PREVENTING BULLYING & VIOLENCE IN SCHOOLS AND …...Cyber-Bullying Prevalence • 7% of students in...
Transcript of PREVENTING BULLYING & VIOLENCE IN SCHOOLS AND …...Cyber-Bullying Prevalence • 7% of students in...
PREVENTINGBULLYING&VIOLENCEINSCHOOLSANDBEYOND
DorothyL.Espelage,[email protected]:http://www.psych.ufl.edu/espelage/Twitter:DrDotEspelage
FUNDINGSOURCES&DISCLAIMER
ResearchwassupportedbyCentersforDiseaseControl&Prevention(#1U01/CE001677)toDorothyEspelage(PI);Opinions,findings,andconclusionsorrecommendationsexpressedinthispresentationarethoseoftheauthor(s)anddonotnecessarilyreflectthoseoftheCDC
[Analysesandmanuscriptpreparationwassupportedthroughaninter-personnelagencyagreement(IPA)betweenUniversityofFlorida(Espelage)andtheCDC(17IPA1706096).]
ResearchwassupportedbyNIJGrant(MUOFX-0022)toDorothy
Espelage(PI);Opinions,findings,andconclusionsorrecommendationsexpressedinthispresentationarethoseoftheauthor(s)anddonotnecessarilyreflectthoseoftheDepartmentofJustice
EspelageResearchLab▫ SOCIAL-ECOLOGY&SCHOOL-BASEDPREVENTION(Espelage&Swearer,2003;Espelage,2012,2014)
▫ EXPOSURETOVIOLENCESTUDY(Espelage,1998;Low&Espelage,2014)
▫ SOCIALNETWORKANALYSISSTUDY(Birkettt&Espelage,2014;Espelage,Holt,&Henkel,2003;Espelage,Green,&Wasserman,2007;Espelage,Green,&Polanin,2012)
▫ SEXUALHARASSMENT,DATINGVIOLENCE,&BULLYINGSTUDIES(Holt&Espelage,2003;Holt&Espelage,2005;Espelage&Holt,2006;Espelage,Basile,&Hambuger,2012,2014)
▫ THEORYOFMIND,EMPATHY,&PEERRELATIONS(Espelageetal.,2004;Mayberry&Espelage,2006)
▫ SEXUALVIOLENCE,&BULLYING(Poteat&Espelage,2006;Espelageetal.,2008;Espelageetal.,2012)
▫ YOUTH&MENTALHEALTHOUTCOMES(Espelage,Aragon,Birkett,&Koenig,2008;Poteat,Espelage,&Koenig,2009;Birkett,Espelage,&Koenig,2009;Robinson&Espelage,2012,2013)
▫ STUDENTSWITHDISABILITIES-Victimization&PsychologicalCorrelates&SELprevention(Roseetal.,2010;Rose&Espelage,2012;Espelage,Rose,&Polanin,2015)
▫ SCHOOLCLIMATE,ACADEMICENGAGEMENT(Espelageetal.,2014,2015)
Policies & Procedures –Behavioral
Expectations (PBIS)
Ongoing ALL Staff Training
Effective Violence Prevention
Social-Emotional
Competences
InterconnectedRisks
TrustingRelationships
Supportive Schools
Bullying/AggressionSchool Violence
InterconnectedProtective
Factors
Prosocial Peers
EspelageMantra:WithAwarenessComesMisperception
MisperceptioninMedia ScientificEvidence-Bullyingisanepidemic. -BullyRatesVary-Bully-suicidelinked. -BullyOnlyOneofMany
Predictors-Bullyareyoungcriminals. -Bulliesarediverseintheir
outcomes-Bulliesneedtobepunished. -IgnoresGroupPhenomena-Bullies–dysfunctionalfamilies -Goodkidsgetinvolvedinbullying-Bullyingishard-wiredinyouth -Environmentmatters–gene
expression
DefinitionofBullying(CDC;Gladdenetal.,2014)
Bullyingisunwantedaggressivebehavior(s)amongschool-agechildrenthathasahighlikelihoodofcausingphysicalorpsychologicalharmorinjuryandischaracterizedby:
1)animbalanceofrealorperceivedpowerthatfavorstheaggressor(s);
2)isrepeatedorhasahighlikelihoodofbeingrepeated;
3)Thevictim(s)ofbullyingmayfeelintimidated,demeaned,orhumiliatedasaresultoftheaggression.
ComponentsMatter(Ybarra,Espelage,&Mitchell,2014;JAH)
• Nationally-representativesamples:(1)2008:1,15712-to17-year-olds;(2)2010-11:3,98913-to18-year-olds.
• Youthwhoreportedneitherdifferentialpowernorrepetitionhadthelowestratesofinterferencewithdailyfunctioning.
• Youthwhoreportedeitherdifferentialpowerorrepetitionhadhigherrates.
• Highestratesofinterferencewithdailyfunctioningwereobservedamongyouthwhoreportedbothdifferentialpowerandrepetition;theseyouthreporthighestlevelofhelplessness.
• Youthwerevictimsofonlinegeneralizedpeeraggression(30%)orbothonlinegeneralizedpeeraggressionandcyberbullying(16%)butrarelycyberbullyingalone(1%).
BullyingPrevalence
Among3rd–8thgraders:15%ChronicallyVictimized17%RingleaderBullies8%Bully-Victims60%Bystanders
Only13%intervenetohelpvictim(Espelage,2015)
Cyber-BullyingPrevalence
• 7%ofstudentsinU.S.publicschoolsnationwidereportedbeingcyberbulliedin2013(Zhang,Musu-Gillette,&Oudekerk,2016).
• Rateofcyberbullyingislowerthantherateofface-to-facebullyingvictimization(22%),th
• Cyberbulliedstudentswerelesslikelytonotifyanadultthanface-to-facebullyingvictims(23%vs.39%;Zhangetal.,2016).
• Reviewofcyberbullyingliteraturebytheratetobeanywherebetween4%and78%(Aboujaoude,Savage,Starcevic,&Salame,2015).
TransactionalAssociationsBetweenSchool-Based
Aggression/Bullying&Cyberbullying
This research was supported by Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (#1U01/CE001677) to Dorothy Espelage (PI)
MethodParticipants ◦ 1,132 students (49.1% female) ◦ 3 cohorts (5th, 6th, 7th graders) ◦ Assessed across 4 waves including
Spring/Fall 2008, Spring/Fall 2009 ◦ Racially diverse (51% Black; 34% White;
3% Hispanic; 3% Asian; 9% Other)
BullyingPerpetration&CyberbullyingPerpetration
0.131
0.499 0.590 -0.102(ns)
0.2790.114
0.2580.209
0.117
-0.239
0.280
0.143
0.5320.490BullyPerp(T1)
CyberbullyPerp(T1)
CyberbullyPerp(T2)
CyberbullyPerp(T3)
BullyPerp(T2)
BullyPerp(T3)
BullyPerp(T4)
CyberbullyPerp(T4)
0.253
0.294
Figure1.ModelFit:χ2(219,n=1132)=945.318;RMSEA=0.0542(0.0506;0.0577);NNFI=.0975;CFI=0.980
0.184
Espelage,Rao,&Craven,2013
BullyingVictimizationandCyberbullyingPerpetration
0.564
0.187
Figure2.ModelFit:χ2(222,n=1132)=854.147;RMSEA=0.0486(0.0453;0.0525);NNFI=.0965;CFI=0.972
BullyVictim(T2)
BullyVictim(T1)
BullyVictim(T3)
BullyVictim(T4)
CyberbullyPerp(T2)
CyberbullyPerp(T1)
CyberbullyPerp(T3)
CyberbullyPerp(T4)0.543 0.115
0.452 0.582 0.313
0.160 0.258
0.195
0.278
0.077
0.101
0.279
0.0640.100
Espelage,Rao,&Craven,2013
Bullying-SexualViolencePerpetrationPathwayAmongMiddleSchoolStudents
ThisresearchwassupportedbyCentersforDiseaseControl&Prevention(#1u01/ce001677)toDorothyEspelage(PI)
Do r o t h y L . E s p e l a g e , P h . D . U n i v e r s i t y o f F l o r i d a L i s a D e L a R u e , P h . D .
U n i v e r s i t y o f S a n F r a n c i s c o &
K a t h l e e n C . B a s i l e , P h . D . D i v i s i o n o f V i o l e n c e P r e v e n t i o n
C e n t e r s f o r D i s e a s e C o n t r o l & P r e v e n t i o n , A t l a n t a , G e o r g i a Me r l e E . H ambu r g e r , P h . D .
Jou rna l o f Ado le s cent Hea l th (2012 ) , J ou rna l o f I n te rpe r sona l V io lence (2014 )
2008-2015 CDC-NIJ Study Participants
} Demographics: – 3549 students (49.1% female) – 3 cohorts (5th, 6th, 7th graders) – Racially diverse (51% Black, 34% White) – 60% Free/reduced lunch
7 waves of data collection (from spring 2008-spring 2015)
Percentages of Youth who Bully
Percentages of Youth Who Engage in Homophobic Name-Calling
Longitudinal Middle School Results
BullyingPerpetration
Wave1
HomophobicTeasing
PerpetrationWave1
SexualHarassmentPerpetration
Wave1
SexualHarassmentPerpetrationWave2(5)
Controllingfor:
+
+
+
+
+
(Espelage, Basile, & Hamburger, 2012; Espelage, Basile, & De La Rue, 2014)
LongitudinalHighSchoolResults(Mediator–HomophobicName-calling)
BullyingPerpetration
HomophobicPerpetration
SexualViolencePerpetration
HomophobicVictimization
B=0.41(0.03)
B=1.9(0.16)AOR=6.73
B=1.21(0.21)OR=3.31
B=-0.67(0.18)AOR=0.51
B=0.13(0.01)
(Espelage,Basile,etal.,2018)
MODERATORS (ESPELAGE ET AL., UNDER REVISION)
• Traditional masculinity ideology – Linked to gender-based harassment (Horn, 2007, Parrott, 2009, Pleck, 1995) • High rates of bullying in middle school and high levels of
traditional masculinity predicted sexual violence perpetration six years later, effect stronger for males than females.
• Dismissive attitudes toward sexual harassment – Associated with greater sexual violence perp and victimization (Charmaraman, Jones, Stein, & Espelage, 2013; Rogers et al., 2017) • High rates of bullying in middle school and high levels of
dismissiveness of sexual harassment predicted sexual violence perpetration six years later, effect stronger for males than females.
DISCUSSION • A comprehensive approach that addresses
the climate that may give potential perpetrators the license to perpetrate is important and may diffuse risk for sexual violence perpetration later in high school and emerging adulthood.
• Another important piece of prevention programming suggested by this research is counteracting perceptions of gender non-conformity (Messerschmidt, 2000; Meyer, 2008).
ProtectiveFactorsforSexualViolence:UnderstandingHow
TrajectoriesRelatetoPerpetrationinHighSchool
KathleenC.Basile,PhDaWhitneyRostad,PhDaRuthW.Leemis,MPHa
DorothyL.Espelage,PhDbJordanP.Davis,PhDc
PreventionScience(2018)
aCDCbUniversityofFlorida
cUniversityofSouthernCalifornia
InteractionbetweenBiologicalsexandSexualviolence(SV)perpetration
7
7.5
8
8.5
9
9.5
10
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time
FemalePerp FemaleNonPerp
MalePerp MaleNonPerp
11
11.2
11.4
11.6
11.8
12
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time
FemalePerp FemaleNonPerp
MalePerp MaleNoPerp
EMPATHYSCHOOLBELONGING
ImplicationsforPrevention
• Protective factors are important to identify in order to prevent sexual violence among middle and high school students.
• Addressing empathy and school sense of belonging would be a fruitful area of investigation.
Developmentalmodelofbullying,sexualharassmentanddatingviolence
NIJGrant(MUOFX-0022)toDorothyEspelage(PI)Espelage,Low,Anderson,&DeLaRue,2014
ImplicationsforPrevention• Research must consider multiple contexts to identify
longitudinal predictors, mediators, moderators associated with outcomes for youth who bully and later forms of violence.
• Bullying programs need to incorporate discussion of gender-based name-calling, sexual violence, and gender expression (homophobic language; Birkett & Espelage, 2010; Meyer, 2009, 2010; Espelage, 2016).
Social-EcologicalPerspective
Community School
/Peers
Family Child Society
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Espelage, 2014; Hong & Espelage, 2012)
IndividualCorrelatesofBullyingInvolvement
• Depression/Anxiety • Empathy • Delinquency • Impulsivity • Other forms of Aggression • Alcohol/Drug Use • Positive Attitudes toward Violence/Bullying • Low Value for Prosocial Behaviors
• Forreview(Espelage&Horne,2007;Espelage&Holt,2012)
Family&SchoolRiskFactorsn FAMILY
– Lackofsupervision– Lackofattachment– Negative,criticalrelationships
– Lackofdiscipline/consequences
– Supportforviolence– Modelingofviolence For review (Espelage, 2012; Espelage & Horne, 2007)
n SCHOOL
– Lackofsupervision– Lackofattachment– Negative,criticalrelationships
– Lackofdiscipline/consequences
– Supportforviolence– Modelingofviolence
FamilyXSchoolInteractions(Merrin,Espelage,&Hong,2016)
Meta-Analytic Study Cook, Williams, Guerra, Kim, & Sadek (2010)
• Reviewed 153 studies since 1970 • Youth who bully other students: have
significant externalizing behavior, social competence and academic challenges, negative attitudes toward others, family characterized by conflict
• Peer Status & Bully varied by age: Adolescents who bully have higher peer status than children who bully others
Meta-AnalysisofBullyPreventionProgramsTtofi&Farrington,2011
JournalofExperimentalCriminology
• Mostcomprehensivemeta-analysisthatappliedtheCampbellSystematicReviewprocedures.
• Reviewed44rigorousprogramevaluationsandrandomizedclinicaltrials(RCT)(Ttofi&Farrington,2011).
• Almost2/3ofthestudieswereconductedoutsideoftheUSorCanada.
• 1/3oftheprogramswerebasedontheOlweusBullyPreventionProgram(Olweus,1999).
• Foundthattheprograms,onaverage,wereassociatedwitha20%–23%decreaseinbullyingperpetration,anda17%–20%decreaseinvictimization.
• However,smallereffectsizeswerefoundforRCTdesignsincomparisontonon-RCTdesigns.
Meta-AnalysisofBullyPreventionProgramsTtofi&Farrington,2011
JournalofExperimentalCriminology• Decreasesinratesofvictimizationwereassociatedwith
thefollowingspecialprogramelements:• Non-punitivedisciplinarymethods• parenttraining/meetings• useofvideos,• cooperativegroupwork• greaterdurationandintensityoftheprogram
• However,workwithpeers(e.g.,peermediation)wasassociatedwithanincreaseinvictimization
• Thisiatrogenicfindingisnotnew.Scholarshavearguedforadecadethatpeermediationiscontraindicatedforbullyprevention(Espelage&Swearer,2003).
Meta-AnalysisofBullyPreventionProgramsTtofi&Farrington,2011
JournalofExperimentalCriminology• Decreasesinratesofbullyperpetrationforprogramsthat
included:• parenttraining/meetings• improvedplaygroundsupervision• Non-punitivedisciplinarymethods• classroommanagement• teachertraining• classroomrules• whole-schoolanti-bullyingpolicy• cooperativegroupwork• greaternumberofelementsandtheduration
• Programs-lesseffectiveintheUSandinCanada
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
−0.2
−0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12thGrade Level
Cohe
n's d
Inte
rven
tion
Effe
ct o
n Re
duce
d Bu
llyin
g(H
igh
Valu
es =
Les
s Bu
llyin
g)
Raw Within−Study Anti−Bullying Effect
Meta-Analysis:Yeager,Fong,Lee,&Espelage(2015)
DevelopmentalLens
BullyingPrevention–PushingTheFieldForward• Bullyingco-occurswithothertypesofaggressionandotherriskybehavior(delinquency,AOD).
• Overlappingriskandprotectivefactorsneedtobetargetedinschool-basedprogramsinordertoaddressspectrumofproblembehavior(Catalianoetal.,2002).
37
Social-EmotionalLearning
• Self-awareness:Abilitytoaccuratelyrecognizeone’sownownemotions/thoughtsandhowtheiremotions/thoughtsinfluencetheirbehavior.
• Socialawareness:Abilityforperspectivetakingandempathywithothersofdiverseculturesandbackgroundsinone’sownfamily,school,andcommunity.
• Self-management:Abilitytoregulateone’sownemotions,thoughts,andbehaviorseffectivelyindifferentsituations.
Social-EmotionalLearning
• Relationshipskills:Abilitytoestablishandmaintainhealthyandrewardingrelationshipswithdiverseindividualsandgroups.
• Responsibledecision-making:Abilitytomakeconstructiveandrespectfulchoicesaboutpersonalbehaviorandsocialinteractions.
• ThecorefivesocialemotionallearningcompetenciesasidentifiedbytheCollaborativeforAcademic,Social,andEmotionalLearning(CASEL,2013).See:http://www.casel.org
Social-EmotionalLearning(SEL)• SELfocusesonthesystematicdevelopmentofa
coresetofsocialandemotionalskillsthathelpyouthmoreeffectivelyhandlelifechallenges,makebetterdecisions,andthriveinboththeirlearningandtheirsocialenvironmentsthroughaclimatethatsupportsthepracticingofskills.
• Ameta-analysisof213programsfoundthatifaschoolimplementsaqualitySELcurriculum,theycanexpectbetterstudentbehaviorandan11percentileincreaseintestscores(Durlak,Weissberg,Dymnicki,Taylor,&Schellinger,2011).
40
Tayloretal.(2017)Meta-analysis
• Meta-analysisof82school-based,universalsocialandemotionallearning(SEL)interventionsinvolving97,406K-12students• Follow-upoutcomesdemonstratesSEL’senhancementofpositiveyouthdevelopment,includingprosocialbehaviors.
41
SocialEmotionalLearningandFutureHealth
• “Non-cognitiveabilitytoself-controlinchildhoodwaspredictiveofadultoutcomesrangingfromphysicalhealthtocrimetosubstanceabuse.”
(Moffittetal.,2011,ascitedinJonesetal.,2015)
• Jonesetal.(2015)foundstatisticallysignificantassociationsbetweenteacher’smeasuredSocialEmotionalSkillsduringkindergartenandyoungadultsoutcomesineducation,employment,criminalactivity,substanceuse,andmentalhealth.
ImpactofSELprogramsforearlychildhoodpopulationsSELcurriculumhadthegreatesteffectcomparedwithcontrolson:• Children’sskillsrelatedtosocialcompetenceand
behaviorregulation(effectsizerange0.21–0.41)• Emotionunderstanding(effectsizerange0.25–0.48)
(Landryetal.,2014).AMindfulnessprogramtargetingthedevelopmentofSELskillsresultedin:• A24%gaininpeer-nominatedpositivesocialbehaviors.• Againof15%inmathachievement.• Againof20%inself-reportedwell-beingandpro-
sociality.• Areductionof24%inpeer-nominatedaggressive
behaviors.(Schonert-Reichletal.,2015)
MULTI-SITEEVALUATIONOFSECONDSTEP:STUDENTSUCCESSTHROUGHPREVENTION
(SECONDSTEP–SSTP)INPREVENTINGAGGRESSION,BULLYING,&SEXUAL
VIOLENCE
DorothyL.Espelage,Ph.D.Professor,Psychology,UniversityofFlorida
SabinaLow,Ph.D.,
ArizonaStateUniversityJoshPolanin,M.A.,DSG
EricBrown,Ph.D.,UniversityofMiami
JournalofAdolescentHealth(2013),JournalofAppliedDevelopmentalPsychology(2015);
SchoolPsychologyReview(2015)
Research supported by Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (#1U01/CE001677)
Committee for Children, 2008
ProgramGoals
• Research Foundations • RiskandProtectiveFactors• Bullying• BrainResearch• PositiveApproachestoProblemBehavior• DevelopmentalNeedsofYoungAdolescents
GradeLevels&Lessons50minutestoteachacompletelessonEachlessonisdividedintotwopartsthatcanbetaught
separately
47
Grade6SteppingUpHandlingnewresponsibilities15lessons
Grade7SteppingIn
Decisionmaking,stayingincontrol
13lessons
Grade8SteppingAheadLeadership,goal
setting13lessons
MajorStudyObjective
TorigorouslyevaluatetheoveralleffectivenessoftheSecondStep:StudentSuccessThroughPreventionprogramonimpactingbullyingbehavior,peervictimization,andsexualharassment/violenceamongalargesampleof6thgradersinanestedcohortlongitudinaldesign.
48
StudyTimeline
49
Intervention Schools
6th Graders----------------7th Graders----------------8th Graders O1 X1 O2 X2 O3 X3 O4 6th Graders----------------7th Graders----------------8th Graders O1 O2 O3 O4
Comparison Schools
Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring O = Assessment X = Intervention
Year 1 (2010-11)
Year 2 (2011-12)
Year 3 (2012-13)
Results–MiddleSchool
• Reductionsinphysicalaggression,bullying,cyberbullying,homophobicname-calling,&sexualharassmentacrossthree-yearmiddleschoolstudy(Espelageetal.,2014,2015,2016).
• Greaterreductionswhenteachersimplementedwithfidelity&engagedwithprogramastheywouldacademics(Polanin&Espelage,2015).
50
Results–HighSchoolEffects
IndividualsinthetreatmentgroupreportedsignificantlyhigherlevelsofgrowthinschoolbelongingfromT1–T4(b=.013,p=.042),growthinschoolbelongingwasinturnassociatedwithreductionsingrowthinbullyingperpetrationfromT5–T7(b=-.147,p=.067);Espelageetal.,2017.
51
SecondStepIntervention
MiddleSchool–SchoolBelonging
HighSchool–BullyPerpetration
+ -
StudentswithDisabilities–BullyPerpetration(Espelage,Rose,&Polanin,2015;2016)
Teacher/StaffPerceptionsofSchoolCulture:LinkstoStudentReportsofBullying,
Victimization,Aggression,&WillingnesstoIntervene
DorothyL.Espelage,Ph.D.JoshuaPolanin,Ph.D.SabinaLow,Ph.D.
SchoolPsychologyQuarterly(2014)
This research was supported by Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (#1U01/CE001677) to Dorothy Espelage (PI)
School Culture Matters
• “schoolpolicies,attitudesandbehaviorsofteachers,administratorsandthestudentbody,andtheoverallatmosphereorschoolethos,determinetheinternallifeorsocial,emotional,andmotivationclimateoftheschool.”(Kasenetal.,2004).
School Environment Scale
Six scales emerged from factor analyses, measuring teacher/staff PERCEPTIONS OF: • Student intervention (5 items; α = .83) • Staff intervention (5 items; α = .89) • Aggression being a problem (5 items; α = .80) • School is doing professional development/
administrator support (8 items; α = .90) • Positive school climate overall (7 items; α = .85) • Gender Equity/Intolerance of Sexual Harassment (7
items; α = .79)
Final Multi-level Model Variable BullyingPerpetration PeerVictimization PhysicalAggression WillingnesstoIntervene
β(SE) B β(SE) B β(SE) B β(SE) BIntercept .39(.03)** - .96(.04)** - .96(.05)** - 2.03(.04)** -Individual Female -.03(.02) -.03 -.05(.03) -.05 -.20(.03)** -.21 .14(.02)** .14Mother’sEducation .01(.01) .01 .01(.03) .03 -.01(.01) -.03 .02(.01)** .08White .17(.02)** -.15 .11(.05)* .10 -.51(.05)** -.47 .18(.03)** .17Hispanic -.17(.02)** -.17 -.23(.05)** -.23 -.47(.05)** -.46 .09(.03)** .09Asian -.22(.04)** -.07 -.13(.07) -.04 -.64(.06)** -.21 .19(.05)** .06Bi-racial .11(.03)** -.08 -.01(.08) -.01 -.29(.05)** -.2 .12(.03)** .08School-level StudentIntervention .15(.14) .04 -.03(.18) -.01 .19(.20) .05 -.07(.10) -.02StaffIntervention .15(.10) .04 .30(.22) .07 .02(.19) .01 -.02(.11) -.01AggressionProblem -.07(.08) -.04 -.14(.12) -.08 .09(.12) .05 -.18(.06)** -.10SchoolCommitmenttoBullyPrevention
-.20(.06)** -.13 -.42(.09)** -.27 -.17(.08)* -.11 .08(.05) .05
PositiveTeacher-Staff-StudentInteractions
-.01(.11) .01 .14(.16) .04 -.23(.21) -.07 -.13(.08) .02
Genderequity/intoleranceofsexualharassment
-.23(.10)* -.08 -.71(.20)** -.24 -.13(.14) -.05 -.13(.08) -.05
State .05(.05) .05 -.04(.03) -.04 .05(.07) .05 .03(.04) .03Free/ReducedLunch .01(.01) .05 -.01(.01)* -.14 .01(.02)* .26 -.01(.01)* -.12%Female -.66(.29)* -.07 -.71(.32)* -.08 -.45(.42) -.05 .17(.25) .02%White .17(.11) .06 -.49(.15)** -.18 .64(.24)** .23 -.25(.11)* -.09
Final Multi-level Model Variable BullyingPerpetration PeerVictimization PhysicalAggression WillingnesstoIntervene
β(SE) B β(SE) B β(SE) B β(SE) BIntercept .39(.03)** - .96(.04)** - .96(.05)** - 2.03(.04)** -Individual Female -.03(.02) -.03 -.05(.03) -.05 -.20(.03)** -.21 .14(.02)** .14Mother’sEducation .01(.01) .01 .01(.03) .03 -.01(.01) -.03 .02(.01)** .08White .17(.02)** -.15 .11(.05)* .10 -.51(.05)** -.47 .18(.03)** .17Hispanic -.17(.02)** -.17 -.23(.05)** -.23 -.47(.05)** -.46 .09(.03)** .09Asian -.22(.04)** -.07 -.13(.07) -.04 -.64(.06)** -.21 .19(.05)** .06Bi-racial .11(.03)** -.08 -.01(.08) -.01 -.29(.05)** -.2 .12(.03)** .08School-level StudentIntervention .15(.14) .04 -.03(.18) -.01 .19(.20) .05 -.07(.10) -.02StaffIntervention .15(.10) .04 .30(.22) .07 .02(.19) .01 -.02(.11) -.01AggressionProblem -.07(.08) -.04 -.14(.12) -.08 .09(.12) .05 -.18(.06)** -.10SchoolCommitmenttoBullyPrevention
-.20(.06)** -.13 -.42(.09)** -.27 -.17(.08)* -.11 .08(.05) .05
PositiveTeacher-Staff-StudentInteractions
-.01(.11) .01 .14(.16) .04 -.23(.21) -.07 -.13(.08) .02
Genderequity/intoleranceofsexualharassment
-.23(.10)* -.08 -.71(.20)** -.24 -.13(.14) -.05 -.13(.08) -.05
State .05(.05) .05 -.04(.03) -.04 .05(.07) .05 .03(.04) .03Free/ReducedLunch .01(.01) .05 -.01(.01)* -.14 .01(.02)* .26 -.01(.01)* -.12%Female -.66(.29)* -.07 -.71(.32)* -.08 -.45(.42) -.05 .17(.25) .02%White .17(.11) .06 -.49(.15)** -.18 .64(.24)** .23 -.25(.11)* -.09
Final Multi-level Model Variable BullyingPerpetration PeerVictimization PhysicalAggression WillingnesstoIntervene
β(SE) B β(SE) B β(SE) B β(SE) BIntercept .39(.03)** - .96(.04)** - .96(.05)** - 2.03(.04)** -Individual Female -.03(.02) -.03 -.05(.03) -.05 -.20(.03)** -.21 .14(.02)** .14Mother’sEducation .01(.01) .01 .01(.03) .03 -.01(.01) -.03 .02(.01)** .08White .17(.02)** -.15 .11(.05)* .10 -.51(.05)** -.47 .18(.03)** .17Hispanic -.17(.02)** -.17 -.23(.05)** -.23 -.47(.05)** -.46 .09(.03)** .09Asian -.22(.04)** -.07 -.13(.07) -.04 -.64(.06)** -.21 .19(.05)** .06Bi-racial .11(.03)** -.08 -.01(.08) -.01 -.29(.05)** -.2 .12(.03)** .08School-level StudentIntervention .15(.14) .04 -.03(.18) -.01 .19(.20) .05 -.07(.10) -.02StaffIntervention .15(.10) .04 .30(.22) .07 .02(.19) .01 -.02(.11) -.01AggressionProblem -.07(.08) -.04 -.14(.12) -.08 .09(.12) .05 -.18(.06)** -.10
SchoolCommitmenttoBullyPrevention
-.20(.06)** -.13 -.42(.09)** -.27 -.17(.08)* -.11 .08(.05) .05
PositiveTeacher-Staff-StudentInteractions
-.01(.11) .01 .14(.16) .04 -.23(.21) -.07 -.13(.08) .02
Genderequity/intoleranceofsexualharassment
-.23(.10)* -.08 -.71(.20)** -.24 -.13(.14) -.05 -.13(.08) -.05
State .05(.05) .05 -.04(.03) -.04 .05(.07) .05 .03(.04) .03Free/ReducedLunch .01(.01) .05 -.01(.01)* -.14 .01(.02)* .26 -.01(.01)* -.12%Female -.66(.29)* -.07 -.71(.32)* -.08 -.45(.42) -.05 .17(.25) .02%White .17(.11) .06 -.49(.15)** -.18 .64(.24)** .23 -.25(.11)* -.09
Final Multi-level Model Variable BullyingPerpetration PeerVictimization PhysicalAggression WillingnesstoIntervene
β(SE) B β(SE) B β(SE) B β(SE) BIntercept .39(.03)** - .96(.04)** - .96(.05)** - 2.03(.04)** -Individual Female -.03(.02) -.03 -.05(.03) -.05 -.20(.03)** -.21 .14(.02)** .14Mother’sEducation .01(.01) .01 .01(.03) .03 -.01(.01) -.03 .02(.01)** .08White .17(.02)** -.15 .11(.05)* .10 -.51(.05)** -.47 .18(.03)** .17Hispanic -.17(.02)** -.17 -.23(.05)** -.23 -.47(.05)** -.46 .09(.03)** .09Asian -.22(.04)** -.07 -.13(.07) -.04 -.64(.06)** -.21 .19(.05)** .06Bi-racial .11(.03)** -.08 -.01(.08) -.01 -.29(.05)** -.2 .12(.03)** .08School-level StudentIntervention .15(.14) .04 -.03(.18) -.01 .19(.20) .05 -.07(.10) -.02StaffIntervention .15(.10) .04 .30(.22) .07 .02(.19) .01 -.02(.11) -.01AggressionProblem -.07(.08) -.04 -.14(.12) -.08 .09(.12) .05 -.18(.06)** -.10SchoolCommitmenttoBullyPrevention
-.20(.06)** -.13 -.42(.09)** -.27 -.17(.08)* -.11 .08(.05) .05
PositiveTeacher-Staff-StudentInteractions
-.01(.11) .01 .14(.16) .04 -.23(.21) -.07 -.13(.08) .02
Genderequity/intoleranceofsexualharassment
-.23(.10)* -.08 -.71(.20)** -.24 -.13(.14) -.05 -.13(.08) -.05
State .05(.05) .05 -.04(.03) -.04 .05(.07) .05 .03(.04) .03Free/ReducedLunch .01(.01) .05 -.01(.01)* -.14 .01(.02)* .26 -.01(.01)* -.12%Female -.66(.29)* -.07 -.71(.32)* -.08 -.45(.42) -.05 .17(.25) .02%White .17(.11) .06 -.49(.15)** -.18 .64(.24)** .23 -.25(.11)* -.09
Teacher/Staffperceptionsofschoolculture:
LinksToStudentReportsOfGender-basedBullying
SarahRinehart,M.A.UniversityofIllinois,Urbana-Champaign
DorothyL.Espelage,Ph.D.UniversityofFlorida
PsychologyofViolence(2015)
This research was supported by Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (#1U01/CE001677) to Dorothy Espelage (PI)
NextSteps• Bullydown Text-Messaging SEL middle school program (Ybarra, Prescott, & Espelage, 2016). • Gender-enhanced SEL Middle School Trial (Centers for Disease Control & Prevention #1RO1CE002340)
• SEL, Restorative Problem-Solving/Justice, & Student-Led Campaigns (National Institute of Justice w/Univ. of Oregon # 2015-MU-MU-K003]
• Sources of Strength High School Suicide Prevention Evaluation for sexual violence outcomes (Centers for Disease Control & Prevention #CE0002841-01)
Youth-Driven Interventions • Studentvoices-notincorporatedintoschoolsafetyplanningeffortsin
spiteofresearchclearlyshowingthatsomeone(mostoftenpeers)oftenhaspriorknowledgeofaplannedtragicevent.
• Studentsreportavarietyofreasonsfornotcomingforwardbeforehandwiththatinformation(e.g.,distrust,“snitching”).
• Totakeadvantageofthiscriticalinformation,schoolsneedto:• a)involvestudentsmeaningfullyinschoolsafetyplanningeffortsas
co-equalpartnersalongwithschoolstaff,administrators,andparents;
• b)haveanefficient,easymechanismforreportingsuchinformationconfidentially,&
• c)assurestudentsthattheirconcern(s)willbepromptlyactedupon.Inourview,suchchangesarelikelytoincreasestudentinvestmentandparticipationinkeepingtheschoolsafe.
(Vincent,Espelage,Walker,etal.,2017,2018)
Youth-Driven Interventions • Youthdofeelthatschoolsshouldworkhardertoestablish
apositiveschoolclimate.• Adultsneedtopayattentiontoemotionalandphysical
safety.• Youthindicatedthatfairness&equityissuesneedtobe
addresseddirectly.• Researchshowsthatstudentsinschoolswithpositive
climatesaremorelikelytoreportonthesituations,individualsandeventsthatendangeraschool’ssafety.
• Suchaclimatecanalsoimprovestudentbondingandschoolengagementandserveasaprotectivefactoragainstahostofnegativeoutcomesoverthelongtermwithinandbeyondtheschoolcontext.
(Vincent,Espelage,Walker,etal.,2017,2018)
Barriers to Open Communication • Focusgroupswithstudentsidentifiedkeystudentconcerns
thatparticipantsseeasthreatstotheirschool’ssafety&opencommunicationwithadults:
a)bullying,harassmentandaggression,b)weapons,drugsandalcoholoncampus,c)lackofsupportsforstudentswithmentalhealthissues,d)overtdiscriminationamongidentifiedstudentgroupssharingcertaincharacteristics,e)relationalaggressionanddamagingreputation,andf)inequityinallaspectsofeducation.
(Espelageetal.,2018;Vincent,Espelage,Walker,etal.,2017,2018)
Advocatr
(Espelageetal.,2018;Vincent,Espelage,Walker,etal.,2017,2018)
Advocatr
https://advocatr.org
TheImpactofSourcesofStrength,aPrimaryPreventionYouthSuicideProgram,onSexualViolencePerpetrationamongColoradoHigh
SchoolStudents
DorothyL.Espelage,Ph.D.UniversityofFloridaPeterWyman,Ph.D.
UniversityofRochesterTomeiKuehl,MPH
ColoradoDept.ofPublicHealthToddLittle,Ph.D.
TexasTechUniversity
This research was supported by Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (#1U01CE002841) to Dorothy Espelage (PI)
SOURCES OF STRENGTHS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RanDdvzHkjA
SOURCES OF STRENGTHS
SourcesofStrengthemploysaradicallystrength--basedapproachtoprevention.inschools–PEERLEADERS.
SourcesofStrengthfocusesondeveloping
protectivefactors,usingamodelthatisinnovative,interactive,andradicallystrength-based.
Usinganactivelearningmodel,incorporating
art,storytelling,smallgroupsharingandgames.
SourcesofStrengthexplorestheeightprotectivefactors,depictedinthewheelofstrength,todevelopresilientindividualsandcommunities.
EVIDENCE-BASED
Programoutcomeshaveshown:• Increaseinconnectednesstoadults• Increaseinschoolengagement• Increaseinlikelihoodtoreferasuicidalfriend
toanadult• Increaseinpositiveperceptionsofadult
support• Increasedacceptabilityofseekinghelp• Largestincreasesamongststudentswitha
historyofsuicidalideationWyman,,P..etal..(2010).AnoutcomeevaluationoftheSourcesof
Strengthsuicidepreventionprogramdeliveredbyadolescentpeerleadersinhighschools..AmericanJournalofPublicHealth,Vol.100:1653--1661.
Sources of Strength Evaluation:
Sexual Violence Outcomes [(CDC Grant #1 U01 CE002841 - Espelage (PI)]
N=4600
Treatment
SexualViolencePerpetrationW2
R2 =.075
CyberSexualViolence
PerpetrationW2R2 =.047
DismissivenessofSexual
ViolenceW2R2 =.320
SexualViolenceVictimizationW2
R2 =.082
SexualViolencePerpetrationW1
CyberSexualViolence
PerpetrationW1
DismissivenessofSexual
ViolenceW1
SexualViolenceVictimizationW1
.27***(.04)
.21***(.04)
.57***(.01)
29***(.03)
ENHANCINGSCHOOLSAFETYOFFICERS’EFFECTIVENESSTHROUGHONLINEPROFESSIONALDEVELOPMENTTRAINING Dr.DorothyEspelage,Ph.D. Co-PIDr.PhilipPoekert Co-PIDr.WalterLeite,Ph.D.UniversityofFlorida UniversityofFlorida UniversityofFloridaDepartmentofPsychology LastingerCenterforLearning [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
FundingSource:NationalInstituteofJustice(January2018–December2021)
SchoolResourceOfficers(SROs)=PoliceOfficers
• SROsreceiveextensivetrainingtoaddressphysicalsafetyconcernsandcrime.
• Enhancingexistingextensivetrainingwithtrainingincompetenciesspecifictochilddevelopmentandyouthbehavioralandmentalhealthhaspotentialtopavethewayfornation-wideprogressinSROprofessionaldevelopment.
Trauma-InformedApproachestoViolencePrevention
RestorativeProblemSolvingAlthoughfurtherresearchisneeded,thereareverypromisingfindingsendorsingtheuseofRestorativeProblemSolvinginourschools(Froniusetal.,2016).
Conclusions• Perceptions of staff matter – intolerance for sexual harassment is critical to reduce gender-based bullying and other forms of aggression.
• Social-emotional learning program – promise for reducing bullying and sexual violence perpetration
• Program to build stronger relationships in schools could be promising approach to reduce gender-based aggression.
Conclusions
• Strong support for the Bully-Sexual Violence Pathway (homophobic name-calling mediator & moderator)
• Traditional masculinity and dismissiveness of sexual harassment – moderators
• Peer norms matter - need to target these in programs
Conclusions• Addressingaggressionandschoolviolencerequires
understandingtheunderlyingetiologyofthisviolence.• Simply”hardening”ofourschoolshastheriskofcreating
greaterinequities,anxiety,andisolationofstudents,teachers,andfamilies.
• Youthneedtobeauthenticallyengagedineffortstopromoteschoolsafety,socialjustice,equity,andinclusion.
• Alladultswhointeractwithyouthcanbenefitfromtrainingintrauma-informedapproaches,restorativeapproaches,social-emotionallearning,&culturalcompetence.