, p. 143.


Many victims suffer in silence, struggling to understand bullying, make futile attempts to

halt bullying, despair when it continues, and formulate violent thoughts. Most victims associate

not being well-known or popular as the reason for being bullied, and most definitely for being

clustered within a gifted program which identifies them for their select abilities and focuses on

differentiation, therefore, once again setting them apart from the rest of the school population.

Differentiation is designed for instruction in mixed-ability classroom regarding multiple

intelligences, as referenced earlier; and not for meeting the special needs of gifted children.

Many peers, and even adults, do not understand the placement of students in these particular

classroom environments, and this distinction can be explained and understood quite simply by

referencing the following table.

Table 6: Differentiated Instruction for Mixed-Ability Classrooms

Differentiation is … Differentiation is not…

provision of a variety of ways to explore

curriculum content

making all tasks the same, with adjustments by

merely varying difficulty level of questions

provision of an array of processes for

understanding and owning information

marking some students harder than others

provision of options for demonstrating or

exhibiting what has been learned

letting those who finish early play games for

enrichment

giving students extra problems, extra reports,

or extension assignments

Differentiating Instruction for Advanced Learners in the Mixed-Ability Middle School

Classroom, Dr. Tracy Riley, Massey University, 2000 at http://www.kidsource.com/

kidsource/content/diff_instruction.html.

http://www.kidsource.com/%20kidsource/content/diff_instruction.html

http://www.kidsource.com/%20kidsource/content/diff_instruction.html


Certainly a victim’s apparent tendency not to tell adults about being bullied means that

parents and school personnel are often not aware of the extent of the bullying. Bullying often

occurs under the radar, and is “even normalized by adults as a ‘basic rite of passage’ into

adulthood” (Peterson, 2009, p. 280). These behaviors invalidate the feelings of the victim and

children who try to cope or adapt pay a big price, particularly when it comes to their health. They

experience significant physical and mental health problems including, but not limited to “high

stress much like post-traumatic stress disorder; and chronic stress which causes physical changes

in the brain that can lead to depression” (Peterson, 2009, p. 281). Stress is also linked with high

blood pressure, phobias both real and perceived, insomnia, bad dreams and bed-wetting, and

eating disorders. Additionally, “many gifted children suffer from extreme self-criticism, and self-

destructive behavior caused by perceived inadequacies” (Peterson, 2009, p. 281). These

conditions cause many to self-medicate with stolen or illegal substances and alcohol, followed by

finally dropping out of school in order to remove themselves from the source of their stress.

Gifted children that have difficulty coping tend to choose one of three patterns for

adjusting to their world. They may choose to withdraw and isolate themselves, and this occurs

most often when a situation seems hopeless. They may become disruptive or even class clowns

in order to gain acceptance, but this behavior is normally carried to a point that “teachers and

peers reject such attempts as being inappropriate or silly, and view the child as a nuisance” (Van

Tassel, et al. 2008, p. 55). Finally, some gifted children may hide their superior intelligence, but

this results in “loss of function, and growth cannot be nurtured through this subterfuge” (Van

Tassel, et al. 2008, p. 55). Gifted students, particularly those inhibited by their need for

perfectionism both academically and socially, now account for “as much as 20% of students who

drop out of high school” (Van Tassel, et al. 2008, p. 61).


Table 7: Perfectionism At-A-Glance

How A Perfectionist Acts

overcommits self rarely delegates to others hard time making choices

always has to be in control competes fiercely arrives late often

does last-minute cramming gets carried away with details never satisfied with their work

frequently criticizes others refuses to hear criticism of self checks on other peoples work

makes negative comments calls self 'stupid' procrastinates

How A Perfectionist Thinks

"If I can't do it perfectly, what's the point in doing it at all?"

“Every detail of a job should be perfect.”

“I always have to stay ahead of the others.”

"I'm a wonderful person if I do well; I'm a lousy person if I do poorly."

"I'd better not make a mistake here, or people will think I am stupid."

"Everything should be clearly black or white. Grays are a sign of confused thinking."

How A Perfectionist Feels

anxious and nervous deeply ashamed of mistakes worried about details

afraid of rejection angry if routine is interrupted discouraged

ashamed of having fears ashamed of being rejected plagued by self-hatred

exhausted, unable to relax afraid of appearing incompetent disgusted by criticism

When Gifted Children Don’t Have All The Answers, Chapter 3: Emotional Dimensions of

Giftedness, by J. Delisle and J. Galbraith, Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing, Inc., Copyright

2002, p. 65-66.


Social and Emotional Needs

School officials, peers, and adults at one time assumed that gifted and talented

children did not have unique social and emotional needs. “Positive stereotypes prevailed based

on media images of confident and motivated students, athletes, actors and actresses, and

musicians;” and these media images did not reflect the underlying concerns of their social and

emotional well-being (Young, et al. 2004, p. 529). Early identification of giftedness may have

also “contributed to the notion that high academic capability means solid mental and physical

health, and future success in higher education, careers, and interpersonal relationships” (Young,

et al. 2004, p. 533). Federal education mandates have also shown little concern for the well-being

of gifted children, and even the field of gifted education itself has not advocated as strongly as it

could have for “proactive approaches to promote healthy social and emotional development”

(Walker, 2009, p. 8). Even past literature suggests that “characteristics of giftedness such as

sensitivity, intensity and overexcitability are not only overlooked risk factors, but detrimental to

a child’s overall well-being if not equipped with coping skills” (Robinson, et al. 2006, p. xi).

Gifted individuals differ greatly from less able age peers and among themselves in the actual

degree of characteristics associated with giftedness, making it “difficult sometimes to identify,

anticipate, and react to social and emotional concerns” (Young, et al. 2004, p. 534). Giftedness

may also co-exist in a child with learning disabilities; therefore, further contributing to

frustration, behavioral problems, and bully victimization.

Asynchronous development is quite common in gifted and talented

children, and refers to “uneven intellectual, physical, and emotional development” (Breedlove,

2010, p. 48). The developmental rates are usually even within average children, including

physical, cognitive, social, and emotional. With above-average children, their rates of


development are a little faster than average children, however, they are still linked. The

developmental rates of these four categories for gifted and talented children are out-of-sync, with

each child normally developing in their own unique pattern. “These children are usually

cognitively gifted, however, there is a less rapid rate of development physically, socially, and

particularly emotionally” (Breedlove, 2010, p. 50). This out-of–sync development, also called

asynchronous, of gifted children is an integral part of who they are and how they interact with

the world; which explains why they may act like an adult one moment and throw a temper

tantrum the next. Overexcitabilities are “inborn intensities indicating

a heightened ability to respond to stimuli” (Piechowski, 1999, p. 325). These overexcitabilities

are found to a greater degree in gifted and talented individuals, as they are generally expressed in

forms of increased sensitivity, awareness, and intensity. “One who manifests several forms of

overexcitability sees reality in a different, stronger, and more multi-sided manner” and

experiencing the world in this unique way carries with it not only joys, but great frustrations as

well (Lind, 2001, p.1). There are five overexcitabilities and each once carries with it different

concerns, particularly in relation to the reactions to bullying.

Psychomotor overexcitability is a “heightened excitability of the neuromuscular system,”

and this includes a capacity of being active and energetic (Piechowski, 1999, p. 325). This

surplus of energy is usually demonstrated by “rapid speech, zealous enthusiasm, intense physical

activity, and a need for action” (Piechowski, 1999, p. 329). Many gifted children experience life

more intensely than others, and they react in big ways to small things. They often get tunnel

vision, which causes them to have trouble changing topics or transitioning to the next activity

smoothly. These children tend to not be able to sit still or be quiet, and many teachers and adults

find them disobedient and distracting; and “often they are misdiagnosed as Attention Deficit


Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)” (Piechowski, 1999, p. 329). Sensual overexcitability is

expressed as a “heightened experience of sensual pleasure or displeasure emanating from sight,

smell, touch, taste, and hearing” and they have an early and increased appreciation for pleasures

such as music, art, and language (Lind, 2001, p. 2). These children may find clothing tags,

classroom noise, or smells in the cafeteria so distracting that they are unable to function at that

moment beyond their uncomfortableness.

Intellectual overexcitability is marked by “a need to seek understanding and truth, to gain

knowledge, and to analyze and synthesize” and these children are intensely curious, and usually

very avid readers (Lind, 2001, p.4). There is a strong moral focus which comes at this level, and

they tend to be concerned with issues such as AIDS, Gay and Lesbian Rights, animal cruelty,

cancer research, the environment, and war. Since these children are so independent and

outspoken, they often appear critical and impatient of others who “cannot sustain their

intellectual pace” (Lind, 2001, p. 4). Imaginational overexcitability reflects a “heightened play of

the imagination with rich association of images and impressions, frequent use of image and

metaphor, facility for invention and fantasy, detailed visualization, and elaborate dreams” (Lind,

2001, p. 4). These children often tend to mix truth with fiction, and create their own imaginary

private worlds with made-up companions and scenarios. They also often sit in class and draw or

write stories instead of doing their school work; and when they turn in assignments, they usually

“are tagged by some incredible idea which sends them off in a different direction from the

assigned task” (Lind, 2001, p. 4).

The last and most prevalent of the overexcitabilities in gifted and talented children

is emotional, which is “heightened, intense feelings, extremes of complex emotions,

identification with others’ feelings, and strong affective expression” (Lind, 2001, p. 6). These


children are often accused of overreacting to situations, and their feelings are so intense that they

cannot return to tasks at hand like homework, chores, or even playing. Often these children have

“extremely high energy levels, and require less sleep than their peers, having stopped napping at

a very early age” (Lind, 2001, p. 7). This extra energy leads them to prefer faster activities and

games, and a desire to get away from a lesson or a situation that has lost their interest. Since the

degree of social difficulties may increase in proportion to the level of giftedness, not only is a

profoundly gifted child likely to have very few intellectual or interest peers at school or in the

community, but also “schools may not be receptive or accommodating to the child” (Breedlove,

2010, p. 61). Even moderate giftedness may lead to a poor initial fit in school, with their social

and emotional discomfort levels increasing as they progress through their grade levels.

The moral development of gifted and talented children is also woven into their social and

emotional development, and from an early age “they show evidence of moral concerns, including

empathy, compassion, idealism, global concern, and advanced understanding and judgment of

moral issues” (Strip, et al. 2000, p. 47). These children are reported as being far beyond their

age-peers in understanding the “need for fairness, justice, and responsibility” (Strip, et al. 2000,

p. 48). Adolescent highly compassionate children are especially vulnerable because they have

“not yet developed effective ways to deal with strong emotional content,” and they are

overwhelmed by unclear directions, difficult situations, unfair treatment, and misunderstandings

(Strip, et al. 2000, p. 50). The attitudes of teachers and school personnel towards gifted children

clearly affect not only the students’ social and emotional well-being, but their educational

progression as well. The concerns of these children have been surveyed below, further enforcing

the issue that an “establishment of a moral climate within the school is required in order for all

students and school personnel to interactive positively” (Strip, et. al, 2000, p. 53).


Table 8: Gifted Kids on Giftedness

More than 1,000 gifted middle school children responded to an online survey regarding

their giftedness. Here are the responses to some of the questions:

Q: Gifted kids are often described as: easily bored when not intellectually challenged,

needing a lot of novelty, craving mental stimulation, and are often overexcitable.

In general, how true is this for you?

22% All of the time 41% Most of the time

29% Some of the time 8% Infrequently

Q: Gifted children are often described as: intuitive, insightful, perceptive, and able to

simultaneously see several points of view. In general, how true is this for you?



Q: Gifted children are often described as: introverted, preferring privacy, reflective,

quiet in large groups, and uncomfortable as the center of attention in a large group.

In general, how true is this for you?



Q: Gifted children are often described as: possessing a keen sense of justice, nonconforming,

and frequently questioning rules and authority. In general, how true is this for you?



When Gifted Children Don’t Have All The Answers, Chapter 1: What is Giftedness, by J. Delisle

and J. Galbraith, Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing, Inc., Copyright 2002, p. 35.


Being bullied has also been recognized as a major health problem for gifted children

because of their already present association with adjustment problems. This usually manifests

itself into “poor mental health with thoughts of suicide, and more extreme violent behavior such

as homicide perceived as justifiable retaliation” (Juvonen, et al. 2003, p. 1235). Juvonen (2002)

found in her research that the bullies themselves were actually psychologically stronger than the

victims, and had a higher social standing. These bullies are often popular within their groups, and

their groups possess other bullies; therefore making them a “higher population in respect to the

groups of non-bullies” (Juvonen, et al. 2003, p. 1235). To be able to intervene with bullying,

Juvonen stresses that it is important to recognize the unique problems of these gifted children

and address them directly with the assistance of parents, teachers, and school personnel. In

addition to recognizing these problems, school-wide antibullying approaches that aim to change

peer dynamics that support and maintain bullying should be developed and implemented. In

order to meet the social and emotional needs of these gifted children, a good school environment

should set “explicit standards or codes of appropriate student behavior” (Juvonen, et al. 2003, p.

1237). Administrators should also lay out clear expectations for their teachers and staff in

adhering to these standards, and recruit their assistance in gathering and reviewing feedback and

meeting set goals. Juvoven admits that a code of conduct may not be enough to eliminate

bullying, but “well-established policies with methods to investigate issues and resolve problems

as they arise provide all with a better opportunity to intervene on the behalf of students most

affected by bullying” (Juvonen, et al. 2003, p. 1237).

As educators struggle to reduce violence, dealing with all of these bullying behaviors has

truly come to the forefront. In order for effective programs to be developed and implemented, the

social and emotional needs of those bullied, as well as the bullies themselves, must be


understood and met. In the Bosworth study (2001), the first purpose was to “determine the

distribution of bullying behavior within a sample of urban middle school students” (Bosworth,

2009, p. 345-346). The bullying behavior was viewed on several levels and these levels included

mild teasing all the way to extreme violence, as well as a review of the actual cases reported and

the frequency of these reports. The second purpose was to describe the characteristics associated

with the bullying, such as which students were targeted, and what factors caused them to become

targets. Included in these variables were also the age, gender, grade, ethnicity, and socio-

economic status, such as whether they received free or reduced lunch. The third and final

purpose was to examine the extent of the psychosocial risks such as anger, feelings of

depression, and the tendency to have thoughts of violence. Included in this purpose was also the

accessibility to guns or other weapons, as well as if these victims had any intervention regarding

the “use of non-violent strategies associated in dealing with bullies” (Bosworth, 2009, p. 346).

The variables of bullying behavior were examined within a sample of 558 urban

middle school students and the study focused mostly on the actual behaviors rather than the

demographics. The data was collected from student self-reports as well as information gathered

from teachers and parents, and all agreed that most of the bullying behavior took place at times

“which adult supervision is limited or nonexistent” (Bosworth, 2009, p. 356). Also, many

teachers found it difficult to recognize the bullying because it was often done so subtle or

indirectly, and many children as well as their parents do not report these incidents and they are

unable to intervene effectively. Many teachers reported teasing, which they considered “a

common part of socialization to later adolescence,” but if teasing is related to problem behaviors

or negative consequences, then the teasing has crossed the line over into bullying (Bosworth,

2009, p. 356).


Berthold and Hoover (1987) found similar findings in their study of 591 fourth, fifth, and

sixth grade students, noting the correlations they found between the bullying behavior as well as

the social and emotional consequences of the victims. In their study, they argued that the

outcomes of bullying and victimization are serious over the long term, and that early bullying led

to “inhibited self-esteem in young people” which rolled over into adulthood (Berthold, et al.

2008, p. 66). In working with adults who were victimized as children through bullying, Berthold

and Hoover found that these adults “found it difficult to establish sexual relationships, hold down

long-term employment, and connect with their family members” due to the fact that they

experienced peer abuse as children and still harbored the resentment (Berthold, et al. 2008, p.

68). These adults all demonstrated a tendency towards depression, and remembered their

childhood days most unpleasantly; and “they continue to experience anxiety when they try to

formulate relationships, both interpersonally and professionally” (Berthold, et al. 2008, p. 68).

There are many statistics and reports regarding bullying, and the prevalence of

this information speaks volumes regarding the impact that bullying has on our schools and the

children. It has been determined that “a high percentage of children, over 89% have experienced

victimization at some point throughout their school experience” (Burrill, 2005, p. 84). These

children are more likely to experience “attention deficit disorder, oppositional defiant disorder,

conduct disorder, and depression” (Burrill, 2005, p. 86). Suicidal thoughts are more prevalent in

victims of bullying, particularly the gifted, and “these victims reported experiencing feelings of

vengefulness, anger, and self-pity” (Olweus, 1996, p. 17). Olweus has extensively researched the

effects of bullying on gifted and talented children, and found that victimization is “highly

correlated with low self-esteem, depression, isolation, suicidal ideation, and violent retaliation”

(Olweus, 1996, p. 18). Victims of relational aggression are found to be at risk for developing


additional issues in adulthood, including “substance abuse, lack of connectedness

interpersonally, and maladaptive eating disorders” (Olweus, 1996, p. 22).

Bullying Intervention

Many gifted and talented children and adolescents are targets of teasing and

bullying because teachers perceive them as “too verbal, too bossy, too nerdy, or too different”

(Delisle, et al. 2002, p. 36). Since gifted individuals tend to be highly sensitive to others, their

reactions to being bullied are extremely intense, which just causes further problems. As Schuler

has commented in previous studies, “one only has to look at recent shootings and suicides around

the country committed by children who were identified as gifted to see obvious examples of this

intensity” (Schuler, 2002, p. 3). Schuler attests that administrators, teachers, and school staff

including coaches and counselors, must be trained specially in the social and emotional needs of

these children in order to maintain a positive school climate and a bully-free zone. First and

foremost, they “must not minimize any bullying situation by suggesting that everyone gets

teased; or suggesting that it is their problem and to stand up for themselves,” which only makes

these children feel even more inadequate and powerless (Cavanaugh, 2009, p. 9). The biggest

mistakes made by school personnel is “speaking with the bully and negotiating a plan to stop

their behavior by offering rewards; and calling the parents of the bully or bullies to complain

only intensifies the situation” (Cavanaugh, 2009, p. 9).

Gifted children have an internal drive to learn and know things and unfortunately, their

interests don’t always coincide with what their teachers are teaching. Due to their social and

emotional needs, “they tend not to respond to the same rewards as general classroom students”

(Jacobsen, et al. 2007, p. 8). A well-informed teacher motivates a gifted child by tapping into

their interests, values, and abilities; and by “assisting in providing challenges and opportunities


of interest for them” (Jacobsen, et al. 2007, p. 8). When these alternative strategies are

implemented within the classroom, positive interactions take place and the emotional and social

needs of the child are being satisfied, as well as their educational needs. By the same token,

recent research has shown that “teaching gifted children alternative strategies in dealing with

bullying besides exploding in anger or suffering passively is the most important aspect of a

school improvement plan” (Beane, 2006, p. 3).

Simple strategies which are non-aggressive and low stress can be taught to these children

to help them to go from being victimized, to being positive and assertive. These strategies take

power away from the bully and do not allow an opportunity for them to retaliate. Such strategies

should include looking the bully in the eye but staying relaxed and friendly; and at the same time

standing up straight, feet slightly apart, and staying in close proximity to the bully. To appear

non-threatening, the potential victim should keep their hands behind them or in their pockets;

and speak loud enough to be heard using a firm and determined voice, but continuing to smile.

Finally, they should “make statements such as ‘I do not like it when you push me around’ and

end it with ‘you will no longer bully me,’ as they turn and be the first to walk away” (Beane,

2006, p. 26-27).

Bullying creates a sense of fear that disrupts the learning environment, and we need to

actively address the impact of bullies on school climate and the social pressures of students

victimized by this bullying. Bullying sets a tense environment in a school and as addressed

earlier, can lead to violence towards others or suicide by the victims. Although freedom from the

fear and shame of bullying does not necessarily ensure academic success for all students, “it is

indeed a necessary condition to promote effective learning in a positive classroom culture”

(Schuler, 2002, p. 4).


Table 9: Tips for Teachers and Students in Creating A Positive Classroom Climate

TEACHER DIRECTIONS: STUDENT DIRECTIONS: At Our School, We Are:

Clearly communicate a zero-

tolerance policy for bullying.

Use kind words and help when

you can.

RESPECTFUL

* Show consideration for others

Reinforce your students'

positive behaviors.

Listen to what others have to

say, share, and take turns.

* Honorable

* Appreciate our peers and

teachers

Get to know and understand

your students even better.

Be honest and truthful, and

remember your manners.

ON TIME

* Punctual

Treat your students with great

kindness and respect.

Think before you speak or act,

and hold your temper.

* Ready for the day

* Eager to participate

Model accepting and

appropriate behavior in all kinds

of situations.

Work and play fairly,

remembering to enjoy each

other.

PREPARED

* Have our homework

* Always have necessary

materials

Teach your students skills that

will help them resolve conflicts,

affirm themselves and each

other, and make friends.

Think about the feelings of

others, and how you would like

to be treated.

RESPONSIBLE

* Make positive decisions

* Give it our best

The Bully Free Classroom: Over 100 Tips and Strategies for Teachers K-8, Chapter 1: Creating

A Positive Classroom, by A.L. Beane, Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing, Inc., Copyright 1999,

p. 15.


Instruments of Measure

The purpose of the Olweus study was “to explore relationships between bullying

and additional psychiatric symptoms that have not been fully examined previously” (Olweus,

1996, p. 15). In the Olweus study, as well as the studies of Burrill and Peterson, three self-

reported, standardized instruments were used to form a “comprehensive picture of a child’s

experience to peer-related threat, level of distress, and anxiety related to school safety”

(Peterson, 2009, p. 280). The Bully Victimization Scale (BVS) is designed to “assess bullying

behavior and bully-victimization experiences in children and adolescents” (Burrill, 2006, p. 87).

The BVS consists of two sub-scales, the Bully Scale and the Victimization Scale; and is designed

for use with students ages nine through thirteen, and takes five to ten minutes to complete. The

BVS provides for the “identification of youngsters who are being bullied and students who

engage in bullying behavior” (Burrill, 2006, p. 87). The BVS may be used individually and as a

school-based screening measure for the identification of bullies and bully-victims. The use of the

BVS as a screening measure “assists in the creation of safe schools by identifying youngsters

who bully as well as their victims who often feel distressed, disenfranchised, and alienated from

school” (Burrill, 2006, p. 88).

The Bully-Victimization Distress Scale (BVDS) is designed to “evaluate

victimization distress in children and adolescents in ages nine through fourteen” (Reynolds,

2009, p. 2). The BVDS is conceptualized as “measuring components of externalizing distress and

internalizing distress through self-reports which take around ten minutes each to complete”

(Reynolds, 2009, p.3). A student's response to being bullied may be characterized as

internalizing, meaning symptoms of depression, anxiety or fearfulness; and externalizing,

meaning symptoms of anger, aggression, acting out, oppositional or defiance, and a tendency


towards thoughts of violence. The test provides scores on externalizing distress subscales and

internalizing distress subscales, as well as a total distress scale. There will be a “moderate

correlation between the two sub-scales since it is expected that some students will show both

internalizing and externalizing responses to bully-victimization” (Reynolds, 2009, p. 4). The

BVDS is a measure of a students' psychological response to bullying and determines the

internalizing and externalizing nature of this distress and it allows counselors, psychiatrists, and

clinical psychologists to evaluate students victimization distress, which is “an important activity

given the extent to which bullying is a problem in our nations schools” (Reynolds, 2009, p. 4).

The School Violence Anxiety Scale (SVAS) is a

“measure of anxiety designed for use with students in grades five through twelve, to assess

students' perception of school violence and safety” (Burrill, 2006, p. 7). The SVAS evaluates a

students' level of anxiety about the school as a safe environment, including “anxiety specific to

physical harm at school, harassment at school, and the potential for violence occurring at school”

(Reynolds, 2009, p. 3). These SVAS items evaluate physiological, cognitive, and emotional

components of anxiety due to the effects of bullying and victimization.

All three of these scales lend themselves to

screening for children who engage in bullying as well as those who are the victims of bullying,

and are used in both school and clinical settings. The BVS and BVDS are written at the third

grade reading level, while the SVAS is written at the fifth grade reading level, and profiles are

developed to “understand and treat the psychological underpinnings of bullying and

victimization” (Reynolds, 2009, p. 4). These scales are also used to monitor environmental

changes associated with new safe school initiatives, particularly in checking for a decrease in

bullying in school climate and the physical and emotional well-being of the students involved in


the initiatives. The Myers-Briggs

Type Indicator (MBTI) is often administered prior to the instruments referenced above, which is

a “forced-choice, self-report inventory that identifies people’s basic preferences in relation to

their perceptions and judgments” (Sak, 2004, p. 78). The essence of the theory behind the MBTI

is that much seemingly random variation in behavior is actually quite orderly and consistent,

being due to basic differences in the ways individuals prefer to use their perception and

judgment. The indicators generate four preferences for the eight basic personality types: EI

(Extraversion-Introversion), SN (Sensing-Intuitive), TF (Thinking-Feeling), and JP (Judging-

Perception).

An integration of these findings is used in order to understand the psychological types of

gifted children and adolescents, and sixteen personality types are created using the indicators

above to create more comprehensive results. For example, the combination ISTJ (Introversion-

Sensing-Thinking-Judgment) identifies someone who is quiet, serious, and earns success by

thoroughness and dependability. Additionally, they are “practical, matter-of-fact, realistic and

responsible, and decide logically what should be done and work toward it steadily, regardless of

distractions” (Sak, 2004, p. 79). On the other hand, the combination ESFP (Extroversion-

Sensing-Feeling-Perception) identifies someone who is outgoing, friendly, and accepting, as well

as an exuberant lover of life, people, leisure activities, and material comforts; and “they enjoy

working with others to make things happen, and bring with them a common sense and a realistic

approach to their work, and make work fun” (Sak, 2004, p. 79). These individuals are normally

flexible and spontaneous, adapt readily to new people and environments, and learn best by trying

a new skill with other people or peers. Through these measures, we are better able to identify the


effects of bullying among middle school gifted and talented children; and develop strategies for

more effective bullying intervention for all students.

Summary







(Schuler, 2002, p. 4).


CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY


Chapter III

“We are altogether too easily deceived by the time-worn argument that

the gifted student, the genius perhaps, will get along somehow without

much teaching. The fact is, the gifted... and the brilliant... are the

ones who need the closest attention of the skillful mechanic” (page 99).

W. Franklin

Jones (1972) Introduction

Research related to giftedness has not focused on the inner life of

gifted children and adolescents until recently; and according to Robinson, the inability to respond

to negative behaviors from others is related to the “vulnerability to bullying” (Robinson, et al.

2006, p. xi). Regarding this vulnerability, Robinson noted that the most highly talented, because

of their normally poor fit to school programs, are most vulnerable to poor peer relations. The

issue precipitates itself in the situation that they are “unable in finding compatible friends,

especially when they are young and their social sphere is restricted to a particular classroom,

school, neighborhood, or small town” (Robinson, et al. 2006, p. xii). Because of this, they are

“likely to be less socially adept, more introverted, and more inhibited than other gifted children”

(Robinson, et al. 2006, p. xxiv).

All children are vulnerable to the effects of bullying, but gifted children differ

from other children in several significant ways. Most gifted and talented children are already

very intense and anxious, as well as highly sensitive due to their own and others’ high

expectations of them. Gifted children consider social justice issues very important to them, and


with their own hyper-sensitivity to self-criticism and perfectionalism, “they struggle to make

sense of this cruelty and aggression; many times blaming themselves or the lack of adult

support,” and respond by withdrawing socially in order to hide from bullies (Morrison, et al.

2006, p. 212). “Gifted children are more susceptible to the severe emotional damage that

bullying can inflict” (Schuler, 2002, p. 3).

This chapter will include the purpose of the study, research

questions and categories used for data retrieval, and an overview of the methodology. The

methodology will include descriptions of the setting for the study, the participants, the measures

and instruments used in the study, the procedure and the rationale.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to indicate the incidents and

reactions to bullying, and to what extent it exists within the school climate. Certainly, a victim’s

apparent tendency not to tell adults about being bullied means that parents, teachers and school

personnel are often not aware of the extent of the bullying. Bullying often occurs under the radar,

out of sight, or is even “normalized by adults as a basic ‘rite of passage’ into adulthood”

(Peterson, 2009, p. 280). These behaviors therefore, invalidate the feelings of the victim and as

originally stated, they now continue to suffer in silence. Children who try to cope or adapt to

bullying conditions pay a big price, particularly when it comes to their health and well-being.

The problem is made worse when adults normalize bullying behavior, and then victims feel even

more stigmatized and isolated. Research has shown that victims of bullying experience

significant physical and mental health problems including, but not limited to “high stress much

like post-traumatic stress disorder; and unresolved, chronic stress which causes physical changes

in the brain that can lead to depression” (Peterson, 2009, p. 281).


In working with adults who were victimized as children

through bullying, it was found that these adults “found it difficult to establish intimate

relationships, hold down long-term employment, and connect with their family members” due to

the fact that they experienced peer abuse as children and still harbor the resentment (Spriggs, et

al. 2008, p. 742). These adults all demonstrated a tendency towards depression, and remembered

their childhood days most unpleasantly; and continue to experience anxiety when they try to

“formulate relationships, both interpersonally and professionally” (Spriggs, et al. 2008, p. 744).

There are many statistics and factual data regarding bullying, and the prevalence of this

information speaks volumes regarding the impact that bullying has on our schools and the

children. It has been determined that “a high percentage of children, over 89% have experienced

victimization at some point throughout their school experience” (Burrill, 2005, p. 84).

For the purpose of this study, the research

questions investigated how safe gifted children actually felt within school grounds and on the

school bus, how other students treated them, what they have seen and heard as well as how they

reacted to bullying, their thoughts on gangs, and how much of a problem they believed bullying

was in their particular school. Research Questions

The following categories and questions

guided this research study: Category One questions pertained to

how safe they felt. These questions included how safe they felt in their general and elective

classrooms, as opposed to their gifted classrooms, as well as areas such as the gymnasium and

athletic fields, cafeteria, and hallways. These questions extended the safety issue out to walking

to and from school, as well as taking the school bus with all the other students of the school.

Category Two allowed them to discuss how others treated them with questions such as how often


did other students bully them by laying their hands on them, including incidents of hitting,

kicking, pushing, or hurting their body otherwise. Questions asked how often did other students

bully them by saying mean things to them, things which hurt their feelings, how often did other

students bully them by spreading mean rumors about them; and how often did other students

bully them by leaving them out of their activities. Further insight was acquired by asking in what

grade was the student or students which bullied them, and had they ever told or asked for help

when being bullied. Category Three asked questions about what

they have seen or heard, such as how often they have seen another student bully others by laying

their hands on them or by saying mean things to them, things which hurt their feelings. Also,

how often have they seen another student bully others by spreading mean rumors about them,

and how often have they seen another student bully others by leaving them out of their activities.

Category Four questions pertained to how they reacted, such as what have they done when they

have seen a student being hit, kicked, pushed, punched or otherwise physically hurt in school or

on the school bus; and if they helped a student in a bully situation, what was the outcome, and

whether it was positive or negative. Category Five pertained specifically to gangs due to

the demographics of the subjects, such as did they know of students in their school who were

members of a gang, or were wanna-be’s of a gang; and exactly how much of a problem did they

think gangs were in their school. Category Six completed the questionnaire with an essay

question asking how much of a problem did they think bullying was in their school. Participants

were asked to give some examples and specific situations, and no names were included.

Methodology

Setting


The setting for this study was a public middle school in the city of Norfolk in the state of

Virginia, and the school contains sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students. More than 85% of the

families are economically disadvantaged and approximately 80% of students are eligible for free

or reduced lunch. The student demographics are approximately 84% African-American, 9%

White, 4% Hispanic, and 3% Asian. The middle school has an enrollment of approximately

1,440 students and continues to grow at a rate of 3-4% a year for the past 10 years.

Participants

This school provides a self-contained classroom academy program called Young Scholars

for gifted and talented students with approximately 98 students totaling from the sixth, seventh,

and eighth grade levels. These children range in ages from ten to sixteen, and cover all the

economical and ethnic demographics. For the purpose of this study, students were selected from

the Young Scholars program only.

Measures

The responses to the research questions referenced above were tallied for common and

uncommon patterns, and the essay questions assisted in pinpointing specific reasons for the

bullying of gifted and talented children within their school climate. Category One questions

which pertained to how safe they felt allowed for responses of very unsafe and scared, kind of

unsafe, kind of safe, and very safe. Category Two questions regarding how others treated them

allowed for responses to particular scenarios with answers such as every day, once or twice per

week, once or twice per month, once or twice per year, and never. Category Three questions

about what they have seen and heard were responded to with frequency of particular incidents

with answers such as everyday, once or twice per week, once or twice per month, once or twice


per year, and never.

Category Four questioned how they reacted with responses such as they have never seen

another student being bullied, they walked away and ignored it, they stood and watched, they

helped the person who was being bullied, or they laughed. The Category Five questions about

gangs had yes or no answers, and frequency of gang activity responses such as if they are a huge

problem, a big problem, somewhat of a problem or no problem at all. Category Six responses

were provided in the form of an essay discussing how much of a problem they thought bullying

was in their school, and they provided some examples and specific situations, and they excluded

using any names.

Measurable content questions were rated according to the frequency of occurrences, and

three validity scales were used from the Trauma Symptom Survey (TSI), including a five-point

scale ranging from 5 (often) to 0 (never). “The validity scales and scoring provides summaries of

the effects of bullying on gifted children, and registers the psychological effects of said bullying”

(Reynolds, 2009, p. 11-12). The validity scales of the TSI are as follows: “Response Level (RL)

measuring a tendency towards defensiveness, denial or a need to appear unusually symptom free;

Atypical Response (ATR) measuring extreme distress, anxiety, and appearing dysfunctional, and

Inconsistent Response (INC) attention or concentration problems, communication difficulties,

and social withdrawal” (Reynolds, 2009, p. 7-8).

Instruments

A comparative research study was conducted in order to examine the impact of bullying

on gifted and talented children within the middle school climate. A questionnaire was

administered and completed by the participants. Category One results were compiled in order to

examine how safe students felt within their school culture, and Category Two questions were


examined in order to determine how they were treated by other students. Category Three

questions were reviewed to revel what these participants had seen and heard, and the Category

Four Questions provided data on how they reacted to the referenced situations in the previous

categories. Additionally, Category Five provided data pertaining to gangs within the school

climate, and Question Six essays were analyzed for specific causes and situations of bullying

among gifted and talented students.

Procedure

Questionnaires were administered at the same time on the same day to sixth, seventh, and

eighth graders in three different classrooms each containing a teacher monitor. Each grade level

consisted of 30 students which had been in the Young Scholars program from the beginning of

the 2009-2010 school year. No time limit was placed on the questionnaires, and the

questionnaires were collected by the teacher monitors once all had been completed. Permission

had been granted for this study by the district school board, gifted department chair, and assistant

principal; and all issues of anonymity and privacy were adhered to and thereafter. All parental

consent forms were signed and filed with the school main office, and additional copies were

provided to the gifted department.

Both male and female participants were selected for this study with a total of 90

students from the Young Scholars program; 30 from the sixth grade level, 30 from the seventh

grade level, and 30 from the eighth grade level. Since there was an average of 33-35 students per

grade level within the program, all students present the day of the test being administered were

included as participants. However, 94 participants were present, and four were randomly

removed from the study to maintain a participation number of 90, 30 from each grade level, in


order to keep the study consistent across grade levels.

Using the Trauma Symptom Survey (TSI) which is a five-point scale ranging

from 5 (often) to 0 (never), the mean score was calculated per category, and the average mean

was compared across grade levels. Additionally, the essay questions served to provide specific

details and situations asked for within the categories for clarity and further analysis.

Rationale

This study did show how bullying effects gifted and talented children in the middle

school grades. Much of the research within the literature review already indicated that the most

common type of bullying during the middle school years was name-calling, teasing about

appearance, pushing and shoving, and insults regarding their intelligence and grades. Regular

children get bullied too but gifted children are most often bullied based on their school

performance, which "turns their strength into a weakness and a source of shame” (Smith, et al.

2008, p. 7). Certain challenges due to emotional immaturity comes automatically with

exceptional intellectual ability, therefore, gifted children are extremely sensitive to bullying.

The data collected from this study indicated how safe and unsafe these students

felt within their school culture and how they were treated by other students. It also provided data

on what these participants had seen and heard, and how they reacted to the situations of bullying.

Furthermore, the study provided insight pertaining to gangs within the school climate, and

specific causes and situations of bullying among gifted and talented students.

Summary








(Schuler, 2002, p. 4).

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION OF DATA


CHAPTER IV

“Aim for success, not perfection. Never give up your right to be

wrong, because then you will lose the ability to learn new things

and move forward with your life” (page 37).

David M. Burns (1993)

Introduction

Included within this chapter, you will find a brief introduction restating the purpose of

this study, as well as the setting and the participants. Research questions and the methodology

used will also be included, followed by the presentation of data and concluding remarks.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to indicate the incidents and reactions to bullying, and to

what extent it exists within the school climate. Certainly, a victim’s apparent tendency not to tell

adults about being bullied means that parents, teachers, and school personnel are often not aware

of the extent of the bullying. Bullying often occurs under the radar, out of sight, or is even

“normalized by adults as a basic ‘rite of passage’ into adulthood” (Peterson, 2009, p. 280). These

behaviors therefore, invalidate the feelings of the victim and as originally stated in Chapter I,

they continue to suffer in silence, or retaliate with violence.

Children who try to cope or even adapt to bullying conditions pay a big price,


particularly when it comes to their physical, mental, and emotional health and well-being. The

problem is made worse when adults normalize bullying behavior, and then victims feel even

more stigmatized and isolated. Research has shown that victims of bullying experience

significant physical and mental health problems including, but not limited to “high stress much

like post-traumatic stress disorder; and unresolved, chronic stress which causes physical changes

in the brain that can lead to depression” (Peterson, 2009, p. 281).

Bullying research suggests that bullying not only affects the bullied

victims, but also damages an entire school’s atmosphere by creating “a climate of fear and

intimidation” (Bandyopadhyay, et al. 2009, p. 44). In addition, teasing and bullying have a

detrimental effect on student learning and achievement, and “contributes to school refusal,

truancy, and dropout” (Bandyopadhyay, et al. 2009, p. 44).

The setting for this study was a public middle school in the

city of Norfolk in the state of Virginia, and the school contains sixth, seventh, and eighth grade

students. More than 85% of the families are economically disadvantaged and approximately 80%

of students are eligible for free or reduced lunch. The student demographics are approximately

84% African-American, 9% White, 4% Hispanic, and 3% Asian. The middle school has an

enrollment of approximately 1,440 students and continues to grow at a rate of 3-4% a year for

the past ten years. This school provides a self-contained classroom academy program

called Young Scholars for gifted and talented students with approximately 98 students totaling

from the sixth, seventh, and eighth grade levels. These children range in ages from ten to sixteen,

and cover all the economical and ethnic demographics. For the purpose of this study, students

were selected from the Young Scholars program only.

A comparative research study was conducted in order to examine


the impact of bullying on gifted and talented children within the middle school climate, and a

questionnaire was administered and completed by the participants. Category One results were

compiled in order to examine how safe students felt within their school culture, and Category

Two questions were examined in order to determine how they were treated by other students.

Category Three questions were reviewed to reveal what these participants had seen and heard,

and the Category Four Questions provided data on how they reacted to the referenced situations

in the previous categories. Additionally, Category Five provided data pertaining to gangs within

the school climate, and Question Six essays were analyzed for specific causes and situations of

bullying among gifted and talented students.

Questionnaires were administered at the same time on the same day to

sixth, seventh, and eighth graders in three different classrooms each containing a teacher

monitor. Each grade level consisted of 30 students which had been in the Young Scholars

program from the beginning of the 2009-2010 school year. No time limit was placed on the

questionnaires, and the questionnaires were collected by the teacher monitors once all had been

completed. Permission had been granted for this study by the district school board, gifted

department chair, and assistant principal; and all issues of anonymity and privacy were adhered

to and thereafter. All parental consent forms were signed and filed with the school main office,

and additional copies were provided to the gifted department.

Both male and female participants were selected for

this study with a total of 90 students from the Young Scholars program; 30 from the sixth grade

level, 30 from the seventh grade level, and 30 from the eighth grade level. Since there was an

average of 33-35 students per grade level within the program, all students present the day of the

questionnaire being administered were included as participants. However, 94 participants were


present, and four were randomly removed from the study to maintain a participation number of

90; 30 from each grade level, in order to keep the study consistent across grade levels.

Using the Trauma Symptom Survey (TSI) which is

a five-point scale ranging from 5 (often) to 0 (never), the mean score was calculated per

category, the results were then calculated into percentages, and the percentages were compared

across grade levels and genders. This survey measuring system was developed to assess the

prevalence of the bullying and the various types of bullying, the attitudes on aggressive behavior,

and the willingness to give and seek assistance. Additionally, the essay questions served to

provide specific details and situations asked for within the categories for clarity and further

analysis. Presentation of Data

Category One questions pertained to how safe they felt, and these questions delved into

how safe they felt in their general and elective classrooms, as opposed to their gifted classrooms,

as well as areas such as the gymnasium and athletic fields, cafeteria, and hallways. These

questions extended the safety issue out to walking to and from school, as well as taking the

school bus with all the other students of the school not within the Young Scholars Program.

Table 10

Results: Bullying Questionnaire

Category One: How Safe Do You Feel?

Question 1: How safe do you feel in your general and elective classrooms, as opposed to your

Young Scholars classrooms?

Grade 6 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 8

Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls


a very unsafe, scared 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00

b kind of unsafe 29.42 17.65 11.76 41.19 05.88 17.65

c kind of safe 35.30 52.96 17.65 41.19 35.30 35.30

d very safe 17.65 23.54 47.07 17.65 52.96 29.42

No Response 17.65 5.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

For all three grade levels, 67.84% of the students found their general and elective

classrooms kind of safe or very safe, with the remaining 20.63% finding them kind of unsafe,

and very unsafe and scared, leaving 11.53% which did not respond to the question. The majority

of participants commented within their essay question and additional comments that they found

their Young Scholar classrooms equivalent to a haven, where they were safe and protected. Also,

they commented that their Young Scholar teachers protected them as well as understood their

social and emotional needs, and there was no bullying amongst themselves. In fact, they

commented that if they were not within this inclusive program, many would not have attended

this particular school at all.

Table 11



Question 2: How safe do you feel in the gymnasium or on the athletic fields?




b kind of unsafe 17.65 17.65 00.00 29.42 11.76 23.54


c kind of safe 41.19 35.30 41.19 53.30 23.54 23.54

d very safe 23.54 35.30 35.30 29.42 64.72 35.30

No Response 17.65 05.88 00.00 00.00 00.00 17.65

For this question, 73.61% of the students reported the gymnasium and the athletic fields

were areas they felt kind of safe or very safe, with 18.63% finding them kind of unsafe, and very

unsafe and scared, leaving 7.76% which did not respond to the question. They commented that

though the verbal harassment was still evident, the physical harassment was at a minimal due to

the careful watch of the physical education teachers. Furthermore, the Young Scholars were not

distributed across the other classes; they were still somewhat together with two mutual teachers

for physical education half the year in the gymnasium and health in a classroom for the other half

of the year.

School climate can be defined as the “quality and frequency of interactions among adults

and students,” which includes aspects such as perceptions of fairness, strictness of school rules,

and qualities of student-teacher relationships” (Spriggs, et al. 2008, p. 744). A good example of

this are these two physical education teachers who work closely with the Young Scholars

program, and are aware of the vulnerability to bullying these children experience, therefore, they

put out the extra effort to support their social and emotional needs. There is better

socioemotional adjustment among students within a positive climate, as indicated by “prosocial

behavior, greater teacher support, greater safety, and clarity of the rules” which ultimately leads

to a student’s higher commitment to academic achievement (Spriggs, et al. 2008, p. 746).

Bullying creates a sense of fear that disrupts the learning environment, and there is a

need to actively address the impact of bullies and their victims on school climate and academic


success of students. These teachers are aware of this concern, therefore, lay out clear

expectations for their students in adhering to the schools’ non-bullying standards, and although a

code of conduct may not be enough to eliminate bullying, “well-established policies with

methods to investigate issues and resolve problems as they arise provide all with a better

opportunity to intervene on the behalf of students most affected by bullying” (Juvonen, et al.

2003, p. 1237).

Table 12



Question 3: How safe do you feel in the cafeteria?




b kind of unsafe 17.65 41.19 11.76 58.84 00.00 00.00

c kind of safe 29.42 29.42 17.65 11.76 35.30 47.07

d very safe 35.30 11.76 47.07 23.54 58.84 35.30

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

In regards to the cafeteria environment, 63.74% of the students found it kind of safe or

very safe, with 24.51% finding them kind of unsafe, and very unsafe and scared, leaving 11.75%

which did not respond to the question. They reported the cafeteria as an environment of

‘distance’ bullying, meaning that since all students had to sit in their seats and there was a dean

and a security guard present, the bullying was done differently. Mostly they were intimidated


into the back of the food line with stares and whispers, and have learned early on to just get to

the back of the line when others enter the food line.

Furthermore, they are with their Young Scholars class at the same table, so they are all

bombarded with food every day. Although the dean and security guard often interfere to stop it,

no one exactly ever sees who has thrown it so no administrative action ever takes place. Many

participants bring their own lunch, roughly 75%, in order not to stand in line at all; and often

their table is released first by the dean so they may head back to their class before the rest of the

general population is present in the hallways with them.

Table 13



Question 4: How safe do you feel in the hallways?




b kind of unsafe 17.65 29.42 11.76 35.30 05.88 23.54

c kind of safe 47.07 41.19 17.65 29.42 64.72 35.30

d very safe 17.65 17.65 47.07 05.88 23.54 23.54

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

The results reported that 60.77% of the students felt that the hallways were kind of safe

or very safe, with 27.46% finding them kind of unsafe, and very unsafe and scared, leaving

11.77% which did not respond to the question. The students that found the hallways unsafe and


were scared shared their remarks within the essay question. By far, they felt that the hallways

were the worst and would rather be written up by teachers for arriving late to class, rather than

endure the bullies within the crowds. These students reported to developing methods and

strategies in order to avoid contact with bullies as much as possible in a consistent, daily manner.

Location plays a significant role in bullying and the students noted that the hallways,

cafeteria, and restrooms were the most vulnerable areas; and many refuse to enter the locker

rooms as well. The locker rooms are unmonitored and many students wear their gym clothes

under their uniform to avoid entering them all together. Many participants also reported sneaking

to the fourth floor teachers restrooms in order to avoid the student restrooms where bullying not

only occurs, but other incidents of smoking, drugs, weapons, and precocious behavior, and they

are afraid of being witnesses to this behavior or even accused of being involved.

Within the essay comments, the participants noted that these are the same areas they were

bullied in when in elementary school, and they cited that lack of adult supervision as the number

one reason that bullying occurs. Their biggest grievance was that they were aware of the rule that

all teachers are required to monitor the hallways during bell change, and they wanted to know

why so few are present during this time. Furthermore, they cited the lack of dean presence for the

majority of the school day, and wanted to know why normally only two of the four security

guards were ever present in the building at the same time.

Table 14



Question 5: How safe do you feel going to and from school, walking or taking the bus?





b kind of unsafe 00.00 11.76 00.00 23.54 00.00 05.88

c kind of safe 23.54 29.42 11.76 35.30 29.42 29.42

d very safe 58.84 47.07 64.72 41.19 64.72 47.07

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Within this question, 80.39% of the students reported that the buses were kind of safe or

very safe, with 7.84% finding them kind of unsafe, and very unsafe and scared, leaving 11.77%

which did not respond to the question. The students who reported feeling safe acknowledged that

they took the 4:00pm activity bus everyday, whereas the general population left on the busses at

2:35pm. Thus, only Young Scholars and students participating in afterschool activities are on the

busses, and the bullies have long since left the school grounds for the day. The students which

reported feeling unsafe did not participate in any activities or sports, and were on the busses

daily with the general population, and therefore in the presence of the bullies. Many victims

“avoid public areas in the school such as the cafeteria, restrooms, and hallways in an attempt to

elude bullies” (Lumsden, 2002, p. 346). Within the essay responses, nearly half of the

participants noted that the fear of being bullied is so great sometimes that they arrive very early

and leave very late, or avoid school altogether when a situation has escalated to the point where

they are fearful of their safety.

Category Two allowed them to discuss how others treated them with questions such as

how often did other students bully them by laying their hands on them, including incidents of

hitting, kicking, pushing, or hurting their body otherwise. The questions also addressed how

often did other students bully them by saying mean things to them, things which hurt their


feelings, how often did other students bully them by spreading mean rumors about them, and

how often did other students bully them by leaving them out of their activities. Further insight

was acquired by asking in what grade was the student or students which bullied them, and had

they ever told or asked for help when being bullied. Additionally, the section for additional

comments provided further analysis regarding their answers to the questions.

Table 15


Category Two: How Others Treat You

Question 1: How often do other students bully you by laying their hands on you (hit, kick, or

push you or hurt your body otherwise)?



a every day 05.88 00.00 05.88 23.54 00.00 00.00

b once or twice a week 05.88 23.54 17.65 05.88 00.00 00.00

c once or twice a month 05.88 00.00 11.76 11.76 00.00 11.76

d once or twice a year 35.30 11.76 05.88 23.54 58.84 11.76

e never 29.42 58.84 35.30 35.30 35.30 11.76

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 64.72

Within this question, 14.71% of the student participants reported that other students

bullied them by laying their hands on them, including hitting, kicking, pushing, or hurting their

body otherwise on an frequent basis, either daily or several times per week. Many commented

that this bullying was unrelentless, and from the same bullies year after year, some of it even


carrying over from elementary school. Those that reported the bullying was infrequent, perhaps

once or twice per month, or even per year, averaged at 31.36%. Finally, 34.32% reported never

having been bullied in this particular manner, leaving 19.61% which did not respond to the

question.

In review of the comments within this category, the participants noted that much of the

bullying took place not only without intervention, but without interruption. Many of the

participants have been bullied by the same students since elementary school, and these bullies

have recruited other students to assist them in their bullying behavior. This dynamic “empowers

the bully to act aggressively without fear of sanction, and encourages passivity in bystanders”

(Tomlinson, 2008, p. 62). This creates an environment in which the victims of bullying no longer

see a reason to report their victimization, and they have given up on any hope of adult assistance.

These participants expressed a fear in reporting this bullying, since they will also be attending

high school in the future with their bullies. Additionally, many stated that this questionnaire was

the only time they had actually been asked their opinion and remarks on the bullying taking place

in their school.

Table 16



Question 2: How often do other students bully you by saying mean things to you, things which

hurt your feelings?



a every day 29.42 17.65 11.76 17.65 00.00 00.00





e never 23.54 52.96 17.65 00.00 17.65 11.76

No Response 17.65 00.00 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

In responding to this question, 25.49% of the student participants reported that other

students bullied them by saying mean things to them, things that hurt their feelings on a frequent

basis, either daily or several times per week. These students reported that they were deeply upset

by the remarks and the rumors about them. As a group, they commented, the Young Scholars

were called ‘geeks,’ ‘nerds,’ and told they acted ‘stuck-up’ and better than everyone else.

Individually, they were attacked for their weight and their race, with the majority of Young

Scholars being of mixed-heritage and nearly all the white, Mexican, and Asian students within

the school are in the Young Scholar program. By the eighth grade, they reported that they were

attacked with rumors about their sexuality, often called “faggots,’ ‘lesbos,’ and often accused of

bisexuality with each other because ‘no one else would want them.’ The essay comments were

strongest in this category and participants reported crying and being distressed about these

remarks on a daily basis.

Those that reported the bullying was infrequent, perhaps once or twice per month, or

even per year, averaged at 43.13%. Finally, 20.59% reported never having been bullied in this

particular manner, leaving 10.79% which did not respond to the question. Within the essay

comments, the participants again noted that lack of adult supervision as the number one reason

that bullying occurs. Their grievance was that they were aware of the code of conduct rules and


even signed the student contracts regarding bullying and harassment; however, teachers and

administrators were not following procedure in reprimanding the bullies with detention or

suspension. Furthermore, they again cited the lack of dean presence in the hallways for the

majority of the school day, and wanted to know why normally only two of the four security

guards were ever present in the building at the same time.

Table 17



Question 3: How often do other students bully you by spreading mean rumors about you?



a every day 00.00 05.88 05.88 11.76 00.00 00.00




e never 35.30 52.96 35.30 17.65 58.84 41.19

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Within this question, 10.78% of the student participants reported that other students

bullied them by spreading mean rumors about them on a frequent basis, either daily or several

times per week. Those that reported the bullying was infrequent, perhaps once or twice per

month, or even per year, averaged at 37.24%. Finally, 40.21% reported never having been

bullied in this particular manner, leaving 11.77% which did not respond to the question.


The essay comments were essentially the same as the previous question, with the

participants reporting that they were deeply upset by the rumors about them and stressing that

they could not ‘get away’ from the rumors. In addition to being called ‘geeks,’ ‘nerds,’ and told

they acted ‘stuck-up’ and better than everyone else since they were in the Young Scholars

program, they stated that as absurd as many of the rumors were, they were treated as ‘truth’ by

the general population within the school. This made it impossible for them to make friendships

outside of the program, particularly since they lived in the same neighborhoods with many of the

non-Young Scholars students. Individually, they were once again attacked for their weight and

their race, with the majority of Young Scholars being of mixed-heritage and nearly all the white,

Mexican, and Asian students within the school are in the Young Scholar program.

By the eighth grade, they again reported that they were attacked with rumors about their

sexuality, often called “faggots,’ ‘lesbos,’ and often accused of bisexuality with each other

because ‘no one else would want them.’ Compounding these rumors were also accusations of

being “oreos” which means being black on the outside, but white on the inside; as well as being

attacked at school events for dancing like “dorks” or for their “Sears clothing.”

Table 18



Question 4: How often do other students bully you by leaving you out of their activities?



a every day 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00





e never 35.30 52.96 41.19 58.84 70.61 23.54

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

In responding to this question, 14.71% of the student participants reported that other

students bullied them by leaving them out of their activities on a frequent basis, either daily or

several times per week. Those that reported the bullying was infrequent, perhaps once or twice

per month, or even per year, averaged at 26.45%. Finally, 47.07% reported never having been

bullied in this particular manner, leaving 11.77% which did not respond to the question.

When it came to bullies leaving them out of activities, 47.07% reported that this rarely

happened for the sole purpose that these bullies did not participate in school extracurricular or

sports activities. The other participants who remarked that they experienced this behavior noted

in their comments that this occurred when doing group projects within a classroom, or when

getting selected for teams within physical education class, but even these incidents were

infrequent such as once or twice a month.

Once again the participants reported in their comments that they took the 4:00pm activity

bus everyday due to afterschool activities and sports, mainly with other Young Scholars students;

whereas the general population left on the busses at 2:35pm. Thus, only Young Scholars and

students participating in afterschool activities are within the school building, and the bullies have

long since left the school grounds for the day. Once again the participants noted that the fear of

being bullied is so great sometimes that they arrive very early and leave very late, or avoid

school altogether when a situation has escalated to the point where they are fearful of their


safety. In addition, this fear carried over to even community-related and church activities, since

many live in the same neighborhoods as their bullies.

Category Three asked questions about what they have seen or heard, such as how often




student bully others by leaving them out of their activities.

Table 19


Category Three: What You Have Seen Or Heard

Question 1: How often have you seen another student bully others by laying their hands on them

(hit, kick, or push you or hurt their body otherwise)?



a every day 23.54 29.42 17.65 47.07 41.19 17.65




e never 00.00 00.00 05.88 05.88 00.00 05.88

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

In responding to this question, 55.87% of the student participants reported that they have

seen another student bully others by laying their hands on them, either hitting, kicking, pushing,


or hurting their body otherwise on a frequent basis, either daily or several times per week. Those

that reported the bullying was infrequent, perhaps once or twice per month, or even per year,

averaged at 29.42%. Finally, 2.94% reported never having seen bullying in this particular

manner, leaving 11.77% which did not respond to the question.

In reviewing the essay questions and supporting comments, the numbers of frequency for

these incidents were high for all questions within Category Three. The Young Scholars reported

feeling safe within their inclusive classrooms and environment, as well as the extent of support

of their Young Scholars teachers, but found that others within the general population had it even

worse at the will and hands of the bullies. Within their statements, they reported witnessing this

abuse on a daily basis and found themselves powerless to help, mostly afraid of retaliation from

the bully and the chance of becoming their next target.

Table 20



Question 2: How often have you seen another student bully others by saying mean things to

them, things which hurt their feelings?



a every day 35.30 64.72 35.30 58.84 58.84 52.96




e never 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 05.88


No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Within this question, 77.43% of the student participants reported that they have seen

another student bully others by saying mean things to them, things which hurt their feelings on a

frequent basis, either daily or several times per week. Those that reported the bullying incidents

were infrequent, perhaps once or twice per month, or even per year, averaged at 9.80%. Finally,

1.00% reported never having seen bullying in this particular manner, leaving 11.77% which did

not respond to the question.

In reviewing the essay questions and supporting comments, the participants once again

commented feeling safe within their inclusive classrooms and environment, as well as the extent

of support of their Young Scholars teachers, but found that others within the general population

had it even worse at the will and hands of the bullies. They reported witnessing this abuse on a

daily basis and found themselves powerless to help, stating again that they were mostly afraid of

retaliation from the bully and the chance of becoming their next target.

Table 21



Question 3: How often have you seen another student bully others by spreading mean rumors

about them?



aevery day 11.76 11.76 17.65 35.30 17.65 17.65

bonce or twice a week 29.42 23.54 29.42 29.42 35.30 11.76



donce or twice a year 05.88 05.88 05.88 11.76 11.76 00.00

enever 17.65 05.88 05.88 00.00 00.00 05.88

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

When responding to this question, 45.09% of the student participants reported that they

have seen another student bully others by spreading rumors about them on a frequent basis,

either daily or several times per week. Those that reported the bullying was infrequent, perhaps

once or twice per month, or even per year, averaged at 37.26%. Finally, 5.88% reported never

having seen bullying in this particular manner, leaving 11.77% which did not respond to the

question. The comments of the participants once again reinforced that although they witnessed

this abuse on a daily basis and found themselves powerless to help, they were mostly afraid of

retaliation from the bully and the chance of becoming their next target.

Table 22



Question 4: How often have you seen another student bully others by leaving them out of their

activities?



a every day 23.54 11.76 17.65 58.84 35.30 23.54





e never 17.65 05.88 23.54 17.65 05.88 00.00

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

In answering this question, 53.91% of the student participants reported that they have

seen another student bully others by leaving them out of their activities on a frequent basis, either

daily or several times per week. Those that reported the bullying incidents were infrequent,

perhaps once or twice per month, or even per year, averaged at 22.55%. Finally, 11.77%

reported never having seen bullying in this particular manner, leaving 11.77% which did not

respond to the question.

The participants stated within their comments that this behavior was what kept them from

making friends outside of their Young Scholars program. In essence, the bullies use peer and

social relationships as the weapon to harm someone, meaning that the bully threatens to destroy a

victim’s relationship with the few peers and friends they presently have, thus destroying their

social life. Examples of this type of bullying include spreading rumors, ignoring the victim

completely, telling others to specifically ignore the victim, and intentional exclusion from

activities.

Additionally, the participants reported very high levels of profanity being thrown in their

direction, and cursing being done by these bullies on a regular basis. Referring to specific body

parts or commenting on sexual activity is commonplace for these bullies, and they continue to

persist until they reach shock value from these participants within the study. Within the essay

question, participants noted that there are no serious consequences for using profanity in their

school, and although it is listed in the student code of conduct as an offense, no one else

considers it an offense. They noted that particularly in the hallways and cafeteria profanity is


screamed at them, and bystanders mostly laugh and encourage the bullies even more; and

unfortunately, administrators and teachers appear to just ignore it, often citing that they pretend

not to have heard it in the first place, or they are unwilling to take the time or effort to write-up a

formal offense form.

Category Four questions pertained to how they reacted, such as what have they done

when they have seen a student being hit, kicked, pushed, punched or otherwise physically hurt in

school or on the school bus; and if they helped a student in a bully situation, what was the

outcome, and whether it was positive or negative.

Table 23


Category Four: How You Reacted

Question 1: What have you done when you have seen a student being hit, kicked, pushed,

punched or otherwise physically hurt in school or on the school bus?



a never seen another

student being bullied

00.00 05.88 05.88 05.88 00.00 00.00

b walked away and

ignored it

17.65 58.84 35.30 11.76 41.19 23.54

c stood and watched 35.30 11.76 11.76 35.30 23.54 35.30

d helped the person 23.54 17.65 17.65 35.30 29.42 17.65


being bullied

e laughed 05.88 00.00 05.88 11.76 00.00 05.88

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Within this question, 2.94% reported to never having seen another student being bullied

such as being hit, kicked, pushed, punched, or otherwise physically hurt in school or on the

school bus. However, 31.38% reported to walking away and ignoring incidents of this bullying

behavior upon others, while 25.49% reported to standing and watching these incidents of

bullying on another student passively. When asked if they ever helped a person being bullied,

23.53% responded that they did, while 4.90% admitted to having laughed, leaving 11.76% which

did not respond to the question.

Table 24



Question 2: What have you done when you heard a student being teased or called names in

school or on the school bus?



a never seen another

student being bullied

00.00 05.88 00.00 00.00 00.00 05.88

b walked away and 41.19 41.19 23.54 11.76 35.30 23.54


ignored it


d helped the person

being bullied

05.88 41.19 41.19 58.84 17.65 17.65

e laughed 11.76 05.88 00.00 11.76 23.54 05.88

No Response 11.76 05.88 00.00 11.76 23.54 05.88

Within this question, 1.96% reported to never having seen another student being bullied such

as being teased or called names in school or on the school bus. However, 27.47% reported to

walking away and ignoring incidents of this bullying behavior upon others, while 16.67%

reported to standing and watching these incidents of bullying on another student passively. When

asked if they ever helped a person being bullied, 30.40% responded that they did, while 11.75%

admitted to having laughed, leaving 11.75% which did not respond to the question.

In reviewing their comments, many of the participants once again stated that they did not

report these experiences to teachers or school personnel because they were afraid of retaliation

on the part of the bully. Furthermore, they did not want to draw further attention to themselves,

which could make them the next target. They admitted to empathizing and sympathizing with the

victims, but the risk in getting involved was too big for them; therefore, they also understood

when others did not come to their aid when being bullied themselves. The participants also noted

that their advanced academic performance and inclusion in the Young Scholars program made

them a target to their bullies, often being told they ‘asked for it.’


When it came to verbal attacks, the participants most often helped the student being

teased or called names in school or on the school bus. In reviewing the comments on the

questionnaires, the participants did not offer direct assistance, but were readily and willingly

available to offer comfort and understanding to the victim after the incident.

Category Five pertained specifically to gangs due to the demographics of the participants

of this study, such as did they know of students in their school who were members of a gang, or

were wanna-be’s of a gang. Additionally, the participants were asked exactly how much of a

problem did they think gangs were in their school.

Table 25


Category Five: Gangs

Question 1: Do you know of students in your school who are members of a gang, or are

wanna-be’s?



a Yes 00.00 05.88 17.65 52.96 52.96 29.42

b No 41.19 11.76 17.65 05.88 41.19 11.76

c wanna-be's, not

members

23.54 23.54 29.42 29.42 00.00 35.30

d no gangs, just

'cliques'

17.65 23.54 11.76 11.76 00.00 05.88

No Response 17.65 35.30 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65


Within this question, 26.48% of the participants found gangs to be a major problem

within their school and community, with 23.54% worried not particularly about gangs, but

wanna-be’s wanting to be gang members. Additionally, 21.57% did not believe that gangs were a

problem, and 11.77% stating that there supposed ‘gangs’ were actually cliques of bullies

pretending to be an actual gang or trying to form a gang within the school, leaving 16.64% which

did not respond to the question.

The participants commented that most gang members that they see in and around

their school are actively involved in criminal activity within the community, and this often

involves violence, the possession of weapons, and the sale of drugs, particularly marijuana and

crack cocaine. Also noted within their comments was the issue that they were often related to

these gang members, such as being siblings, step-siblings, or cousins.

Table 26



Question 2: How much of a problem do you think gangs are in your school?



a a huge problem 05.88 00.00 05.88 23.54 05.88 11.76

b a big problem 11.76 17.65 00.00 23.54 29.42 05.88

csomewhat of a

problem41.19 35.30 29.42 35.30 41.19 58.84

d no problem at all 23.54 11.76 41.19 17.65 17.65 05.88


No Response 17.65 35.30 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

When responding to this question, 8.82% of the participants found gangs to be a ‘huge’

problem within their school and community, with 14.71% finding them to be a ‘big’ problem,

and 40.21% of them reporting that they found gangs to be ‘somewhat’ of a problem. However,

19.62% reported that they felt gangs were not a problem within their school or community,

leaving 16.64% which did not respond to the question.

Category Six completed the questionnaire with an essay question asking how much of a

problem did they think bullying was in their school. Participants were asked to give some

examples and specific situations, and no names were included. These results were included

within the presentation of data per category and question to which they pertained.

Summary

The presentation of data reviewed within this study indicated how safe and unsafe these

students felt within their school culture and how they were treated by other students. It also

provided data on what these participants had seen and heard, and how they reacted to the

situations of bullying. Furthermore, the study provided insight pertaining to gangs within the

school climate, and specific causes and situations of bullying among gifted and talented students.

The basis of this presentation of data is to support the rationale that “gifted kids are

bullied based on their superior school performance, which makes the child’s strength into a

weakness” (Peterson, 2003, p. 65). Inevitably, their giftedness and talents turns into a source of

shame for the child and many are unable to cope with this shame, and being bullied has already

been recognized as a major health problem for gifted children because of their already present

association with adjustment problems, as reviewed in Chapter II. Due to the fact that bullying

behaviors arouse a sense of fear and can lead to major physical altercations that disrupt the


learning cycle, “educators are urged to address actively the impact of bullies on their school

culture and on the academic success of all students” (Bosworth, et al. 2009, p. 362).

Bullying prevention programs are often created based on studies such as this one, and the

results are analyzed in an attempt to create strategies to modify school climate by changing

students’ attitudes that promote bullying and foster these behaviors towards the joining of gangs.

Furthermore, these studies and prevention programs encourage administrators and teachers to

recognize bullying as a serious problem, and “attempt to increase student willingness to seek

help for themselves and other victims” (Bandyopadhyay, et al. 2009, p. 42).

Chapter V

CONCLUSION


Chapter V

"The best indicator of a sociopathic serial bully is not a clinical diagnosis but

the trail of devastation and destruction of lives and livelihoods surrounding this

individual throughout their life” (p. 18).

J.S. Peterson

(2002)

Introduction

Historically, bullying among school children and youth has not been a topic of great

public concern; mostly due to the fact that “many adults viewed the experience of being bullied

as a rite of passage for many children” (Caruana, 2002, p. 54). All children are vulnerable to the

effects of bullying, but gifted children differ from other children in several significant ways.

Most gifted children are already very intense and anxious, as well as highly sensitive due to their

own and others’ high expectations of them. Gifted children consider social justice issues very

important to them, and “with their own hyper-sensitivity to self-criticism and perfectionalism,

they struggle to make sense of this cruelty and aggression; many times blaming themselves and


withdrawing socially in order to hide from bullies” (Clark, 2008, p. 151). These gifted and

talented children are “more susceptible to the severe emotional damage that bullying can inflict”

(Bosworth, 2009, p. 342). Take into consideration also that gifted students “tend to strive

towards perfectionalism and consider their lives less fulfilling without the pursuit of high goals,

some impossibly high” (Lumsden, 2002, p. 346).

The significance of this study was not to review bullying in gifted and talented children

versus common classroom children; however, it was to study the prevalence and impact that

bullying has on gifted and talented children specifically. The most common type of bullying

during the middle school years is “name-calling, teasing about appearance, pushing and shoving,

and insults regarding their intelligence and grades” (Smith, et al. 2008, p. 3). Regular children

get bullied too but gifted children are most often bullied based on their school performance,

which “turns their strength into a weakness and a source of shame” (Smith, et al. 2008, p. 7).

Certain challenges due to emotional immaturity come automatically with exceptional intellectual

abilities, therefore, gifted and talented children are extremely sensitive to bullying.

Summary of Findings

The setting for this study was a public middle school in the city of Norfolk in the state of

Virginia, and the school contains sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students. More than 85% of the

families are economically disadvantaged and approximately 80% of students are eligible for free

or reduced lunch. The student demographics are approximately 84% African-American, 9%

White, 4% Hispanic, and 3% Asian. The middle school has an enrollment of approximately

1,440 students and continues to grow at a rate of 3-4% a year for the past ten years. This school

provides a self-contained classroom academy program called Young Scholars for gifted and

talented students with approximately 98 students totaling from the sixth, seventh, and eighth


grade levels. These children range in ages from ten to sixteen, and cover all the economical and

ethnic demographics. For the purpose of this study, students were selected from the Young

Scholars program only. A comparative research study was conducted in order to examine the

impact of bullying on gifted and talented children within the middle school climate, and a

questionnaire was administered and completed by the participants.

Category One questions within the questionnaire pertained to how safe they felt, and

these questions delved into how safe they felt in their general and elective classrooms, as

opposed to their gifted classrooms, as well as areas such as the gymnasium and athletic fields,

cafeteria, and hallways. These questions extended the safety issue out to walking to and from

school, as well as taking the school bus with all the other students of the school not within the

Young Scholars Program. The study showed that 19.81% of the participants self unsafe in every

aspect of their school climate, and similarly, 89.08% of the participants did not report such

behaviors to school personnel because they were scared and lacked the confidence, or felt they

did not have the parental support to make the report. Bullying sets a tense environment in a

school and as addressed earlier, can lead to violence towards others or even suicide by the

victims. A student that has bullied can have far-reaching effects in a school and “create a climate

of fear and intimidation not only in his or her victims, but in fellow students” as well; therefore,

students who bully, their victims, and bystanders are all affected (Branson, et al. 2009, p. 8).

When asked the number one reason for not returning to school, “10% of high school dropouts

reported fear of being harassed, teased, or attacked” (Walker, 2009, p. 7).

Category Two allowed them to discuss how others treated them with questions such as

how often did other students bully them by laying their hands on them, including incidents of

hitting, kicking, pushing, or hurting their body otherwise. The questions also addressed how


often did other students bully them by saying mean things to them, things which hurt their

feelings, how often did other students bully them by spreading mean rumors about them, and

how often did other students bully them by leaving them out of their activities. From exclusion

from activities and cliques, to mean remarks and the spreading of gossip, and even

cyberbullying, 51% of the participants reported that this type of bullying happened most often to

them, and not always within the school environment either. Many times it rolled over into the

weekends and holiday and summer breaks when they encountered these bullies within their

neighborhoods and community, even in church and the shopping mall. Some students stated they

were just grateful when the bullies ignored them outside of the school environment, but were

quick to add that the bullying just started up again when school resumed. This added anxiety

during non-school time which reaches over into neighborhood and community time goes

unreported, but “eventually leads to poor grades, increased truancy, and increased violence

among students” (Holmes, 2010, p. 4).

Category Three asked questions about what they have seen or heard, such as how often




student bully others by leaving them out of their activities. Within this category, 81.03% of the

participants reported having seen another student bully others by spreading mean rumors about

them. Since many gifted children are perfectionistic, they feel that telling an adult what is

happening is “a reflection on their ability to control their lives” (Schuler, 2002, p. 3). To their

detriment, however, many adults tell these participants that this is a form of tattling, snitching, or


story-telling, therefore, leading them to distrust all adults and withdraw into themselves, often

causing them to suffer silently as situations escalate from their tormentors.

Most studies about bullying focus on boys as aggressors but girls can be bullies too, and

when girls bully, it is most often done in the form of rumors and gossip. Within their essays, the

participants reported that most of the boy bullies leaned towards violence and outward taunting,

but girl bullies and their tactics were often quiet and covert. The female participants noted that

when teachers are standing around, they don’t notice the group of girls who are bullying and

saying mean things apart from a group of girls who are innocently standing around and talking.

Girls socialize differently than boys, and as girls enter middle school their peer interactions

become less physical and more social and “they engage in verbal bonding by sharing stories,

hopes, and dreams” (Clark, 2008, p. 104). Since girls bond differently than boys, it makes sense

that when they bully it would be different too, but when girls bully they aren’t so obvious. The

most common tactic is rumors and gossip, and “playing the popularity game in a way that causes

fear or inadequacy in others is a form of bullying and it is a common tactic used by girls” (Clark,

2008, p. 105).

Research has shown us that bullies often come from homes in which physical punishment

is used, “where striking out physically is a way to handle problems, and where parental

involvement and warmth are frequently lacking” (Peterson, et al. 2007, p. 154). These students

who engage in bullying behaviors have a need to feel powerful and in control, and very often

appear to “derive satisfaction from inflicting injury and suffering on others and seem to have

little empathy for their victims,” and often they defend their actions by saying that their victims

provoked them in some way (Peterson, et al. 2007, p. 158).


Category Four questions pertained to how they reacted, such as what have they done

when they have seen a student being hit, kicked, pushed, punched or otherwise physically hurt in

school or on the school bus; and if they helped a student in a bully situation, what was the

outcome, and whether it was positive or negative. Nearly 95% of the participants reported having

seen another student bully others by saying mean things to them, things which hurt their feelings.

Bullying is a common experience for many children and teenagers as per the research, but the

incidents evolve as well do the means. “Direct bullying seems to increase through the elementary

school years, peak in middle school, and decline during the high school years” (Van Tassel,

2007, p. 144). Although this direct bullying seems to decrease with the increase of age in the

victim, “verbal abuse appears to stay constant, often escalating within the high school years”

(Van Tassel, 2007, p. 145).

This verbal abuse, as stated by the participants, often comes in the form of intense

profanity. There is a rise in profanity in our schools today primarily due to music, movies, and

television; and “our kids are routinely exposed to a variety of language that can only be

considered inappropriate” (Morrison, et al. 2006, p. 216). Profanity has gradually become a more

accepted part of pop culture with our children as is evidenced by the sitcoms they watch and the

music they listen to, and familiarity breeds acceptance. Profanity is now a common occurrence

within the halls of our high schools, middle schools, and even elementary schools; and school

officials, parents and the media need to share in the responsibility to curtail this growing

epidemic. There are many statistics and reports regarding bullying, and the prevalence of this

profanity speaks volumes regarding the impact that bullying has on our schools and the children.

It has been determined that “a high percentage of children, over 89% have experienced

victimization at some point throughout their school experience” (Burrill, 2005, p. 84). These


children are more likely to experience “attention deficit disorder, oppositional defiant disorder,

conduct disorder, and depression” (Burrill, 2005, p. 86). Suicidal thoughts are more prevalent in

victims of bullying, particularly the gifted, and “these victims reported experiencing feelings of

vengefulness, anger, and self-pity” (Olweus, 1996, p. 17). Olweus has extensively researched the

effects of bullying on gifted and talented children, and found that victimization is “highly

correlated with low self-esteem, depression, isolation, suicidal ideation, and violent retaliation”

(Olweus, 1996, p. 18).

Category Five pertained specifically to gangs due to the demographics of the participants

of this study, such as did they know of students in their school who were members of a gang, or

were wanna-be’s of a gang. Additionally, the participants were asked exactly how much of a

problem did they think gangs were in their school. All of the participants found gangs a problem

at some level, as referenced in Question 1 in this category. Bullies are often surrounded by

others, not through popularity but through fear. It is this dynamic which has caused the

development and rise of gangs in schools and neighborhoods. A bully is rarely able to sustain a

friendship because it is “based on trust, dependability, loyalty, and mutual respect” (Parker,

2008, p. 101). Therefore, the bully forms alliances with others which is part of his or her strategy

for power and control. Looking at the bully and their cohorts, a clique and then eventually a gang

mentality is formed where true friendship is absent. Many of the cohorts side with the bully and

join these gangs “for fear of otherwise becoming a target” (Parker, 2008, p. 101). Many join

gangs, as noted earlier in the comments of the participants, because they were often related to

these gang members, such as being siblings, step-siblings, or cousins.

Implications


Victims experience real suffering that can interfere with their social and emotional

development, as well as their actual school performance. Some victims of bullying have

“attempted suicide rather than continue to endure harassment and abuse” (Marr, et al. 2001, p.

32). Bullycide is the word coined by researchers to describe when “bullied children are driven to

suicide rather than face another day of unrelenting bullying, harassment, and abuse” (Marr, et al.

2001, p. 11). Many victims haven taken out their anger and frustration by using violence, which

“normally manifests itself in high school” (Whiting, 2009, p. 227). Many of the “young people

who have caused school-related violence and even deaths have been bullied themselves,” and

examples such as the Columbine high school tragedy shows how bullying can lead to violence

and suicide (Whiting, 2009, p. 232).

Being bullied has also been recognized as a major health problem for gifted children

because of their already present association with adjustment problems. This usually manifests

itself into “poor mental health with thoughts of suicide, and more extreme violent behavior such

as homicide perceived as justifiable retaliation” (Juvonen, et al. 2003, p. 1235). Juvonen (2002)

found in her research that the bullies themselves were actually psychologically stronger than the

victims, and had a higher social standing. These bullies are often popular within their groups, and

their groups possess other bullies; therefore making them a “higher population in respect to the

groups of non-bullies” (Juvonen, et al. 2003, p. 1235). To be able to intervene with bullying,

Juvonen stresses that it is important to recognize the unique problems of these gifted children

and address them directly with the assistance of parents, teachers, and school personnel.

In addition to recognizing these problems, school-wide antibullying approaches that aim

to change peer dynamics that support and maintain bullying should be developed and

implemented. In order to meet the social and emotional needs of these gifted children, a good


school environment should set “explicit standards or codes of appropriate student behavior”

(Juvonen, et al. 2003, p. 1237). Administrators should also lay out clear expectations for their

teachers and staff in adhering to these standards, and recruit their assistance in gathering and

reviewing feedback and meeting set goals. Juvoven admits that a code of conduct may not be

enough to eliminate bullying, but “well-established policies with methods to investigate issues

and resolve problems as they arise provide all with a better opportunity to intervene on the behalf

of students most affected by bullying” (Juvonen, et al. 2003, p. 1237).

Recommendations for Future Studies

Bullying thrives in schools because teachers and school officials are often unaware that it

is taking place, and normally only learn about it when it is finally reported due to the escalation

of situations to the point of violence. One of the goals for bullying prevention programs is to

promote student willingness to seek help when they directly experience or witness serious

circumstances of bullying. Students who regard this aggressive behavior as acceptable or even

normal within their school climate are more likely to become bullies themselves, therefore

escalating the problem even more. In order to prevent this escalation, it must first be ascertained

to what extend bullying is taking place by measuring these participants perceptions of these

behaviors, and the frequency of the incidents.

Bullying prevention programs are designed through such studies, and they attempt to

modify school climate by changing student attitudes that promote bullying and foster these

behaviors. More specifically, these programs “aim to reduce aggressive attitudes among students

and encourage them to be more accepting of classmates from diverse backgrounds” (Webb, et al.

2005, p. 87). With this, these programs encourage administrators and teachers to recognize how

serious of a problem bullying is within their school climate, and to assist in student willingness


to seek help for themselves or report incidents in order to assist others. The prevalence of

bullying within a school ultimately impacts student learning and achievement not only for the

victims, but for bystanders as well, and contributes again to truancy, and even increases the

dropout rate.

School districts struggle to reduce violence and dealing with bullying behaviors has come

to the forefront recently. In order for effective programs to be developed through school

improvement plans, “researchers must first be able to identify the students most at risk for

engaging in bullying behavior and provide data regarding the behavioral and psychosocial

characteristics associated with the different types and levels of these behaviors.” (Cavanaugh,

2009, p. 9) Researchers have used an array of definitions, such as those referenced in Chapter 2,

to focus on the identification of bullies and their victims and have used “various measures to

measure the prevalence and effects of bullying” on not only individuals but the school climate as

a whole. (Peterson, 2003, p. 71)

School professionals are charged with teaching and modeling good social and emotional

behavior so that students will act appropriately and thrive in school, academically and socially.

Therefore, they should always be on alert for bullying behaviors among children and act pro-

actively. In order to end this negative behavior, “the behavior of the bullying child needs to

change, as well as helping the child who is being bullied respond appropriately.” (Peterson,

2002, p. 18)

Reflections








(Schuler, 2002, p. 4).

As educators struggle to reduce violence, dealing with all of these bullying behaviors has

truly come to the forefront. In order for effective programs to be developed and implemented, the

social and emotional needs of those bullied, as well as the bullies themselves, must be

understood and met. Combating bullying is a mission that requires cooperation between

everyone involved including parents and the community, as well as the school administration and

staff. Future studies and comprehensive intervention plans can help ensure that all students learn

in a safe and fear-free environment.

References

Bandyopadhyay, S., Cornell, D. G., & Konold, T. R. (2009). Validity of Three School Climate

Scales to Assess Bullying, Aggressive Attitudes, and Help Seeking. School Psychology

Review, 38(3), 42-59.

Beane, Ph.D., A. L. (1999). The Bully Free Classroom: Over 100 Tips and Strategies for

Teachers K-8. Minneapolis MN: Free Spirit Publishing, Inc.

Beane, Ph.D., A. L. (2006). How To Be Bully Free Workbook. Minneapolis MN: Free Spirit

Publishing, Inc.

Berthold, K. A., & Hoover, J. H. (2008). Correlates of Bullying and Victimization among

Intermediate Students in the Midwestern USA. School Psychology International, 21(1),

65-78. Retrieved November 18, 2003, from


http://spi.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/21/1/65

Bosworth, K., Espelage, D. L., & Simon, T. R. (2009). Factors Associated with Bullying

Behavior in Middle School Students. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 19(3), 341-363.

Retrieved November 18, 2009, from

http://jea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/19/3/341

Bradshaw, C. P., Sawyer, A. L., & O'Brennan, L. M. (2007). Bullying and Peer Victimization at

School: Perceptual Differences Between Students and School Staff. School Psychology

Review, 36(3), 361-382.

Branson, C., & Cornell, D. G. (2009). A comparison of self and peer reports in the assessment of

middle school bullying. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 25, 5-27.

Breedlove, L. (2010). The Intensity of Giftedness: Dabrowski's Overexcitabilities. Journal of

Secondary Gifted Education, 3(1), 47-73. Retrieved June 14, 2010, from Texas Gifted

Buchanan, N. K., Fox, R. A., & Martin, D. E. (2006). Gifted and Talented Programs in Charter

Schools. Journal of School Choice, 1(2), 101-130.

Burns, D. M. (1993). Ten Days to Self-Esteem. New York City: Quill: Harper Collins Publishers.

Burrill, Ph.D., K. A. (2006). Bully Victimization, PTSD Risk Factors and Dissociation: A

Correlation Study. Pearson Assessments and Information, 67(5), 84-89. Retrieved

November 18, 2009, from

http://www.pearsonassessments.com/haiweb/cultures/en-us/productiondetail.htm

Caruana, V. (2002). Educating Your Gifted Child. Wheaton IL: Crossway Books (A Division of

Good News Publishers).

Cavanaugh, S. (2009). Challenging Programs Cater to the Profoundly Gifted. Education Week,

28(33), 9.


Clark, B. (2008). Growing Up Gifted (Seventh Edition ed.). Upper Saddle River NJ Columbus

OH: Pearson Publishing Merrill Prentice Hall.

Cukierkorn, J. R. (2008). Talented Young Artists: Understanding Their Abilities and Needs.

Gifted Children Today, 31(4), 24-33.

Delisle, J., & Galbraith, J. (2002). When Gifted Children Don't Have All The Answers.

Minneapolis MN: Free Spirit Publishing, Inc.

Evans, M. (2008). Gifted and Talented: A Special Approach? Gifted Education International,

24(1), 82-87.

Firestone, H. (2001). Teaching By Lesson Planning. New York: Hart Publishers.

Gagne, F., Colangelo, N., & Davis, G. (2003). Transforming Gifts into Talents: The DMGT as a

Developmental Theory. Handbook of Gifted Education (3rd ed., pp. 60-74). Boston:

Allyn & Bacon.

Gardner, H. (1995). Reflections on multiple intelligences myths and messages. Phi Delta

Kappan, 77, 200-209.

Holmes, A. (2010). Law enforcement encouraging an end to bullying. jdnews.com, 66(347), 1-4.

Retrieved July 10, 2010, from http://jdnews.com/articles/school-66347-bullying-

encouraging.html

Jacobsen, K. E., & Bauman, S. (2007). Bullying in Schools: School Counselors' Responses to

Three Types of Bullying Incidents. Professional School Counseling, 11(1), 1-9.

Jones, W. F. (1972). An Experimental Critical Study of the Problem of Grading and Promotion.

Psychology Clinic, 5(2), 99-120.

Juvonen, J., Graham, S., & Schuster, M. A. (2003). Bullying Among Young Adolescents: The

Strong, The Weak, and The Troubled. Pediatrics: the official journal of the American


Academy of Pediatrics, 112(6), 1231-1237. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from

http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/112/6/1231

Keller, T. (2010). Girl Scouts Are Taking A Stand Against Bullying. Coastline, 2009-

2010(Winter), 3.

Kirk, K. D. (2009). Turn Off Online Bullies. Tidewater Moms, 9(September), 23-28.

Koth, C., Bradshaw, C., & Leaf, P. (2008). A multilevel study of predictors of student

perceptions of school climate: The effect of classroom-level factors. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 100, 96-104.

Lane, S., & Stone, C. (2006). Performance Assessment. Educational Measurement (pp. 387-

432). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Lind, S. (2001, May). Overexcitability and the Gifted. Gifted child quarterly, 56, 1-7. Retrieved

April 10, 2010, from www.sengifted.com

Luker, J. (2002). Challenge: Reading and Teaching The Gifted Child. Gifted child quarterly,

48(February), 21. Retrieved April 10, 2010, from Good Apple Press

Lumsden, L. (2002). Preventing Bullying. ERIC Digests, 3, 345-346. Retrieved March 29, 2010,

from http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx/345

Marr, N., Field, T., Stoppard, M., Hamed, P. N., Jones, B., Roache, W., et al. (2001). Bullycide:

Death at Playtime - An Expose of Child Suicide Caused by Bullying. New York: Times

Educational Supplement.

Matthews, M. S. (2006). Gifted Students Dropping Out: Recent Findings from a Southeastern

State. Roeper Review, 28(4), 216-223.

McIntosh, J. (2006). Gifted Children Especially Vulnerable to Effects of Bullying. Prufrock

Gifted and Advanced Learners, 56(06), 4-6. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from


http://resources.prufrock.com/GiftedEducation/tabid/56/article2006/060406.bullies

Milsom, A., & Peterson, J. (2006). Examining Disabilities and Giftedness in Schools.

Professional School Counseling, 10(1), 36-39.

Morrison, G., Redding, M., & Fisher, E. (2006). Assessing School Discipline. The Handbook of

School Violence and School Safety: From Research to Practice (pp. 211-220). Mahwah,

NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Newman, K., Fox, C., Harding, D., Mehta, J., & Roth, W. (2004). Rampage: The Social Roots of

School Shootings. New York: Basic Books, Perseus Books Group.

Olweus, D. (1996). Bully/Victim Problems at Schools: Facts and Effective Intervention.

Reclaiming Children and Youth: The Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Problems,

5(1), 15-22.

Parker, D. (2008). Bullying and the Gifted Student: Changing School Culture with Conflict

Resolution. Integrating Gifted Children, 1, 101-103. Retrieved March 29, 2010, from

http://integrating-gifted-students.com/article.cfm/bullying_and_the_gifted_student

Peterson, J. S. (2002). A Longitudinal Study of Post High School Development in Gifted

Individuals at Risk for Poor Educational Outcomes. Journal of Secondary Gifted

Education, 14, 6-18.

Peterson, J. S. (2003). An Argument for Proactive Attention to Affective Concerns of Gifted

Adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14, 62-71.

Peterson, J. S. (2004). Gifted and Traumatized: A Study of the Adolescent Experience. Gifted

child quarterly, 39, 135-137.

Peterson, J. S., & Ray, K. E. (2006). Bullying Among The Gifted: The Subjective Experience.


Gifted child quarterly, 50(3), 252-269. Retrieved February 27, 2010, from

http://sagepublications.com

Peterson, J. S. (2009). Myth 17: Gifted and Talented Individuals Do Not Have Unique Social and

Emotional Needs. Gifted child quarterly, 53(4), 280-282. Retrieved February 27, 2010,

from http://www.sagepublications.com

Peterson, J. S., & Ray, K. E. (2007). Bullying and The Gifted: Victims, Perpetrators, Prevalence

and Effects. Gifted child quarterly, 50, 148-168.

Pfeiffer, S. I. (2006). Gifted Identification: Measuring change in a student's profile of abilities

using the Gifted Rating Scales. The School Psychologist Newsletter, 60(3), 106-1111.

Phoenix, A., Froth, S., & Pattman, R. (2003). Producing Contradictory Masculine Subject

Positions: Narratives of Threat, Homophobia and Bullying in 11-14 Year Old Boys.

Journal of Social Issues, 59(2), 159-195.

Piechowski, M. (1999). Encyclopedia of Creativity (Volume 2 ed.). San Diego: Academic Press.

Pittinsky, M., & Carolan, B. (2008). Behavioral versus cognitive classroom friendship networks:

Do teacher perceptions agree with student reports? Social Psychology Education, 11,

133-147.

Polgar, L. (2007). Gifted Children: Bright Sparks. The Economist, 382, 78-79.

Reynolds, W. (2009, February). Reynolds Bully Victimization Scales for Schools. Pearson

Assessments and Information, 2, 1-12. Retrieved November 22, 2009, from

www.pearsonassessments.com

Rigby, K. (2003). Addressing Bullying in Schools: Theory and Practice. Trends & Issues In

Crime And Criminal Justice, 259, 1-6.

Riley, D. T. (2000). Differentiating Instruction for Advanced Learners in the Mixed-Ability


Middle School Classroom. KidSource, 1(Massey University). Retrieved August 23,

2009, from http://www.kidsource.com/ kidsource/content/diff_instruction.html.

Robinson, N., Reis, S., Neihart, M., & Moon, M. (2006). The Social and Emotional

Development of Gifted Children: What Do We Know? Prufrock Gifted and Advanced

Learners, 34(2), xi-xxiv.

Romain, T. (1997). Bullies Are A Pain In The Brain. Minneapolis MN: Free Spirit Publishing,

Inc.

Sak, U. (2004). Supporting Emotional Needs of the Gifted: A Synthesis of Research on

Psychological Types of Gifted Adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education,

15(2), 70-79. Retrieved March 29, 2010, from Supporting Emotional Needs of the Gifted

Schuler, P. A. (2002). Teasing and Gifted Children. SENG: Supporting Emotional Needs of the

Gifted, 2(1), 3-4. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from www.sengifted.org

Shepard, S. J. (2008). Counseling and Curricular Needs for Gifted and Talented Children. The

Iowa Psychologist, 8, 11-12.

Smith, P. K., Smith, C., Osborn, R., & Osborn, M. (2008). A content analysis of school anti-

bullying policies: progress and limitations. Educational Psychology in Practice, 24(1),

1-12.

Spriggs, A., Halpern, C., & Martin, S. (2008). Continuity of adolescent and early adult partner

violence victimization: association with witnessing violent crime in adolescence.

Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 4, 741-748.

Spriggs, A., Lannotti, R., Nansel, T., & Haynie, D. (2009). Adolescent bullying involvement and

perceived family, peer, and school relations: Commonalities and differences across


race/ethnicity. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41, 283-293.

Strip, C. A., & Hirsch, G. (2000). Helping Gifted Children Soar: A Practical Guide for Parents

and Teachers. Scottsdale: Great Potential Press, Inc. (Gifted Psychology Press, Inc.).

Tomlinson, S. (2008). Gifted, talented and high ability: Selection for education in a one-

dimensional world. Oxford Review of Education, 34(1), 59-74.

VanTassel-Baska, J. (2007). Alternative Assessments with Gifted and Talented Students. Waco,

TX: Prufrock Press.

VanTassel-Baska, J., Cross, T., & Olenchak, R. (2008). Social and Emotional Curriculum with

Gifted and Talented Students. Waco: Prufrock Press.

Walker, D. (2009). Effectiveness of State Anti-Bullying Laws Questioned. Education Week,

29(4), 7-8.

Webb, J., Amend, E., Goerss, J., Beljan, P., & Olenchak, F. (2005). Misdiagnosis and dual

diagnosis of gifted children and adults: ADHD, bipolar, OCD, Asperger's, depression,

and other disorders. Scottsdale: Great Potential Press, Inc. (Gifted Psychology Press,

Inc.).

Whiting, G. (2009). Gifted Black Males: Understanding and Decreasing Barriers to Achievement

and Identity. Roeper Review, 31(4), 224-233.

Whitmore, J. R. (1980). Vulnerability of Gifted Children. Giftedness, Conflict, and

Underachievement (p. 143). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Young, R., & Sweeting, H. (2004). Adolescent Bullying, Relationships, Psychological Well-

Being and Gender-Atypical Behavior: A Gender Diagnosticity Approach. Prufrock

Gifted and Advanced Learners, 50(4), 525-537.


APPENDIX

APPENDIX A: Human Participant Approval Generic Consent


APPENDIX B: Bullying Questionnaire


Bullying Questionnaire

(Circle One) I am in: (a) 6th grade (b) 7th grade (c) 8th grade

(Circle One) I am a: (a) boy (b) girl

My age is: _________


1. How safe do you feel in your general and elective classrooms, as opposed to your Young

Scholar classrooms?

a. very unsafe and scared

b. kind of unsafe

c. kind of safe

d. very safe

2. How safe do you feel in the gymnasium or on the fields?


b. kind of unsafe

c. kind of safe

d. very safe

3. How safe do you feel in the cafeteria?


b. kind of unsafe

c. kind of safe

d. very safe

4. How safe do you feel in the hallways?


b. kind of unsafe

c. kind of safe


d. very safe

5. How safe do you feel going to and from school, walking or taking the bus?


b. kind of unsafe

c. kind of safe

d. very safe


1. How often do other students bully you by laying their hands on you (hit, kick, or push

you or hurt your body otherwise)?

a. every day

b. once or twice per week

c. once or twice per month

d. once or twice per year

e. never

2. How often do other students bully you by saying mean things to you, things which hurt

your feelings?

a. every day




e. never

3. How often do other students bully you by spreading mean rumors about you?

a. every day




e. never


4. How often do other students bully you by leaving you out of their activities?

a. every day




e. never

In what grade is the student or students which bully you?

__________________________________________

Who have you told or asked for help when being bullied?

__________________________________________


1. How often have your seen another student bully others by laying their hands on them (hit,

kick, or push you or hurt your body otherwise)?

a. everyday




e. never

2. How often have your seen another student bully others by saying mean things to them,

things which hurt their feelings?

a. everyday




e. never


3. How often have your seen another student bully others by spreading mean rumors about

them?

a. everyday




e. never

4. How often have your seen another student bully others by leaving them out of their

activities?

a. everyday




e. never


1. What have you done when you have seen a student being hit, kicked, pushed, punched or

otherwise physically hurt in school or on the school bus?

a. I have never seen another student being bullied

b. I walked away and ignored it

c. I stood and watched

d. I helped the person who was being bullied

e. I laughed

2. What have you done when you heard a student being teased or called names in school or

on the school bus?






e. I laughed

3. If you helped a student in a bully situation, how did you help?





e. I laughed


1. Do you know of students in your school who are members of a gang, or are wanna-be’s?

a. Yes

b. No

c. wanna-be’s, but not actual members

d. we don’t have gangs, just “cliques” who control others

2. How much of a problem do you think gangs are in your school?

a. a huge problem

b. a big problem

c. somewhat of a problem

d. no problem at all

Category Six: Essay Question

How much of a problem do you think bullying is in your school?

Give some examples and specific situations, no names included.______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________


______________________________________________________________________________

Please use back if needed. Thank You.

APPENDIX C: Bullying Questionnaire Grade 6 Comprehensive Results


BULLYING QUESTIONNAIRE: Grade 6PTS Boy 1 Boy 2 Boy 3 Boy 4

Category One: How Safe Do You Feel?1 How safe do you feel in your general and elective classrooms, as opposed to your Young Scholar classrooms?

a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 3 3 c kind of safe 2 2 d very safe 1 1

2 How safe do you feel in the gymnasium or on the fields?a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 3 c kind of safe 2 2 2 d very safe 1 1

3 How safe do you feel in the cafeteria?a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 2 2 d very safe 1 1 1

4 How safe do you feel in the hallways?a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 3 c kind of safe 2 2 2 d very safe 1 1

5 How safe do you feel going to and from school, walking or taking the bus?a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 d very safe 1 1 1 1 1

Category Two: How Others Treat You1 How often do other students bully you by laying their hands on you (hit, kick, push or hurt your body otherwise)?

a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 2 e never 1 1 1

2 How often do other students bully you by saying mean things to you, things which hurt your feelings?a every day 5 5 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 e never 1 1

3 How often do other students bully you by spreading mean rumors about you?a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3 d once or twice per year 2 2 2 2 e never 1 1

4 How often do other students bully you by leaving you out of their activities?a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 e never 1 1 1


In what grade is the student or students which bully you? 6 6 6 Who have you told or asked for help when being bullied? mom, dad, mom no

grandparents,

Category Three: What You Have Seen or Heardteachers

1 How often have your seen another student bully others by laying their hands on them (hit, kick, push or hurt their body otherwise)?a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 4 4c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 e never 1

2 How often have your seen another student bully others by saying mean things to them, things which hurt their feelings?a every day 5 5 5 b once or twice per week 4 4c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 e never 1

3 How often have your seen another student bully others by spreading mean rumors about them?a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 4c once or twice per month 3 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 2 e never 1

4 How often have your seen another student bully others by leaving them out of their activities?a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 4 4c once or twice per month 3 d once or twice per year 2 2 e never 1


1What have you done when you have seen a student being hit, kicked, pushed, punched or otherwise physically hurt in school or on the school bus?

a I have never seen another student being bullied 1 b I walked away and ignored it 2 2 c I stood and watched 3 3 3 d I helped the person who was being bullied 4 4e I laughed 5

2 What have you done when you heard a student being teased or called names in school or on the school bus?a I have never seen another student being bullied 1 b I walked away and ignored it 2 2 2 2c I stood and watched 3 3 d I helped the person who was being bullied 4 e I laughed 5

If you helped a student in a bully situation, never told the bully

how did you help? helped to stop

Category Five: Gangs1 Do you know of students in your school who are members of a gang, or are wanna-be’s?

a Yes 4 b No 1 1 c wanna-be’s, but not actual members 2 2 2d we don’t have gangs, just “cliques” who control others 3 3

2 How much of a problem do you think gangs are in your school?a a huge problem 4 b a big problem 3 c somewhat of a problem 2 2 2d no problem at all 1 1 1


POINTS TOTAL 48 41 41 35

Category Six: Essay QuestionHow much of a problem do you think bullying is in your school?Give some examples and specific situations, no names included.

BIG ! No Big People get teased

groups of wanna-be made fun everywherebullies gangs of a lot

for skin No one

gang up oncolor

(white)really hits

one persontold I act

tripped funnyeveryday

hallwaysare really

bad


Boy 5 Boy 6 Boy 7 Boy 8 Boy 9 Boy 10 Boy 11 Boy 12 Boy 13

3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1

3 32 2 2 2 1 1 1

3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1

3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1

2 2 21 1 1 1 1 1

5 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 1

5 5 5 4 4 4 2 1 1

4 3 32 2 1 1 1 1

4 4 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 6 6-7-8 6 - 8 6 - 8 6

Young no no no no no mom no no


Scholarteachers

5 5 5 54 4 3 3 3

5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3

5 5 4 4 4 4 1 x 1

5 5 5 5 4 4 1 1 1

2 2 3 3 34 4 4 5

2 2 2 3 3 3 4 5 5

I get

annoyednever by ending it

support them

yell loud to helped get told the

I tell them helped back them

upget them to them away bully to

to stop back offfrom the

bullystop

1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3

4 3 32 2 2 2 1 1

51 52 40 45 30 58 43 29 52


BIG25%

problemBig Big Just some SERIOUS Big lots of Large

punks arguments

some kidsespecially

inget bullied I have to

Especially on

I get very and yelling especially

come tothe

cafeteriaabout my

help some of

the bus depressed in the

school afraid

weight but my friends not a lot of cafeteria

not by the a lot told I have

aAfraid fist-fights

beenother

Youngflat chest someone

pantsed Scholars and butt could killsomeone

left out in that I must elsegym games be gay

some of these

call be an bullies arealbino cause

going to be in

I'm mixedjail when

theygrow up


Boy 14 BOY Girl 15 Girl 16 Girl 17 Girl 18 Girl 19 Girl 20 Girl 21TOTALS

5 3 3 2 6 2 2 2 3 1 1

3 3 3 3 2 7 2 2 2 4 1

4 3 3 3 3 3 5 2 2 6 1

3 3 3 3 3 3 8 2 3 1 1

3 3 2 4 2 2 2 10 1 1

1 1 4 4 4 1 2 6 2 2 5 1 1

5 5 5 3 1 3 1 2 2 21 4 1 1 4 4 2 3 3 5 1 6 1 1 1

4 2 3 3 2 2 6 1 1 1 1 16 6 6 6 6 - 7 6

dean no no mainly mother teacher friends counselor


4 5 5 5 5 4 3 5 3 3 3

6 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 3 3

2 5 5 4 43 3 3 3 1 2 3 1

4 5 4 6 4 4 4 3 3 1 2 3

1 3 2 2 2 2 23 6 4 4 1

2 7 2 2 2 2 4 1 4 4 4 2

broke up

thestood up stood up

told the bully

I ignore it I don't want

fight for them for them to leave

them to be a part

alone of it

4 1 7 1 1 4 2 2 3 3 3

1 2 3 3 2 7 2 2 2 2 4 1

39 238 61 42 44 60 29 37 45


BigEveryday I

seeBig MAJOR HUGE HUGE HUGE

lots of fights

at least 4 or throw things

in the cafeteria

especially 5 studentsreally easy

to Big in my

I heard someone

Young at each other

in thegetting picked

just set some

school and threaten to Scholarsthrowing

foodcafeteria

andon bullies off will never

kill someone

get bullied food thrown

the hallways

be resolvedelse if they

dida lot

becauserubbed in

facebullies throw

fights justnot give

themwe are

food on because We don't money different girls getothers and someone bully each slapped

make thembumped

intoother in

I've seen drugs

They call

cry them Young and

weaponsus nerds use really

Scholars foulget tripped Things get they hate us language

grabbed andbecause

theystolen in the think we are curse at the

hallways better teachers

really bad in

they don't even

electives know us

safe in it's notYoung right

Scholars


Girl 22 Girl 23 Girl 24 Girl 25 Girl 26 Girl 27 Girl 28 Girl 29 Girl 30 GIRLTOTALS

3 32 2 2 2 2 2 9 1 1 4

4 1 3 2 2 2 61 1 1 1 1 6

4 2 3 3 3 3 72 2 2 5 1 2

4 1 3 52 2 2 2 2 2 7 1 3

4 1 2 2 2 51 1 1 1 1 1 8

4 4 21 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10

5 5 4 3 3 3 4 31 1 1 1 5 5 1 2 2 2 2 21 1 1 1 1 1 9

4 1 3 3 4 2 2 21 1 1 1 96 6 6 6-7-8 6 6 no no no no no no counselor no

PE

teachers


5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 72 1

5 5 5 5 5 5 11 4 4 43 1

5 2 4 4 43 3 3 3 3 3 8 1 1

5 2 4 4 5 3 3 3 3 62 2 1 1

12 2 2 2 2 10 3 3 2 4 4 3

1 1 2 2 2 7 4 4 4 4 7 5 1

get a teacher

try to help moved them

stood up told the helped never never

write a bullies don't

away from for them teacherverbally

buthelped helped

statementlisten to

mebully

not physically

1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 43 3 3 4

3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 61 2

29 41 41 43 37 40 66 40 40 262


verbal BIGsaw a

bunch ofcall us nerds

lots of fights

I get kicked

lots of fights

lots of fights

girls throw and geeksin the

hallwayand called

namesin the

hallwayin the

cafeteriabullies have

teased andoranges at

a

really bad harassedgirl and would

I was told that

throwing food

attitudesnot stop

evenI couldn't

everkids are made

though shetalk in the

schoolonly 1 dean

to cry was cryingcause I'm

whiteand 1 guardin the

cafeteriapunched

inspoke up

for

the facemyself once

and the girl

this is DAILY

threatened to

cut my throat

I feel left outa lot


APPENDIX D: Bullying Questionnaire Grade 7 Comprehensive Results


BULLYING QUESTIONNAIRE: Grade 7 PTS Boy 1 Boy 2 Boy 3 Boy 4Category One: How Safe Do You Feel?

1 How safe do you feel in your general and elective classrooms, as opposed to your Young Scholar classrooms?

a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 d very safe 1 1 1 1 1

2 How safe do you feel in the gymnasium or on the fields? a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 2d very safe 1 1 1 1

3 How safe do you feel in the cafeteria? a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 2 2d very safe 1 1 1

4 How safe do you feel in the hallways? a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 3 c kind of safe 2 2 d very safe 1 1 1

5 How safe do you feel going to and from school, walking or taking the bus? a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 d very safe 1 1 1 1 1


a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3 3d once or twice per year 2 e never 1 1 1 1

2 How often do other students bully you by saying mean things to you, things which hurt your feelings? a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3 3d once or twice per year 2 2 2 e never 1 1

3 How often do other students bully you by spreading mean rumors about you? a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 2e never 1 1 1

4 How often do other students bully you by leaving you out of their activities? a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3


d once or twice per year 2 e never 1 1 1 1 1

In what grade is the student or students which bully you? 7 7 7 - 8 Who have you told or asked for help when being bullied? mother no friends

friends

Category Three: What You Have Seen or Heard

1 How often have your seen another student bully others by laying their hands on them (hit, kick, push or hurt their body otherwise)?

a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 c once or twice per month 3 3 3d once or twice per year 2 e never 1 1

2 How often have your seen another student bully others by saying mean things to them, things which hurt their feelings?a every day 5 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 4c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 e never 1

3 How often have your seen another student bully others by spreading mean rumors about them? a every day 5 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 c once or twice per month 3 3d once or twice per year 2 2 e never 1

4 How often have your seen another student bully others by leaving them out of their activities? a every day 5 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3 d once or twice per year 2 2 e never 1 1 1


1 What have you done when you have seen a student being hit, kicked, pushed, punched or otherwise physically hurt in school or on the school bus?

a I have never seen another student being bullied 1 1 b I walked away and ignored it 2 2 2 2c I stood and watched 3 d I helped the person who was being bullied 4 e I laughed 5

2 What have you done when you heard a student being teased or called names in school or on the school bus? a I have never seen another student being bullied 1 b I walked away and ignored it 2 2 c I stood and watched 3 d I helped the person who was being bullied 4 4 4 4e I laughed 5

If you helped a student in a bully situation, not tried to I drag stood up how did you help? helped talk the them away for them

Category Five: Gangs bully away1 Do you know of students in your school who are members of a gang, or are wanna-be’s?

a Yes 4 4 4


b No 1 1c wanna-be’s, but not actual members 2 2 d we don’t have gangs, just “cliques” who control others 3

2 How much of a problem do you think gangs are in your school? a a huge problem 4 b a big problem 3 c somewhat of a problem 2 1 d no problem at all 1 1 1 1


Category Six: Essay Questionbullied pushed fights over

racist remarks

How much of a problem do you think bullying is in your school? a lot down the nothing cause I'm

Give some examples and specific situations, no names included.stairs

becausemixed

say mean I'm an lots of

things athlete gossipthey get

even

and liesmore mad

ifyou try to

fights justignore them

for bumpinginto one another


Boy 5 Boy 6 Boy 7 Boy 8 Boy 9 Boy 10 Boy 11 Boy 12 Boy 13 BOYTOTALS

3 3 22 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 8 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 1 1 1 6 3 3 22 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 3 2 2 2 31 1 1 1 1 1 8 2 2 21 1 1 1 1 1 1 11

5 1 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 11 1 1 6 5 5 2 4 1 3 2 2 2 2 51 1 3 5 1 4 1 3 2 2 2 31 1 1 1 6


4 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 11 1 1 7 7 7 7 7 7 - 8 7 friends parents no friends parents teacher friends 5 5 5 34 4 4 4 5 3 3 4 1 5 5 5 5 5 64 4 4 5 1 2 1 5 5 34 4 4 4 5 3 3 3 1 1 1 5 5 34 4 4 4 4 5 1 1 1 4

12 2 2 6 3 3 2 4 4 4 3 5 1 2 2 2 4 3 3 2 4 4 4 4 7

nothing I told the bully

tell them totell them

totell them

tohelped them

told them nevernothing I

can

can do to to be quiet ignore the back off lay off out to stop helped do to help

helpwalked away

bully

4 3 1 1 32 2 2 2 5 3 3 2 4 1


2 2 2 2 5 1 1 1 1 7

36 36 53 56 53 33 41 36 55 221

bullies are pushed disrespectfulI get

bulliedwe don't people are

White kids

I get teased

Big

strong and regularlysocialize

inalways get it the a lot but I

powerful yelled ata lot of gossip

our elective

getting worst stay with Everyday

and dramaget

insultedclasses revenge

because they

only Young

I get called

people arebecause

theybecause

weafter are so few Scholars gay and

rude get cursed atdon't like

myare afraid school where it is faggot

personality they are safeYoung Young I stay late told they

Scholars Scholars they laughwith the

otherdon't

belongback up

eachis safe if I cry Young in the

other Scholars schooland we

take the 4 pm

buswith just us

or get picked

up by ourparents in

frontof the school

we avoid the

bullies thebest we can


Girl 14 Girl 15 Girl 16 Girl 17 Girl 18 Girl 19 Girl 20 Girl 21 Girl 22

3 3 3 32 2 2 2 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 4 4 4 3 3 3 32 2 3 3 32 2 2 2 1 1

5 5 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 54 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 4 4 3 32 2 2 2 2 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 17 7 7 7 7 - 8 7 7 - 8 7 - 8 7 - 8


no no mother teachers teachers no no mother Young (not helpful) friends parents Scholars

friends

Teachers

5 5 5 5 3 32 2 1 5 5 5 54 4 4 3 2 5 5 4 3 3 3 32 2 5 5 5 5 5 4 3 2 1

1 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 2 2 3 4 4 4 45 5

told bully to I do not help victim get a teachertold the bully

told the bully

call over other

I bring a I can't really

leave them helponce the

bullyright away to stop to go away

Young Scholars

teacher overhelp - I comfort

alone goes away to help afterwards 4 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 1


42 53 51 40 57 42 56 61 56

name calling

Bigonly the Young

Huge I hate thethey bully

meBig

I get screamed

name calling

Scholars get hallwaysin the

cafeteriaat on the bus

teasing some of us bullied because

bullying is bullies come every day spread really

struggle through

we are smart

mostly done to

getting bullied

they call meto our Young

bad rumors

called a slut schooland that makes

Young Scholars

is a daily big and fat Scholarthat are not

trueand a

strippereveryday us different activity

classrooms and

and don't ever

this disrupts they won't

let table in the go away

had buttonsI always

havewe are told

we our learning

the bullies are

you ignorecafeteria

evenripped off

myto be careful

are all gay and

like animals,

themwhen they

arethey make

lies

shirt what I say bisexual andwe only

havethey are not told NOT to the truth

sleep witheach other

andeven

civilizedeach other our Youngcause no

oneScholar

they are very

else wants us

teachers racist to

white, mixed,

we are told we

Asians, and

are spoiled, Mexicansselfish brats

they hate us


Girl 23 Girl 24 Girl 25 Girl 26 Girl 27 Girl 28 Girl 29 Girl 30 GIRLTOTALS

3 3 3 7 3 3 7 1 1 1 3 1 5 2 2 2 2 61 1 1 1 5 13 3 3 3 10 3 2 1 1 1 4 4 3 5 3 3 6 3 3 3 5 1 1 3 42 2 6 1 1 1 1 1 7

5 5 4 1 2 5 41 1 1 1 1 6 5 5 34 4 4 7 1 2 2 2 6 5 5 2 4 3 3 3 2 6 1 1 1 3 4 23 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 10


7 7 7 7 7 7 - 8 7 7 Young

Scholarsmom, dad mom, dad

Young Scholars

mom mom, dad mom no

teacher teacher mother

5 5 5 5 8 4 13 3 3 5 2 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 10 4 4 5 1 1 5 5 5 5 64 4 4 4 5 4 2 5 5 5 5 5 10 4 2 1 1 1 1 3

1 2 3 3 3 3 6 4 4 65 5 2 2 3 3 34 4 4 4 4 4 10 2

stood up for I got a comfort stood up for I got a take them to got a

them teacher afterwards them teacherthe

counselor teacher

4 4 4 4 4 9 1 2 5 3 3 2 4 4 4 3 3 4 2 2 6 1 1 3

60 44 59 59 44 43 54 51 289


kids arekids are

mad the Young I hate my

my school is

jealous of the

at me cause Scholar Scholar schoolso

dangerousYoung

ScholarsI'm a Young teachers get teachers get

Scholar rid of the rid of the I am afraidthey

torment bullies bullies every day

usthey bump

intoon purpose

they try to and then

startruin our a fight like I

reputations, did iteven with

ourown

teachersthey say I'm

really not smart


APPENDIX E: Bullying Questionnaire Grade 8 Comprehensive Results


BULLYING QUESTIONNAIRE: Grade 8 PTS Boy 1 Boy 2 Boy 3 Boy 4Category One: How Safe Do You Feel?

1 How safe do you feel in your general and elective classrooms, as opposed to your Young Scholar classrooms? a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 2 2d very safe 1 1 1

2 How safe do you feel in the gymnasium or on the fields? a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 2d very safe 1 1 1 1

3 How safe do you feel in the cafeteria? a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 2 2d very safe 1 1 1

4 How safe do you feel in the hallways? a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 2 2d very safe 1 1 1

5 How safe do you feel going to and from school, walking or taking the bus? a very unsafe and scared 4 b kind of unsafe 3 c kind of safe 2 d very safe 1 1 1 1 1


a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3 d once or twice per year 2 2 2 2 2e never 1

2 How often do other students bully you by saying mean things to you, things which hurt your feelings? a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 2 2e never 1

3 How often do other students bully you by spreading mean rumors about you? a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3 d once or twice per year 2 2 2 e never 1 1 1

4 How often do other students bully you by leaving you out of their activities? a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 c once or twice per month 3


d once or twice per year 2 2 2 e never 1 1 1

In what grade is the student or students which bully you? 8 8 8 Who have you told or asked for help when being bullied? no friends parents

Category Three: What You Have Seen or Heard

1 How often have your seen another student bully others by laying their hands on them (hit, kick, push or hurt their body otherwise)?a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 4 4c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 e never 1

2 How often have your seen another student bully others by saying mean things to them, things which hurt their feelings?a every day 5 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 4 4c once or twice per month 3 d once or twice per year 2 e never 1

3 How often have your seen another student bully others by spreading mean rumors about them? a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 4c once or twice per month 3 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 2 e never 1

4 How often have your seen another student bully others by leaving them out of their activities? a every day 5 b once or twice per week 4 4 4 c once or twice per month 3 3 d once or twice per year 2 e never 1 1


1 What have you done when you have seen a student being hit, kicked, pushed, punched or otherwise physically hurt in school or on the school bus?

a I have never seen another student being bullied 1 b I walked away and ignored it 2 2 2 c I stood and watched 3 3 3d I helped the person who was being bullied 4 e I laughed 5

2 What have you done when you heard a student being teased or called names in school or on the school bus? a I have never seen another student being bullied 1 b I walked away and ignored it 2 2 c I stood and watched 3 3 3d I helped the person who was being bullied 4 4 e I laughed 5

If you helped a student in a bully situation, tell the bully

I don't like told the I walk

how did you help? to go away to get bully to awayCategory Five: Gangs involved calm down

1 Do you know of students in your school who are members of a gang, or are wanna-be’s?

a Yes 4 4 b No 1 c wanna-be’s, but not actual members 2 1 1 1d we don’t have gangs, just “cliques” who control others 3

2 How much of a problem do you think gangs are in your school? a a huge problem 4


b a big problem 3 c somewhat of a problem 2 2 2 2d no problem at all 1 1


Category Six: Essay Question

How much of a problem do you think bullying is in your school? I get people getbullies want

lots of

Give some examples and specific situations, no names included. teased seriously you to fist fights

everyday hurt respect andmainly in

PEbow down

keep getting

to them lots of

teased about

cursing

the same they neverthings over stop verbaland over attacks

they don't care

no onecan stop

them


Boy 5 Boy 6 Boy 7 Boy 8 Boy 9 Boy 10 Boy 11 Boy 12 Boy 13

3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 21 1 2 2 2 21 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 3


1 1 1 1 1 1 18 6 8 8 8 8

friends counselor parents no no no no teachers 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 43 3 3 2 5 5 54 4 4 2 2 2

2 2 2 2 2 34 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 4 5

I comfort I tell the I walk away it is not I defend I help I tell themafterwards bully to I cannot safe to get them when I can to just

stopphysically

helpinvolved stop

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2


45 33 35 51 41 43 41 43 44

Being in I can't talk I get kicked I hate the bullying is they hate

Young to anyoneand

punchedhallways normal in athletes

Scholars outside of every time my schoolkeeps me Young I am in the I'm alwayssafe from Scholars or hallways punched people

the bullies it is taken call me names

wrong they think everyday Bullies can't its funny and hurtget to us in my feelings

our classrooms

or afterschoolactivities


Boy 14 Boy 15 Boy 16 BOY Girl 17 Girl 18 Girl 19 Girl 20 Girl 21TOTALS

1 3 6 2 2 2 21 1 1 9 1 3 3 4 2 21 1 1 11 1 6 2 2 21 1 1 10 1 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 11 2 4 1 3 2 5 2 2 21 1 11 1

2 2 10 2 2 2 2 1 6 1 1 3 2 4 3 3 3 8 2 1 3 1 3 2 2 4 2 2 1 10 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 1 3 2 21 1 1 12 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 no mom no no no parents cried to Myself


5 5 7 5 4 7 4 4 4 4 2 5 5 5 10 5 5 5 5 6 4 5 5 3 5 5 4 6 5 3 3 3 2 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 1 3 1

7 2 3 4 3 4 4 5 4 4 4 1 6 3 3 3 4 4 45 5 5 4

I really I tell them I comfort I told them I backed I comfort I try to getcan't help to just afterwards to shut up them up afterwards them away

stopfrom the

bully

4 9 4 4 4 4 7 2 2 2 1 4 2 5 3 7 2 2 2 1 1 3

47 43 45 272 51 52 46 51 49


non-Youngpeople always

when I'm in Health there are no made fun of

Scholarsmake fun of

mebullied, I

feelI've been

manners with

every day

ignore meand make

surelonely,

attacked with

bullies

I'm not confused,

andthings being rumors

they don't included broken thrown at they don'tinvolve me me like care about people are

in anythingthey turn

theirteachers pencils, their peers jealous of

friends think that waterbottles, Youngagainst me bullying is paper balls, they act like Scholars

normal anything the school isthey make

metheirs …

feel bad about

some of these

they steal and it is

small stuff bullies just my bookssnap and work


Girl 22 Girl 23 Girl 24 Girl 25 Girl 26 Girl 27 Girl 28 Girl 29 Girl 30 GIRLTOTALS

3 3 32 2 6 1 1 1 1 1 5 3 3 42 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 6 2 2 2 2 2 8 1 1 1 1 6 3 4 2 2 2 2 2 6 1 1 1 4 1 2 2 51 1 1 1 1 1 1 8

3 3 2 2 2 21 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 3 3 3 3 7 2 2 2 41 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 1 1 1 1 7 4 4 1 2 2 2 2 51 1 1 1 48 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 no friends no no parents friends no friends friends

Young Scholar

sister

teachers


5 5 3 4 4 6 3 3 2 2 3 21 1 5 5 5 5 5 9 4 2 3 3 2 1 1 5 3 4 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 8 1 1 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 32 2 2 2 4

2 2 2 43 3 3 3 3 6 3 5 1 1 3 2 2 2 43 3 3 3 5 3 5 1

I really I comfort I just stand there really

I help I'm scared I tell them I stand up

can't help afterwardsnext to them

isn't much afterwards to shut up for them

to help I can do

4 5 1 1 22 2 2 2 2 6 3 1 4 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 10 1 1

32 34 40 39 40 35 45 43 41 230


pushingthey call

uswhite and I get called Bullies are

we are called

I get calledevery school

it is best in

aggressivestuck-up

andmixed kids fat and gay

sneaky and

nerds and fat white jas bullies Young

know-it-alls

are bullied the

they will show-offs girl Scholars

the bleachers

most always get I hate hate

are very it's muchaway with

it they

spreadhate gym

we are safe

dangerous safer in theeven more

ifrumors about

from bullies

Young Scholar

you are in us, all lies there is no in our

classrooms Young point in classroomsScholars making a

report, nothing

our Young

we are picked on

happens Scholars

all day,teachers

keepevery day us safe

bullies areignorant


APPENDIX F: Bullying Questionnaire Category 1 Calculated Results




Question 1: How safe do you feel in your general and elective classrooms, as opposed to your

Young Scholars classrooms?

Grade 6 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 8 Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girlsa very unsafe, scared 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00b kind of unsafe 29.42 17.65 11.76 41.19 05.88 17.65c kind of safe 35.30 52.96 17.65 41.19 35.30 35.30d very safe 17.65 23.54 47.07 17.65 52.96 29.42

No Response 17.65 5.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Question 2: How safe do you feel in the gymnasium or on the fields?


No Response 17.65 05.88 00.00 00.00 00.00 17.65

Question 3: How safe do you feel in the cafeteria?


No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Question 4: How safe do you feel in the hallways?


No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65


Question 5: How safe do you feel going to and from school, walking or taking the bus?




b kind of unsafe 00.00 11.76 00.00 23.54 00.00 05.88

c kind of safe 23.54 29.42 11.76 35.30 29.42 29.42

d very safe 58.84 47.07 64.72 41.19 64.72 47.07

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65


APPENDIX G: Bullying Questionnaire Category 2 Calculated Results




Question 1: How often do other students bully you by laying their hands on you (hit, kick, or

push you or hurt your body otherwise)?

Grade 6 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 8 Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girlsa every day 05.88 00.00 05.88 23.54 00.00 00.00b once or twice a week 05.88 23.54 17.65 05.88 00.00 00.00c once or twice a month 05.88 00.00 11.76 11.76 00.00 11.76d once or twice a year 35.30 11.76 05.88 23.54 58.84 11.76e never 29.42 58.84 35.30 35.30 35.30 11.76

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 64.72

Question 2: How often do other students bully you by saying mean things to you, things which

hurt your feelings?


No Response 17.65 00.00 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Question 3: How often do other students bully you by spreading mean rumors about you?


No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65


Question 4: How often do other students bully you by leaving you out of their activities?


No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65


APPENDIX H: Bullying Questionnaire Category 3 Calculated Results




Question 1: How often have your seen another student bully others by laying their hands on them

(hit, kick, or push you or hurt your body otherwise)?


No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Question 2: How often have your seen another student bully others by saying mean things to

them, things which hurt their feelings?


No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Question 3: How often have your seen another student bully others by spreading mean rumors

about them?


No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65


Question 4: How often have your seen another student bully others by leaving them out of their

activities?

Grade 6 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 8Grade

8 Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girlsa every day 23.54 11.76 17.65 58.84 35.30 23.54b once or twice a week 35.30 29.42 29.42 11.76 29.42 17.65c once or twice a month 00.00 35.30 00.00 05.88 05.88 17.65d once or twice a year 05.88 11.76 05.88 05.88 17.65 23.54e never 17.65 05.88 23.54 17.65 05.88 00.00

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65


APPENDIX I: Bullying Questionnaire Category 4 Calculated Results




Question 1: What have you done when you have seen a student being hit, kicked, pushed,

punched or otherwise physically hurt in school or on the school bus?

Grade 6 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 8 Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girlsa never seen another

student being bullied00.00 05.88 05.88 05.88 00.00 00.00

b walked away and ignored it

17.65 58.84 35.30 11.76 41.19 23.54


d helped the person being bullied

23.54 17.65 17.65 35.30 29.42 17.65

e laughed 05.88 00.00 05.88 11.76 00.00 05.88

No Response 17.65 05.88 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Question 2: What have you done when you heard a student being teased or called names in

school or on the school bus?

Grade 6 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 8 Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girlsa never seen another

student being bullied00.00 05.88 00.00 00.00 00.00 05.88

b walked away and ignored it

41.19 41.19 23.54 11.76 35.30 23.54


d helped the person being bullied

05.88 41.19 41.19 58.84 17.65 17.65

e laughed 11.76 05.88 00.00 11.76 23.54 05.88

No Response 11.76 05.88 00.00 11.76 23.54 05.88


APPENDIX J: Bullying Questionnaire Category 5 Calculated Results




Question 1: Do you know of students in your school who are members of a gang, or are

wanna-be’s?

Grade 6 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 8 Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girlsa Yes 00.00 05.88 17.65 52.96 52.96 29.42b No 41.19 11.76 17.65 05.88 41.19 11.76

cwanna-be's, not members

23.54 23.54 29.42 29.42 00.00 35.30

d no gangs, just 'cliques' 17.65 23.54 11.76 11.76 00.00 05.88 No Response 17.65 35.30 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

Question 2: How much of a problem do you think gangs are in your school?

Grade 6 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 8 Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girlsa a huge problem 05.88 00.00 05.88 23.54 05.88 11.76b a big problem 11.76 17.65 00.00 23.54 29.42 05.88c somewhat of a problem 41.19 35.30 29.42 35.30 41.19 58.84d no problem at all 23.54 11.76 41.19 17.65 17.65 05.88

No Response 17.65 35.30 23.54 00.00 05.88 17.65

"the effects of bullying among middle school gifted and talented children"

Documents