Program Puts Smackdown on Bullying

Program Puts Smackdown on Bullying
By John Gever, Senior Editor, MedPage Today
Published: February 06, 2012

Reviewed by Robert Jasmer, MD; Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco and Dorothy Caputo, MA, RN, BC-ADM, CDE, Nurse Planner


Action Points
An integrated program to encourage respectful student behavior in schools reduced the number of teacher-reported bullying incidents and the prevalence of peer rejection.

Point out that when children were older, the program appeared relatively more effective in reducing peer rejection.


An integrated program to encourage respectful student behavior in schools reduced the number of teacher-reported bullying incidents and the prevalence of peer rejection, researchers said.

In a randomized trial conducted in 37 Maryland public schools, students in elementary schools participating in the program were significantly less like to experience verbal teasing and threats, as well as physical violence from other children as reported by teachers, according to Catherine P. Bradshaw, PhD, of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, and colleagues.

Peer rejection -- appearing to have few friends or being the target of evident dislike by classmates -- was also significantly less common in schools using the multifaceted School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS) program.

The benefits came despite an increase in risk factors for bullying during the four-year study, the researchers indicated in the February issue of Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine.

"The effects of SWPBIS on bullying are encouraging and consistent with policymakers' and researchers' emphasis on school climate and culture as potential targets for bullying prevention efforts as an alternative to zero-tolerance policies," Bradshaw and colleagues wrote.

Based on previous sociobehavioral research, the SWPBIS is intended to create an overall school environment that discourages aggressive behaviors, the researchers explained.

Several behavioral expectations are stressed to students, such as "be respectful, responsible, and ready to learn," in all school-related activities, with discipline invoked for violations, but positive reinforcement used as well.

In the study, 21 elementary schools were randomly chosen to use the program with students in kindergarten, and first, and second grades, which continued for four years. Another 16 schools served as controls. Nearly 12,000 students from the 37 schools were included in the study.

Bradshaw and colleagues reported results from three-level hierarchical modeling that took into account risk factors for bullying and peer rejection:

Gender
Grade level at baseline
Special education status
Free and reduced-cost meal status
Ethnicity

Teacher-reported incidents of victimization also were included.

For both bullying and peer rejection, risk factors increased over the four years of the study. Nevertheless, the researchers wrote, "children in the SWPBIS schools displayed significantly less bullying behavior (gamma statistic -0.02, t=-2.60, P<0 data-blogger-escaped--0.03="-0.03" data-blogger-escaped-.05=".05" data-blogger-escaped-and="and" data-blogger-escaped-br="br" data-blogger-escaped-children="children" data-blogger-escaped-compared="compared" data-blogger-escaped-control="control" data-blogger-escaped-gamma="gamma" data-blogger-escaped-in="in" data-blogger-escaped-less="less" data-blogger-escaped-over="over" data-blogger-escaped-p="p" data-blogger-escaped-rejection="rejection" data-blogger-escaped-schools.="schools." data-blogger-escaped-statistic="statistic" data-blogger-escaped-t="-2.32," data-blogger-escaped-the="the" data-blogger-escaped-time="time" data-blogger-escaped-with="with">
The only factor that was associated with the magnitude of the difference between intervention and control schools was age level with respect to peer rejection. When children were older, the SWPBIS program appeared relatively more effective in reducing this aspect of victimization.

However, Bradshaw and colleagues noted several important limitations to the study, including the reliance on teacher reports without input from students themselves or independent observers.

Another was that the effect sizes were modest, leading the researchers to suggest that a cost-benefit analysis could be instructive.

On the other hand, they also cited several ways in which the program could be made more effective. These included the possibility of adding more specific anti-bullying measures to the program and involving parents in it.

Also, focusing some elements of the program on individual children considered at risk to be perpetrators or victims of bullying could be helpful as well, Bradshaw and colleagues said.

The study was funded by the CDC, the National Institute of Mental Health, and the Institute of Education Sciences.

Study authors all declared they had no relevant financial interests.

Primary source: Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine
Source reference:
Waasdorp T, et al "The impact of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on bullying and peer rejection: a randomized controlled effectiveness trial" Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2012; 166: 149-156.