SHB5990: Studies In Human Behavior Integrative Project

Georgia Safe School Coalition Evaluation Plan
Mesha Rookard
SHB5990 – Studies in Human Behavior Integrative Project

2125 Southwood Cove
Atlanta, GA 30331
Telephone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Instructor: Dr. Catherine Waugh

Table of Contents
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………................3
Introduction to the coalition……………………………………………………………….........4-5
Literature review…………………………………………………………………………..............6 Method of review………………………………………………………………………….6 Overall issues…………………………………………………………………………...6-8 Theories and models…………………………………………………………………...8-10
Ethics…………………………………………………………………………………11-12
Best practices………………………………………………………………………....12-14
Stakeholders…………………………………………………………………………..14-16
These individuals need to work together in order to make the schools safer for LGBTQQ youth. Developing anti-bullying strategies should involve all stakeholders working together in order to be most effective. GSSC measures effectiveness by the number of teachers trained, the level of bullying based on a school climate report card done every two years by Gay, Lesbian, & Straight Education Network (GLSEN), they also keep track of consultations and the results from those efforts. When passing policies they can track how many districts have added protections. Effectiveness is sometimes measured by feedback surveys conducted after trainings as well as feedback from coalition partners and directly talking with our connections (E. Elliot, personal communication, October 27, 2013). One of the most important factors to consider when developing anti-bullying strategies is location. In a study conducted by Blosnich and Bossart (2011), they found that having adults in hallways, on playgrounds, parking lots, buses, restrooms, and in the cafeteria reduced bullying incidents significantly. In one study, over 25 percent of LGBTQQ students reported being chased by other students in their cars in the school parking lot and 38 percent reported being pushed into hallway lockers and down stairs (Watson & Miller, 2012). Student input should be used to develop procedures for
E. (2005). Language and meaning: Data collection in qualitative research. Journal Of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 137-145. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.137
Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Safe Zone (2013). Georgia safe schools coalition. Retrieved from http://www.georgiasafeschoolscoalition.org/
Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., van Laar, C., & Levin, S. (n.d). Social Dominance Theory: Its agenda and method. Political Psychology, 25(6), 845-880. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00401.x
Stake, R., & Mabry, L. L. (1998). Ethics in program evaluation. Scandinavian Journal Of Social Welfare, 7(2), 99.
Tuckwiller, B. L., & Childress, R. B. (2012). Stakeholder participation in program Eealuation: A model for school and district administrators. National Social Science Journal, 38(2), 98-106.
Wandersman, A. (2009). Four keys to success (theory, implementation, evaluation, and resource/system support): High hopes and challenges in participation. American Journal Of Community Psychology, 43(1/2), 3-21. doi:10.1007/s10464-008-9212-x
Whitted, K. S., & Dupper, D. R. (2005). Best practices for preventing or reducing bullying in schools. Children & Schools, 27(3),