Key Takeaway: The implication of this review is that a lack of preparation prior to supporting students with disabilities in PE class, particularly those with visual impairments, can lead to indirect and direct bullying of the students by teachers, paraeducators, and peers. As special educators, we must include PE teachers and paraeducators in IEP meetings and ensure they feel prepared to modify and adapt their program for learners with disabilities. —Erin Madonna

Lindsay Ball and colleagues completed a systematic review of the literature around bullying of students with visual impairments in the Physical Education (PE) setting. The purpose of their review was to describe the current experiences of youth with visual impairments in order to develop avenues for future research around issues of bullying in physical education classes. 

For the study, 114 participants reported on their experiences in PE with a broad age range represented due to the retrospective nature of some of the included studies. Ball et al. (2021) oriented their work with the definition of bullying posed by Chester et al. (2015)1 and Stough et al. (2016);2 Bullying is “the intentional behavior to physically or emotionally harm another, which occurs through an imbalance of power.” Exclusion of youth with visual impairment, when done with intention, was considered bullying in the context of this review. The team focused their review around three questions:

  • “What types of bullying are youth with visual impairments experiencing during PE?”
  • “When/how does the bullying take place and by whom?”
  • “What are the outcomes of the bullying?”

Overwhelmingly, this review makes clear just how common bullying of youth with visual impairments is in the PE setting. As they describe the frequency found within the studies they reviewed, Ball et al. (2021) point to the findings of Bear et al. (2015)3 reporting that young people with visual impairments are likely to be bullied twice as frequently as peers without disabilities. Social-relational bullying was by far the most common form found in the reviewed studies, with 86% of studies reporting exclusion, marginalization, isolation, and other forms of discrimination present in PE experiences. Dishearteningly, 93% of studies indicated that the bullying occurred during PE class time with 93% of studies showing peer-to-peer bullying and 50% of studies revealing the bullying was perpetrated by the educators themselves.

While the rate of bullying may appear shockingly high, it is upon review of Ball et al.’s (2021) data where we begin to understand the systematic structures which have allowed for this bullying to persist. “PE teachers are often ill prepared to teach children with visual impairments due to a lack of adequate preparation. This lack of knowledge leads to unnecessary exclusion, both intentional and unintentional, of students with visual impairments from participation during PE.” 

Underprepared educators are unable to create an environment where students with visual impairments are empowered and included. As Ball et al. (2021) point out “efforts made by teachers to promote a climate that is autonomy-supportive are the foundation of positive perceptions of inclusion, according to the perspectives of children with disabilities.”

They even go further to share Jimenez-Barbero et al.’s (2020) recommendation that, “when Universal Design for Learning is utilized in PE, all students with or without disabilities benefited from it. Physical educators can create a climate of acceptance and empathy that fosters participation by all students which may lead to increased self-esteem and decreased bullying of students.”

When considering the outcomes of the bullying experienced, Ball et al. (2021) describe how negative feelings towards physical education can persist through adulthood, often manifesting in the form of avoidance of physical activities. This impact has long-reaching implications for the health and well-being of those with visual impairments. Allowing youth with visual impairments to participate fully in physical education classes, rather than restricting their participation because of a fear of risk, perception of weakness, or other limits has the potential to positively impact their self-esteem. “Autonomy, competence, and dignity of risk are all critical components of an individual’s self-determination, which has a large influence on an individual’s motivation to participate in physical activity.”

Ball et al. (2021) also touch upon the question of self-advocacy as a possible counter-action to bullying. In the majority (86%) of participant responses, no resolution to the bullying occured. There was evidence that when the student with visual impairments ceased to be perceived as an “easy target,” the bullying also ceased. If students with visual impairments are supported in harnessing the power of their own voice, we provide alternate paths to confronting bullying and changing the paradigm that has allowed bullying to persist in PE classes.

It is important to note that this review was limited in part by the fact that not much was known about the participant’s backgrounds or the training of the PE teachers and paraeducators involved. The retrospective nature of some of the included studies may also have resulted in details being forgotten or reported PE practices being inconsistent with current practices.

Summarized Article:

Ball, L., Lieberman, L., Haibach-Beach, P., Perreault, M., & Tirone, K. (2021). Bullying in physical education of children and youth with visual impairments: A systematic review. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 02646196211009927.

Summary by: Erin Madonna — Erin philosophically aligns with the MARIO Framework’s deeply rooted belief that all learners are capable, and she firmly believes in MARIO’s commitment to the use of evidence-based practices drawn from the field of multidisciplinary research.

Research author Lauren J. Lieberman, Ph.D., was involved in the final version of this summary.

Additional References:

  1. Chester, K. L., Callaghan, M., Cosma, A., Donnelly, P., Craig, W., Walsh, S., & Molcho, M. (2015). Cross-national time trends in bullying victimization in 33 countries among children aged 11, 13, and 15 from 2002 to 2010. The European Journal of Public Health, 25(Suppl. 2), 61–64. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckv029
  2. Stough, C. O., Merianos, A., Nabors, L., & Peugh, J. (2016). Prevalence and predictors of bullying behavior among overweight and obese youth in a nationally representative sample. Childhood Obesity, 12(4), 263–271. https://doi.org/10.1089/chi.2015.0172
  3. Bear, G. G., Mantz, L. S., Glutting, J. J., Yang, C., & Boyer, D. E. (2015). Differences in bullying victimization between students with and without disabilities. School Psychology Review, 44(1), 98–116. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR44-1.98-116

Key Takeaway: Developing strong relationships with your students that are characterized by closeness and support can act as a protective factor for the students. Teachers can stimulate prosocial behaviours through this relational model, as well as help the child to feel included in and develop positive attitudes towards the school climate.  —Ayla Reau

Previous research has already identified that a “good quality teacher–pupil relationship is a protective factor for the child’s development,” lowers the risk of victimization, and increases the chance for inclusion in the peer group. The authors of this study, Longobardi, Settanni, Lin, and Fabris, from the University of Turin’s Department of Psychology, wanted to further investigate whether teacher-pupil relationships are positively associated with students’ higher levels of prosocial behaviour. The study considered the perspectives of both the teacher and student in the perceived relationship. 

Longobardi et al. define prosocial behaviour as “actions aimed at favouring other people,” meaning behaviours that involve a cost for the self and result in benefits for others. Prosocial behaviours are especially important to develop since children with increased prosocial behaviours tend to have “more positive outcomes, both in the social domain (e.g. peer acceptance or peer victimization) and in the non-social domain (e.g. academic success).” 

The results of the study concluded that a teacher-student relationship that is characterized by closeness, affection, and support is positively associated with higher levels of prosocial behaviour in the student. This is likely the case as in these relationships teachers can become a reference adult, “offering relationship models that the child can acquire, develop, and replicate in peer interactions.” Teachers also play a role in mediating relationships between classmates, helping them manage conflict, encouraging correct behaviors, and discouraging incorrect behaviours. 

The authors also examined the mediating effects on teacher-student relationships and prosocial behaviours for the following two factors: attitude towards school and academic competence. They found that only attitude towards school was a predictor of prosocial behaviour. One possible explanation given was that “academic competence is not always associated with greater acceptance and popularity in the peer group.” On the other hand, attitude towards school was found to be a mediator, likely because meeting students’ needs of relatedness, competence, and autonomy, results in more positive attitudes towards school and more involvement in the school content. A teacher can help a student develop a positive attitude towards school, which in turn could facilitate the development of prosocial behaviours.

Ultimately, prosocial behaviours “tend to correlate negatively with aggression and the risk of victimization and predict greater student adaptation and more positive school outcomes.” These behaviours can be developed through a close relationship with a teacher. Teachers can offer a supportive relational model and help the student develop more positive attitudes towards school, which this study found is directly associated with the increase in prosocial behaviour. However, Longobardi, Settanni, Lin, and Fabris do warn us that we must exercise caution in the interpretation of their data as more research should be done on the causality and directionality of these relationships.

Summarized Article:

Longobardi, C., Settanni, M., Lin, S., & Fabris, M. A. (2021). Student–teacher relationship quality and prosocial behaviour: the mediating role of academic achievement and a positive attitude towards school. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 547-562.

Summary by: Ayla Reau — Ayla believes that one-to-one conversations, through the MARIO Approach, are the key to understanding and unlocking a student’s potential.

Article Abstract

This work includes the following topics:

  • the defining properties of the bio-ecological model and the model applied
  • developmental science in the discovery mode and some concrete examples
  • a biological model of the nature/nurture concept from research to policy and practice
  • (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

MARIO Connections

Bronfenbrenner’s work is integral to the design of MARIO’s one-to-one sessions and conferences as well as the development of learning modules which expose students to deeply effectual teaching practices. By considering how environmental and social factors may activate biological potential, we strategically provide as many opportunities for significant growth in the individuals we serve as possible. 

Article Abstract

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has long been thought to reflect dysfunction of prefrontal-striatal circuitry, with involvement of other circuits largely ignored. Recent advances in systems neuroscience-based approaches to brain dysfunction have facilitated the development of models of ADHD pathophysiology that encompass a number of different large-scale resting-state networks. Here we review progress in delineating large-scale neural systems and illustrate their relevance to ADHD. We relate frontoparietal, dorsal attentional, motor, visual and default networks to the ADHD functional and structural literature. Insights emerging from mapping intrinsic brain connectivity networks provide a potentially mechanistic framework for an understanding of aspects of ADHD such as neuropsychological and behavioral inconsistency, and the possible role of primary visual cortex in attentional dysfunction in the disorder.

MARIO Connections

Castellanos and Proal’s study has influenced MARIO’s envisioning of the teacher-student relationship in that an educator with a solid understanding of neuropsychological functioning can better optimize the interventions utilized with learners. This study also presents a pathway for exploring how neuroplasticity can be considered when planning for productive conversations with MARIO learners.

Article Abstract

This study investigates interpersonal processes underlying dialog by comparing two approaches, interactive alignment and interpersonal synergy, and assesses how they predict collective performance in a joint task. While the interactive alignment approach highlights imitative patterns between interlocutors, the synergy approach points to structural organization at the level of the interaction—such as complementary patterns straddling speech turns and interlocutors. We develop a general, quantitative method to assess lexical, prosodic, and speech/pause patterns related to the two approaches and their impact on collective performance in a corpus of task-oriented conversations. The results show statistical presence of patterns relevant for both approaches. However, synergetic aspects of dialog provide the best statistical predictors of collective performance and adding aspects of the alignment approach does not improve the model. This suggests that structural organization at the level of the interaction plays a crucial role in task-oriented conversations, possibly constraining and integrating processes related to alignment.

MARIO Connections

Fusaroli and Tylén’s study informs the MARIO Approach through their description of the synergy approach to dialog. Through an understanding of the nuances of a synergistic approach, MARIO Educators are able to foster deep connections with their students, resulting in greater outcomes for both.

Article Abstract

This chapter describes the wisdom of practice that explains the lessons learned from the study of highly effective tutors. This chapter presents that in the 21st century, tutoring remains the ideal of education. The tutorial is inherently individualized. This individualization, in turn, permits the tutor to elicit from each student a much higher level of on-task attention and effort. It is, in addition, a virtual prerequisite for the high levels of both immediacy and interactivity that also characterize the tutorial process. Thus, in an individual tutorial, both knowledge of results and other forms of feedback and instruction are received by students. Highly effective or “expert” tutors are then identified on the basis of their actual degree of observable success, across a number of different tutees, in promoting student learning and motivation. The tutoring sessions conducted by the highly effective tutors are analyzed from a number of perspectives, and are contrasted with tutoring sessions conducted by less experienced or by equally experienced but objectively less successful tutors. The tutors share a generally Socratic approach, in the sense that tutors seek to draw as much as possible from the student and to impose as little as possible of themselves on the student. Finally, the goal of the analyses is to begin to identify the goals, strategies, and specific techniques that might contribute to the success of an individual tutorial.

MARIO Connections

Lepper and Woolverton’s study is the heartbeat of the MARIO Educator’s role. MARIO is a learner-centered framework and the role of the educator as a “highly effective tutor” by utilizing questioning strategies which encourage deep cognitive growth is central to the framework.

Article Abstract

Person-centered education is a counseling-originated, educational psychology model, overripe for meta-analysis, that posits that positive teacher-student relationships are associated with optimal, holistic learning. It includes classical, humanistic education and today’s constructivist learner-centered model. The author reviewed about 1,000 articles to synthesize 119 studies from 1948 to 2004 with 1,450 findings and 355,325 students. The meta-analysis design followed Mackay, Barkham, Rees, and Stiles’s guidelines, including comprehensive search mechanisms, accuracy and bias control, and primary study validity assessment. Variables coded included 9 independent and 18 dependent variables and 39 moderators. The results showed that correlations had wide variation. Mean correlations (r= .31) were above average compared with other educational innovations for cognitive and especially affective and behavioral outcomes. Methodological and sample features accounted for some of the variability.

MARIO Connections

The MARIO one-to-one relationship between educator and student is deeply rooted in Cornelius-White’s meta-analysis. This is particularly true for elements relating to the growth of independent student learning behaviors including, but not limited to, motivation and effort.

Article Abstract

In this article, a four-point framework is described, which has been found to be helpful for general practitioners who try to achieve greater breadth in each consultation. The framework has also provided a useful stimulus in undergraduate and postgraduate teaching, because it provides a nomenclature to identify four major components of clinical practice which are particularly relevant to primary care.

MARIO Connections

Stott and Davis’ work is infused into MARIO’s One-to-One conferences and aspects of our self-reflective process relating to coached self-assessment. This study influences how we, as educators, maximize the impact of our conferences through the structured conversation we utilize.