Practice Profile: School-Based Conflict Resolution Education
Evidence Rating for Outcomes
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors |
Multiple juvenile problem/at-risk behaviors
Date:
This practice aims to reduce school-based conflict and encourage long-term prosocial behavior. It teaches students to understand the nature of the conflict and provides options for responding. This practice is rated Promising for multiple problem or at-risk behaviors. Student participants in the programs reported significantly fewer antisocial behaviors than students in the control group.
Practice Goals/Target Population
Conflict resolution education (CRE) programs target incidences of opposition or disputes between youths (such as fights over possessions or verbal arguments), with the intention of affecting long-term prosocial behaviors of students in grades K–12. The primary goal of CRE programs is to facilitate constructive resolution of interpersonal conflicts between students and reduce related antisocial behaviors. CRE programs fall within the positive youth development family of programs that are designed to develop youth resiliency and capacity building.
Practice Activities
School-based CRE programs focus on the nature of the conflict between students and provide options for responding. Such options are constructive self-management, communication, social perspective-taking, cooperative interpersonal problem- solving, promoting respect, and other related concepts. CRE program activities include facilitation, modeling, and guided practice of skills and strategies to manage conflict and develop social cognitive competence.
There are typically three formats of delivery for CRE programs. Direct skills instruction programs train students on CRE topics and rehearse conflict resolution strategies. Peer mediation programs train student-peer mediators in the specific CRE program to help their peers resolve disputes through a prescribed process. Embedded curriculum integrates CRE components into traditional school curricula and lesson plans.
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors | Multiple juvenile problem/at-risk behaviors
Garrard and Lipsey (2007) examined the results from 36 studies on conflict resolution education (CRE) programs and found that students who received CRE reported significantly fewer antisocial behaviors than students in the control group (effect size=0.26). When converted into an odds ratio, this means that the proportion of students involved in fights dropped nearly one third as a result of CRE programs (a reduction in proportion from 0.14 to 0.095). Similarly, as a result of CRE, the proportion of students being bullied dropped from 28 percent to 20 percent, and the proportion of students being called hate-related words dropped from 11 percent to 7.5 percent.
Meta-Analysis Snapshot
Literature Coverage Dates
Number of Studies
Number of Study Participants
Meta Analysis 1
1970-2006
36
4971
Meta Analysis 1
Garrard and Lipsey (2007) conducted a meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of conflict resolution education (CRE) programs on reducing antisocial behaviors of K–12 students. A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted to locate studies, published and unpublished, between 1960 and 2006. To be included, studies had to have been evaluations of CRE programs; delivered in U.S. schools with grades K–12; used a research design with a control group; provided information about the CRE program group and control group at the baseline (when random assignment was not possible); and assessed antisocial behavior outcomes. A total of 36 studies were identified and fit the criteria for inclusion. The final sample comprised 4,971 student participants between the ages of 5 and 17. Nineteen studies included students aged 10 to 13, 11 studies included students aged 14 to 17, and 6 studies included students aged 5 to 9. The most common CRE program type was peer mediation (17 studies), followed by direct skills instruction (16 studies), and infused curriculum (3 studies).
The outcome of interest was antisocial behaviors, which was measured in a variety of ways across the studies, including scales completed by adults or youths, student self-ratings, research ratings, teacher ratings, and reported behaviors such as school disciplinary events. The standardized mean difference effect size, with a 95 percent confidence interval, was used to assess program impact. A random effects analysis was conducted, and the effect size was weighted by the inverse of sampling error variance. Effect sizes were adjusted for outliers and small sample sizes.
There is no cost information available for this practice.
Garrard and Lipsey (2007) included additional tests—called moderator analyses—to see whether any factors, such as student variables, strengthened the likelihood that conflict resolution education (CRE) programs improved outcomes. They found that significantly larger effect sizes were reported for students aged 14 to 17 (effect size=0.53), while smaller effect sizes were reported for students aged 6 to 9 (effect size=0.06)
These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:
Meta Analysis 1
Garrard, Wendy M., and Mark W. Lipsey. 2007. "Conflict Resolution Education and Antisocial Behavior in U. S. Schools: A Meta-Analysis." Conflict Resolution Quarterly 25(1):9–38.
Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice: