Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Bully prevention and intervention & Threat assessment

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Bully prevention and intervention & Threat assessment"— Presentation transcript:

1 Bully prevention and intervention & Threat assessment
Dorothy L. Espelage, Ph.D. Professor, Child Development Division; Educational Psychology, Univ. of Illinois Joey Merrin, Ed.M. Doctoral Candidate, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign This research was supported by Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (#1U01/CE001677) to Dorothy Espelage (PI)

2 University of Illinois Anti-Bullying Program
Indiana University Teen Conflict Survey (Bosworth, Espelage, & Simon, 1999; Espelage et al., 2000, 2001) University of Illinois Bullying Research Program INTERVIEW STUDY (Espelage & Asidao, 2001) EXPOSURE TO VIOLENCE STUDY (Espelage, 1998) SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS STUDY (Espelage, Holt, & Henkel, 2003; Espelage, Green, & Wasserman, 2007; Espelage, Green, & Polanin, in press) SEXUAL HARASSMENT, DATING VIOLENCE, & BULLYING STUDIES (Holt & Espelage, 2003; Holt & Espelage, 2005; Espelage & Holt, 2006) ATTRIBUTION, COPING STYLES, & BULLYING (Kingsbury & Espelage, 2006) THEORY OF MIND, EMPATHY, & BULLYING (Espelage et al., 2004; Mayberry & Espelage, 2006) HOMOPHOBIA, SEXUAL VIOLENCE, & BULLYING (Poteat & Espelage, 2006; Espelage et al., 2008) Sexual Orientation, Bullying, & Mental Health Outcomes (Espelage, Aragon, Birkett, & Koenig, 2008; Poteat, Espelage, & Koenig, 2009; Birkett, Espelage, & Koenig, 2009) CDC Federally-funded Grants: Bullying & SV Overlap ( ) Randomized Clinical Trial of Middle School Second Step Program (Committee for Children, 2008) in Reducing Bullying & SV ( )

3 Sample Implications for Intervention
Evolutionary Insights Into Risky Adolescent Behavior (Ellis et al., 2011) Domain of Study Sample Insights Sample Implications for Intervention Functions of risky and aggressive behavior Both Prosocial and antisocial behavioral strategies function to control resources Bullying is a common animal behavior that increases access to physical, social, and sexual resources Adolescents are adapted to engage in bullying when the conditions are right Many antibullying interventions fail because they are based on false stereotypes about the social incompetence of bullies. Interventions need to alter the cost-benefit ratio of bullying so that it is no longer an adaptive strategy in the school ecology. Interventions should try to substitute more prosocial strategies that yield outcomes that are comparable to those achieved through bullying

4 Sample Implications for Intervention
Evolutionary Insights Into Risky Adolescent Behavior (Ellis et al., 2011) Domain of Study Sample Insights Sample Implications for Intervention Conditional adaptation to stressful environments Stressful experiences direct or regulate development toward strategies that are adaptive under stressful conditions Exposures to harsh and unpredictable environments each uniquely increase risky adolescent behavior Interventions should be careful of declawing the cat. Band-Aid solutions that do not address causative environmental conditions will not effectively change high-risk behaviors. Interventions need to alter social contexts in ways that--through changes in the experiences of at-risk-youth—induce an understanding that they can lead longer, healthier, more predictable lives.

5 Definition of Bullying (Swearer, 2001)
Bullying happens when someone hurts or scares another person on purpose and the person being bullied has a hard time defending himself or herself. Usually, bullying happens over and over. Punching, shoving and other acts that hurt people physically Spreading bad rumors about people Keeping certain people out of a “group” Teasing people in a mean way Getting certain people to “gang up” on others Use of technology

6 Bully/Victim Continuum
Bully – reports bullying others Victim – reports being bullied by others Bully-victim – reports bullying others & being bullied Bystander – reports observing others being bullied No Status/Not involved – does not report any involvement with bullying

7 Bullying Prevalence Among 3rd – 8th graders:
15% Chronically Victimized 17% Ringleader Bullies 8% Bully-Victims 60% Bystanders Only 13% intervene to help victim (Espelage & Swearer, 2003)

8 Cyber-Bullying “Cyber-bullying involves the use of information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm others." (Bill Belsey: cyberbullying-from-the-national-crime-prevention- council html

9 Technology Use by Youth
Most children and adolescents are online (93%) – but not all are (7% are not) Many (73%) are on Face book and other social network sites But very few (8%) are tweeting Constantly text messaging? YES 72% of teens text; at an average of 112 texts per day

10 CyberBullying (Ybarra, 2012)
Cyberbullying (bullying online) affects between 15-17% of youth each year; harassment affects about 38% More than 4 in 5 youth who use the Internet are *not* cyberbullied About 1/3 of bullied and harassed youth are very or extremely upset 2/3 bullied and harassed youth are less affected Bullying is most commonly an in-person experience (21% are bullied exclusively this way). For a concerning minority (8%), bullying is ubiquitous (in person, online, via text) Internet victimization is not increasing Text messaging victimization may be increasing…

11 Bullying Prevention – Meta-analysis (Merrell et al., 2008)
Evaluated effectiveness of 16 bullying efficacy studies across some six countries (six studies in US). Only two of six US studies published. All showed small to negligible effects. Small positive effects found for enhancing social competence and peer acceptance, and increasing teacher knowledge and efficacy in implementing interventions. Reality—No impact on bullying behaviors. Farrington & Tfoti (2009) – programs that are effective in European country include parents, use of multimedia, and target teacher’s competence in responding to bullying.

12 Bullying Prevention –Why little success?
Majority of the programs fail to recognize that bullying co-occurs with other types of aggression, including sexual violence, dating aggression, and homophobic banter. Programs often fail to address basic life and social skills that kids may need to effectively respond to bullying. Only one program directs prevention efforts at the key context that promotes and sustains bullying perpetration – the peer group. No programs consider the impact of family and community violence on bullying prevalence . All programs fail to address the extent to which demographic variables (such as gender and race) and implementation levels impact a program’s effectiveness. 12

13 www.

14 Social-Ecological Perspective
Community School /Peers Family Child Society (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Swearer & Doll, 2001; Espelage & Swearer, 2003; Espelage & Horne, 2007)

15 Individual Correlates of Bullying Involvement
Depression/Anxiety Empathy Delinquency Impulsivity Other forms of Aggression Alcohol/Drug Use Positive Attitudes toward Violence/Bullying Low Value for Prosocial Behaviors For review (Espelage & Swearer, 2003; Espelage & Horne, 2007)

16 Family & School Risk Factors
Lack of supervision Lack of attachment Negative, critical relationships Lack of discipline/ consequences Support for violence Modeling of violence SCHOOL Lack of supervision Lack of attachment Negative, critical relationships Lack of discipline/ consequences Support for violence Modeling of violence For review (Espelage & Swearer, 2003; Espelage & Horne, 2007)

17 Sibling Bullying Sibling bullying is tied to school-based bullying in many countries (Espelage & Swearer, 2003 for review) Study of 779 middle school students, association between bullying perpetration and sibling aggression perpetration was strongly associated (girls r = .52, boys r = .42; Espelage & Stein, in prep)

18 Relation Between Bullying & Other Victimization Forms
Child maltreatment has been associated with difficulties in peer relations (Jacobsen & Straker, 1992; Shields & Cicchetti, 2001) Exposure to domestic violence has been linked to bullying perpetration (Baldry, 2003) Study of 779 middle school students, association between bullying perpetration and family violence victimization was moderately associated for females (r = .31) and bullying perpetration was also related to neighborhood violence victimization (r = .40; Espelage & Stein, in prep)

19 Homophobic Language & Bullying
Approximately 22% of middle school students (n = 4,302) report teasing another student because he/she was gay (16.6% girls, 26.1% boys; Koenig & Espelage, 2003) 17.7% of high school students (n = 4,938) reported teasing another student because he/she was gay (9.2% girls, 26.2% boys; Koenig & Espelage, 2003) Bullying and homophobia perpetration strongly related among middle school students (r = .61; Poteat & Espelage, 2005) Homophobia victimization was reported more by males than females (Poteat & Espelage, 2007)

20 Poteat & Espelage (2005) Bullying and homophobia are strongly interrelated for males and females Homophobic content and empathy Similar to past findings for attitudinal homophobia and empathy (Johnson, Brems, & Alford-Keating, 1997) Homophobic content and school belonging Similar to past findings for LGBT students and isolation, stigmatization (Uribe & Harbeck, 1991) Homophobic content and anxiety/depression Negative consequences to “harmless” banter?

21 Openness to friends and schools (Poteat, Espelage, Koenig, 2009)
To what extent are heterosexual youth willing to remain friends with lesbian and gay peers after disclosure? This would reflect a removal of an already existing support system This may differ from befriending someone already known to be gay or lesbian To what extent are heterosexual youth willing to attend school with lesbian and gay students? We expected gender and grade differences

22 Description of Studies
Dane County Youth Survey 2005 (Study 1) Countywide, school-based Limitations to sexual orientation item Dane County Youth Survey 2008 (Study 2) Same locations and procedures Improved item for sexual orientation

23 Study 1 Study 1 Middle school: N = 7,376; High school: N = 13,133
Gender: 50.7% girls m.s.; 50.3% girls h.s. Racial identity: 72.7% White1 m.s.; 79.7% White2 h.s. Sexual orientation: 75.2% heterosexual m.s % heterosexual h.s. % White, 7.7% bi/multi-racial, 6.9% African American, 5.2.% Asian American, 3.7% Latino/a, 1.1% Native American, 2.6% “Other” % White, 5.2% bi/multi-racial, 4.7% Asian American, 4.2% African American, 3.5% Latino/a, 0.9% Native American, 1.8% “Other”

24 Study 1 Question Study 1 Question: “I could never stay friends with someone who told me he or she was gay or lesbian” Response options: 0 = strongly agree 1 = agree 2 = disagree 3 = strongly disagree Higher scores = more willing remain friends

25 Study 2 Study 2 Middle school: N = 5,470; High school: N = 11,447
Gender: 50.2% girls m.s.; 49.8% girls h.s. Racial identity: 71.5% White1 m.s.; 75.5% White2 h.s. Sexual orientation: 85.3% heterosexual m.s % heterosexual h.s. % White, 7.7% bi/multi-racial, 7.5% African American, 5.2% Latino/a, 4.4.% Asian American, 1.2% Native American, 2.2% “Other” % White, 6.7% African American, 6.1% bi/multi-racial, 4.5% Asian American, 4.1% Latino/a, 1.0% Native American, 1.7% “Other”

26 Study 2 Question Study 2 Question: “I would rather attend a school where there are no gay or lesbian students” Response options: 0 = strongly agree 1 = agree 2 = disagree 3 = strongly disagree Higher scores = more willing to attend school with gay/lesbian students

27 Study 1 Results Boys reported less willingness to remain friends
F (1, 16243) = , p < .001, η2 = .07 Boys: M = 1.91 (SD = 0.94) Girls: M = 2.37 (SD = 0.78) Students in lower grades reported less willingness to remain friends F (5, 16243) = , p < .001, η2 = .04 All grade differences significant except 9/10

28 Distribution of Responses by Grade
30.4% 25.9% 18.5% Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12 16.8% 13.4% 10.8%

29 Study 2 Results Boys reported less desire to attend school with lesbian and gay students F (1, 13363) = , p < .001, η2 = .09 Boys: M = 1.63 (SD = 1.04) Girls: M = 2.22 (SD = 0.88) Students in lower grades reported less desire to attend school with lesbian and gay students F (5, 13363) = , p < .001, η2 = .04 No difference between 9/10, 10/11, or 11/12

30 Distribution of Responses by Grade
44.5% 34.0% 26.4% Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12 25.2% 23.1% 20.6%

31 LGBT Bullying is Driven by Peers
Adolescent peer groups play a significant role in the formation and maintenance of harmful and aggressive behaviors, particularly homophobic behavior (Espelage & Polanin, 2010; Poteat, Espelage, & Green, 2009) Peers influence has to be considered in developing and evaluating prevention/intervention programs Only one bullying prevention program attempts to target and shift peer norms and mentions LGBT bullying.

32 Bullying Perpetration & Subsequent Sexual Violence Perpetration Among Middle School Students
Dorothy L. Espelage, Ph.D. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign & Kathleen C. Basile, Ph.D. Division of Violence Prevention Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia Merle E. Hamburger, Ph.D. Short talk Quickly go through what's going on …usage, rates, etc. And then provide some practical tips that parents can use No Kinda This research was supported by Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (#1u01/ce001677) to Dorothy Espelage (PI)

33 Bullying & Sexual Harassment Overlap
Bully perpetration associated with sexual harassment perpetration among middle and high school students. Bully victimization is associated with sexual harassment victimization. A large percentage of bullying among students involves the use of homophobic teasing and slurs, called homophobic teasing or victimization.

34 Bully-Sexual Violence Pathway
Emerging theory – bullying perpetration & homophobic teasing are thought to be predictive of sexual violence over time. Bullying is associated with increasing homophobic teasing perpetration during early adolescence. When students engage in homophobic teasing, sexual perpetration may develop as students are developing opposite- sex attractions and sexual harassment becomes more prevalent.

35 Definitions Bullying: An act of intentionally inflicting injury or discomfort upon another person (through physical contact, through words or in other ways) repeatedly and over time for the purpose of intimidation and/or control. Homophobic Teasing: Negative attitudes and behaviors directed toward individuals who identify as or are perceived to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered. Sexual Harassment: Includes comments, sexual rumor spreading, or groping.

36 Participants of Current Study
1,391 middle school students 5 middle schools (grades 5 – 8) 49.8% Females 59% African-American, 41% Caucasian 67% Low-Income

37 Procedure Meetings with school parents, teachers, administrators
Newsletters, parent information forms Surveys administered to students in Spring 2008 and then Fall 2008 Items on scales aggregated

38 Bully Perpetration In the 30 days, how often did you do the following to other students at school? I teased other students. In a group I teased other students. I upset other students for the fun of it. I excluded others. I encouraged people to fight. I spread rumors about others. I was mean to someone when angry. I helped harass other students. I started arguments or conflicts. Response options: Never, 1 or 2 times, 3 or 4 times, 5 or 6 times, or 7 or more times

39 Homophobic Teasing Perpetration
Some kids call each other names like homo, gay, fag, or dyke. How many times in the last 30 days did YOU say these words…… To a friend Someone you did not like Someone you did not know Someone you thought was gay Someone you thought was not gay

40 Sexual Harassment Perpetration
In the last year, how often did you do the following to other students at school? Made sexual comments, jokes, gestures.. Showed, gave, or left sexual pictures,…. Pulled at clothing of another student Wrote sexual messages/graffiti about them… Spread sexual rumors about them. Touched, grabbed, or pinched..sexual way Pulled at their clothing Blocked their way or cornered them in a sexual way Response options: Not Sure, Never, Rarely, Sometimes, & Often

41 Percentages of Bullies

42 Percentages of Homophobic Teaser

43 Percentages of Sexual Harassment Perpetration

44 Longitudinal Results Bullying Perpetration Wave 1 + +
Sexual Harassment Perpetration Wave 2 Homophobic Teasing Perpetration Wave 1 + + Controlling for: Sexual Harassment Perpetration Wave 1 +

45 CAUSAL LINK: Bullying – Homophobic Teasing
0.30 0.25 0.325 0.375 Bully Time 1 HPC Time 2 Time 3 Time 3 Time 4 Time 5 Model Fit: χ2 (340, n=790)= ; RMSEA = .057 (0.053 ; 0.060); NNFI = .0985; CFI = .988; (Espelage & Rao, under review)

46 Discussion This research is focused on one kind of sexual violence – Sexual HARASSMENT Sexual harassment that does not include forcible acts like rape. The findings suggest that bullying perpetration and homophobic teasing perpetration are associated with each other and both are associated with later sexual harassment perpetration.

47 Future Analyses Underway
Bullying perpetration causally linked to homophobic teasing perpetration. Relation between bullying perpetration and sexual harassment perpetration explained by homophobic teasing perpetration. Association between bullying perpetration and homophobic perpetration explained by higher levels of traditional masculinity. Bullying perpetration, homophobic bullying perpetration, and sexual harassment perpetration develops from peer influence, modeling, and socialization.

48 At a minimum, homophobic teasing should be addressed by adults:
Suggestions Addressing homophobic teasing explicitly within a bullying prevention curriculum may be a way to delay development of sexual harassment. At a minimum, homophobic teasing should be addressed by adults:

49 Why little success in preventing school bullying?
Most frequently used bullying prevention programs DO NOT incorporate content related to use of homophobic language & bullying directed at LGBT youth. 23 bullying prevention programs in US, only three mentioned LGBT bullying; and NONE did this indepth (Birkett & Espelage, 2010) These include Flirting or Hurting (Stein & Sjorstom, 1996), Step Up (Madsen et al., 2006), Second Step (CfC, 2008) Meta-analyses do not include evaluation of Groundspark videos: Let’s Get Real (2003), Straightlaced (2009). SOLUTION: Bully State Laws should require bully prevention plan to include LGBT related material (GSA, lessons, academic content)

50 Willingness to Intervene in Bullying Episodes Among Middle School Students: Individual and Peer-Group Influences Journal of Early Adolescence Dorothy L. Espelage, Ph.D. Professor, Child Development Division; Educational Psychology Harold J. Green, Ph.D.; RAND Corporation Joshua Polanin, M.A., Loyola University, Chicago This research was supported by Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (#1U01/CE001677) to Dorothy Espelage (PI)

51 Bystander Intervention
Scholars suggest that including bystanders increases school-based bullying programs’ effectiveness (Newman, Horne, & Bartolomucci, 2000; Olweus, 1993; Rigby & Johnson, 2006). These researchers advocate encouraging bystanders to create a more positive school climate through intervening (e.g., reporting an incident, confronting the bully). Self-declared bullies and bystanders sometimes report feeling sorry after bullying their peers though they rarely intervene in bullying episodes (Borg, 1998). For example, 43% of an Australian adolescent sample (n = 400) reported that they would intervene to help a victim depicted in a videotaped bullying situation (Rigby & Johnson, 2006).

52 Bystander Intervention
Observational data indicated a stark contrast in outcome. O’Connell, Pepler and Craig (1999) videotaped 1st through 6th graders (n = 120) during recess. 54% of peers spent their time reinforcing bullies by passively watching, 21% actively modeled bullies, and only 25% intervened. Older boys (grades 4-6) were more likely to join actively with the bully than were younger boys (grades 1-3) and older girls. Younger and older girls intervened on behalf of victims more often than older boys. 88% of bullying episodes involved multiple children, but only intervened 19% of the time. 57% of the interventions effectively stopped the bullying (Hawkins, Pepler, & Craig, 2001).

53 Rigby & Johnson (2006) Australian primary and secondary students (n = 400) viewed a videotape of a bullying situation and were subsequently asked what they would do. Multiple regression analysis indicated that greater willingness to intervene was associated with being younger, having rarely or never bullied others, having been victimized, and having a positive attitude toward victims. Students were more likely to intervene if they believed their friends expected them to support victims. Friends’ attitudes weighed heavily in a student’s decision to intervene, highlighting the need for research that addresses peer influence.

54 Attitudes & Empathy Some scholars posit that modifying attitudes supportive of violence and empathy training positively influence bullying prevention. Numerous character education, bullying curricula, anger management, and social problem-solving prevention/intervention programs include empathy training and promote prosocial, nonviolent attitudes (e.g., Goldstein, Glick, & Gibbs, 1998; Newman et al. 2000; Pecukonis, 1990). These programs are predicated on the assumption that understanding negative behavior toward others (i.e., empathy) and engaging in prosocial behavior will decrease an individual’s bullying behavior.

55 Research Questions Are middle school male and female peer groups similar in their level of willingness to intervene? Is willingness to intervene stable over 1-year period? Do attitudes supportive of bullying, empathy, and perspective-taking predict willingness to intervene over time? Does peer-group level bullying predict willingness to intervene over time?

56 Participants 210 middle school students (grades 6 – 7)
117 males; 93 females One mid-western middle schools 94% White, .5% Black, .5% Asian, 2.3% Biracial, 2.7% Other Survey completed Spring 2003 & Spring (Wide range of scales & friendship nominations)

57 Gender Differences* *η2 = .27; individual η2s = .25, .13, .27

58 Gender Differences* *η2 = .27; individual η2s = .12, .16, .08

59 Results & Conclusions In this study (at least for boys) efforts to influence an individual’s willingness to intervene will be more successful with careful consideration of the bullying perpetration level among friendship groups. Findings suggest importance to explore predictors of attitudes and behaviors across multiple levels, including individual and peer groups. Lack of attention to peer group influences on bullying attitudes and behaviors is an unfortunate phenomenon because bystander intervention is emphasized within some of the most commonly utilized bullying prevention programs (Newman et al., 2000; Olweus, 1993). These findings provide support for the practice in many of these programs to teach students perspective-taking skills.

60 Bystander Interventions (Polanin, Espelage, & Pigott, 2011)
Meta-analysis synthesized the effectiveness of bullying prevention programs in altering bystander behavior to intervene in bullying situations. Evidence from twelve school-based interventions, involving 12,874 students, revealed that overall the programs were successful (ES = .21, C.I.: .12, .30), with larger effects for high school samples compared to K-8 student samples (HS ES = .44, K-8 ES = .13; p = .001). Analysis of empathy for the victim revealed treatment effectiveness that was positive but not significantly different from zero (ES = .05, CI: -.07, .17). Nevertheless, this meta-analysis indicated that programs were effective at changing bystander behavior both on a practical and statistically significant level. 60

61 Impact of a School-Randomized Trial of Steps to Respect: A Bullying Prevention Program®
Eric C. Brown, Sabina Low, & Kevin P. Haggerty Social Development Research Group, School of Social Work University of Washington, Seattle, WA Brian H. Smith Committee for Children Seattle, WA Funded by: Raynier Foundation

62 Study Purpose Build upon prior STR evaluation (Frey et al., 2005) by assessing the efficacy of the STR program in preventing bullying and bullying-related behaviors among elementary school children using a rigorous school-randomized design. Secondary Research Question: -To examine the predictors, of and outcomes from, program implementation in intervention schools… …incorporating the nested design of the original efficacy study.

63 Program Components: School-wide and Parent components Program Guide
Develop an anti-bullying policy Gain staff buy-in Implementation Information Staff Training Parent Materials Annual letter from principal Parent night materials Parent handouts

64 Program Components Classroom-based components (3rd-6th grades)
10 Skills Lessons that focus on: Friendship skills Recognizing bullying Refusing and reporting bullying Bystander skills Literature Lessons: Reinforces STR concepts while addressing language arts objectives

65 Study Design School-randomized controlled trial Participants
Elementary schools matched on key demographic variables (size, %FRPL, mobility rates) Randomized to intervention or wait-listed control Selected four 3rd-5th grade classrooms to collect data One-year, pre-post data collection from school staff, teachers, and students Participants 33 elementary schools in 4 counties in northern, central California 25% rural, 10% small towns, 50% suburban, 15% mid-sized cities Average N of students = 479 (range = 77 to 749) Average N of teachers = 24 Average 40% of students receiving FRL

66 Study Design Participants School Staff
Ns = 1,307 (pretest) and 1,296 (postest) -Teachers N= 128 Students N = 2,940 Students 94% of target population 51% Male 52% White 42% Hispanic 6% Asian 35% Other race/ethnicity Age range = 7 to 11 years 41% 3rd-grade 48% 4th-grade 9% 5th-grade < 1% 3rd/4th-grade split < 1% 4th/5th-grade split 77% of target population 90% female 12% Hispanic 88% White Average age = 46 years Worked at school median = 3 to 5 years

67 Measures School Environment Survey (SES)
six subscales (Mean alpha = .91, range = .82 to .95) Teacher Assessment of Student Behavior (TASB) five subscales (Mean alpha = .87, range = .80 to .95) Teacher Program Implementation Log weekly online report of classroom curricula adherence and student engagement Student Survey 13 measures (Mean alpha = .79, range = .68 to .87)

68 Results School Staff School Anti-Bullying Policies and Strategies (+)
Student Bullying Intervention (+) Staff Bullying Intervention Student Climate (+) Staff Climate (+) School Bullying-Related Problems (-) Average d = .296 (range = .212 for Staff Climate to .382 for Anti-Bullying Policies and Strategies). Note: Bolded outcomes indicate significant (p < .05) intervention effects.

69 Results Teacher Report Social Competency (+) Academic Competency
Academic Achievement Physical Bullying Perpetration (-) Non-Physical Bullying Perpetration d = .131 for Social Competency AOR = .609 for Physical Bullying Perpetration Note: Bolded outcomes indicate significant (p < .05) intervention effects.

70 Results Student Report
Student Support Student Attitudes Against Bullying Student Attitudes Toward Bullying Intervention Teacher/Staff Bullying Prevention (+) Student Bullying Intervention (+) Teacher/Staff Bullying Intervention (+) Positive Bystander Behavior (+) School Bullying-Related Behaviors Bullying Perpetration Bullying Victimization Student Climate (+) School Connectedness Staff Climate Note: Bolded outcomes indicate significant (p < .05) intervention effects.

71 Outcomes Related to Program Implementation
Exposure School Bullying as a Problem (-) Student Attitudes Against Bullying (+) Student Attitudes Toward Bullying Intervention (+) Student Bullying Intervention (+) Teacher/Staff Bullying Intervention (+) Bullying Victimization (-) Engagement Student Support (+) Student Climate (+) School Connectedness (+) Student Attitudes against Bullying (+) Student Attitudes toward Bullying Intervention (+)

72 Second Step Committee for Children, 2008
Program design was driven by client requests and market demands. Committee for Children had numerous requests for a bullying program for this age group and there is a clear need to address substance abuse at this age. A thorough market review indicated that schools and districts don’t have the time and resources to be teaching multiple prevention programs. In the academic climate in the United States, schools have a hard time doing prevention and social emotional learning programs at all. They want one program that covers it all. Committee for Children, 2008

73 Second Step: Addresses Multiple Issues
Second Step: Student Success Through Prevention Bullying program for middle school Prevalence of aggression and bullying in middle schools Substance abuse is a middle school prevention priority One program that focuses on multiple issues Program design was driven by client requests and market demands. Committee for Children had numerous requests for a bullying program for this age group and there is a clear need to address substance abuse at this age. A thorough market review indicated that schools and districts don’t have the time and resources to be teaching multiple prevention programs. In the academic climate in the United States, schools have a hard time doing prevention and social emotional learning programs at all. They want one program that covers it all.

74 Program Goals Increase school success Decrease aggression and violence
Decrease bullying behaviors Decrease substance abuse As always with Second Step, the focus of the program is on social emotional competency and developing the cognitive and behavioral skills young people need for their safety and well-being. However, specific program outcomes have been expanded in this new program to include: Decrease aggression and violence Decrease bullying behaviors Decrease substance abuse Increase school success This program has been developed very intentionally to increase students’ success at school. It is not just a side effect of decreasing the other negative behaviors. In the Second Step program, school success relates to: Getting along with peers Getting along with teachers Feeling safe, more accepted and part of a community Managing aggression and impulsivity in the classroom More effective communication These school success factors are all shown to also improve academic success.

75 Program Goals Research Foundations Risk and Protective Factors
Bullying Brain Research Positive Approaches to Problem Behavior Developmental Needs of Young Adolescents We’ll spend the next several slides talking about the research foundations of the program. It’s important to note that the Second Step program was developed by Committee for Children which has a 25 year history of providing research-based, proven effective social and emotional learning programs for children. REMOVE WORD “PROVEN” WE CAN’T SAY OUR PROGRAMS “PROVE” ANYTHING…SCIENCE CAN ALWAYS BE “DISPROVEN.” DO YOU WANT TO BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT SECOND STEP. CAN WE SAY ALL OF OUR PROGRAMS ARE DEMONSTRATED EFFECTIVE? WHAT ABOUT WOVEN WORD, TAT? Their programs are used in schools throughout the world. This program builds upon that history and was developed based on an exhaustive review of research.

76 Prevention Research Supports One Program Targeting Multiple Issues
Risk and protective factors are at the heart of Second Step: Student Success Through Prevention Many of the same factors predict substance abuse, violence, delinquency and school failure. The market challenged Committee for Children by asking, “Can’t you just do everything?” The good news is that in the field of prevention science the wisdom of doing a program that targets multiple behaviors is supported by evidence. Over recent decades researchers have successfully identified factors in multiple domains in children’s lives that increase the risk of problems and support healthy development. The big discovery was that kids who have some problems often have several, and similar problems go together. Or in other words risky problematic behaviors have many common risk factors and they also have common protective factors. Risk factors increase the likelihood youth will experience problems or engage in problem behavior. Protective factors protect students from the effects of risk and improve their chances for success. This risk and protective factors approach is now the basic model that everyone uses within the prevention field. It may seem like a big leap to have a program that targets multiple problems but in fact the evidence supports it. WE CAN’T SAY “EVERYONE” USES IT. BUT, IT’S A WAY OF ORGANIZING AND SUMMARIZING DECADES OF RESEARCH IN THE PREVENTION SCIENCE FIELD. Research on risk and protective factors has laid the groundwork for interventions that can simultaneously address multiple problems, reducing the need for a separate program for each concern. Many of the same risk and protective factors predict substance use, violence, delinquency, and school failure. THIS SEEMS A LITTLE REPETITIVE. That is the strength of the social emotional learning approach to problems – social emotional competency is not just linked to one problem. Social emotional competency provides foundational skills that address the range of problems. THIS IS THE NECESSARY BUT NOT SUFFICIENT ARGUMENT. SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL SKILLS AREN’ SUFFICIENT FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE, OR BULLYING PREVENTION; AS WE KNOW, MANY BULLIES HAVE ADEQUATE SOCIAL SKILLS IN SOME DOMAINS. The power of reducing risk and increasing protection to safeguard youth is essential to the design of the new Second Step middle school program. 76

77 Risk and Protective Factors Addressed in the Second Step Program
Risk Factors Inappropriate classroom behavior Favorable attitudes towards violence or substance use Friends who engage in violence or substance use Early initiation of violence or substance use Peer rewards for antisocial behavior Peer rejection Impulsiveness Protective Factors Social skills School connectedness Adoption of conventional norms about substance use Bridgid/Sabina – can you add a little content here that is more specific to substance abuse. These are the risk and protective factors addressed in the Second Step program. These risk factors are consistent for aggression and violence, substance abuse, and lack of success in school. Inappropriate classroom behavior includes: Aggression Impulsivity Lack of respect/compliance All of these are addressed in multiple ways throughout the program. With the protective factors, there is a complex interweaving between social skills, school connectedness and program outcomes. Having good social skills protects youth from involvement in substance use, violence, and delinquency. Social skills include social and emotional competence, thinking and resistance skills. I MIGHT SAY ASSERTIVENESS INSTEAD OF RESISTANCE SKILLS..OR, DID YOU MEAN REFUSAL SKILLS, SUCH AS THOSE AROUND ALC/DRUG USE? “THINKING” ALSO SEEMS A LITTLE GENERIC…WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THINKING? PROBLEM SOLVING? Social skills and the ability to get along with classmates decreases inappropriate classroom behavior such as aggression Peer rejection At the same time, social skills facilitate positive relationships with peers and school staff which increases school connectedness. School connectedness is shown to protect students from a wide range of problem behaviors. The higher degree of connectedness correlates to lower-level problem behavior. Reduction of bullying behaviors impacts a students sense of safety, which contributes to school connectedness. Another aspect of school connectedness is a teacher who is empathetic, consistent, and encourages students’ self- management and allows students to make decisions. Students connection to teachers can counterbalance the negative influences of bonding antisocial peers. Committee for Children expects that like the other Second Step programs, teachers of this middle school program will experience a shift in attitude and behavior.

78 Levels and Lessons 50 minutes to teach a complete lesson
Handling new responsibilities Stepping Up Grade 6 15 lessons Decision making, staying in control 13 lessons Stepping In Grade 7 Leadership, goal setting Stepping Ahead Grade 8 There is one set of lessons for each grade level. Grade 6 has 15 lessons and grades 7 and 8 have 13 lessons each. As you can see here, each level has an underlying theme that is appropriate to that grade level. At grade 6, students are handling new responsibilities and transitioning to middle school At grade 7, they are increasing their focus on good decision making and staying in control and at grade 8, they are focusing on leadership and goal setting as they prepare for their transition to high school. Each lesson is 50 minutes in length. They are divided into two parts so they can be taught as one long lesson or two shorter lesson. This gives flexibility to schedule during advisory periods, block classes or a regular class period. 50 minutes to teach a complete lesson Each lesson is divided into two parts that can be taught separately 78

79 Teaching strategies Use of DVD with rich multi-media content to accompany each lesson Carefully constructed approach to partner and group work Class discussion and activities Partner or group exchanges Individual, partner, or group activities Partner or group skill practices Individual reflection Frequent review of core skills and concepts The Second Step program employs a wide variety of teaching strategies that were chosen specifically because of their appropriateness to the developmental needs of middle school age students. Each lesson provides a great deal of variety, interaction, movement, meaning and self-reflection. Students are involved throughout the whole lesson. Activities include discussion, skill practices, games, challenge activities, and video. Group work is critical in this program. Not only is it developmentally appropriate, it is best practice and core to any quality prevention program. There are a variety of group exchanges built into the program. Partner or group exchanges are short, 1 to 2 minutes simultaneous interaction so all are engaged in topic. Partner or group activities are longer and more involved, lasting 3-7 minutes. These include games, challenges, handout work. Skill practice give students the opportunity to practice the skills that are learned in the lessons. Videos demonstrate skill practice so kids know exactly what to do. In all cases, students are called on at random after an activity to share their point of view. This ensures that they are all engaged and ready should they be called on. VIDEO – starts w/ intro and review of skills; starting video with the actual skill practice 79

80 Increasing Student Exposure to Lesson Content
Additional practice activity Reflective writing assessment Homework Integration activities Journal page The program was developed with a variety of activities that allow you to extend the learning about the lesson content beyond the lesson content itself. There is enough depth in the program that you could do a Second Step program activity almost every day. Additional practice activities are short activities that provide further opportunity to practice the specific skills introduced and explored in each lesson. The reflective writing assessment is a formative assessment that allows students and teachers to see whether students are understanding the content. Each lesson includes an optional homework assignment. Many are designed to be done at home with a parent or other involved adult. Each lesson also includes lesson ideas for incorporating Second Step concepts and skills into three subject areas: language arts or social studies, health or science, and media and technology. Journal pages are provided for each lesson so students can journal about topics specific to that lesson and express their own opinion and learning about the subject. 80

81 Five Program Themes Each level includes the following five themes:
Empathy and communication Bullying prevention Emotion management Coping with stress (grades 7 and 8) Problem-solving Decision-making (grade 7) Goal-setting (grade 8) Substance abuse prevention Each of the grade levels includes the following themes: Empathy and communication Bullying prevention Emotion management Problem solving Substance abuse prevention As students move to grades 7 and 8, some of those themes are developed further, more specifically to developmental needs and challenges of those grades. For example, students learn how to cope with stress in both 7th and 8th grades. Problem-solving is extended to include decision making in grade 7 and goal setting in grade 8. Each grade level starts with empathy and communication skills because they are foundational to the rest of the program and are essential for working with others. Bullying is addressed early in the program. Substance abuse prevention is last as it incorporates all of the skills students are learning throughout the program. Bridgid/Sabina: The following were in your original speaker’s notes. I wasn’t sure what they meant. Please incorporate if you think it is not already covered. I don’t think we should even mention gang prevention here. Interwoven throughout Scenarios Academic Bullying leads to violence or aggression Substance use Throughout social elements Every theme from old - except gang prevention 81

82 Substance Abuse Prevention Tobacco, Marijuana, Alcohol and Inhalants
Health, personal and social consequences of using alcohol and other drugs Preferred future Making good decisions about friends Normative education Resistance skills Making a commitment Bridgid/Sabina – I totally made this up. Please help! Substance abuse lessons are taught in all three grades. Students learn the facts about health and social consequences of substance abuse. They talk about what they want in the future and how that can be impacted by using alcohol and other drugs. Students also learn about the true substance abuse norms in their school and across the nation and that their perceptions are often not the reality. They focus on positive decision making and how to choose friends who support their decision not to use. Finally, they end the substance abuse lessons by making a commitment not to use. 82

83 Implications for Prevention Programming
Need to give kids life and social skills, not just knowledge about bullying Need to develop secondary and tertiary programs, not just primary prevention programs Bullying programs need to consider incorporating discussion of sexual harassment and (homophobic language; Birkett & Espelage, 2010). 67 bullying prevention programs in US, only five discuss sexual harassment or sexual orientation issues. Peers influence has to be considered in developing and evaluating prevention/intervention programs 67 bullying prevention programs, only one attempts to target and shift peer norms.

84 Implications for Prevention Programming
Recognize that students are witnessing and involved in violence in their homes. We need to give them alternatives to violence for solving problems and conflicts. Consider how the use of technology is influencing relationships and talk to kids about responsible use of technology.

85 Realistic Strategies Simple strategies can help to decrease bullying
Use data to make decisions (i.e., Increase hallway monitors; reduce time between classes) Involve PE teachers and coaches in stopping bullying behaviors With your support, students can play an important role in decreasing bullying Implement a procedure to allow students to confidentially repot bullying incidents Take all bullying reports seriously! Create a confidential reporting system Have an open door policy with counselors to address the needs of students involved in bullying

86 Realistic Strategies Make sure your school has an anti-bullying policy that is consistent with state and federal policies Make sure the adult workplace models healthy social relationships Work respectfully and collaboratively with families Use videos and classroom discussion guides to talk about the detrimental effects of bullying Use social-emotional learning activities to create a positive school climate Use a positive behavioral interventions and supports to respond effectively to student behaviors

87 Realistic Strategies 2008 meta-analysis by Ttofi, Farrington, & Baldry found that reductions in bullying were associated with: Parent training Increased playground supervision Non-punitive disciplinary methods Home-school communication Effective classroom rules Effective classroom management Embed in curriculum

88 Thank you! Dorothy L. Espelage Joey Merrin
Joey Merrin

Download ppt "Bully prevention and intervention & Threat assessment"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google