Middle School Bullying: A Prevention Plan Without New Funding
The principal asks you to reduce bullying in a 600-student middle school. Last year there were 38 harassment referrals, most in hallways and the cafeteria, and a student survey shows 22% of students report being bullied weekly but only 11% report it to adults. The district has no budget for a new curriculum. Teachers say they are 'already stretched' and resist additional duties. The principal wants a plan by the end of the month and will allocate 20 minutes of one faculty meeting per month for training. You have access to existing PBIS data, supervision schedules, and a student advisory group. The school already has Tier 1 PBIS expectations, but hallway supervision is inconsistent: three of eight scheduled supervisors routinely miss their posts. The district requires any new initiative to be reviewed by the school improvement team.
1. What prevention framework would you propose, and what are the first three actions?
Read the worked answer
I would propose an MTSS-aligned bullying prevention framework that integrates with existing PBIS rather than adding a standalone curriculum. Bullying is a system problem: 22% report weekly victimization, only 11% report to adults, and referrals cluster in hallways and the cafeteria. The first action is to form a small team-administrator, counselor, teacher representative, student advisory member, and you-to review referral data by location and time. The second is to fix the most visible structural gap: three of eight scheduled hallway supervisors miss their posts. Without adult presence, any curriculum is undermined. The third is to establish a low-burden, confidential reporting system and teach students and staff how to respond to disclosures. Universal supports should include brief lessons on bystander intervention and respectful behavior, but they must be paired with supervision and consistent consequences. Tier 2 should target students with repeated involvement as victims or aggressors. The plan should be reviewed by the school improvement team, as district policy requires, and should not rely on a one-time assembly.
2. How would you build teacher and staff buy-in given no budget and only 20 minutes of one faculty meeting per month?
Read the worked answer
Buy-in comes from reducing perceived burden and showing respect for existing work. I would not present bullying prevention as a new initiative; I would frame it as strengthening PBIS and supervision. The 20 minutes per month should be used for active, practical training-not lectures-focused on one skill at a time: recognizing bullying, responding in the moment, and reporting. I would recruit two or three teacher leaders to co-design and co-deliver the training, which builds ownership. I would ask the student advisory group to help create messaging and reporting options, because students are more likely to report when they trust the system. I would also use data to make the case: show staff the referral hotspots and the low reporting rate, then commit to measuring whether their effort reduces both. To keep workload low, I would embed strategies in existing routines (hallway greetings, advisory period, cafeteria supervision) and avoid new paperwork. Recognizing staff publicly and sharing early wins will matter more than a mandate.
3. How would you evaluate whether the plan is working within one semester, and what would you do if referrals drop but victimization does not?
Read the worked answer
Use multiple indicators, not just referral counts. Within one semester, track (1) the student survey's weekly victimization and reporting rates, (2) harassment referrals by location and time, (3) supervision fidelity (percentage of posts covered), (4) the number and source of reports through the new system, and (5) student focus-group feedback. A drop in referrals alone is ambiguous: it could mean less bullying, or it could mean students have stopped reporting. If referrals drop but the survey shows victimization unchanged, I would investigate reporting trust and staff response. Perhaps students do not believe adults will act, or consequences are inconsistent. I would also check whether supervision improved only in monitored areas and whether bullying moved to less supervised spaces. The team should present data monthly to staff and adjust the plan. A one-semester window is short for changing norms, so I would look for intermediate outcomes-more reports, better supervision, students intervening-before expecting large reductions in victimization.