Table of Contents • Abstract • Introduction • Statement of Problem • Literature Review (Pros/Cons, Theorists/ Instructional Strategies) • Statement of Hypothesis • Method/Instruments • Research Design • Threats to Internal/External Validity • Data • Pre/Post Test Results • Correlations • Bell Curve • Discussions/Implication • Student Reflections • References
Abstract The study examined the impact of participation in anti-bullying intervention. The chosen sample group comprised of 27 general education students. A research design, intervention model and dramatic role play was utilized. Analysis of quantitative- data showed that anti-bullying intervention impacted the decrease in class-based bullying. The student focus group resulted in three themes which included 1) exposure to a program, 2) participation in a program through class discussion and group work, and 3) student civility. Sample group’s test results and implications are discussed
Introduction • Bullying has been around for years, but it has never been taken to the extreme as it has today • According to Berthold & Hoover, Slee, Walker, Ramsey & Gresham, “ targets of bullying may suffer greatly in terms of their social and emotional well-being, become anxious, and depressed, isolate themselves from peer groups, and avoid school for fear of being bullied” (in Integrating Bullying Prevention Into School-wide Positive Behavior Support, p.48) • With the help of school-based intervention programs, the frequency of bullying has the ability to be minimized greatly • Many theorists and practioners believe programs have already been put in place to intervene bullying, but too many tragedies are still occurring; so there needs to be more of an effective intervention
Statement of Problem • Bullying has and will be a problem in this world if school-based intervention programs are not effectively put into place • Schools have not done their best to work towards eliminating this problem because we hear about new tragedies so frequently • Tragedies include suicides, depression, long and short term health effects • Unawareness is the main problem • According to Limber & Nation 2003, “not only does bullying harm both its intended victims and its perpetrators, it also may affect the climate of schools and, indirectly, the ability of all students to learn to the best of their abilities.” (p.1)
Pros of Intervention Review of Literature: • All of these sources include pros of intervention and how it will benefit schools to prevent bullying. • In the article “Integrating Bullying Prevention into School-wide Positive Behavior Support”, Simonsen mentions how consequences for bullying needs to be more severe. In addition, he mentions how students respond most to intervention with integrity (Good, McIntosh & Geitz, 2011) • In the article “Understanding and Dealing with Bullying in Schools”, Smokowski & Kopasz mention strategies that were proven to transform the school climate like reaching out to victims, set clear consequences and enforce them, supervise students during breaks, engage students in activities related to bullying and create community action teams. (Yerger & Gehret, 2011) • Young & Ward talk about incorporating literature into teaching anti-bullying . (Young & Ward, 2011)
Theorists/Practioners Review of Literature: • Theorists include Dr. Dan Olweus, Maria Montessori, Susan Limber, Maury Nation & TonjaNansel that believe anti-bullying programs would decrease bullying in schools • Olweus believes there are two true preventive approaches to bullying: a) teaching all students the skills needed without bullying b) changing aspects of school culture. (Limber & Nation, 2003) • Limber & Nation believe that adopting comprehensive approaches to reduce bullying will change students’ behavior and attitudes giving teachers the willingness to intervene. (Limber & Nation, 2003) • Nansel feels that bullying needs serious attention for future research and preventative actions (Nansel, Overpeck, Phila, Ruan, Morton-Simons & Scheidt, 2001) • Montessori has a character education model that should be incorporated at an early age to instill important values of good character that will decrease bullying behavior. (Lombardi, 2010)
Current Instructional Strategies Review of Literature • According to the World Health Organization in 1992, “anti-bullying interventions are promoted via the Health Promoting Schools Frame particularly in Europe.” • Instructional strategies have been put in place that include school-wide interventions including School-Wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS), The Bullying Prevention in Positive Behavior Support (BP-PBS), and The Social Skills Group Intervention (S.S. GRIN) These programs have an overall goal to promote positive social and learning environments. These also focus on the students outcomes of bullying, social relations and safety. (Good & McIntosh, 2011) • Instructional strategies are world-wide which include countries like Italy, Canada, England, etc. (Ferguson, San Miguel & Kilburn, 2007 ) • Character Education has been put in place to teach respect, morality and values (Berkowitz & Bier, 2005).
Statement of Hypothesis Integrating anti-bullying lessons and character education over a five-week period once a week 90 minutes a day with 27 third grade students at P.S. X in Brooklyn, New York will decrease anti-social behavior and increase student civility. This will be measured by integrating role play into the lessons.
Method Participants • 27 3rd grade gifted students (ethnicity: 26 African Americans and 1 Asian) • 1 Teacher • 1 Principle Instruments • Consent forms • Parent Survey • Student Survey • Pre-test • Post-test • Student-made performance skits • Checklist during Role Play Performance • Bullying Incident Reports • Class Bullying Reports Bar Graph • Role Play Rubric
Research Design/ Threats to Validity External Validity Internal Validity • Selection-Maturation Interaction • Pre-Test Treatment • Specificity of Variables • Experimenter Effects • History • Maturation • Testing/Pre-test Sensitization • Instrumentation • Mortality • Differential Selection of Subjects • Research Design: Pre-Experimental • One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design • Symbolic Design: OXO • Single group is pretested (O), exposed to a treatment (X), and post tested (O). • The same treatment will be given to one group once a week for four weeks two periods a day. -- Students will be split up into 5 groups of 4 and 5 for the cumulative assignment to perform dramatic role play
Procedure • Pre-Test Administration • Bullying Instruction (5 weeks, once a week) • Read Alouds • Class Work Activities (making lists, making a bar graph) • Strategies • Open Discussion • Role Play Rehearsal • 5 groups of 4 or 5 • Assign group jobs (leader, reporter, errand monitor, time keeper, presenter) • Role Play Performance • Rubric to Assess • Post-Test Administration
Pre-Test/Post Test • “Bullying Situations” • Parent Survey • Demographics, Attitude, Frequency • Student Survey • Demographics, Attitude, Frequency • Bullying Incident Reports • Dramatic Role Play Rubric
Pre Test/Post Test Data • This graph shows that Class X’s pre-test average was 72%. With the informative class sessions and the cumulative assignment, Class X’s post-test average is 85%. This is a 13% increase from the pre-test.
37% of the 27 parents disagreed to their child being a victim of bullying. There was no correlation between children not being victims and the pre-test scores (Bullying Situations) 62% of the 27 parents agreed to their child being a victim of bullying. There was a fair correlation of 0.43 for students who have been victims and pre-test scores (Bullying Situations)
18% of 27 parents disagree to talk to their child about bullying on a continuous basis. There was a very high negative correlation of -0.75 between not talking with child about bullying and pre-test scores(Bullying Situations) 81% of 27 parents agree to talk to their child about bullying on a continuous basis. There was a very high positive correlation of 0.70 between agreeing to talk to their child about bullying and pre test scores(Bullying Situations)
44% of 27 parents disagreed to their children having access to social media. There was no correlation between children having access to pre-test scores(Bullying Situations). This might be the reason for low pre-test scores. 55% of 27 parents agreed to their children having access to social media. There was no correlation between children having access to pre-test scores (Bullying Situations). This might be the reason for low pre-test scores.
Bell Curve Mean: 84.8 Median: 90 SD:12.28 Variation: 151 Mean: 72.04 Median: 75 SD: 14.22 Variation: 189
Discussions • Research shows that students test scores increased by 13% from their pre-test and their post-test in one month • The action research results supports the theorists ideologies and current research: • The Olweus Intervention Model: School Based, Class Based, Individual Based • Implementing drama into bullying interventions • Providing effective strategies • Speaking up for others in the occurrence of bullying through Bullying Incident Reports
Implications • The researcher presumes that there was a connection between students not having an anti-bullying program at school and poor pre-test results • The researcher presumes there is a connection between students having an anti-bullying intervention for 4 weeks and high post-test results. • However, more research is needed due to the inability to intervene directly to the entire school
Students Reflections Q: Was this intervention or bullying program helpful in your class and school environment? Why or why not? A1: “It was helpful in my class because it taught us how people bully” A2: “Yes, it was because more people stopped bullying me.” A3: “Yes, because we don’t usually have the program in our school.” A4: “Yes, because I am starting to control my anger a little.” A5: “The intervention was helpful because now I have strategies to protect myself from a bully.”
References Bandyopadhyay, S., Cornell, D.G., & Konold, T.R. (2009). Validity of Three School Climate Scales to Assess Bullying, Aggressive Attitudes, and Help Seeking. The School Psychology Review v, 30(3) 338-355. Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/publications/spr/pdf/spr383bandyopadhyay.pdf Berkowitz, M.W., & Bier, M.C. (2005). What Works In Character Education: A research-driven guide for educators. University of Missouri- St. Louis. Retrieved from http://www.rucharacter.org/file/practitioners_518.pdf Cook, C.R. , Williams, K. , Guerra, N.G., Kim, T.E., & Sadek, S. (2010). Predictors of Bullying and Victimization in Childhood and Adolescence: A Meta-analytic Investigation. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/spq-25-2-65.pdf Cornell, D.G. (2011). Student Threat Assessment: Virginia Youth Violence Project Curry School of Education University of Virginia Retrieved fromhttp://youthviolence.edschool.virginia.edu/pdf/threatchap.pdf Farrington, D.P., & Ttofi, M.M. (2009). School-Based Programs to Reduce Bullying and Victimization. Campbell Systematic Reviews. Retrieved from http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.campbellcollaboration.org%2Flib%2Fdownload%2F718%2F&ei=N0vATrjfL-HW0QHx_ZRJ&usg=AFQjCNGOvuMdtj1l5QZsTBcQZ4sEWMnLCA&sig2=0Uw4GBjkg5SbUFTuC8gRdA Fekkes, M., Pijpers, F.I.M., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P. (2005). Bullying: Who does what, when and where? Involvement of children, teachers and parents in bullying behavior. Health Education Research. Retrieved from http://her.oxfordjournals.org/content/20/1/81.full.pdf+html Ferguson, C.J., San Miguel, C., & Kilburn, J.C. Jr (2007). The Effectiveness of School-Based Anti-Bullying Programs: A Meta-Analytic Review. Georgia State University Criminal Justice Review. Retrieved from http://www.tamiu.edu/~CFERGUSON/bully.pdf Finger, L.R., Craven, R.G., Marsh, H.W., & Parada, R.H. (2004). Characteristics of Effective Anti-Bullying Interventions: What Research Says.SELF Research Centre University of Western Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/05pap/fin05420.pdf
References Good, C.P., McIntosh, K., & Geitz, C. (2011). Integrating Bullying Prevention Into School-Wide Positive Behavior Support. Teaching Exceptional Children v. 44 no. 1.Retrieved from http://njbullying.org/documents/BullyingPosBehSupports.pdf Hall, H.C., & Sewell, D.T.(2003). Teachers’ Attitudes toward Character Education and Inclusion in Family and Consumer Science Education Curriculum. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, Vol. 21, No. 1. Retrieved from http://www.natefacs.org/JFCSE/v21no1/v21no1Sewell.pdf Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, Cyber bullying, and Suicide. Archives of Suicide Research, 14(3), 206‐221. Retrieved from http://www.cyberbullying.us/cyberbullying_and_suicide_research_fact_sheet.pdf Limber, S & Nation, M. (2003). Bullying Among Children and Youth. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved from http://www.ojjdp.gov/jjbulletin/9804/bullying2.html Lombardi, Emily (2010). Character Education: Integration of an Ancient Theory. ESSAI: Vol. 7, Article 32. Retrieved from http://dc.cod.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1127&context=essai&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D1%26ved%3D0CCAQFjAA%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fdc.cod.edu%252Fcgi%252Fviewcontent.cgi%253Farticle%253D1127%2526context%253Dessai%26rct%3Dj%26q%3DLombardi%252C%2520Emily%252C%25202010%2520character%2520education%26ei%3DsfWUTsmFCqT10gG5qa3ABw%26usg%3DAFQjCNHeH1s0UPH2T3qtZn6uDgsUKUaleQ%26sig2%3Dyx5xgfdSUjq8QzPzxigkpA#search=%22Lombardi%2C%20Emily%2C%202010%20character%20education%22 Nansel, T., Overpeck, M., Phila, R.S., Ruan, W.J., Morton-Simons, B. & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying Behaviors Among US Youth: Prevalence and Association With Psychosocial Adjustment. American Medical Association, Vol 285, No. 16. Retrieved from http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/285/16/2094.full.pdf+html Narvaez, D. & Lapsley, D.K. (2006). Teaching Moral Character: Two Strategies for Teacher Education. Center for Ethical Education University of Notre Dame. Retrieved from http://www.nd.edu/~dnarvaez/documents/NarvaezLapsleyTeacher.pdf National Center for Educational Statistics and Bureau of Justice Statistics (2009). Indicators of School Crime and Safety. Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/iscs09.pdf
References Person, A.E., Moiduddin, E., Hague-Angus, M., & Malone, L.M. (2009).Survey of Outcomes Measurement in Research on Character Education Programs. United States Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.servicelearning.org/filemanager/download/9060_survey_outcomes_measurement.pdf Peterson, J.S., & Ray, K.E. (2006). Bullying and the Gifted: Victims, Perpetrators, Prevalence, and Effects. Purdue University. Retrieved from http://www.nagc.org/uploadedFiles/GCQ/GCQ_Articles/Bullying%20-%20Spring%202006.pdf Raskauskas, J., & Modell, S. (2011). Modifying Anti-Bullying Programs to Include Students With Disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children v.44 no. 1. Retrieved from http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.44 Rivers, I., Poteat, V. Noret, N., & Ashurst, N. (2009). Observing Bullying at School: The Mental Health Implications of Witness Status. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/spq-24-4-211.pdf Sylvester, R. (2011). Teacher as Bully: Knowingly and Unintentionally Harming Students. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin v. 77 no. 2. Retrieved from http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhl?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.44 Williams, K.R., & Guerra, N.G. (2007). Prevalence and Predictors of Internet Bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41. Retrieved from http://www.jahonline.org/webfiles/images/journals/jah/zaq11207000S14.pdf Williams, K., Chambers, M., Logan, S., & Robinson, D. (1996). Association of common health symptoms with bullying in primary school children. British Medical Journal, 3(13) 17- 19. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2351438/ Yerger, William ; Gehret, Cliff. (2011) Understanding and Dealing With Bullying in Schools. The Educational Forum, 75: 315-26. Retrieved from: http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.44 Young, Terrell A; Ward, Barbara A. (2011) Bullies in Recent Books for Children and Young Adults. Reading Horizons v. 51 no. 1. Retrieved from: http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtm l?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.44