Introduction 

Twenty five percent of students have been a victim of a violent act that occurred in or around school (Metropolitan Life, 1999).  These conflicts include fights, teasing, bullying, and escalating amounts of gun and knife usage that resulted in fatalities.  Nationwide, fifteen percent of high school students had participated in a physical fight in the past twelve months (Snyder et al., 1999).  Violence in schools is actually declining nationally according to a 1999 Annual Report on School Safety (Malico and Peterson, 1999).  This finding is overshadowed, however, by the horrifying specter of gun violence in suburban schools throughout the nation with multiple student fatalities, exemplified here in the west with the situation at Columbine High School, with X school fatalities .   Although rare, these occurrences lead to an increase in public concern and anxiety about violence in schools.  Parents, students, and whole communities question the safety of their schools and communities.

Students too have greater awareness of the presence of conflict, and the potential for violence within their schools. (Bruised Inside)   This undermines their capacity to learn in the school environment, and diminishes the quality of life in the community (1994).   Students need help to build skills to negotiate conflict successfully.  As Carolyn Pereira (1995) explains, “Children who think that there are only two ways to solve problems – fight or give up- are more likely to become either perpetrators or victims of violence”.

            To counter the threat of violence and in response to growing public concern, schools are employing a variety of security measures, such as resident security officers, strictly-enforced zero tolerance policies for possessing weapons, and closed campuses. 

            While situations like Columbine are in fact quite isolated, other kinds of conflict are omnipresent in schools: fighting, bullying, teasing, and threats of physical harm.  In fact, legislation has been introduced in the 2001 session of the Washington Legislature by the Offices of the Attorney General and the Superintendent of Public Instruction to help build policies to address bullying, a widespread phenomenon that affects many students, most as victims.

            Truancy is another issue of conflict in the schools.  In many instances of truancy, students respond to a source of conflict by avoiding the source of the conflict, often in the school setting. The state’s new truancy legislation, the BECCA Bill requires prompt remedies to student truancy, leading in advanced cases to court hearings and sanctions.  The impetus for

the BECCA bill was a student, Becca, who was murdered while away from her home, truant from school.  

Violent infractions in schools bring disciplinary referrals, often including detention, suspension, and ultimately – expulsion.   Truancy, a passive response to conflict, is answered with court action.  Another perspective gaining growing support is that safety for students and staff  in schools comes from a combination of physical security and an environment that supports the peaceful resolution of conflicts.   Evidence suggests that conflict resolution education can bring about significant reductions in suspensions, disciplinary referrals, academic disruptions, and fights.  Conflict resolution strategies, including those offered by the L.A.S.E.R. project, assist students in managing conflict to maintain a peaceful and cooperative environment thus preventing the escalation of violence.   

This document is a summary of the L.A.S.E.R. Project – Lawyers and Students Engaged in Resolution.  This program, initiated in 1994 in the state of Washington, provides peer mediation training to the state’s schools and communities, using volunteer attorneys trained in mediation techniques.  L.A.S.E.R. lawyer volunteers partner with schools to build peer mediation programs.  Over its seven year history, L.A.S.E.R. has trained more than ))))) studnets in (((( schools across the state.

Overview of Peer Mediation Efforts Nationwide

            In many respects, the L.A.S.E.R. project does not plow new ground: it draws upon widely-accepted dispute resolution models and techniques used today in a variety of settings.  The adoption of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methodologies in the schools is in keeping with the greater acceptance of ADR in the courts as a means to reduce court costs and delays in litigation (Erickson and Savage, 1999).  Many excellent conflict resolution programs have operated for years in schools and communities across the nation. 

            Peer mediation is easily adapted to school environments, and gives students a variety of life skills including the ability to talk out problems and solve problems, which in turn foster self-esteem and self-discipline.   Because they provide consistent access to students throughout their developmental years, schools offer an ideal training opportunity for conflict resolution (Denise Gofftredson (1998)).

The Genesis of ADR techniques in schools.

            Early in the history of our nation’s schools, corporal punishment was a widely accepted and condoned practice for maintaining discipline in schools.  This gave way to a more effective practice, which was to suspend or expel students whose behavior indicated that they didn’t value education, and either could not or would not observe the behavior requirements of a well-disciplined classroom.  However, these strategies were in conflict with compulsory education which was critical to the development of a well-informed citizenry.   School was therefore not just a right of well-behaved children but a requirement for all students.  Other strategies needed to be found to ensure all students could learn in a school setting. 

Other approaches were soon under development.  An example of one of the first programs using alternative dispute resolutions (ADR)  was Teaching Students To Be Peacemakers, a program introduced in the mid-1960s which utilized peer mediation and positive relationship building.  In the early 1970s, the Children’s Creative Response to Conflict Program taught nonviolence as a means to achieve justice.  In 1977, the Community Boards of San Francisco Conflict Managers Program developed conflict management curriculums and peer mediation programs.  In the 1980’s, a group of educators known as Educators for Social Responsibility created the Resolving Conflict Creatively Program, which included dispute resolution curriculum, peer mediation training, and dispute resolution procedures.  In 1984, the National Association for Mediation (NAME) brought together both educators and justice centers to consider how best to instruct mediation and conflict resolution in schools and neighborhood organizations.   [Johnson and Johnson (1995)]

ADR programs help students develop skills to resolve conflict productively.  Students learn to resolve conflicts by identifying and discussing the source of hostility and to find voluntary ways to resolve it (Williams,1999).   ADR programs teach students that although conflict is omnipresent and often inevitable, it can be managed. 

The L.A.S.E.R. Program

The L.A.S.E.R. Project’s objectives are:

1.      To promote students’ understanding that conflict is a natural and normal part of life and that mediation is a better response than resorting to violence.

2.      To help all members of the community work in harmony with each other despite individual differences.

3.      To promote a positive school climate and neighborhood climate in which each and every student can be safe and successful.  To avoid suspensions and expulsions from school by providing alternative methods of handling conflict behaviors or misbehaviors.

4.      To improve essential communication skills within the community. 

5.      To develop an awareness of and to encourage the use of a form of compromise as a positive means of resolving conflict.

L.A.S.E.R. Project training shares many of the elements of these other programs, and incorporates techniques developed by accomplished practitioners of school-based mediation.  Two nationally recognized experts providing valuable counsel to the L.A.S.E.R. Project were Fred Schrumpf, who supervises district-wide programs of peer mediation training in Washington State, and Gail Hoover, (association and title) who helped to establish the training model the L.A.S.E.R. Project now uses.  The curriculum development was enhanced by the presence on the L.A.S.E.R. Board of many attorneys who were mediators themselves, many from the Alternative Dispute Resolution sections of the Washington Bar.

            L.A.S.E.R. Project lawyers teach alternative dispute resolution methods that have been adopted by many professions as a response to growing concerns over litigation.  Skills associated with these procedures include active listening, perspective shifting, conflict analysis, anger management, cooperative problem solving, and negotiation.   The L.A.S.E.R. Project is also a natural adjunct to LRE (Law-related Education) activities undertaken by bar associations throughout the nation. 

            What differentiates the L.A.S.E.R. Project from other peer mediation programs is the involvement of lawyers in the creation and maintenance of youth peer mediation programs in schools and community settings.  L.A.S.E.R. lawyers will support sites that have received peer mediation training from other programs, or can provide training for staff and students.   The attorneys, however, are not on site for a one-shot training course, but rather make a significant long-term investment with the students. 

            Since its inception in 1994, the L.A.S.E.R. project has trained almost 100 lawyers to teach conflict resolution techniques to youth peer mediators.  These lawyers are volunteers whose legal expertise is wide-ranging and who come from firms, public agencies and corporations of all sizes, as well as from solo practice.   Thus far, the L.A.S.E.R. project has trained and supported teams of volunteer lawyers in setting up and maintaining L.A.S.E.R. programs in public middle and high schools, and in neighborhood community centers.   L.A.S.E.R. Project lawyers make a two-year commitment to the school or neighborhood organization to which they are assigned.  During this commitment they not only train youth peer mediators, but also undertake activities necessary to support the program.

            L.A.S.E.R. utilizes the cadre approach to conflict resolution and involves the training of selected peer mediators, although the entire school can be educated on the philosophy and techniques of L.A.S.E.R. mediation.  The specific goal of the program is to provide the following elements:

1.      Promote understanding that conflict is a natural part of life, and that mediation is a better response to violence

2.      Help students work together despite individual differences

3.      Promote a positive school climate

4.      Reduce suspensions and expulsions by providing alternative methods of resolving conflicts

5.      Improve essential communication skills

6.      Develop an awareness of compromise as a positive means of resolving conflict (L.A.S.E.R., 1999). 

ORIGINS OF L.A.S.E.R. PROJECT

Policy Context for Youth Violence Prevention – 1993-94

Throughout 1993 and 1994, there was a growing statewide awareness of the increase of violence among and toward youth.  The Governor’s office and the executive offices of the Departments of Community Development and Employment Security were circulating white papers on the issue.   At this time, the number of violent crimes committed by young people under 18 had more than doubled over the prior decade, despite a 3% drop in this population.  Suicide was found to be the second leading cause of death among Washington’s youth after vehicle related deaths; for African American youth aged 10 to 17, homicide was the leading cause of death.  One quarter of students in Washington’s junior and senior high schools had carried a weapon to school at some time in the past five years.

In response to these statistics, Governor Lowry made youth violence prevention and/or reduction a priority policy issue for his administration, and asked all cabinet level agencies to respond.  He asked his cabinet, the Office of the Administrator of the Courts, the Family Policy Council, and the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction to help reduce youth violence by:

§         Targeting resources to address risk factors known to contribute to youth violence, and

§         Fund a balanced approach to reducing violence through a continuum of care, including prevention.

Models for prevention were being studied by the Department of Community Development.  Using a grant through the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance,  DCD funded six projects throughout the state in the following locations: Puget Sound Educational Service District serving King County; Pierce County’s Safe Streets Campaign in Pierce County; the Yakima County Gang Prevention Coalition; Benton-Franklin Juvenile Justice Center; and Echo Glen Children Center, and the Center for Career Alternatives in Seattle.  Each project was to mobilize its community to address these issues, and each project was to involve young people themselves.   Among the services provided for the youth included anger management and conflict resolution training, peer mentoring, and other leadership and self-esteem building opportunities.  The results of these efforts were very encouraging.  The Yakima Police Department compiled data indicating that violent crime had decreased 82% at program sites; at Echo Glen, recidivism rates declined dramatically compared to non-program control sites.

The Governor encouraged agencies to adopt a community-based approach used in these successful demonstration programs.  He encouraged using these methods at the neighborhood level to build protective factors and reduce risk factors close to where young people lived.  He encouraged efforts that would prevent youth violence by strengthening families, schools and communities, using approaches that emphasized prevention.

Primary prevention methods were to follow a public health model.  A media campaign was designed to provide education on alternatives to violence, to reduce the incidence of youth violence.  Communities were to be provided with the resources to implement curricula and develop programs in anger management and conflict resolution through the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction and the Department of Community Development; students in primary and secondary levels would receive this training.  Under the Neighborhood Youth Mobilization initiative, youth violence reduction strategies were developed, using young people to play the primary role.  Communities were invited to convene groups of young people and community members (parents, educators, health officials, business and religious leaders, law enforcement and the media) to develop and implement youth violence reduction strategies.

In January 17, 1994, Christine Gregoire, Attorney General, addressed the House and Senate Human Services Committee endorsing the general thrust of the Governor’s initiative, and urging the legislature to add a critical prevention component to the juvenile crime bill being considered.  She urged that this prevention be centered at the community level, and that government should operate in a support role.  One of the prevention strategies she spoke for was a volunteer program, established through the State Bar Association, to teach conflict resolution/mediation in the public schools.

Source of the Concept – Original authors

            The idea for this volunteer program for teaching conflict resolution in the public schools, was the idea in 1993 brainchild of two pioneering women attorneys in state government – Judith Billings, then Superintendent of Public Instruction, and newly elected Christine Gregoire, Washington State’s Attorney General.  It was their thought that schools needed more resources to help deal with the burgeoning issues of discipline and violence in school buildings and classrooms.  They reasoned that the skills used by attorneys in finding peaceful resolution to conflict in the practice of law could reap dividends in the school.  These skills, inherent in the practice of law, could be brought to the school by lawyers trained in mediation techniques.  

Billings and Gregoire recognized that school building staffs were overburdened and were often unable to implement valuable programs like peer mediation, even if they wholeheartedly supported the idea.   In addition, Gregoire was clear that such efforts should be community based, not reliant on government. 

Billings and Gregoire’s solution was to suggest that lawyers volunteer their time to provide not only training but also ongoing administrative support for the programs in the school building.  Whenever possible, these lawyers would volunteer in schools in communities in which they lived or worked, or where their own children attended.   These programs could be implemented throughout the state.  The Washington State Bar Association, as the voice of the bar in the state, recognized the value of this kind of community service for members of the bar partnered with the Attorney General’s Office and the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction to support the initiative. 

Thus, the idea of lawyer-promulgated student-peer mediation training found its way into legislation in the 1994 session of the Washington State Legislature.  While the legislature felt it was a promising idea and passed authorizing legislation, they did not provide funding with which to accomplish the laudable goals of the program.

Legislative History and Authorization/Primary Partners

            Legislative authorization for the L.A.S.E.R. Project was included in Governor Lowry’s 1994 Youth and Violence Bill.  In April of that year, the legislature directed (RCW 28A.300.280) the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) and the Washington State Office of the Attorney General (AG) in cooperation with the Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) to develop a volunteer-based conflict resolution program for use in schools and neighborhood organizations.  The statutory language reads as follows:

“The Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) and the office of the Attorney General in cooperation with the Washington State Bar Association shall develop a volunteer-based conflict resolution and mediation program for use in community groups such as neighborhood organizations and schools.  The program shall use lawyers to train students who in turn become trainers and mediators for their peers in conflict resolution.”

                                                Revised Code of Washington Title 28A.300.280 

The project was endorsed and supported by the Alternative Dispute Resolution Section and Young Lawyers Division of the Washington State Bar Association, the Asian Bar Association, the Hispanic Bar Association, the Loren Miller Bar Association, the Native American Bar Assocation, the U.S. Attorney’s Office – Western Washington District, and the Washington State Trial Lawyers Association.

Early Planning

            In June of 1994, the AGO, OSPI and WSBA formed a planning committee to work out the operational details of this concept in collaboration with representatives of schools and community organizations.   The initial tasks of the planning committee were to determine the type of training required, the funding requirements, and resources and infrastructure needed to support the program.  One of their earliest tasks was to conduct a nationwide search for conflict mediation/resolution programs to use as a model for the design of Washington’s new initiative. (Billings 8/12/94 letter).  

The nationwide review found several programs of conflict mediation and conflict resolution in operating in various guises throughout the country.  A pivotal piece of research came from the American Bar Association’s Special Committee on Youth Education for Citizenship, which published several articles from school- and community-based programs of peer mediation.  These articles made several strong claims for the value of such programs to help students, and provided valuable guidelines for the design of such programs. The ABA had also circulated a resource list for peer mediation training in schools.

Several programs provided a “train the trainers’ model” of peer mediation training to school personnel.  Examples included the Community Board Program in San Francisco which piloted a conflict manager program in the Bay area in 1982, producing brochures and training resources for peer mediation training at both the elementary and secondary levels.  Also active was NIDR (National Institute for Dispute Resolution, Washington DC), who worked to support and expand the fellowship of related conflict resolution programs.  NAME (National Association for Mediation in Education), founded in 1984, promoted the development, implementation and institutionalization of school and university-based conflict resolution programs and curricula, and continues today to serve as the primary national and international clearinghouse for information, resources, technical assistance and training in the field of conflict resolution. 

In these programs trained professional mediators trained teaching staffs, and often groups of students, in mediation techniques.  Only two programs identified at that time incorporated attorneys in the training or management of peer mediation programs.  One of these was a program in Massachusetts, under then Attorney General Scott Harshbarger.  The Massachusetts program provided some training for schools through the state’s Attorney General’s Office, in the Family and Children Unit.  The other program was the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Dispute Resolution which offered information and materials for school mediation, and in 1994 piloted a program to engage law firms in “adopting” school mediation programs.  (need to check the status of this program – there was no mention of it from the ABA discussion last April…)

The L.A.S.E.R. Ad Hoc Planning Committee:

The L.A.S.E.R. Ad Hoc Committee members included many well-respected members of bar from both public and private practice, and respected members of the educational community and the Governor’s office.  The members included Monica Benton (King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office), Linda Dunn (Leginson, Friedman, Vhugen, Duggan & Bland), Mary Fairhurst (Assistant Attorney General, Attorney General’s Office), Daniel Gandara (Vandeberg, Johnson and Gandara), Ronald Gould (Perkins Coie), Christine Gregoire (Attorney General), Sally Gustafson (Assistant Attorney General, Consumer Protection, AGO), J. Tate London (Cairncross & Helpelmann), Sheryl A. Clarke, (Obmudsman, AGO), Daniel L. Hannula, (Rush Hannula & Harkins), Lis Wiehl, (U.S. Attorneys Office), Sandy Macdonald (Attorney at Law), Marc Silverman, Attorney at Law).  Also on the Planning Committee were Denise Fitch, (Director of Safe & Drug Free Schools, Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction) and Vickie Wallen, (Office of the Governor.)

The initial stated goals of the L.A.S.E.R. Ad Hoc Committee were as follows: 

§         To develop and implement a pilot project beginning the fall of 1994 and continuing through the 1997-98 school year.

§         Secure ongoing, self-sustaining funding

§         Conduct a statewide survey to determine:

§         Mediation projects in schools

§         Violence prevention programs currently active in schools.

§         Develop self-sustaining training support for attorney-trainers.

§         Adapt and expand the pilot project to schools and community organizations statewide.

§         Diversity at all levels of implementation.

In the summer of 1994, the Ad Hoc Committee disseminated a letter and survey under the signature of both Judith Billings, Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Christine Gregoire, Attorney General, to all school districts in Washington to gather information on existing conflict mediation, conflict resolution, violence prevention and other related programs.  The purpose was to determine what kind of conflict mediation program would be well received by the schools.  The survey found was that many Washington schools had existing mediation programs that were faltering from overworked teachers. Schools said they would welcome a volunteer-led program of training for peer mediators.  “The best thing that could happen was to bring in positive outside adult role models to the classrooms who could help support the teachers’ and the students’ efforts.” (Russell Morris e-mail to Barbara Peterson, 6/8/99)

A program that would be well-received by schools would be one that offered mediation training to the whole school community (students, teachers, parents, staff, and administrators) about the conflict resolution program.  The attorneys would then train students selected as peer mediators and would help them implement the program designed for their school.  Once the program was underway, the attorneys would continue to work on a regular basis with the student mediators and the school, providing technical advice on mediation and support. (7/25/94 memorandum Russell Morris to Dan Fleissner)  The planning committee coined the name L.A.S.E.R. – standing for Lawyers and Students Engaged in Resolution to identify the project. 

Seattle Police Department - Comprehensive Communities Program Grant 

In August of 1994, Sally Gustafson, a member of the L.A.S.E.R. Ad Hoc committee, connected with officials of the Seattle Police Department’s who were then in the process of applying for a Comprehensive Community Grant from the federal Bureau of Justice Assistance (Department of Justice) for a Comprehensive Communities Program (CCP).  The purpose of the CCP was to promote community policing, community mobilization, and nonviolent dispute resolution efforts and was initially authorized to commence on January 1, 1995 and continue to March 31, 1996.

            The intended use of funds for the L.A.S.E.R. program was for staff support, development of a trainer of trainers models, training materials for trainers, staff and students.  In addition, it could provide time off for teachers and staff to receive training (primarily through paying for substitutes), some financial support for on-site coordinators, and resources to conduct a program evaluation.

On August 11, 1994 the L.A.S.E.R. program signed an MOU with the City Of Seattle and Seattle Police Department for the CCP.  The original grant amount was to have been $35,000, but a reduction in the SPD award similarly reduced the amount given to L.A.S.E.R. to $27,500.  Consistent with the MOU, the L.A.S.E.R. project was to do the following:

§         Establish a nonprofit foundation to act as fiscal agent for the program, with the AGO providing general oversight

§         Manage the Seattle CCP/L.A.S.E.R. pilot

§         Work collaboratively with Seattle school personnel to develop the program

§         Provide training to attorneys, school personnel, and students in selected schools

§         Customize training and technical assistance to meet individual school needs

§         Analyze results of the pilot for applicability in additional Seattle schools, and statewide.

§         Comply with all relevant regulations.

Establishing the L.A.S.E.R. Board

The first task for the Board was to establish a nonprofit L.A.S.E.R. Board and to elect directors. L.A.S.E.R. was incorporated September 16, 1994, [UBI 601 572 856] as a nonprofit organization in the State of Washington and in October 1994, the planning committee gave way to the newly formed non-profit L.A.S.E.R. Foundation Board.   The first officers of the L.A.S.E.R. program were Daniel Hannula, President,  (Attorney at Law, Tacoma); Linda Dunn, Vice President (Leginson, Friedman, Vhugen, Duggan & Bland); Marc L. Silverman, Secretary, (Attorney at Law, Bellevue); Daniel Gandara, Treasurer, (Vandeberg, Johnson and Gandara).

The L.A.S.E.R. Project Articles of Incorporation identify the following as the methods for serving the mandate of the L.A.S.E.R. Program Foundation:

§         By gathering info about the scope and nature of existing school mediation and violence prevention programs

§         By recruiting, training, and coordinating volunteers to provide training in mediation skills to school faculty and students, and to community groups;

§         By establishing, coordinating and evaluating a pilot project

§         By adapting and expanding such pilot project to schools and community groups statewide

§         By establishing a self-sustaining mechanism for the training of additional mediators and trainers

§         By establishing a mechanism for permanent funding for achieving these goals and carrying out these activities

§         By assuring diversity at all levels of implementation.

RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING

Recruiting L.A.S.E.R. Volunteers

The next critical task, undertaken in early 1995 is to start recruiting the first class of L.A.S.E.R. volunteers.  The L.A.S.E.R. program recruited from many sources, seeking to develop a diverse team of volunteer lawyers.  The Loren Miller bar, Seattle’s African-American bar, helped to solicit volunteers, as did the Asian Bar Association. The wide ranging solicitation brought volunteers from all over the Puget Sound area. The first attorneys trained were primarily from King County, and came from private law firms, the U.S. Attorney’s office, the Office of the Attorney General, King County Prosecuting Attorney’s office, as well as attorneys who are parents of students in Seattle schools. 

The first training was held on ___________ with Gail Hoover, nationally known consultant and expert on peer mediation, using materials available in the general domain through the Northwest Regional Labs, a (describe organization). 

Diane May,  L.A.S.E.R.’s first coordinator, also sent out letters to a roster of schools, informing them of the program and soliciting their interest.  Trained L.A.S.E.R. volunteers were also asked to make contact with a school with whom they wanted to partner.  In August of 1995, Whitman Middle School and Ingraham High School were identified as two schools in which to pilot the L.A.S.E.R. project model.  These schools had a history of working together and indicated they would support the program with additional training on conflict prevention and anger management.

L.A.S.E.R. Pilot Project – Ballard and Garfield High Schools

Despite these initial plans, it was eventually Ballard and Garfield High Schools who were to become the sites for the L.A.S.E.R. pilot project during the 1995-96 school year. These buildings were selected based upon their application, determined need, and the willingness of their staff members to undertake a two-to three-year project. The pilot project was slated for a two-year minimum time period.  The study was to include a yearly evaluation component so that the effectiveness of the project could be measured through baseline and long-term data.  When the study has been completed, the L.A.S.E.R. project would amend the initial program, and infuse the effective elements developed into school districts throughout the state (Judith Billings, 1994 letter).

The L.A.S.E.R. program contracted with CRU, a Bellevue mediation company offering intensive mediation training for L.A.S.E.R. volunteer attorneys, high school officials and project  committee.  The training was conducted by Nancy Kaplan, CRU Director in March 1995 who also provided advice on the training requirements for this new program through the end of 1995. 

Initial Garfield Training:   By the end of October 1995, efforts at Garfield were beginning to show results.  Students undertook training on September 20-22.  Students began to mediate disputes.  The L.A.S.E.R. peer mediators visited all the classes in the school to describe the program.  The program brought together 27 students, four attorneys and the CRU staff with five Garfield High School teachers.  Not only did the students learn the substantive techniques of mediation, they met each other for the first time and began to form a bond surrounding their common goal of operating a successful mediation program.

Ballard:  At Ballard, 16 mediations were held during the first year and 17 in the second year.  The number of mediators expanded from 15 in the first year to 23 in the second.  The most common kinds of disputes were found to be those that involved rumors, friendships, and boyfriend-girlfriend conflicts.  Surveys with the counselor involved and other teachers found that school personnel believed that peer mediation was a significant time and energy saver for the administration, and was valuable for the participating students and the school itself.

Differing Results from the Pilots

This initial results from the two pilot schools showed that there was much in the program that was strong and vibrant.  However, by the end of 1995-6 school year, it was clear that Garfield would be a less successful implementation than Ballard. The results of the efforts in each school drew quite different results.  However, much was learned from each project.

While the program at Garfield initially showed promise, it “withered” for lack of staff time and support, which occurred when the primary school proponents – the principal and a senior counselor – were both reassigned at the end of the school year to different buildings within the Seattle School district system.  Although the recruiting of these key personnel was appropriate, it was obvious that the program needed a broader base within the school, and greater ownership from the L.A.S.E.R. volunteer lawyers.

The peer mediation program at Ballard HS was robust and well supported with training occurring annually up to and including the beginning of this school year.  One Ballard student won a scholarship to Seattle University, in part on the basis of a research paper on the L.A.S.E.R. project.   The strength of this program was tested when Ballard HS’s historic building on 65^th NW was abandoned, razed and replaced, requiring that the entire school be moved for the 1997-98 school year to a building in Wallingford.  Ballard HS students are now enrolled in their new high tech building, and training was conducted at the new facility.   

However, the disappointing experience at Garfield yielded more than valuable lessons – Sara Chapman, the key counselor responsible for implementing and overseeing the L.A.S.E.R. program at Garfield was reassigned to Franklin High School.  Once established at Franklin, she implemented the L.A.S.E.R. program there.  To this day, the Franklin program has some of the most seasoned peer mediators.  In fact, last summer, the L.A.S.E.R. program recruited two of Franklin’s peer mediators to talk about mediation with the Board.  One of these students also was involved in two mock mediations at the 9^th Annual Washington Bar Association Dispute Resolution conference, demonstrating the value of using peer mediators in truancy situations in line with BECCA bill mandates.

L.A.S.E.R. Schools Added

      Even as the Board was learning from the initial pilot projects, the program was recruiting more schools.  By October 1996, L.A.S.E.R. had more than doubled the number of participating schools by conducting training at Capital High School in Olympia and at Curtis Junior and Senior High School in Tacoma. In addition, a partnership with ESD 101 in Spokane provided the opportunity to train several volunteers in Spokane and Pend Oreille counties, and to assign a team of L.A.S.E.R. volunteers to Halstead Middle School in Newport, Washington.

The Board Amends the Program

The L.A.S.E.R. Board’s planning committee worked to frame broader roles for the L.A.S.E.R. volunteers in helping to implement and sustain the administration of the programs within the schools. A decision was made to involve the L.A.S.E.R. attorneys more closely in the implementation strategies in addition to training the students, and to cultivate resources and referrals within the educational system for technical assistance that the program cannot realistically provide.  This effort continues today with the introduction in April 2000 of the first L.A.S.E.R. Operating Manual, which clarifies and strengthens the roles and expectations of the school administration and counseling staff, L.A.S.E.R. lawyers and L.A.S.E.R. trained peer mediators in assuring the acceptance and sustenance of this valuable program. 

New Training – 1997

In early 1997, L.A.S.E.R. co-sponsored training with the Puget Sound Educational Service District. A new training regimen was developed in collaboration with the L.A.S.E.R. Project, Puget Sound Educational Service District, and a well-known training consultant in peer mediation programs, Gayle Hoover. This training was also used to develop skills among select L.A.S.E.R.  Board members as “trainers of trainers.” Hoover worked with four L.A.S.E.R. Foundation members on this new training routine to help develop them in this role.

Later that year, the project was able to sponsor new volunteer training by relying on experienced L.A.S.E.R. attorneys at trainers. The two-day training in 1997 was completely filled and had a substantial waiting list. On August 22 and 23 in 1997, the L.A.S.E.R. project trained 23 new volunteer lawyers in the Washington State Bar Association offices in downtown Seattle. Twenty three new volunteer lawyers were trained alongside school personnel. 

More than 25% of those new volunteers were recruited through the Loren Miller Bar Association, who were then teamed with schools with significant populations of African-American students principally Franklin High School in Seattle.  In Seattle those schools included Roosevelt HS, Marshall Alternative School, Whitman Middle School and the American Indian Heritage HS, as well as the Cascade Middle School in the Shoreline School District and the junior and senior high schools in Enumclaw.  Other volunteers at this training were assigned to American Indian Heritage School, Ballard High School, Marshall Alternative School, Roosevelt HS, Cascade MS, Enumclaw HS, Snoqualmie Middle School and McMurray MS in King Count; and to Capital High School, Olympia, North Thurston High, Lacey;  Tenino High, Tenino; Edmonds Woodway HS, and Bordeaux Elementary in Shelton.   New L.A.S.E.R. teams were dispatched to Renton High School, McMurray Middle School on Vashon Island and Aylen Junior High in Puyallup.

In the last quarters of 1997, the L.A.S.E.R. program grew rapidly.   By the end of that year, there were more than 70 trained volunteers working in 9 schools.  L.A.S.E.R. volunteers were forming new teams and meeting with a number of interested schools. 

[Diane May starts the project in 1994.  Marla Elliot starts the project in September 1996.  1998, Marla’s title is changed to Executive Director, L.A.S.E.R. Foundation. Barbara Peterson joined the project in this position in November of 1998.]

FUNDING:

The remaining funds in the CCP grant were used up at the end of 1997. The longterm goal of the L.A.S.E.R. Board for the program were to spread the program through out the state.  To do this required a concerted effort to broaden the funding base. Beyond the CCP grant, the sustaining funds for the program came from the founding organizations (AGO, OSPI, WSBA) in staff salary and support, and in-kind support.

            AGO: The AGO funded a .5 FTE staff person who served as program manager, providing administrative support to the Board and to the school site implementations.  Senior AGO attorneys provided oversight.  The AGO also provided use of AGO facilities for meetings and trainings, use of the AGO print shop, copying, and mailing facilities as well as travel and printing expenses.  The AGO also provided access to agency information distribution sources to use to publicize the program and recruit volunteers. The AGO also authorized staff participation in the L.A.S.E.R. Project under the office’s existing pro bono policy.  In the first years of the grant, the value of the annual expenses was approximately $47,000. 

OSPI: The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) provided technical support, training, and strategic assistance that allowed the program to create partnerships with school districts, school buildings and the educational Service Districts, most notable Puget Sound ESD. OSPI co-sponsored training programs and recruited schools and school districts to work with the program.   The director of the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program represented OSPI on the L.A.S.E.R. Foundation Board of Directors.  Additional OSPI staff members were authorized to serve on the L.A.S.E.R. Foundation board as appropriate.  OSPI staff served without charge as educational consultants and trainers for L.A.S.E.R. Project staff and volunteers.  OSPI staff assisted the L.A.S.E.R. Project in perfecting its message that peer mediation programs further the goals of education reform through the Essential Learnings Program.  OSPI supported the L.A.S.E.R. Project through speeches, media contacts, and joint activities with co-sponsors.

WSBA helped the L.A.S.E.R. Project with a resolution passed by its Board of Governors on June 21, 1997.  That resolution stated that the WSBA would provide in kind support, including the use of Association facilities for the L.A.S.E.R. Project; and that the WSBA would encourage its members to participate as volunteers, as board members, and as financial contributors.  The past-president of the WSBA Board, Wayne Blair, represents the Association on the L.A.S.E.R. Foundation Board of Directors.  Other WSBA leaders could serve on the board as appropriate.  The WSBA provided to the L.A.S.E.R. Project, at no cost, mailing labels and lists of bar members, bar associations, and law-related organizations, for solicitation of volunteers, fundraising, and education.  WSBA publications accepted articles and press releases from and about the L.A.S.E.R. Project.  Further, the WSBA supported the L.A.S.E.R. Project through speeches, media contacts, and joint activities with co-sponsors.  WSBA encouraged private law firms to participate in the L.A.S.E.R. Project as corporate sponsors and financial contributors in addition to serving as volunteers, supported L.A.S.E.R. projects with WSBA resources, and had been willing to consider submitting, with the other L.A.S.E.R. Project sponsors, a joint legislative request for state government funding for the L.A.S.E.R. Project. 

The Board Expands

In January of 1996, the Board approved a resolution to amend the bylaws to expand the size of the Board to “no less than ten (10) members and no greater than twenty (20) members.”   Election at that time brought in the following members:

In January 1997, additional new members were added, including Shirley Battan and Mary Barrett who provided oversight from the AGO.  In addition to Battan and Barrett, additional board members included Priscilla Scheldt (OSPI), Gene Piculell (Young Lawyers), Mike Hall (Attorney at Law) and Elizabeth Pauli (organization?)

January 30, 1997  Dan Hannula – resigns]

In August 1997, the L.A.S.E.R. foundation board of directors added representatives of groups not previously enrolled on the board.  Those members included Kristine Wolfla, a student mediator and 1997 graduate of Ballard High School; Deborah Wiley, director of the Pierce County Center for Dispute Resolution; Kimberly Noel, a manager/consultant with the Puget Sound Educational Service District; Bob Dickson, counselor at Capital High School in Olympia; and Fred Schrumpf, consultant/trainer for the Spokane School District and co-author of two nationally recognized books on peer mediation (Peer Mediation; and Creating the Peaceable School.  Prior to this, the board had had few non-lawyers; adding these representatives from various related fields significantly enhanced the ability of the project to work with schools and to recruit additional mediators.

In 1999, the Board again revisited their bylaws to consider incorporating non-lawyers into the L.A.S.E.R. pool of volunteers trained to work with schools.   School-based conflict management trainers had always been members of the Board (Denise Fitch, Priscella Scheldt, OSPI; Kim Noel, PSESD; Fred Schrumpf, Spokane School District).  School personnel had been trained along with the students in L.A.S.E.R. trainings, but their role vis a vis the program had not been clear.  At some sites, it had been difficult to recruit the number of attorneys thought necessary (3-4 per site) to ensure that busy schedules of practicing lawyers would not mean a training class would have to be cancelled when a court date came up unexpectedly.  In addition, school personnel on the Board suggested that other adults could be trained in the peer mediation techniques and could provide stability and community connection to the program.  Another group that was authorized in this move was the introduction of law students, who had over the years asked for the opportunity to participate in the program.  These bright young people, the Board felt, could be ideal trainers for middle and high school peer mediators because of their relative closeness in age.  In (month) 1999, the Board voted unanimously to expand the program to incorporate non-lawyers into the L.A.S.E.R. pool

Additional Schools are Added -- 1998

The program had been operating for two years when in 1998, two schools were added to the L.A.S.E.R. roster that in some ways exemplified the program’s ability to meet school needs.

American Indian Heritage School: AIH, an alternative school focusing on Native American children at risk, located in 1997 in the Greenlake area in Seattle. The school had suffered a trauma after the sudden death of a charismatic principal who had founded the school.  There was a lot of disruption in the classrooms and on the school grounds, students with students as well as student with staff.  The interim principal asked L.A.S.E.R. to provide training to the entire student body. The August training enabled L.A.S.E.R. to recruit a team of 12 volunteer lawyers to provide training to the entire staff and student body at the American Indian Heritage School.  The interim principal reported that following the training, where there had been physical altercations, there now was evident “spontaneous mediations” with students stepping in to quell conflicts using the techniques taught by the L.A.S.E.R. attorneys – a particularly satisfying outcome for a school which included many at-risk youth.  Three L.A.S.E.R. volunteers remained part of the permanent AIH team, and rotated weekly meetings at the school to supervise mediation sessions, continue to train the student mediators, and help publicize the program.  Less than three months after the training in December, students reported fewer incidents of playground fights, and decreased student support for such fights.

          McMurray Middle School/Vashon Island:  Another success story occurred on Vashon Island.   Attorneys from Tacoma and Olympia had indicated an interest in training at this school, and there were interested faculty and professional mediators in the community that were also intrigued.  The administration was initially skeptical about the use of peer mediators, and of the value of bringing in attorneys to provide the training.  Skeptics in the school worried about the small, close knit community, and wondered if peer mediation deliberations would be kept confidential.   L.A.S.E.R. board member Kim Noel, a counselor with the Puget Sound ESD, who worked with McMurray on other PSESD programs, was able to work with the administration and staff of McMurray to develop what has come to be a very strong partnership with the school.  In fact, in the first full year following the implementation of the L.A.S.E.R. program,  Mike ___, principal, McMurray Middle School, reported that  incidents of harassment dropped from 39 to seven after project implementation.

Characteristics of Volunteers, Students, Participating Schools

L.A.S.E.R. now has provided, or will soon provide, training in schools across the state, as indicated in the following list:

Location of L.A.S.E.R. Projects by County w/map/year (work with AGO Graphics Dept)

Funding History +Challenges

L.A.S.E.R. has been constantly faced with the issue of financial support.  The early infusion of cash from the Seattle Police Department grant helped establish the core of the program.  AGO support provided funds for a half-time FTE for administrative support. The challenge has been the high interest in the project but the limited administrative funds available to support the soliciting and training of new lawyer volunteers, and the recruiting and collaboration needed to connect schools into the program and sustain their progress. 

From the beginning, the Board asserted that L.A.S.E.R. services  (training and mentoring) would be provided free of charge to the schools from volunteer attorneys who provided their services pro bono.  However, these volunteers needed an administrative agent to do outreach and coordination; in time, the program coordinator became one of the core trainers for the program as well.

In the earliest years, in addition to the SPD grant and agency funding (AGO, OSPI, WSBA) donations from private attorneys sustained the program.   The most recent efforts at fundraising were undertaken in Fall 1998, using direct mail solicitation.  This effort raised the visibility of L.A.S.E.R. among supporters, but resulted in modest funds raised. Following that, the Board and the new coordinator decided it would be prudent to implement a quarterly newsletter to keep L.A.S.E.R. supporters aware and up-to-date with L.A.S.E.R. ‘s activities, in part to “build a buzz” for the program, but also to hopefully improve the success of fundraising efforts.

In mid-1999, the AGO’s Solicitor General was asked to review L.A.S.E.R. ‘s fundraising efforts.  After a review of the facts and the law, a decision was made to discontinue private fundraising, relying instead public funds from local, state, or federal grant programs.

            Several attempts were made to identify grants for which the L.A.S.E.R. program would be a qualified applicant.  The innovative design of this program in fact undermined its potential to be considered for several grant opportunities.  Department of Justice programs, for which other ATG efforts might quality, emphasized work with youth involved with, or seriously at risk of being involved with, the Juvenile Justice system.  The L.A.S.E.R. program did not work directly or at any rate did not limit its operation to youth in this population. 

The L.A.S.E.R. program operated as more of a violence prevention program, but clearly worked directly with students, emphasizing education, character development, and adult mentoring.  This put the program more in the arena of educational entities, but the project was located not within the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, but within the Office of the Attorney General.  Furthermore, as the program was nominally located within the ATG, some funding organizations were confused as to why the project needed to solicit non-state funding.

            Funding for the L.A.S.E.R. program from the office of the AGO will cease in June of 2001.  Much has been accomplished to date in the program; ongoing efforts will be undertaken by the L.A.S.E.R. Board as a purely volunteer operation, with no paid administrative support until or unless other sources of funds are identified.

Training Philosophy + Strategies --- Revising the Program Operations

In the ongoing implementation of the L.A.S.E.R. Project, some changes from the original concept have occurred.  This is true with the training model.   When the L.A.S.E.R. project started, first-time L.A.S.E.R. training took a total of 12-hours.  This was accomplished in several schedules: some schools instituted the training with a full day (often a Friday) followed by a half day (often the following Saturday).  In other schools, L.A.S.E.R. teams trained two hours a day for six days – sometimes one day a week for six weeks.  Usually the training occurred in the fall, or first quarter of the school year, but in other instances training occurred in January, or at the end of the school year, in May or early June, to prepare students for the coming year.  Subsequent mentoring occurs throughout the school year; some L.A.S.E.R. teams meet monthly with the schools over a lunch hour; others meet only quarterly for a longer period of time.  In the interim, peermediators work with the school counselor or school L.A.S.E.R. liaison to schedule additional training, or to schedule peer mediators to mediate a dispute. 

The components of training include a background orientation to various communication skills, as well as many opportunities for students to participate in mock mediations of potential disputes as both disputants (using a script designed by the trainers, or more often in recent times, devised by the students themselves) or as mediators, using the multi-step process used in the training.

As the training materials explain, the agenda for the training is “to discuss the concept of conflict itself, to practice skills of effective communication, to learn to negotiate cooperatively, and to gain some experience with the theory and methodology of mediation.”

The specific workshop objectives, reflecting the Program goals, above are to:

§         Develop an awareness of conflict as opportunity

§         Identify different responses and approaches to conflict

§         Learn and practice effective communication skills

§         Understand the theories of collaborative negotiation

§         Lean and practice the methodology of mediation

§         Assist in the implementation of a peer mediation program.

Group interaction activities help students who may not know each other prior to the training to talk with each other, learn to work together, and develop an esprit de corps that will help develop the school peer mediator team.

Ongoing mentoring:

L.A.S.E.R. volunteer trainers do more than the initial training.  As a critical adjunct to the 12-hour training, the L.A.S.E.R. team commits to remaining involved with the school for at least two years.  In addition, they commit to coming back to the school on a regularly scheduled basis to provide ongoing training and mentoring for students.  By so doing, L.A.S.E.R. provides ongoing support and consistency to the implementation of the peer mediation program, which significantly distinguishes this program from many other vendor-offered peer mediation programs that rely on a single dose of training for students.  In general the following are the ways in which the lawyers participate with the schools in supporting the program after the initial training:

§         Help train and coach peer mediators

§         Promote peer mediation and conflict resolution education school-wide

§         Make classroom presentations on alternative dispute resolution (ADR)

§         Support staff advisors, faculty, and administrators in facilitating positive conflict resolution

§         Be professional role models and mentors to student mediators.

Recruitment and Training – Evolution of a Model

The most efficient training method would be to schedule a limited number (1-2) large training sessions in central locations, recruit a large number of interested trainees, train that cadre and then let them find schools with whom to partner.  Interested schools could recruit from the trained cadre of volunteers.  This worked for many schools and volunteers, but not all.  Not all interested and trained L.A.S.E.R. volunteers were able to find a willing school that followed through to implement the program.  In some cases, the volunteers didn’t always understand how to connect with schools, or who within the school would be the most likely best contact.  In other instances, the school – while interested initially in considering the option of incorporating the program into its academic offerings – was too busy with other ongoing initiatives to adopt this new program.

A good connection between volunteers and interested schools seemed a necessary component to ensure success of the program.  Through 1998 and early 1999, a growing number of inquiries started to come from schools who had heard about the program from a variety of sources.   There were not enough inquiries to justify a new volunteer training however, and the schools that indicated interest were not located conveniently close to each other.  Where possible, volunteers who had not yet found schools with whom to partner were solicited for their interest in these new alliances.  In some cases, this worked.  In other cases, the location of the interested schools were distant from the residences of the available L.A.S.E.R. volunteers. 

The group training model in a central Puget Sound locale seemed inefficient to responding to the inquiries for new program sites from scattered school districts.  So in 1999, a new strategy was tried.  Rather than solicit broadly a cadre of trainees and then send them to find an interested school,  the L.A.S.E.R. coordinator responded to those schools who called indicating an interest in L.A.S.E.R.   Whenever possible, existing L.A.S.E.R. trained volunteers in the area were solicited for their interest in taking on the new school.  Often, formerly interested volunteers had found other things to take up their interest in community volunteer work and were no longer available.  In other cases, the schools were located at some distance from available volunteers.

When it was established that there were no already-trained L.A.S.E.R. volunteers for the new school site, the program coordinator would work with schools to try to identify lawyers from among the school’s parents, school alums, or community members who could be recruited to participate in L.A.S.E.R. training. Many volunteers were recruited from the several branches of the Washington State Attorney General’s office – using the Docket – an employee information e-mail newsletter, as a recruitment tool. 

In this model, the first training was provided by experienced L.A.S.E.R. trainers (often L.A.S.E.R. Board members) recruited by the L.A.S.E.R. coordinator.  The newly recruited L.A.S.E.R. volunteers lawyers, school personnel, and the first cadre of students were trained together by experienced L.A.S.E.R. trainers.  In subsequent years, the school’s new L.A.S.E.R. team were responsible for training following cadres of peer mediators.

            This method had strengths and weaknesses.  First, if school readiness is a necessary ingredient of program success, tailoring this training to accommodate the school helped involve the school as a committed partner.  Secondly, there was a lot of training expertise on the Board; using these experienced trainers, including those from school-based programs, bought credibility with the new L.A.S.E.R. schools.   Third, this model significantly reduced the amount of time required of new L.A.S.E.R. lawyer volunteers in the first year.  The original training model asked new L.A.S.E.R. attorney volunteers to complete 12 hours of initial L.A.S.E.R. , then turn around within a few months and commit to an additional 12 hours spent training in the new L.A.S.E.R. school.  This was followed by mentoring hours through the school year.  The new model reduced the training commitment by 1 ½ days, a significant saving for busy professionals.  Fourth, to support this new strategy, the program coordinator compiled several pieces of written material into the first operations manual for the program.  This document provided explanations, suggestions, and checklists for implementation that provided a support resource for L.A.S.E.R. schools, ensuring that each team did not have to “reinvent the wheel” at each new site.

This was a workable model but it had drawbacks as well.   The new model offered custom-tailoring to a school site, but required the investment of greater resources.  Luckily, there is a large cadre of trained L.A.S.E.R. lawyers who have been willing to train, so all school inquiries have been met to date.  If more schools become aware and request training, this model will be taxed.   This may be the only way to train schools in remote locations.  In addition, the coordinating has required administrative support from the program administrator.  If this person is not continued, it will remain to be seen how well this model could be sustained through e-mail solicitation and only very minimal coordination.

Measures of Program Success: TESC Students Evaluate the L.A.S.E.R. Project

            One of the drawbacks of the volunteer status of both the L.A.S.E.R. lawyer/trainers and the school staff L.A.S.E.R. liaison has been the inconsistent collection of evaluation data.  Initially, this was to be one of the key components sought in the implementation of the program, but it has proved problematic.  In the appendix is the survey that was routinely distributed to all the schools.  Most of the information was available within the counseling offices of the primary L.A.S.E.R. school liaison.  However, the more important data was the tally of the reduction of violent incidents or the subsequent suspensions or expulsion of students.  These statistics were often kept in a central school location, and because of the sensitive nature of this information, were more difficult to obtain for school staff.  In addition, staff were asked to complete these surveys at the end of the school year, when many other administrative paper tasks were also required.  As such, it was difficult for the L.A.S.E.R. teams to consistently collect and return the data.  Often, counselors were reassigned to different schools by the start of the next year, so if the data wasn’t dispatched at the end of the school year, it often wasn’t possible to reconstruct it at the start of the next year.

            were reported from the first year implementation at .  At the end of the first year of L.A.S.E.R. , the principal was able to report that incidents went from a prior year high of 39 to 7 in the following year.   Not all could be ascribed to the L.A.S.E.R. program, as the school had undertaken many positive steps to address school climate and address issues of student behavior and violence.

            Anecdotal information came from the American Indian Heritage School and McMurray Middle School on Vashon Island concerning improvements in school climate and reduction in youth offenses and resulting suspensions and explusions was comforting, but not systematic.  An inquiry from a team of masters’ students in the public policy graduate program from The Evergreen State College helped address this evaluation gap.  The students designed a research project that would look at four Washington schools – two high school and two middle schools – that had implemented the L.A.S.E.R. program, and to compare them with similar schools (controls) without the L.A.S.E.R. program.  They collected qualitative data through surveys and reviewed of statistics on disciplinary actions before and after inception of the L.A.S.E.R. project to capture quantitative data.

            Recognizing limits of the study, the group nonetheless was able to make positive findings about the L.A.S.E.R. program as implemented in the subject schools.  In measuring the attitudes and beliefs of peer mediators in the selected schools (response rate of 82%), the survey found that student mediators believed they helped resolve disputes between peers using the L.A.S.E.R. training.  In addition, they expressed the belief that the L.A.S.E.R. project effectively contributes to reducing violence such as physical fighting and bullying.

            In addition, 75% of teachers surveyed indicated that they believed peer mediation was helpful in positively affecting school climate; more than half were aware of and endorsed the specific efforts of the L.A.S.E.R. peer mediators.

            With regard to the gathering of the quantitative data, the TESC researchers came upon a similar problem to the L.A.S.E.R. program administrators.  The sensitivity of the data concerning disciplinary actions yielded incomplete data with gaps and inconsistencies in the compilation of disciplinary actions for selected schools.  Where the L.A.S.E.R. and non-L.A.S.E.R. schools had more reliable data gathered, the results did not provide statistically conclusive differences.  This too had to do with affects of other efforts undertaken by the “control” schools to address student and school climate, whether or not they had adopted a L.A.S.E.R. peer mediation model.

            With acceptance of the limits of the survey, the researchers found that “the L.A.S.E.R. peer mediator survey, school faculty survey, and L.A.S.E.R. site coordinator questionnaire rendered information that clearly supports the L.A.S.E.R. Project.  Respondents to the various survey instruments expressed the belief that the program equips students with the skills to resolve conflicts in a peaceful manner, contributes to a positive school learning climate and is a preventive tool to reduce violence in school settings.” (p 41, The L.A.S.E.R. Project: An Evaluation of a Conflict Resolution Program in Washington State Schools, TESC, June 2000)

Collaborative Initiatives

In addition to participating in the Seattle Police Department Grant, the L.A.S.E.R. project has participated in other collaborative initiatives.  A Board member presented at the ABA Young Lawyers Convention in 199X in Phoenix, explaining the purpose and the success of the early implementation of the program.  In April of 2000, the L.A.S.E.R. Board president, Sandy Macdonald, was invited to participate in the first ABA ADR conference held in San Francisco, along with representatives from the Community Boards of San Francisco Conflict Managers Program,  one of the programs that had been a source of inspiration in the design of the L.A.S.E.R. project.  And in the summer of 2000, the L.A.S.E.R. program’s executive director partnered with the Yakima/Kittitas County Dispute Resolution Center Executive Director and Board member in a presentation before the Washington State 9^th Annual Dispute Resolution Conference, discussing the potential of using peer mediators to address the serious issues of youth truancy highlighted in the state’s BECCA Bill.  Shalika Lewis, an 11^th grader and three-year veteran of the peer mediation program at Franklin High School, participated in two mock mediations demonstrating the skills and perspective that could be brought to the BECCA bill deliberations if peer mediators were allowed to participate to give voice to the truant student.

“Bruised Inside”:The L.A.S.E.R. program was also referenced in the recent booklet, Bruised Inside, a compendium of the concerns and comments surfaced as the nations attorneys general undertook “listening conferences” of youth following the outbreak of youth violence typified by the Columbine High School carnage.  Students in that document rallied behind the concept of using peer mediation to resolve conflicts in their schools.  Establishing such peer mediation programs in school across the nation was one of the five key recommendations made by the nation’s AGOs after they completed their fact-finding.

L.A.S.E.R.: Next Steps.

At this juncture, the Board of the L.A.S.E.R. Project is contemplating more specific actions to become a free-standing, self-managed entity separate from the ATG, OSPI and WSBA, but retaining strong collaborative relationships with these organizations.

Collaborative Relations with Puget Sound ESD for Fundraising and Grant Seeking: In its December 2000 Board meeting, the Board endorsed the potential of seeking a collaborative relationship with Puget Sound ESD.  They directed the L.A.S.E.R. Project program administrator to work with the grantwriter at the ESD to seek possible funding sources.  The Board also asked the program director to investigate the potential of seeking funding from foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Casey Foundation,  or other similar foundation entities.

Web Site for Broad Dissemination of L.A.S.E.R. materials: The program administrator is also developing a Web Site with training materials, possibly also to include video streaming of training videos. A Web site (www.laserpm.com) containing access to the operating manual, the training materials, including the training documents for students and staff, masters for training poster masters and overheads, and sites for each of the participating schools using photos and text forwarded by peer mediators at participating schools is currently in the design phase.

Continued training: The Board continues to recruit new schools for currently trained L.A.S.E.R. volunteers (the most recent training of new volunteers occurred on September 27-28, 2000, with a class of 25 lawyer and school administrators participating, including the first time inclusion of law students added to the trainees.).  The ED continues to recruit volunteers to participate in first-time training of new schools; then supports the new L.A.S.E.R. site as needed until the new “team” can undertake all subsequent training, using materials provided on the L.A.S.E.R. web site.

Seeking Additional Partnerships and Activities:  The recent investigation of the use of peer mediators in issues of truancy has led the Board to also inquire if there is also a role for peer mediators in addressing the newest issue of bullying – the source this year of legislation in the Washington State Legislative session.  These ongoing discussions continue to inspire the Board that there is a significant and growing role for the L.A.S.E.R. program as a model for the state and the nation involving students in the resolution of their own issues.  The Board will continue to investigate ways in which to sustain and expand this valuable model.

APPENDICES

Results of Focus Group Surveys: Students, Teachers and Administrators, Volunteer Lawyers – What they say about the L.A.S.E.R. Project

Appendixes

§         Training Materials, Trainer + Student Guides

§         Foundation Board Bylaws

§         Promotional Materials, including brochures, posters, etc.

§         Operations Manual

§         Appendices

§         Minutes of the Strategic Retreat 4-16-98

§         Options for the Future – March 98 meetings

§         Chronology from 1994

§         Bylaws

§         Articles of Incorporation

[Parameters for attorney participation – Draft document Ron Gould:

1.      Attorney interests and strengths requested which includes past experience withstudetns and mediation, why the attorney volunteered.

2.      Attorney is given background check per the school district policy.

3.      Attorney committed to physically attedance of one hour per week for two years at school

4.      Each volunteer attorney presented before subcommittee and mediation company

5.      Attorney must complete three day mediation training

Attorney teams (4-5 attorneys) adopt a pod of student mediators.