Health warnings could reduce young people’s social media use

Pop-up messages that warn of the harms of social media — such as mental health consequences — have potential to reduce young people’s social media use, a new Stanford Medicine study has found. The online experiment of about 1,000 teens and young adults found that warnings also boosted people’s knowledge of the risks of social media use.

The research, which will publish online Sept. 4 in JAMA Health Forum, was inspired by a 2024 call from then-U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, MD, to add health warning labels to social media, in the same way that tobacco, alcohol and other risky products carry warnings. Four U.S. states have since passed legislation mandating such warnings; California’s law will go into effect Jan. 1, 2027.

Warning labels are one of many tactics that could help people use social media in a healthier way, said lead study author Anna Grummon, PhD, assistant professor of pediatrics. But they haven’t been rigorously investigated.

“We haven’t known what warnings for social media should say, or if they’re promising for changing behavior,” Grummon said. “Sometimes, subtle changes to warnings really matter.”

The study found that, of 15 messages tested, those on overall mental health harms and warnings specific to depression and anxiety resonated most with young people.

“Teens and young adults consistently reported that they felt the warning messages we tested would reduce their social media use compared with a control message,” said senior study author Thomas Robinson, MD, the Irving Schulman, MD, Professor in Child Health.

“Our data suggests these warnings could work, so it’s worth spending time to get the language just right,” Grummon added.

Negative effects of social media

Nearly all U.S. teens and young adults use some form of social media. Previous research has linked excessive social media use to several negative outcomes, including depression, anxiety, worsened body image and sleep disruption.

Adding warnings to social media has broad support, Grummon said, noting that after the surgeon general’s call in 2024, a bipartisan coalition of 42 state attorneys general petitioned Congress to enact warnings at a federal level. In addition to the states that have passed warning laws (California, Colorado, Minnesota and New York), lawmakers in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania have proposed legislation. California’s law has specific warning language built into the legislation; other states have not specified the warnings’ wording.

The Stanford Medicine researchers tested 14 warnings and a control message, using questionnaires administered to 1,012 young people. About half were teenagers who were 13 to 17 years old, and half were young adults, 18 to 29 years old. As part of the questionnaire, they provided information about their demographics and which social media platforms they used.

The researchers developed warning messages on six health topics: social media addiction, negative body image, sleep disruption, depression, anxiety, overall mental health harms and the fact that social media has not been proven safe for young people. They devised two warnings on each topic. They also tested California’s warning.

For instance, one of the messages about sleep said, “SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Using social media causes sleep problems. This is bad for your health.” Another message tested said, “SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Social media is associated with significant mental health harms for children and young adults.”

Because some social media companies have suggested they could provide their own warnings, the researchers also tested a message suggesting a screen time break which was similar to one used on TikTok. Finally, the control message discussed seatbelt safety, a health topic that is relevant to young people but unrelated to social media use.

Participants saw the messages in random order, formatted as though they were appearing on an Instagram page. They rated each message in response to two questions: “How much does this message discourage you from wanting to use social media?” and “How much does this message increase your awareness of the harms of using social media?”

Mental health harm resonates

Participants rated all the warning messages as more effective than the control message. They also rated all warnings that mentioned health effects, except the addiction warning, as more effective than the message suggesting a screen time break.

The messages perceived as most effective were those about overall mental health harms, depression and anxiety. Although the data does not show why those messages performed best, “if I were to speculate, I would say that these are harms that resonate with people,” Grummon said. “People may think, ‘That’s right, I can see that happening to my friends or to me,’ and these are outcomes people care about.”

Teens and young adults responded similarly to the warnings, the study found. The researchers had suspected the age groups might differ.

“If you’re a few years older, it makes a big difference in your experience with digital media since the landscape is changing so quickly,” Robinson said. “But our teen and young adult participants consistently said they felt these messages would reduce their social media use.”

The California warning performed fairly well — its perceived effectiveness was on par with other health warnings, even though it is longer and more complex. It says, “The Surgeon General has warned that while social media may have benefits for some young users, social media is associated with significant mental health harms and has not been proven safe for young users.”

“We talked to the people who created the bill, and they told us the rationale behind it,” Robinson said. “It’s not the message we would have designed, but we think we understand why it performed well, and it was meant to stand up to legal scrutiny. All these bills are in litigation, being challenged by the social media industry.”

The next step is to conduct more extensive tests to see if the warnings in fact reduce social media use.

“With substances like tobacco and alcohol, we find, on average, that well-designed warning labels change behavior,” Grummon said. “But social media is a totally different product from cigarettes or alcohol or sugary drinks, where you just put the warning on the product and it lives there. Social media laws are written so that these warnings are basically pop-ups. We need to find out more about how that changes behavior.”

School-based prevention programs for gaming disorder and problematic online habits

 

School-based prevention programs are designed to help protect adolescents from gaming disorder and problematic online habits. But how effective are these interventions when it comes to promoting responsible use of video games and the Internet? A research team led by Prof. Dr. Katajun Lindenberg of the Institute of Psychology at Heidelberg University investigated this question as part of a statewide study in which a total of approximately 1,800 adolescents from 44 secondary schools in Baden-Württemberg participated. The results show that, in the long run, a four-week behavioral therapy-based program achieved greater effects among participants at high risk of addiction than a media education program did.

“Against the backdrop of ongoing debates about effective measures to protect the mental health of young people in the digital age, the question of effective interventions is highly relevant,” emphasizes Katajun Lindenberg, who is Professor of Clinical Psychology of Childhood and Adolescence at Heidelberg University and directs the Psychotherapeutic University Outpatient Clinic for Children and Adolescents. In addition to much-discussed regulatory measures such as age restrictions, there are parallel calls for measures designed to empower young people to use video games and the Internet responsibly. These include prevention programs based on behavioral therapy or media education approaches. “Our research provides important empirical insights into which programs and content are particularly effective and which target groups benefit the most.” To this end, the scientists compared the behavioral therapy intervention PROTECTtraining and the media education program PROTECTinfo – two interventions developed for the school setting that are identical in terms of duration and implementation effort but differ in content.

Gaming disorder and other problematic online habits – such as excessive use of social media – can lead to reduced mental and physical health among adolescents as well as serious impairments in important areas of life such as school, family, friendships, and leisure time. To determine how effective school-based interventions are in preventing online addictive behavior, the researchers conducted a four-year randomized study involving adolescents aged 11 to 18. As part of this, 1,793 students participated in a four-week intervention consisting of a total of four 90-minute sessions. Half of the adolescents completed the behavioral therapy program PROTECTtraining that, among other things, explained the vicious cycle of addiction and provided training in behavior change and emotion regulation. A second control group participated in the media education program PROTECTinfo covering topics such as media literacy, gaming, cyberbullying, and legal aspects.

As part of the prevention study, the research team assessed the participants’ online addiction behaviors and mental well-being at the beginning and end of the programs as well as after four and twelve months. The researchers conducted a separate analysis for adolescents who had been identified as having a comparatively high risk of addiction at the start of the study. The final survey, conducted one year after the programs began, revealed that among adolescents without a risk of addictive behavior – the majority of study participants – there was hardly any measurable effect on their symptoms. In contrast, for adolescents at high risk of addiction, both interventions proved effective; however, the behavioral therapy intervention was significantly more effective.

“In a direct comparison, the behavioral therapy program is 50 percent more effective against gaming disorder and other problematic online behaviors than the media education program,” stresses Prof. Lindenberg. According to the Heidelberg researcher, these results also underscore that targeted measures tailored to at-risk groups in the school setting achieve significantly better results and are more resource-efficient than prevention programs implemented on a broad scale.

The then Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the former Baden-Württemberg Ministry of Social Affairs and Integration funded the research. The results appear in the journal “JAMA Network Open”.

---

Journal

JAMA Network Open

DOI

10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.31942 

Five ways K–12 leaders can strengthen teacher recognition beyond appreciation weeks

 

University of Phoenix College of Doctoral Studies has published a new white paper, “Beyond Appreciation Weeks: Building Teacher Recognition Into the Everyday Work of K–12 Leadership,” by Contessa Walker-Jackson, Ed.D., alumni fellow with the University’s Center for Educational and Instructional Technology Research (CEITR). In the paper, Walker-Jackson examines how K–12 school leaders can move beyond episodic teacher-appreciation activities by making substantive teacher recognition part of everyday leadership practice.

The full white paper is available as a direct link here.

Walker-Jackson distinguishes between appreciation — general expressions of gratitude directed toward teachers as a group — and recognition, which acknowledges a specific professional contribution by an individual teacher. The paper argues that both have a place in school culture, but that recognition is most meaningful when it is specific, consistent and connected to teachers’ actual work.

“Teacher appreciation plays an important role in school culture, but recognition highlights the specific work that a teacher has accomplished,” said Walker-Jackson. “A principal who notices well is a gem to the school. A principal who departs without incorporating a system of recognition into the school's operations creates a potential failure within the institution, as the elements that contributed to teachers feeling acknowledged and valued will leave with them.”

Why is teacher recognition different from teacher appreciation?

Walker-Jackson argues that appreciation activities such as staff celebrations, thank-you notes and appreciation weeks can help schools express collective gratitude and create opportunities for connection. However, the paper distinguishes those activities from substantive recognition, which is tied to something a leader has directly observed a teacher accomplish.

Drawing on established motivation theory, recent research on teacher engagement and narrative interviews with current and former teachers, the paper suggests that recognition becomes more meaningful when it reinforces professional competence, belonging and contribution rather than functioning primarily as a scheduled or generic gesture.

The distinction is particularly important for school leaders, Walker-Jackson writes, because recognition practices that depend primarily on the preferences of an individual principal may disappear when leadership changes. Building recognition into school routines and expectations can make the practice more consistent over time.

What did teachers say makes recognition meaningful?

For the paper, Walker-Jackson conducted semi-structured narrative interviews with 10 current and former teachers at a faith-based private school in the southeastern United States. The analysis identified six themes:

• Consistency matters. Teachers described recognition as less meaningful when it was unpredictable or dependent on the preferences of an individual leader.
• Culture shapes recognition. Participants emphasized that recognition should reflect the values and norms of the school community, with some preferring private or quieter acknowledgment.
• Leadership plays a central role. Teachers reported that the presence and quality of recognition could change significantly with a change in principal.
• Specific recognition can affect morale. Participants described small, targeted gestures as meaningful when they acknowledged something the teacher had actually done.
• Tangible recognition can have lasting value. Some participants valued recognition that created a visible or enduring acknowledgment of their contribution.
• Structure supports continuity. Teachers with experience across different settings described recognition as more reliable when supported by established practices rather than individual goodwill.

Across the interviews, Walker-Jackson found that teachers tended to describe recognition as meaningful when it was specific and tied to a real professional contribution, while generic, inconsistent or leader-dependent recognition was more likely to be viewed as insufficient.

How can K–12 leaders make teacher recognition part of everyday practice?

The white paper identifies five practices school and district leaders can consider:

1. Replace generic praise with named-action feedback. Give teachers timely feedback that identifies a specific instructional action or professional contribution and its observed effect.
2. Use post-observation conversations as recognition opportunities. Treat the conversation following a classroom observation as an opportunity to acknowledge professional strengths, not solely as an evaluation or compliance step.
3. Protect planning time as a form of recognition. Recognize the importance of teachers’ professional preparation by protecting planning periods from unnecessary disruption when possible.
4. Build recognition practices that survive leadership changes. Establish consistent expectations, review cycles and leadership responsibilities so recognition does not depend entirely on one principal’s personal habits.
5. Train principals in specific recognition. Treat effective recognition as a leadership skill that can be developed through coaching and incorporated into leadership expectations.

Together, the recommendations position recognition not as a once-a-year event, but as a leadership discipline that can be practiced, reinforced and evaluated as part of everyday school operations.

The paper notes important limitations to the findings. The narrative interviews involved 10 current and former teachers from one faith-based private school in the southeastern United States, and Walker-Jackson recommends further research in public schools, additional geographic regions and other educational settings. As the five recommended leadership practices have not yet been tested together as a single intervention, the paper presents them as evidence-informed leadership practices for further consideration and study.

About the author

Dr. Walker-Jackson is an Alumni Fellow with the University of Phoenix Center for Educational and Instructional Technology Research (CEITR) and founding president of the University of Phoenix Alabama Alumni Chapter. An educator, educational consultant, and K-12 school founder with more than two decades in education, she advises schools, districts, and homeschool programs on curriculum design, differentiated instruction, and teacher development. She is a National Certified Trainer in Differentiated Instruction, holds teaching certification in Alabama and Arizona, and founded Teacher's PETS Inc., a 501(c)(3) organization serving underserved students since 2007. Walker-Jackson earned her Doctorate in Educational Leadership with a concentration in Curriculum and Instruction from University of Phoenix, and a bachelor's in elementary education from Oakwood University. She can be reached through her LinkedIn profile.

With education technology, engagement is not the same as learning

 

A new report from the American Psychological Association warns that student engagement with educational technology is not the same as learning — and that generative AI tools pose particular risks by improving students' immediate performance without building their underlying knowledge or skills. 

The APA Expert Report on Children’s and Adolescents’ Learning with Educational Technology argues that students’ ability to apply new knowledge outside of an app or screen is a much stronger indication of learning than how much time a child spends on a screen, and that parents and educators working with children and young people ages 5 to 18 should be wary of marketing claims that run ahead of scientific evidence.

The report stresses that even if a student is paying close attention to an app, such as by clicking frequently, responding to animations or interacting with rewards, that engagement does not necessarily mean that the student is learning.

“Educational technology has the potential to profoundly advance students’ learning and abilities, but parents, teachers and school districts need tools that are safe, supported by evidence and can genuinely help students learn,” said APA CEO Arthur C. Evans Jr., PhD. “These recommendations, based in psychological research, can help determine whether EdTech tools actually produce the learning outcomes they promise.”

Compiled by a multidisciplinary panel of cognitive and educational psychologists, learning scientists and EdTech experts, the report synthesizes evidence across a wide range of technologies, including educational apps, games, intelligent tutoring systems, generative AI tools and digital learning platforms. It offers 10 evidence-based recommendations to help families, educators, policymakers and developers ensure that technology promotes meaningful learning.

Drawing on research from psychological science, the report recommends that schools, families and developers prioritize tools that build durable knowledge and skills that students can carry into other contexts, instead of evaluating apps based on flashy features. Additional recommendations include making adult involvement a significant part of EdTech implementation and investing in research that can keep pace with rapid technological change.

Educators should exercise particular caution when introducing generative AI tools into learning environments, said Nicole Barnes, PhD, APA’s executive lead psychologist for education.

“AI can help a student produce a better essay, but the improved final product does not necessarily mean the student has become a better writer,” Barnes said. “Just as we need to separate engagement from learning, we will increasingly need to separate performance from learning.”

Rather than trying to prevent children and adolescents from using AI tools altogether, the report recommends teaching students to actively evaluate AI-generated responses. Students should learn to question chatbots’ assumptions and identify gaps in chatbots’ reasoning, compare responses against other sources and consider how answers might change under different circumstances. In this sense, students should approach AI less as an answer machine and more as something they are continuously testing, challenging and learning from.

The report stresses that primary responsibility for ensuring that EdTech products are supported by evidence lies with the companies that develop them and the institutions that choose to adopt them. Developers should be prepared to demonstrate that their products improve learning, while schools and districts should expect credible, independent evidence before investing in educational technology.

APA also offers simple advice to parents: look and ask.

• Spend a minute watching the app and pay attention to what is happening on the screen — if much of the experience involves dressing a character, selecting accessories, collecting rewards or responding to flashing images, it is reasonable to question the app’s educational value.
   
• Ask a teacher, principal, early childhood leader or school board whether there is credible, independent evidence showing that the app leads to learning.

Students entering w/low scores: more degrees when part of major’s majority group

 Despite efforts to encourage broader participation, women earn about 25 percent of undergraduate engineering degrees and 18 percent of undergraduate computer science degrees—and men remain a small minority among nursing and education degree earners. Shedding new light on these discrepancies, a study—published in Nature Human Behaviour and examining two US Department of Education datasets—finds that these long-standing patterns tend to be most pronounced among students with lower pre-college grades and test scores, although prior academic performance alone does not explain who stays in a major and who leaves.

The researchers found that in male-majority majors such as physics, engineering, computer science, business, and economics, straight cisgender men with lower-than-average high-school grades and test scores were substantially overrepresented compared to straight cisgender women with similar levels of academic performance. That gap narrowed considerably among the highest-achieving students. LGBTQ+ men were also underrepresented in these fields.

In female-majority fields, evidence for a parallel pattern of overrepresentation for straight cisgender women was mixed. However, some models showed that LGBTQ+ women tend to be overrepresented in female-majority fields among students with the highest pre-college achievement—suggesting that LGBTQ+ women may need stronger academic credentials to gain a foothold even in seemingly welcoming fields.

For the study, the researchers used two large and nationally representative datasets collected by the US Department of Education to analyze patterns of high school performance and college major selection and persistence for straight cisgender men and women, and LGBTQ+ men and women. The High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 provided demographic information including sex and LGBTQ+ identity as well as academic preparation, interests, and outcomes for 6,340 students from their first year of high school in 2009-2010 through their junior year of college. The Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 2016 provided academic and demographic data for 12,950 students who obtained a bachelor’s degree in 2016.

“Across both datasets, we found evidence that when there was a representation gap that varied across the achievement distribution, that gap tended to be more in favor of the major’s historically dominant demographic group among the students with lower pre-college grades and test scores—and less so at other points in the distribution,” says lead author Joseph Cimpian, professor of economics and education policy at NYU Steinhardt and NYU Wagner. “Those gaps tend to narrow considerably among the students with the strongest pre-college performance, highlighting the importance of looking more closely at how these gaps differ by achievement level rather than just overall representation to better understand who is entering these different fields.”

The researchers suggest these more pronounced gaps among students with lower pre-college grades and test scores may be due to social norms and institutional environments that subtly favor a field’s historically dominant demographic group. Because the study is correlational, the authors are careful to note that it cannot establish that these norms directly cause these gaps—only that individual academic and demographic factors on their own do not fully account for the observed patterns.

The study is among the first to use nationally representative data to examine how LGBTQ+ students sort across the full range of college majors, not just STEM. LGBTQ+ students—regardless of sex—were underrepresented in male-majority fields like engineering, computer science, and business. LGBTQ+ males were also underrepresented in nursing and other health fields.

“These patterns suggest a kind of missed opportunity,” Cimpian notes. “If talented students are leaving—or never entering—majors where they would do well and contribute, partly based on factors unrelated to their preparation or even interest in these fields, that’s a loss for the students and for the fields themselves.”

This study is co-authored by Zachary T. McDermott at Abt Global, Jo R. King at Boston University, Nathaniel Woznicki at the NYU Department of Psychology, and Taek H. Kim at the Korean Educational Development Institute.

This research was supported by grants from the Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education (R305B140037 and R305B200010).

---

Journal

Nature Human Behaviour

DOI

10.1038/s41562-026-02510-8

What adults don't see about teen bullying

For two years, Boston University sociologist Sarah Miller went back to high school—but not as a student or a teacher. She was embedded in a rural Northeastern high school for a research project, observing students and gaining an inside look at how teenagers experience bullying in the social media age. 

That immersive research became the foundation for Miller’s first book, The Tolerance Generation: Growing Up Online in the Anti-Bullying Era (University of Chicago Press, 2026). It explores not only how bullying has evolved online, but also why many anti-bullying initiatives fail to address it.

The Brink spoke with Miller, a BU College of Arts & Sciences assistant professor of sociology, about her research, what adults often misunderstand about teen bullying, and why social media can also be one of young people’s strongest tools for support.

 

The Brink: What is The Tolerance Generation about?

Miller: The one-liner is that it’s basically a book looking at how teens grapple with bullying in the digital age, but also how they’re grappling with the industry that’s designed to prevent bullying.

I went into this high school thinking I was going to be studying bullying, and what I found was a whole lot of teenagers doing a whole lot of work to show adults they were being nice and tolerant of each other. That made me realize I needed to start looking at anti-bullying initiatives and policies too.

Teens weren’t not engaging in bullying—they had learned how to do it in ways that weren’t registering to adults. If I wanted to understand teens’ experiences with bullying, I also had to understand their experiences with anti-bullying and social media. So, I observed students in classrooms, extracurricular activities, and social spaces, while also following many of them online. That gave me a unique ability to see what adults often don’t get to see.

How did you conduct your research?

I’m an ethnographer, which means I spend a lot of time in social spaces until I kind of fade into the background. I spent two years in this high school, going everywhere students went. I observed classrooms, hallways, library spaces, parking lots, sporting events, and extracurricular activities during school, after school, on evenings and weekends.

I also interviewed 100 students—about one-fifth of the student body—and observed the social media activities of 75 of them. I interviewed 27 school officials, including teachers, administrators, nurses, and guidance counselors, and analyzed anti-bullying policies, bullying reports, PTA meeting minutes, and materials from bullying prevention programs. There were a lot of different data sources. Looking at teens’ lives online and in person simultaneously is like being on the receiving end of a fire hose. There’s just so much coming at you all at once.

How has social media changed bullying—and how teens respond to it?

Adults are often looking for bullying that’s direct, targeted, and visible. That’s how most prevention policies define bullying. What I found was that by high school, teens had learned not to bully in those obvious ways. Instead, it became much more subtle. It was conversations happening online without tagging someone, subtweets, ghosting, spreading rumors, or inside jokes that everyone understood except the adults. When I asked teens about bullying, this was the kind of harm they described. Adults were looking for direct, targeted behavior, while teens were experiencing something much more subtle, systematic, and much harder to detect.

The students most likely to experience bullying were LGBTQ+ students, gender nonconforming students, students with disabilities, racially minoritized students, and students from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds. But what happened to them often wasn’t something adults recognized as bullying.

At the same time, teens understood that these conflicts were about inequality. They used social media to share information with one another about gender, sexuality, and race when adults refused to teach about those topics. They shared resources, stood up for one another, and created support systems that schools weren’t providing. As we see more restrictions on what educators can teach about diversity, social media is becoming one of the primary ways young people learn these things. That’s why it’s so vital. It’s important to protect youth access to it instead of simply blaming it for youth conflict.

Can you share an example of social media helping students support one another?

One student posted a homophobic tweet late one evening. Overnight, it spread across multiple platforms, and by the next morning, most students knew about it. 

Hundreds of students responded by saying some version of, “You can’t say that.” They changed profile pictures to rainbow flags, posted messages supporting LGBTQ+ classmates, and shared educational resources. One student with two mothers explained different ways LGBTQ+ families exist. Another shared materials from a science lesson about sexual diversity in nature to educate classmates. Many students coordinated to wear rainbow colors at school the next day to show support.

There were many queer students who weren’t out publicly, and afterward, several told me they felt safer coming out because they realized how many classmates supported them. Watching what students called a “Twitter war,” I saw more useful information about sexual diversity shared between teens than I had ever seen in that school. It provided support and education that adults weren’t providing.

Why do many anti-bullying initiatives fail?

We have really consistent national data over the past 15 years showing that bullying rates haven’t significantly declined, despite anti-bullying laws in all 50 states and widespread anti-bullying programming.

The problem isn’t just social media. It’s that these initiatives don’t address inequality—what bullying is actually about. The programs I observed were very good at telling students to be active bystanders, but they weren’t talking about the slut-shaming, racist, transphobic, or homophobic content that was often present in bullying practices, or the ways marginalized students were actually being targeted. Bullying online and in person aren’t separate issues—they’re part of the same continuum. You have to address what people are having conflict over, not just the medium they’re using.

What advice would you give educators about social media and bullying?

It’s not about preventing one student from targeting another. It’s about addressing what bullying is about. That means giving students consistent, supportive information about gender, race, sexuality, class, disability, and other forms of inequality from an early age.

When I asked 100 teenagers what schools should do differently, the overwhelming response was, “Actually talk about it with us.” Students also told me their administrators often put the most socially popular students in charge of anti-bullying initiatives, which just replicates existing inequalities.

Adults also need to understand why some students don’t feel safe asking for help. If you’re being harassed because of your identity and don’t see adults who try to understand your experience, or acknowledge that your identity exists in their classrooms, you’re much less likely to come forward. The book is called The Tolerance Generation because tolerance isn’t the absence of hostility—it just makes hostility quiet.

If readers could take one thing away from your book, what do you hope that is?

If it helps one kid in a school feel safer—but not just safer, feel loved, wanted, cared for—then it’s done its job. 

I watched the same institution make some students feel completely supported while making others feel totally alone. Adults often couldn’t see that difference. Teachers and administrators have so much on their plates—and I don’t blame them—but so many young people are falling through the cracks. I also hope adults recognize how brilliant and resourceful teenagers are. I watched them support each other, educate each other, and navigate incredibly difficult situations, both in person and online, because they had to. I want adults to value that—but I also want adults to recognize that teens shouldn’t have to carry that burden alone.

---

 

Principal support helps teachers, but isn’t enough to stop turnover from classroom violence

 

Researchers find that while administrative backing lowers teacher stress, high levels of student violence weaken its protective impact

An ongoing national teacher shortage has created a sense of urgency to better understand why educators choose to stay in their positions — and why they leave.

Does support from administrative leadership help keep teachers in their jobs by making them feel safer and less stressed? And when teachers experience violence from students in their classrooms, does it weaken the impact of that protective relationship?

To find out, researchers analyzed 2020–21 national survey data on school violence from 5,550 pre-K through 12th-grade teachers. Conducted in collaboration with the American Psychological Association (APA)’s Task Force on Violence Against Teachers and School Personnel, the study was published recently in Educational Researcher.

Andrew Perry, a senior lecturer in educational studies at The Ohio State University, led the project alongside a research team that included co-author Eric Anderman, a professor of educational psychology and vice provost for regional campuses. They focused specifically on teachers’ intentions to transfer or quit, noting that about one-third of educators who express a desire to leave actually follow through within the year.

The researchers’ definition of support centers on transparency and communication — such as teachers feeling safe and comfortable talking to principals about matters of discipline — and a general belief that school administrators will back up teachers when a disciplinary incident occurs.

They found that while supportive leadership is widely recognized as protective against teacher burnout, student-directed violence is a critical tipping point. In a sample where 44% of educators reported experiencing student victimization and up to 80% faced verbal or threatening aggression, high levels of violence systematically weakened the protective benefits of principal support.

These results did not surprise Perry. “Our hypotheses were largely supported by the study. What we expected to find, we found,” he said. “Support is beneficial and necessary, but not sufficient. You have to have it, but in the face of victimization, support alone is not enough.”

Prior research shows that teachers who are on the front lines in our schools are most susceptible to non-physical violence from students — including verbal threats, obscene remarks and slurs. It’s “a demoralizing, sobering day-to-day reality,” Perry said. “If a teacher feels they are in an environment where this stuff is ignored, and they have nobody to turn to, it becomes toxic to their well-being, and they want to get away.”

Notably, elementary school teachers reported being victimized more often than their peers. Perry suspects this is due to elementary students having a lower capacity for self-regulation, making them more likely to lash out through hitting, biting, throwing objects or screaming.

“Teachers sign up for the job, but dealing with young children presenting these behaviors is challenging. School principals being present and showing support is a necessary component, but systematic strategies are required alongside it,” he said.

In a 2024 School Psychology paper co-authored by Perry, researchers evaluated strategies schools use to prevent violence and found that zero-tolerance policies and school hardening practices, like upgrading physical security and surveillance systems, do not work. “The most effective strategies are restorative, prevention-based approaches that build a climate of mutual respect, safety and integrity,” he said.

Beyond institutional policies, Perry emphasized that addressing teacher retention requires a fundamental shift in how schools and communities handle classroom safety.

“Violence against teachers is real, pervasive and impactful. When teachers are victimized, they want to leave. Teacher attrition leads to cascading consequences: schools lose experienced veteran teachers and replacing them is expensive and leads to inexperienced instruction,” Perry said.

Administrators can influence teachers’ perceptions of school safety, anxiety and stress, and retention intentions, the researchers noted, but administrator support needs to be combined with positive and clear discipline policies, and effective violence prevention initiatives that include all stakeholders and systemic improvements in school culture and climate.

“Teachers are human beings who need support not only from principals, but from parents and the public as well,” Perry said.