Research Paper: Support Of Kids With Special Needs

Research Paper
Name
Institution of Affiliation
Date
Research Paper
New Jersey board of education has been a team leader in support of kids with special needs. For instance, the 2004 federal individuals with disabilities education act and New Jersey administrative code for special education [N.J.A.C. 6A:14] are laws that have been enacted to ensure youngsters with debilities have a free and appropriate education in a favorable environment (New Jersey Department of Education, 2010). Additionally, the rules provide parents and guardians with the right to participate in their kids’ education. This includes initiatives like referrals that are helping in identifying special needs case and also calls for action. Besides, the board has enhanced civic education on caring for the needy people. A step that will enhance a study environment for special needs students.
On the other hand, Jersey City’s board of education has established strong policies and a program framework to enhance control, remediation, and prevention of harassment, intimidation, and bullying (Model Policy, 2011). A good example is the anti-bullying bill of rights act which was passed on 2011 to strengthen the fight against school bullying. The law compels the board to facilitate its implementation and guidance to parents, school staff, and students on how to face this issue. To enhance the education of parents and school workers on handling bullying NJ department of education developed guidelines. For instance, we have guidance for parents on the anti-bullying bill of right act and guidance for schools on implementing the anti-bullying bill of rights act (Model Policy, 2011). The parents’ guide defines bullying and terms in the law. It goes further illustrating what stakeholders should do to prevent these illicit behaviors.
The schools' guide demonstrates what should be done by the school management to stop bullying. It also defines bullying and provides a framework to be adopted in fighting bullying. For instance, the act demands the appointment of district anti-bullying coordinator who is charged with the responsibilities of coordinating and strengthening anti-bullying policies. He also reports to NJ department of education matters concerning bullying. School principals also appoint anti-bullying specialist (Model Policy, 2011). The specialist is charged with the responsibility of leading the school safety team and investigation of bullying incidents and is the school official responsible for pinpointing, addressing and preventing bullying. The guideline necessitates the formation of the school safety team. The duty of the team is to identify and address patterns of bullying in school. It is also charged with the responsibility of educating the community.
Besides, the board has established bullying prevention programs and approaches, which are reviewed annually by parents, volunteers, students, law enforcement officials and school staff (Model Policy, 2011). Some of these initiatives include the HIB instruction, professional development training, and week of respect, internet information and bullying prevention fund. All these initiatives aim to develop and maintain a positive study environment by eradicating bullying and related illicit behaviors. Lastly, the board has laid a foundation for a continuous bullying prevention effort; there is no end date for this unlawful conduct. Besides, it has enhanced public education on the impact of bullying on students. Perhaps this will motivate the school staff, parents, and students in their effort of fighting bullying.
The Effectiveness of School-Based Anti-Bullying Programs
The aim of the study is to evaluate the success of school-based anti-bullying programs. However, it starts by illustrating bullying and goes further stating the anti-bullying programs before assessing their achievement. From the introduction, it is evident that multiple anti-bullying programs have been established and instigated in schools. However, their effectiveness is uncertain. The uncertainty is projected to be as a result of not subjecting these programs into a systematic and empirical review or publication bias. The study used moderator analysis, as an analytical tool to expand on the excellent work of Wilson et al. (2001) and Wilson et al. (2003). Using related data the study intended to develop an understanding on whether the inclusion of none experimental studies influenced Wilson et al. (2003) analysis.
Bullying is defined in the literature review as a repetitive, deliberate, aggressive and detrimental behavior by an individual or team with apparently more authority on the people with less power. The literature progresses by narrating what acts are considered bullying and their impacts. It also includes programs designed to avert school bullying. Also in the literature review is the meta-analyses of school violence prevention programs and publication bias. The meta-analysis presents previous studies that have attempted to address the effectiveness of these programs; these include studies by Wilson et al. (2001) and Wilson et al. (2003). However, both the studies had drawbacks. The articles reviewed were only those published between 1995 and 2006, of which their psyINFO determined and their effect size estimate calculated. Last was the analysis of the statistical data and publication bias. It was established that the anti-bullying programs had a positive impact; however, the study demonstrated that the programs had limited effectiveness.
Q1. What was studied, population, study size
The study was focused on evaluating the success of School-Based Anti-Bullying Programs. However, it defined bullying and terms linked to it, presented examples of what is considered as bullying and asserted the anti-bullying programs before evaluating their success.
The population studied was majorly the youths, especially the elementary school, middle school and high school youth.
The s...