{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025225225225225224, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015315315315315315, 'mean_word_length': 5.692771084337349, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Bullying Involvement and the School Adjustment of Rural Students With and Without Disabilities

Bullying involvement status (i.e., bully, victim, bully–victim) and school adjustment were examined in a sample of 1,389 fifth graders (745 female, 644 male) including 145 special education students who were served in general education classrooms for at least 50% of the day. The sample was drawn from 35 rural schools in seven states across all geographic areas of the United States. School adjustment difficulties including internalizing and externalizing behavior problems were most pronounced in students who were identified as bully–victims (students who were identified as both victims and perpetrators of bullying). In contrast, bullies tended to have more positive interpersonal characteristics and fewer negative ones than youth who were identified as victims or bully–victims. Furthermore, compared to their nondisabled peers, students who received special education services had elevated rates of involvement as victims and bully–victims, but not as bullies. Implications for intervention are discussed.