Diversity Civility & Communication in the Midst of Differences How Does Incivility Show Itself on a College Campus?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
Systematic Review of Academic Bullying in Medical Settings: Dynamics and Consequences
Open access Original research BMJ Open: first published as 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043256 on 12 July 2021. Downloaded from Systematic review of academic bullying in medical settings: dynamics and consequences Tauben Averbuch ,1 Yousif Eliya,2 Harriette Gillian Christine Van Spall1,2,3 To cite: Averbuch T, Eliya Y, ABSTRACT Strengths and limitations of this study Van Spall HGC. Systematic Purpose To characterise the dynamics and consequences review of academic bullying of bullying in academic medical settings, report factors in medical settings: dynamics ► This systematic review is comprehensive, including that promote academic bullying and describe potential and consequences. BMJ Open 68 studies with 82 349 consultants and trainees, 2021;11:e043256. doi:10.1136/ interventions. across several countries and including all levels of bmjopen-2020-043256 Design Systematic review. training. We searched EMBASE and PsycINFO for Data sources ► We defined inclusion criteria a priori and used es- ► Prepublication history and articles published between 1 January 1999 and 7 February additional supplemental material tablished tools to assess the risk of bias of included for this paper are available 2021. studies. online. To view these files, Study selection We included studies conducted in ► The included studies varied in their definitions of please visit the journal online academic medical settings in which victims were bullying, sampling bias was noted among the sur- (http:// dx. doi. org/ 10. 1136/ consultants or trainees. Studies had to describe bullying veys and intervention studies were suboptimally bmjopen- 2020- 043256). behaviours; the perpetrators or victims; barriers or designed. facilitators; impact or interventions. Data were assessed Received 29 July 2020 independently by two reviewers. -
Understanding Civility/Incivility
Confidential Impartial Informal Independent UNDERSTANDING CIVILITY/INCIVILITY “Civility’s defining characteristic is its ties to city and society. The word derives from the latin civitas, which means “city,” especially in the sense of civic community. Civitas is the same word from which civilization comes. The age-old assumption behind civility is that life in the city has a civilizing effect…Although we can describe civil as courteous, polite, and well mannered, etymology reminds us that they are also supposed to be good citizens and good neighbors.” “Choosing Civility” by P.M. Forni A civil environment produces: 1. Collaborations 2. Ideas – innovation & creativity 3. Customer satisfaction 4. Retention 5. Supportive learning environment 6. Community of trust and inclusion Source: Adapted from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/diversity/workplace/civility The Price of Incivility: ! 48% intentionally decreased their work effort. ! 47% intentionally decreased the time spent at work. ! 38% intentionally decreased the quality of their work. ! 80% lost work time worrying about the incident. ! 63% lost work time avoiding the offender. ! 66% said that their performance declined. ! 78% said that their commitment to the organization declined. ! 12% said that they left their job because of the uncivil treatment. ! 25% admitted to taking their frustration out on customers Source: “The Price of Incivility”, Harvard Business Review, January 2013 Issue. Authors: Christine Porath and Christine Pearson. 1 Bullying is an example of one type of incivility. Bullying -
Teacher Perspectives on Bullying and Students with Disabilities 1
TEACHER PERSPECTIVES ON BULLYING AND STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 1 Teacher Perspectives on Bullying Towards Primary-Aged Students with Disabilities By Lara Munro A research paper submitted in conformity with the requirements For the degree of Master of Teaching Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto Copyright by Lara Munro, April 2016 TEACHER PERSPECTIVES ON BULLYING AND STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 2 Abstract Bullying is an international phenomenon that impacts up to 70% of students. Research has consistently demonstrated that students with special educational needs are overrepresented as victims of bullying. Despite this high prevalence, limited research has explored teachers’ perspectives on this topic and the challenges they face in preventing bullying in the classroom. This study used a qualitative approach consisting of semi-structured interviews with two educators who are committed to anti-bullying education and inclusion. The purpose of the study included an exploration of strategies and practices used by educators to prevent and respond to bullying behaviour towards students with disabilities. This study looked at various disabilities, such as Autism, ADHD, physical disabilities, and Learning Disabilities. The study found that participating teachers primarily employ preventative approaches to bullying behaviour by creating an inclusive classroom environment, integrating anti-bullying education throughout the curriculum, and being involved in school and classroom-wide anti-bullying initiatives. Moreover, involvement in professional development specific to bullying was identified as a necessary component of reducing bullying behaviour in schools. Participants also identified many challenges they experienced, including lack of teaching staff to adequately support the integration of students with disabilities in a mainstream classroom. -
Doe Cast All Employee Notification
THE NOTIFICATION AND FEDERAL EMPLOYEE ANTIDISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION ACT (No FEAR Act) On March 3, 2011, Secretary Steven Chu issued a memorandum for all DOE employees, entitled “Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity Policy Statement”. In his policy statement, Secretary Chu expressed his commitment to equal employment opportunity and diversity, and his support of the rights of employees to participate in the EEO process without fear of reprisal. The Secretary’s statement accords with the principles of the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (the “No FEAR Act”). The No FEAR Act is designed to reduce and prevent discrimination and retaliation, and to hold agencies and individuals accountable for their actions. The Act is also designed to promote the prompt resolution of complaints at the administrative level. PROHIBITION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION Pursuant to antidiscrimination laws, statutes, regulations and Executive Orders, the Department may not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status, political affiliation, genetic information, or sexual orientation, in any term, condition or privilege of employment. The No FEAR Act reinforces a number of Federal antidiscrimination laws, including: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Equal Pay Act of 1963; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA); Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; and The Civil Rights Act of 1991. WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION Under whistleblower protection laws, the Department may not take a personnel action, threaten to take a personnel action, or refuse to take a personnel action because an employee or applicant made a protected disclosure. -
Pacers' Toolkit Tackles the Wicked Problems of Bullying in Healthcare
ENABLING SOLUTIONS: PACERS’ TOOLKIT TACKLES THE WICKED PROBLEMS OF BULLYING IN HEALTHCARE Program Developed by the PACERS A Seven Member National Project Team from the 2012 Cohort of the: RWJF Executive Nurse Fellows Program Program Funded by the: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation RWJF ENF Action Learning Team • Rita K. Adeniran, RN, DrNP, CMAC, NEA-BC FAAN President/CEO Innovative and Inclusive Global Solutions Drexel Hill, PA • Beth Bolick, RN, DNP, PPCNP-BC, CPNP-AC, FAAN Professor Rush University Medical Center College of Nursing, Chicago, IL • Ric Cuming, RN, MSN, EdD, NEA-BC, CNOR VP/Chief Nurse Executive Einstein Healthcare Network: Philadelphia, PA • Cole Edmonson, RN, DNP, FACHE, NEA-BC VP/Chief Nursing Officer Texas Health Resources: Presbyterian Dallas • Bernadette Khan, RN, MSN, NEA-BC Vice President Patient Care Services/Chief Nursing Officer New York Presbyterian Lower Manhattan Hospital • Linda B. Lawson, RN, DNP, NEA-BC Administrative Director for Health Care Transformation Sierra Providence Health Network - El Paso, TX • Debra White, RN, MSN, MBA, ACNS-BC, NEA-BC VP/Chief Nursing Officer Saint Luke’s Health System, Kansas City, MO • Listed alphabetically, not by weight of contribution This presentation may be used in full or part with attribution. The recommended citation is: Adeniran, R., Bolick, B., Cuming, R., Edmonson, C., Khan, B., Lawson, L., & Wilson, D. (2016). Culture of civility and respect: A healthcare leader’s role. www.stopbullyingtoolkit.org TODAY’S PRESENTER Dr. Rita K. Adeniran President and CEO Innovative -
MEMORANDUM for ALL ACUS EMPLOYEES October 1, 2019 FROM: Matthew L. Wiener, Vice Chairman and Executive Director SUBJECT: Policy
MEMORANDUM FOR ALL ACUS EMPLOYEES October 1, 2019 FROM: Matthew L. Wiener, Vice Chairman and Executive Director SUBJECT: Policy Statement on Equal Employment Opportunity, Non-Discrimination, Diversity, Harassment, and Whistleblower Protection; No FEAR Act Notice Since the re-establishment of ACUS in 2010, this agency has maintained a clean record of non-discrimination, inclusiveness, and diversity in all of its activities and operations. I believe that the agency’s staff has been diligent in observing and complying with the applicable laws and agency policy statements issued from time to time relating to these matters. The following information will serve as an official Policy Statement on Equal Employment Opportunity, Non- Discrimination, Diversity, Harassment, and Whistleblower Protection, as well as the annual notice required by the No FEAR Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-174. The Administrative Conference of the United States is committed to enforcing a zero- tolerance policy for any form of discrimination or harassment in the workplace, including physical, psychological or sexual harassment. Related to this commitment is a determination to seek diversity and to ensure the rights of employees under the federal whistleblower protection laws and policies that prohibit reprisals. Every employee of ACUS is responsible for helping to ensure equal employment opportunity (EEO) and for complying with EEO laws and other federal policies to prevent discrimination, harassment, and reprisal. Each of us has a role in maintaining an environment of equal opportunity and must take personal responsibility for adhering to the principles that guarantee equal opportunity for all. It is important that we always foster a culture of inclusion and respect at ACUS and promote an environment that embraces diversity. -
Whistleblower Protection Policy and Procedure
WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION POLICY AND PROCEDURE POLICY STATEMENT Public Authorities Law §2857, Civil Service Law §75-b, Labor Law §740, State Finance Law §191 and Executive Law §55(1), as well as certain federal laws, provide public employees and other parties, including any Member, officer, employee, consultant or contractor of the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York (“DASNY”), with protection against retaliation for engaging in various forms of “whistleblowing”. It is the policy of DASNY to fully comply with these laws, and to afford certain protections to individuals who in good faith report potential instances of Inappropriate Behavior to a Designated Person within DASNY. The Whistleblower Protection Policy and Procedure set forth herein is intended to encourage and enable Whistleblowers to raise such concerns in good faith within DASNY and without fear of retaliation or adverse employment action. This Policy and Procedure is in addition to, and not a limitation on, any comparable whistleblowing rights and protections under State or federal law. DEFINITIONS For purposes of this policy, the following terms shall be defined as follows: “Whistleblower”: Any Member, officer, employee, consultant or contractor of DASNY who in good faith discloses information to a Designated Person concerning potential Inappropriate Behavior. “Good Faith”: Information concerning potential Inappropriate Behavior is considered to be disclosed in “good faith” when the individual making the disclosure reasonably believes such information to be true and -
An Investigation of Middle School Teachers' Perceptions on Bullying Stewart Waters1 & Natalie Mashburn2 Abstract Introduct
Journal of Social Studies Education Research www.jsser.org Sosyal Bilgiler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi 2017: 8(1), 1-34 An Investigation of Middle School Teachers’ Perceptions on Bullying Stewart Waters1 & Natalie Mashburn2 Abstract The researchers in this study investigated rural middle school teachers’ perspectives regarding bullying. The researchers gathered information about the teachers’ definitions of bullying, where bullying occurs in their school, and how to prevent bullying. Peer-reviewed literature associated with this topic was studied in order to achieve a broader understanding of bullying and to develop a self-administered survey addressing these issues. A total of 21 teachers participated in the survey and the results of this study convey the need to recognize bullying in many forms, appropriately address bullying when it occurs, and incorporate preventive actions that will discourage bullying and encourage acceptance. Keywords: Bullying; Middle School; Teacher Preparation. Introduction Middle school can be a transformative and exciting time for students. However, during these important developmental years, bullying continues to be a persistent and serious issue. In more recent years, national and international concerns relating to the harmful effects of bullying have increased significantly (Thompson & Cohen, 2005). According to Frey and Fisher (2008), bullying has become a part of life for countless students, and can take on many forms within contemporary schools. As a result, bullying has placed a considerable amount of pressure on administrators and teachers to effectively respond to bullying (Bush, 2011). Often, teachers and administrators can be unaware of bullying, making it difficult to develop appropriate policies that are proactive instead of reactive. In 2003, Seals and Young stated that bullying is a persistent and insidious problem that affects roughly one-fourth of the students in the United States. -
Incivility in the Informal Workplace: a Case Study of Emerald Lutheran
INCIVILITY IN THE INFORMAL WORKPLACE: A CASE STUDY OF EMERALD LUTHERAN CHURCH A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the North Dakota State University of Agriculture and Applied Science By Jared Nathan Fougner In Partial Fulfillment for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS Major Department: Communication March 2013 Fargo, North Dakota North Dakota State University Graduate School Title INCIVILITY IN THE INFORMAL WORKPLACE: A CASE STUDY OF EMERALD LUTHERAN CHURCH By Jared Nathan Fougner The Supervisory Committee certifies that this disquisition complies with North Dakota State University’s regulations and meets the accepted standards for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE: Dr. Ann Burnett Chair Dr. Stephenson Beck Dr. Nan Yu Dr. Verena Theile Approved by: 03/08/2013 Dr. Mark Meister Date Department Chair ABSTRACT This study examined how incivility is expressed in an informal church organization and the impact relationships among those in the organization have on incivility. The researcher had staff members of the church complete journals. The researcher also observed the staff for one week and then conducted interviews based on the observations and journals. The researcher then coded data and grouped it into overarching themes. Themes that emerged about displays of incivility included: interrupting or not respecting another’s ideas and yelling and gossiping behind each other’s backs. The researcher examined these themes in terms of the relationships that exist among these coworkers. Results demonstrated that the staff did not frequently escalate incivility because they valued relationships and were aware of external causes of uncivil behavior. Reasons for not escalating incivility were then explored and connected to existing incivility research. -
Bullying and Harassment of Doctors in the Workplace Report
Health Policy & Economic Research Unit Bullying and harassment of doctors in the workplace Report May 2006 improving health Health Policy & Economic Research Unit Contents List of tables and figures . 2 Executive summary . 3 Introduction. 5 Defining workplace bullying and harassment . 6 Types of bullying and harassment . 7 Incidence of workplace bullying and harassment . 9 Who are the bullies? . 12 Reporting bullying behaviour . 14 Impacts of workplace bullying and harassment . 16 Identifying good practice. 18 Areas for further attention . 20 Suggested ways forward. 21 Useful contacts . 22 References. 24 Bullying and harassment of doctors in the workplace 1 Health Policy & Economic Research Unit List of tables and figures Table 1 Reported experience of bullying, harassment or abuse by NHS medical and dental staff in the previous 12 months, 2005 Table 2 Respondents who have been a victim of bullying/intimidation or discrimination while at medical school or on placement Table 3 Course of action taken by SAS doctors in response to bullying behaviour experienced at work (n=168) Figure 1 Source of bullying behaviour according to SAS doctors, 2005 Figure 2 Whether NHS trust takes effective action if staff are bullied and harassed according to medical and dental staff, 2005 2 Bullying and harassment of doctors in the workplace Health Policy & Economic Research Unit Executive summary • Bullying and harassment in the workplace is not a new problem and has been recognised in all sectors of the workforce. It has been estimated that workplace bullying affects up to 50 per cent of the UK workforce at some time in their working lives and costs employers 80 million lost working days and up to £2 billion in lost revenue each year. -
Diversity and Inclusion in Recruitment
ROBERT WALTERS WHITEPAPER DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION IN RECRUITMENT INTRODUCTION: CONTENTS DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION Understanding why 02 IN RECRUITMENT diversity is important Developing an inclusive 05 Employers are increasingly coming to recognise the strong business business culture case for improving the level of diversity and inclusion within their workforce. By recruiting professionals from a range of backgrounds at all levels of Helping diverse candidates 06 seniority, businesses gain access to a wide variety of viewpoints and find your company perspectives. Companies with staff from a broad range of backgrounds have been found to outperform firms with a less diverse workforce1. Exploring new 08 recruitment tools By attracting and retaining a diverse range of staff, businesses can identify opportunities and explore new solutions. Developing, implementing and Reducing unconscious 10 promoting a diversity strategy is the challenge employers now face. bias Securing the most talented professionals will require employers to take on Improving diversity in 11 a new, innovative approach to access more diverse talent pools. leadership This research paper, based on a survey of over 450 employers, will examine new tools and technology that can help businesses reach Encouraging collaboration 13 new sources of talent, explore strategies to develop a company culture in a diverse workforce that embraces diversity and address the hurdles faced when creating a collaborative, diverse workforce. Key findings 15 1http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/why-diversity-matters ABOUT ROBERT WALTERS Robert Walters is a specialist professional recruitment consultancy, working with businesses of all sizes as a trusted recruitment partner. With an international network of offices spanning 27 countries, we are perfectly positioned to help you find the very best skilled professionals. -
Rudeness in the Workplace
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics Rudeness and Incivility in the Workplace Suzanne M. Crampton Grand Valley State University John W. Hodge Grand Valley State University Rudeness and incivility among employees are common throughout the business world. With the emphasis on profits and controlling labor costs, there are many issues evolving from the lack of civility within the workplace. This paper will provide examples of rudeness and incivility along with possible causes and performance problems. Significant attention will be given to the control and management of rudeness and incivility from both a personal and organizational point of view. INTRODUCTION Everyone would like to work in an environment where they are treated with respect and professionalism. However, there is considerable evidence to suggest that the “civil” work environment is the exception rather than the norm. What is “incivility?” The Oxford Dictionary defines incivility as “a rude or discourteous act; to act rudely is to be discourteous without regard for others in violation of norms for respect in social interactions.” The workplace norms are the norms of the community consisting of basic moral standards that have developed over time and are usually prescribed through formal and informal organizational policies, rules, and procedures (Brooks, et al.). Typical words used to describe rudeness and incivility include such terms as being crude, inelegant, uncouth, coarse, vulgar, discourteous, unlearned, uncivilized, ignorant, uneducated, and simple. Examples