PRESENTATION TO STAKEHOLDERS Jo Kleeb

1. PRESENTATION TO STAKEHOLDERSJo Kleeb This presentation provides you with a sample of analysis outcomes from Year 1 of the Youth Connectedness Project, related to the areas of: School Bullying Technology

2. SCHOOL DATA The survey contained a school section that included 37 individual questions. The major areas measured were: School performance Inter-student relationships (including bullying in school) Absences School related wellbeing Staff-student relationships All school-related measures were examined for gender, school decile and school year differences - key findings are reported.

3. GENDER DIFFERENCES IN SCHOOL RELATED MEASURES School Performance: Females rated satisfaction with class work performance higher than males. Inter-student Relationships: Females reported more positive relationships with classmates and other students in the school and lower rates of being a bully than males. School-Related Wellbeing: Females reported higher levels of guidance support and future orientation than males. Staff-Student Relationships: Females reported a higher sense of school community than males. Conclusion: Males are lagging behind females in a number of key areas. These findings suggest that initiatives which aim to increase male academic performance would do well to incorporate the fostering of more positive inter- student and staff-student relationships and active guidance support.

4. DECILE VARIATIONS IN SCHOOL RELATED MEASURES - 1 Inter-student Relationships: Reported rates of witnessing bullying and being a bully were higher in low to mid decile schools compared to high decile schools. Absences: As school decile increased reported rates of absence due to helping parents and truancy decreased. School-Related Wellbeing: As school decile increased so did reported rates of guidance support. High decile schools reported lower future orientation than either mid or low decile schools. Staff-Student Relationships: As school decile increased levels of home-school dissonance, having a positive relationship with teacher(s) and sense of school community decreased.

5. DECILE VARIATIONS IN SCHOOL RELATED MEASURES - 2 Conclusion: For low to mid decile schools, ensuring reliable attendance of students, adequate provision of guidance, combating bullying behaviour and not conflicting too strongly with the values of parents appear to be key challenges. High-decile school students may, on average, feel less necessity to work hard for their future and it is also possible that one or more of the elements typical of high decile schools are not as conducive to positive connections with teachers and sense of school community (compared to low decile schools).

6. SCHOOL YEAR DIFFERENCES IN SCHOOL RELATED MEASURES - 1 School Performance: Ratings of satisfaction with performance in class work, English proficiency and sports decreased with school year. Inter-student Relationships: Rates of witnessing bullying and being a bully increased with school year and ratings of the effectiveness of anti-bullying programmes decreased with school year. Absences: Truancy rates were higher on average in year 10 compared to year 6 and 8. School-Related Wellbeing: Future orientation decreased with school year. Staff-Student Relationships: Ratings of positive relationships with teachers and sense of school community decreased with school year (even when school roll size was controlled for).

7. SCHOOL YEAR DIFFERENCES IN SCHOOL RELATED MEASURES - 2 Conclusion: It is clear that it becomes more difficult to retain student interest in both school and school work as participants get older. Once we have longitudinal data, we will be able to identify the factors that predict (over time): a) students who maintain negative outcomes, b) students who improve, c) students who decline, and d) students who maintain positive outcomes.

8. TURNED ON AND OFF SUBJECTS BY TEACHERS

9. FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT DATA Once we have longitudinal data we look forward to finding the answers to questions such as: What factors, across the full range of connectedness domains, determine how smoothly young people make the transition from one school to another? What is the most difficult transition that young people make � from primary to intermediate, from primary to college or from intermediate to college, and why?

10. PRINCIPAL SURVEYS We sent out short principal surveys to participating schools. By 23rd February 2007 we had received surveys back from 57 schools, representing 75% of the participants in the study (N=1639). The types of schools represented by Principal�s surveys are summarized below.

11. School Donation 46.9% of Principals said they received 50% or less of their school donations. Information about New Students Sufficient? 3.6% said no, 30.9% said yes and 65.5% said it �varies� Top Four Initiatives Provided in Schools Internet safety, literacy, gifted students, anti-bullying.

12. PRINCIPAL SATISFACTION SCALES Summary: Principals tend to report higher satisfaction on those questions related to internal relationships within the school. While they are less satisfied with parental or community support they are least satisfied with external funding.

13. ISSUES FACING SCHOOLS

14. SCHOOL STRENGTHS

15. SCHOOL CELL-PHONE POLICIES - 1 The most common policies were prohibition of use during class time or handed into the school during the school day. Leniency appeared to increase with school year. Of those who said cell-phones were not allowed in class time, 30% specified that breaking the rules resulted in confiscation.

16. SCHOOL CELL-PHONE POLICIES - 2 We collapsed policies into two groups: 1/ allowed during the school day and 2/ not allowed. We then examined mean differences in student data as a function of group membership. RESULTS Lower decile schools were more likely to fall into the �not allowed� category. Controlling for school year and decile, we also found that the �not allowed� category (compared to allowed) was associated with higher levels of text traffic on both school days and weekends and higher rates of text bullying � both sent and received. Results were reported to a post-survey focus group of 13 to 16 year olds who indicated that being told they cannot have a cell phone makes them want to use it more and banning serves to create �hidden� use (which can�t be monitored).

17. BULLYING ANALYSIS - 1 We measured rates of being bullied and victimized both in and outside school and via text messages. For schools we also measured rates of witnessing bullying and bullying programme effectiveness. A selection of outcomes are presented here.

18. BULLYING ANALYSIS - 2 ? Year 8 (12 to 13 years) appears to be a time when gender and decile differences in bullying rates temporarily disappear. ? Bullying rates jumped the most for males between years 8 & 10. ? Participants were more likely to be victimised in school than outside school or via text. ? Rates of being bullied outside school showed a pattern of decrease with advancing school year, which may be tied in part to post-survey focus group comments that parents hitting children may stop when children become big enough to �hit back� (circa age 12). ? Males were more likely to receive a mean text message than females. ? In follow up to post-survey focus group comments to the effect that �teachers need to watch/care in order to make sure bullying doesn�t happen� we found outcomes consistent with an interpretation that teacher engagement plays a key role in reducing bullying behaviour.

19. BULLYING GROUPS - 1 We were able to classify students into four �bullying groups�: Normal (low to no levels of being a bully/victim) � 72% of sample Classic Bully (primarily bullies others) � 12% of sample Classic Victim (primarily bullied by others) � 13% of sample ? Bully-Victim (high levels of both bullying and being bullied) � 3% of sample

20. BULLYING GROUPS - 2 A sample of findings Substance use (particularly cigarettes), truancy and a higher degree of deviant peer affiliation was more likely in bullies and bully-victims. Susceptibility to negative peer influence: Normal<Victim<Bully<Bully-Victim. Bully-victims tended to have poorer social skills and used more negative coping strategies, with those in the normal group reporting the highest adjustment in these areas. Self harming actions/thoughts were more likely in bullies, victims and bully-victims than in the normal group. Family conflict was highest in bully-victims. Bullies and victims also report higher levels of family conflict than the normal group. Victims and bully-victims were least likely to feel they would have reliable support when in trouble, while bullies reported less guidance support than those in the normal group. Bullies and bully-victims reported less secure bonding and reassurance of worth than those in the normal group.

21. TECHNOLOGY - PREVALENCE

22. TECHNOLOGY � KEY FINDINGS Females had higher rates of importance of cell phone for texting friends, using their cell phone to maintain ties with those not seen often and text traffic. 10 to 11 years olds placed the least importance on cell phones for keeping in touch with friends, were less likely to use their cell for maintaining contact with those they don�t see often and had the lowest text traffic during the school week. ? Time spent gaming peaked around 12 to 13 years. ? 10 to 11 year olds were more likely to rate net friends as important and to rate support from net friends more highly, even though they were least likely to have net friends. Using the net to chat showed a robust linear increase with age. Among internet users, those with net friends chatted on the net with people they knew more often than those without net friends, suggesting some tendency to accrue �stranger� friendships via social networking with those that you know. Also, those with net friends spent more time gaming than those without net friends

23. NET FRIENDS vs. TRADITIONAL FRIENDS ? Young people rated traditional friend�s support higher than net friend support � the distinction between the two became greater with age. ? The impact of net friend support on wellbeing lost significance when its effects were considered in tandem with traditional friend support. ? Unlike traditional friend support, higher levels of net friend support were associated with a greater susceptibility to being influenced by others. ? Those with net friends (compared to those without) reported significantly lower levels of family monitoring, sleep sufficiency and body image and higher levels of loneliness, time spent alone and school absences.

24. TECHNOLOGY - ANALYSIS POTENTIAL ? To current knowledge, we are the first worldwide to compare traditional friend support and net friend support. ? Youth 2007 has used some of our technology questions in their survey � we look forward to bringing our two powerful datasets together to provide high quality insights into the relationship between youth and modern technology. ? We have expanded the technology area. The Year 2 survey of YCP has added more questions on technology usage rates and internet bullying.