Focus Group Preliminary Findings Report

Part I. Introduction (Joe)

Our secondary research report shows that there is no systematic approach to anti-bullying

education from the government for school faculty and administration despite all of the negative

impacts that bullying can have. Further research shows that education is vital to preventing

bullying. To maximize the effectiveness of the NAPAB’s messaging and education on bullying,

we have conducted a focus group to determine recent high school graduates’ levels of awareness,

gather their sentiments about bullying and to see how the NAPAB could improve its education

processes for students, parents and school faculty/administration about its cause.

The goal of this focus group was to provide the NAPAB with suggestions from an

audience that has gone through the years in school where bullying mostly occurs. To achieve

this, our moderator guide included questions about parent and teacher awareness and

intervention, questions on bystander intervention and the effectiveness of anti-bullying

organizations such as the NAPAB. Questions like “how do you think anti-bullying organizations

could reach a larger audience? What would be the best way to reach you,” and “What is the best

way to educate young adults on being an active bystander? How do you think anti-bullying

organizations could raise awareness on being an active bystander,” were specifically asked to

gain insight from our participants on ways to improve the NAPAB’s efforts in terms of

communication and education strategies in the future.

The focus group took place on October 9th, 2018. Our focus group started at 6:00 p.m.,

ended at 6:46 p.m. and had four participants. Our questioning lasted 38 minutes and 41 seconds

from our first question to the last comment from a participant. Our team recruited potential

participants by asking in-person, by text or through social media. When recruiting we were

looking for freshman students who were available during the time of our focus group. Overall,

our team used our connections to create a convenience sample in order to get enough

participants. Natalie reached out to people through GroupMe, text message and in-person.

Hannah took the same approach and reached out to people through GroupMe, text message, in-

person and email. Addie reached out to people through text message, GroupMe and in-person.

Joe approached potential participants in-person and through text message. Once recruits agreed

to the focus group, they were texted reminders a week in advance, the day before the focus group

and a few hours prior to the start of the focus group.

Part II. Participants (Natalie)

Participants Characteristics

Name* Age Race Gender Year in

School

Hometown

Taylor Wiens 19 White Female Freshman Olathe, KS

Graham

Heisey

19 White/

Caucasian

Male Freshman Omaha, NE

Sean

Hunwardsen

18 White Male Freshman Eden Prairie,

MN

Ryan

McBride

19 White Male Sophomore St. Louis,

MO

*All names have been changed and a pseudonym has been used.

After going through the focus group, there are some aspects we would like to mention. Most of

our data from our secondary research report focused on females. Due to our struggle with

recruiting participants, we ended up with three males and one female. Also, one of the

participants, Ryan, is currently a sophomore and we wanted to mainly target freshmen. Ryan also

was the only participant to attend an all male, private high school. All of the other participants

attended a medium to large size public high school in the hometown.

Part III. Data Analysis (Hannah and Addie)

The data we collected includes our focus group transcription, our focus group notes and

our self-debriefings. When finished with our data collection, our focus group transcription

contains 6,425 words, we have four pages of notes from our focus group and we have a total of

787 words in our self-debriefings.

When analyzing the data we collected from our focus group, we started by creating

categories based on our main themes. After locating discussions about our categories within our

focus group transcription, we then began grouping topics of discussion into codes based on their

relevance to our main categories. From there, we analyzed each code and found the number of

quotes that went along with each one.

While analyzing our data we found several main categories that emerged. Our first

category is titled “Anti-bullying educational strategies.” This category is important because it

provides insight on our participants first encounters and experiences with bullying as well as how

effective and important bullying education is. Our next category is titled “Cyberbullying.” With

the age of technology, cyberbullying is more prevalent than ever. In this category, participants

shared their views on cyberbullying and the popularity of social media. Next, we titled the

category “In-person bullying” to get our focus group members understanding of in-person

bullying. Our next category is titled “Parent/ Teacher awareness.” Participants expanded both the

awareness and lack of awareness among parents and teachers. Our fifth category is titled

“Bullying in media.” The importance of this category is to provide insight on how the media

portrays bullying and media outlets where bullying occurs. Lastly, our last category is titled

“Gender differences in bullying.” This category highlights the differences between males and

females and the most common forms of bullying between them.

Transcription Table

This is our category-code-quote table. It is hyperlinked above.

Part IV. Findings (Joe, Natalie, Addie)

Category 1

Anti-bullying educational strategies

This category delves into our participants’ sentiments on anti-bullying education and awareness

tactics that they experienced in their time throughout high school. This section of questioning

was used to gain insight on what tactics worked and which ones were ineffective. Though this

covered more beyond just anti-bullying organizations, the information in this category can easily

be used by organizations like the NAPAB. The main subcategories center around anti-bullying

education tactics used in schools such as guest-speakers and the effectiveness of these tactics.

Code 1

Name of Code: Educating through speakers is popular in high school and the

effectiveness varies student to student

Introduction: According to our participants, anti-bullying assemblies with guest-

speakers was the most common form of bullying education in their high schools. Their

comments reveal that this method is not always effective.

Quotes: When asked about their first impression of bullying, many agreed that guest-

speakers were their first impression of bullying within their schools. This led to a discussion

between participants about the effectiveness of these assemblies. “Yeah we had guest speakers

come that didn’t do much,” Ryan said. In response, Taylor said, “Yeah we had some speakers

too, but I don’t think they were very impressionable. I don’t remember, I know we had them, but

I don’t remember them having a huge impact on our school.” Later on in the focus group,

Graham came to this conclusion: “I don’t think, even though that is the main way to do it, I don’t

really think speakers help that much.”

Conclusion: Participants feel that anti-bullying assemblies with guest-speakers are

ineffective in most cases. Often, they leave no impression and do little to increase awareness and

prevent bullying. Though this method may be the most convenient way to reach the majority of a

school’s student body, anti-bullying advocates must evaluate the effectiveness of this method to

develop more effective ones to implement for educating and advocating for anti-bullying

awareness.

Code 2

Name of Code: Emphasizing bullying education in elementary schools due to severity

Introduction: This code shows participants’ ideas on how bullying education should be

implemented in the education system.

Quotes: When asked about how anti-bullying education could be improved, Ryan said, “I

mean like I think like bullying should be focused in elementary schools, like with those teachers.

Like we are in high school, teachers should be there to teach or do their job. Not have to handle

like all these other issues.” Other participants agreed by sharing similar thoughts and emphasized

that children in elementary school are more blatantly mean than young adults in high school.

Participants also think that focusing anti-bullying education in elementary schools would be

more effective than in high schools. “I think that it's hard to talk to younger kids cus they can't

focus for a full hour, I don't know, find a way to talk to them for like 20, 30 minutes I think it'll

be a lot more effective than talking to high schoolers that are like "I don't give a shit" like they

can take this as nap time because they don't want to be stuck in class,” Sean said. Taylor agreed

with this sentiment and made further points. “I think if you talk to kids when they're younger and

let them know that that behavior's not okay, I feel like kids are inherently good and they will

want to please adults. And if they know the behavior is bad at a young age they're more likely to

understand it at an older age,” Taylor said.

Conclusion: Participants believe that implementing anti-bullying education at an early

age will have long-lasting effects that will carry throughout the rest of their time in the school

system and will also have a stronger impact because of their impressionable ages. Further, they

believe that high schoolers are less receptive to these messages that are planted late in their

educational journey.

Code 3

Name of Code: Intervention in bullying cases only happened when the situation was

severe

Introduction: Comments within this code show how participants felt that bystanders

only intervene in severe instances of bullying.

Quotes: Sentiments in this code came out of a conversation about schools’ systematic

approaches to bullying. “I don’t think there was ever a system. There was no week where there

was like anti-bullying week, but like teachers would step in if they saw things like going on that

shouldn’t,” Taylor said. Ryan said something along those lines, but from a different perspective.

“So like going to a high school with all guys, like if someone was I guess getting bullied, maybe

like a teacher would step in, but with it being all guys, usually someone else would step in and

say something. Like it could result in a fight but like everyone in our high school was still

friends,” Ryan said. The moderator then asked “would you say it was very situational with how

the school dealt with it,” and “So like a teacher would step in if it got really bad?” Ryan replied

“yeah” to both questions.

Conclusion: Participants felt that their schools lacked a systematic approach. As a result

of this, teachers had a dominantly reactive approach to addressing instances of bullying.

Additionally, participants felt that teachers would only intervene if bullying was visible enough

to notice, e.g. if a fight broke out.

Code 4

Name of Code: Learning from peers is effective

Introduction: This code reveals participants’ suggestion to use student-body leaders to

spread anti-bullying awareness.

Quotes: This suggestion mainly came from Graham when talking about the effectiveness

of guest-speakers and assemblies for spreading anti-bullying awareness. “I feel like, they should

have like the student leaders like in the grades like focus on that. Like they should always kind of

be there telling them about anti bullying and stuff like that but when there’s a big event that

happens kind of that's when they should sit them down and be like "Alright, listen this really

needs to stop," Graham said. He also said, “I feel like the people who are like kind of what you

would consider like the leaders or like relatively popular in the grade, as long as they aren't the

ones bullying, that people look up to them for a reason that people if they were to talk to people

about it and like carried more weight but I feel that like it depends on like the basis of school by

school.” These comments were based on his experience with his high school class’ student-body

leaders.

Conclusion: Using student leaders to spread anti-bullying messages can be more

effective than guest-speakers. This is dependent on a school-by-school basis, according to

Graham. But, in instances where student leaders have strong connections to their peers, they can

be effective influencers of the student body. Anti-bullying organizations should consider this as a

possible option for spreading their messages within schools.

Code 5

Name of Code: Anti-bullying organizations do not make an impression

Introduction: This code shows that our participants did not believe anti-bullying

organizations were impactful or effective at reducing bullying within schools.

Quotes: When asked how anti-bullying organizations, such as the NAPAB, Taylor said,

“to raise awareness maybe but not to stop it.” Graham also commented, “I feel like a more

obvious presence would help. Instead of being available when they need it, just being available

whenever.”

Conclusion: Anti-bullying organizations only have the potential to increase awareness.

The way they currently exist, they are not effective at stopping or reducing bullying. A more

regular and increased presence within schools will allow anti-bullying organizations to fulfill

their objectives.

Category Conclusion: Schools currently have ineffective approaches to bullying, and use

methods of educating about the issue that are poorly timed and unimpactful for students. In some

schools, it is difficult for teachers to know when to intervene. Anti-bullying organizations should

work closely with schools to create systematic approaches for teachers to take when bullying

occurs. Also, as they currently exist, anti-bullying organizations are making very little difference

in the world of bullying. In order to fulfill their goals, these organizations should increase their

presences within schools, spread messages on a more regular basis and educate younger students

to create a more lasting impact that will stay with students throughout their time within school

systems.

Category 2

Cyberbullying

This category represents all of the statements from our focus group that were directly related to

cyberbullying. Cyberbullying is a form of bullying that happens online, including, but not limited

to, social media, websites, chat rooms. This section directly expresses the feelings teenagers

from our focus group had about cyberbullying. Some codes in this section discuss the prevalence

of cyberbullying compared to other bullying forms, as well as talking about the perception of

cyberbullying.

Code 1

Name of Code: Cyberbullying is more prevalent than other forms of bullying

Introduction: As mentioned in the introduction, this code talks about how the members

of our focus group think that cyberbullying is more prevalent than other forms of bullying. For

example, they think that cyberbullying is more prevalent than in-person and physical bullying,

especially due to the advancement of technology.

Quotes: When our focus group was asked, “Do you think cyberbullying happens more

often now than in-person bullying?” the group unanimously said, “Yeah.” Sean even said,

“Yeah. Most Definitely.” The group clearly thinks that cyberbullying is more prevalent than

other forms of bullying. Graham expanded on the topic when he said, “Yeah I don’t think it’s

physical bullying anymore, it’s bullying on social media and other stuff.” Taylor agreed verbally

by saying, “Yeah social media.” The other group members nodded their head in agreeance. Sean

later said, “I think teachers know a lot of what’s going on in school, but a lot of the bullying

happened outside of school, like outside of class.”

Conclusion: After reading through the quotes that clearly talk about how cyberbullying

is more prevalent than other forms, our group came to a couple conclusions. The first is that we

think cyberbullying actually is more prevalent than in-person bullying. Thanks to the constant

and consistent advancement in technology, cyberbullying is easier to do, therefore bullies choose

to cyberbully their victims rather than bully them in-person. As you read in the quotes section, a

few group participants mentioned cyberbullying on social media. Our group thinks social media

is where the most cyberbullying happens. Social media is free to use and easy to access. People

are also able to easily lie about who they are on social media. This creates the perfect

environment for a bully to thrive. Therefore, we think cyberbullying is now the most popular

form of bullying and we think it happens most often on social media.

Code 2

Name of Code: Responding to drama on social media builds online reputation

Introduction: This code focuses specifically on an element of social media. It was

frequently brought up that when people respond to drama on social media, they build their online

reputation. This building of their online reputation can be in a positive or negative way.

Quotes: This topic was first brought up when Taylor and Sean began talking about

people enjoying drama on social media. Taylor said, “People want to clap-back online. Get lots

of favs and stuff.” To which Sean responded, “Get the retweets.” Taylor and Sean are describing

how people respond to posts on social media in a certain way to get likes, favorites and retweets.

The participants in our focus group talked about how people associate lots of likes, favorites and

retweets with popularity. Popularity can also be seen as building an online reputation. The group

seemed to have mixed feelings about if replies and comments on social media were bullying or

not. Taylor said, “Online, every so often, there’s like drama and someone will clap back but I

don’t know if that is necessarily bullying. I mean it’s not nice, but ya.” When someone says

“clap back” it is slang for responding in to someone who has dissed you in some way.

Sometimes these responses, or clap backs, are mean, offensive and hurtful. The group seemed to

agree that the line is very blurry on whether or not mean comments are bullying or not. Sean then

said, “I mean like my high school had this thing like ‘Think Before You Post’ and like what the

actual long term effects were going to be.” Ryan had a different opinion. He said, “I mean you

just see bullying kinda anywhere. You can click on any tweet that is blown up that has a big

enough thread; you probably find some pretty negative stuff in that tweet or thread I guess.” The

participants in our focus group all agree that responding to other people’s posts will affect your

online reputation. Taylor and Sean think that some people like to start drama by clapping back.

Sean also brought up the fact that schools are trying to educate students on how their posts can

affect their online reputation. Ryan thinks mean responses and comments are just part of social

media.

Conclusion: Our group thinks that our participants were right again. We think that the

way people post on social media and online will affect their online reputation. Since technology

is so widely available, it is important to know that you have an online reputation and an in-

person reputation. For someone who has never met you, they will judge you based on how you

act online. This can be positive or negative. When it comes to bullying, our group believes that

sometimes responses and comments are bullying and sometimes they aren’t. Although this is a

somewhat gray area, it is best to think about what Sean’s school taught him: think before you

post. Educating students, parents and teachers to think about the effects of their post before they

post could lead to less cyberbullying.

Code 3

Name of Code: Cyberbullying is taken seriously

Introduction: Although many people see cyberbullying on a weekly, sometimes even

daily, basis, our participants believe that cyberbullying is taken seriously. They think that

society as a whole recognizes the negative effects of cyberbullying and ultimately will do their

best to consequence bullies.

Quotes: The participants in our focus group agreed that people who cyberbully could end

up with major consequences. Ryan said, “You see a lot of issues or instances where

cyberbullying cases getting taken too far and that person who is doing the bullying usually gets

some pretty serious consequences at that point.” Our focus group also discussed that the severity

of the cyberbullying would directly correlate with the bully’s punishment. Taylor describe this

by saying, “The severity of it is what matters the most. If you're telling a kid to kill himself

online, you're going to get in a shit load of trouble but if you just push someone in a locker, it's

different.” Here, Taylor is saying that based on what a bully says via cyberbullying, the

message’s outcome will affect their consequences.

Conclusion: Based on the comments from our focus group, as well as news surrounding

bullying outcomes, we think that cyberbullying is taken seriously, but only when the victim does

something drastic. For example, in suicide cases where a victim of bullying takes their life, the

bully is usually severely consequenced. But in cases where the victim of the bullying does

nothing, it is much less likely that the bully is consequenced. Normally the bully is

consequenced when the victim or someone aware of the situation speaks out. Our group thinks

that cyberbullying is taken seriously, but we also think a lot of cyberbullying situations go

unattended.

Code 4

Name of Code: Cyberbullying has more consequences than other forms of bullying

Introduction: This code builds off the previous code. It was brought up a few times that

cyberbullying has more consequences than other forms of bullying, such as physical and in-

person bullying. This code dives into how our focus group participants feel about how the

different forms of bullying are consequenced differently.

Quotes: The participants in our focus group seemed somewhat split on this code. Some

participants think that cyberbullying has more consequences than other forms of bullying. For

example, Graham said, “I think it just depends on when the cyberbullying is caught, if it gets

caught really far into it then you might see worse consequences.” Graham thinks cyberbullying

has worse consequences when it has been going on for a while and if it gets caught. Other

participants disagreed. The moderator asked, “Do you think cyberbullying happens more often

now than in-person bullying?” followed by “And then why do you think that?” Graham and Sean

replied. Graham said, “It's easier like you don't have to see the person to comment about them.”

Sean continued by saying, “You don't have to worry about being punched in the face on social

media.” Our participants seemed to think cyberbullying had more consequences only if it was

caught and if it was severe.

Conclusion: Our group thinks that cyberbullying can have drastic consequences. For the

bully and the victim. The bully could be extremely punished. The victim could go as far as

taking their own life. We think cyberbullying has negative effects, which leads to negative

consequences for all involved. It is important that cyberbullying is reported and addressing in a

timely matter to avoid the negative effects that could ensue.

Category Conclusion: The category of cyberbullying was easily one of the most talked about

subjects in our focus group. We think this is due to the increased use of technology, as well as

the easy access to others via social media. Cyberbullying should be an important area of focus

for NAPAB because teenagers, such as the participants in our focus group, think it is the most

popular form of bullying. As an anti-bullying organization, it is important to address all forms of

bullying, such as cyberbullying.

Category 3

In-person bullying

This category dives into detail about all of the comments made about in-person bullying during

our focus group. In-person bullying is what usually comes to mind when young people hear the

word bullying, yet our focus group did not seem to think it was a large issue affecting society.

This category talks about the different aspects of in-person bullying and how our focus group

participants view in-person bullying. Some of the codes in this category will discuss how in-

person bullying tends to be easier to detect, as well as bystanding.

Code 1

Name of Code: In-person bullying is easier to detect

Introduction: This code talks about how the participants of our focus group think it is

easier to detect in-person bullying, compared to cyberbullying. Although we have already come

to the conclusion that cyberbullying happens more often, our participants think in-person

bullying is much easier to recognize.

Quotes: When the moderator asked, “Do you all think it's easier to intervene in a

situation of cyberbullying or in person bullying?” the respondents all had similar answers. Ryan

and Taylor both said, “In-person. For sure.” Graham went into a little bit more depth by saying,

“I think in person is a lot easier to step into and get involved with but everyone sees the

cyberbullying.” This not only agrees with our previous code of cyberbullying being the most

popular kind of bullying, but it also agrees with the fact that in-person bullying is easier to

recognize. The participants in our focus group seemed to all agree that in-person bullying was

easier to detect.

Conclusion: After talking more about the differences between in-person bullying, our

focus group agreed that in-person bullying was much easier to detect. Our group agrees with this

due to how some comments online could be meant in a teasing way and over the internet

someone cannot physically hurt you. Although cyberbullying has its own set of negative effects

and consequences, in-person bullying can be harmful too. The members of our focus group

believe that in-person bullying is easier to detect because you are able to see it happening right in

front of you, you are able to step in and you are able to stop it before it goes too far.

Code 2

Name of Code: Exclusion is a form of bullying mostly found in high school

Introduction: During our focus group, a somewhat different type of bullying was

brought up: exclusion. Although there was somewhat of a debate over whether or not exclusion

was bullying, eventually the group came to the agreement that it was at least somewhat bullying

to purposely exclude someone.

Quotes: This conversation started when the moderator asked, “Do you think exclusion is

a form of bullying?” Graham immediately said, “Yeah. Definitely.” Taylor disagreed and said,

“Mmm... no.” Taylor continued by saying, “I think if you're... if you go to elementary school

with someone and you guys just develop different interests, and you hang out with a different

crowd and hang out with them less it's not necessarily exclusion but I know that a lot of people

view that as exclusion. You stopped hanging out with them you're excluding them from your

group or whatever, but I think there's a difference between excluding people and having different

interests as other people.” Taylor was saying that she doesn’t not view friends going separate

ways as exclusion, therefore she does not think that is bullying for friends to find news friends or

stop being friends. Ryan then said that he mainly saw exclusion among his female friends: “I

guess I still see excluding now mainly with girls. If they're going out or there's a party or there's a

group there's usually one missing of that group that's usually there then there's something going

on.” Taylor was quick to respond with, “I think that's a boy perception cus if one of my friends

has homework or…” Ryan interrupted and said, “I don't know. My friends always traveled in

packs so like if one person was missing it was really weird.” Taylor decided to meet him on a

middle ground by saying, “Probably more in high school like if a girl is pissing you off like ‘I

don't want to hang out.’” Graham returned to the conversation and agreed with Taylor by saying,

“That was the biggest thing I saw.” During this conversation there seems to be a clear divide

between the male and female participants. Gender clearly played a role in how our participants

viewed exclusion.

Conclusion: This was one of the only times during the focus group that the group clearly

disagreed on a topic. There were times when one of them would make a facial expression to

clearly show that they disagreed, but they would not end up saying anything. Here, the topic of

exclusion created a clear divide between the genders. All of the male participants thought

exclusion was a form of bullying. Taylor, on the other hand, only thought it was a form of

bullying if it was done purposefully. She said that if two friends just stopped hanging out, that

should not be seen as exclusion, therefore is is not bullying. Based on our focus group and our

participants opinions, we think exclusion is a form of bullying if done purposely to someone. If

friends somehow stop being friends and therefore stop hanging out, that is not exclusion and that

is not bullying.

Code 3

Name of Code: Wanting someone to stand up for you in a situation of in-person bullying

Introduction: All of our participants agreed that they would want someone to stand up

for them in a case of bullying. Many times, when someone is being bullied, no one holds the

bully accountable and calls them out. Our focus group thinks that should change.

Quotes: The moderator started this section by asking, “If you are being bullied would

you want a bystander to stand up for you?” Our focus group participants all unanimously

responded, “Yeah!” The moderator followed up by saying, “Why would you want them to stand

up for you?” Sean was the only one who responded and said, “Because there is power in

numbers, the more people you have the easier it is to stop a bully, you can shut it down to some

extent but the more people you have on your side the easier it is to stop it.” After saying this, the

rest of the participants nodded their head in agreement, signaling that they agreed with Sean.

Then the topic changed and the focus group continued.

Conclusion: Although there was not a lot of conversation surrounding this topic, the

participants of the focus group clearly would all want someone to stand up for them if they were

being bullied in-person. Sean described how there is power in numbers and bullies would be

deterred by a bystander. Sean also said that is it easier to shutdown a situation of bullying if a

bystander steps in. Our group believes that most people who are victims of bullying would like

someone to stand up for them in cases on in-person bullying. Our group also believes that

students should be better educated on the positive effects of stepping in and standing up for

someone being bullied.

Category Conclusion: This category talks about our focus groups opinions on in-person

bullying. They believe that in-person bullying is easier to detect, but that it happens less than

cyber bullying. Our group thinks that in-person bullying is still happening and should still be a

main focus for NAPAB due to the physical and harmful consequences that will ensue after in-

person bullying begins. Our group thinks that people should stand up for people being bullied

around them. NAPAB should take this into account and try to educate students on the positive

effects of standing up for a victim of bullying. If more people stand up for those being bullied

around them, bullying will decrease.

Category 4

Parent/ teacher awareness

This category focuses on participants’ sentiments about the awareness of bullying

amongst parents and teachers. This included the level of anti-bullying education that

participants’ felt parents and teachers should receive. The main subcategories of this category

reveal mixed feelings about teachers’ awareness of bullying and that parents lack an

understanding of bullying in modern contexts.

Code 1

Name of Code: Teachers were aware of bullying in high school

Introduction: This code shows sentiments from participants about their confidence in

school staff being aware of bullying in high schools.

Quotes: Quotes from mainly from Taylor showcase this sense of confidence. “ I feel like

teachers were pretty on it,” Taylor said when speaking about teachers intervening in instances of

bullying. After participants showed that they agreed with this sentiment, Taylor then said, “they

would jump on any altercation,” and “teachers would step in if they saw things like going on that

shouldn’t.” These quotes show that, at least in some high schools, teachers are highly aware of

bullying that occurs, and can play a very active role in stopping instances of bullying.

Conclusion: Since teachers can be active stakeholders in bullying prevention and

intervention, organizations like the NAPAB could use this information to adjust how they

educate school staff to increase their level of knowledge in terms of intervention and prevention

methods. This information, coupled with sentiments from participants about reporting to teachers

that students are comfortable with, could be used to fine-tune and tailor education programs for

teachers on bullying prevention, intervention and how to handle student reports. Of course, this

depends on the level of awareness of school staff within schools.

Code 2

Name of Code: Parents and teachers do not understand cyber bullying

Introduction: This code shows the sentiment from participants that cyberbullying is a

key element of bullying in a modern context, and that parents and teachers do not understand this

form of bullying because of generational differences.

Quotes: Sentiments from Sean and Taylor exhibit this idea. “I don't feel like they know a

whole lot like about cyberbullying just because like back in their time most of them didn't go

through the same extent of cyberbullying as there is now that like maybe they don't know as

much about it as we do,” Sean said. Agreeing with Sean, Taylor then said, “I think they know

about cyberbullying but I don't think they understand what it is or why it happens or how they

would go about stopping it.”

Conclusion: Anti-bullying organizations such as the NAPAB could use this information

to tailor educational programs specifically for parents and teachers on what cyberbullying is,

what it looks like for the modern student and, potentially, how to notice signs of cyberbullying

without a connected online presence. These signs would most likely be similar to those of in-

person bullying. These could include things such as avoiding school, lower grades, trouble

focusing in class as well as others outlined in our secondary research report. Overall, education

strategies for these stakeholders need to be developed and implemented to deal with the

evolution of bullying.

Code 3

Name of Code: Increasing talks with parents to help them understand bullying would be

effective

Introduction: This code illustrates how our participants felt parents could increase their

role in terms of bullying prevention and intervention.

Quotes: The quote that truly exhibits our participants sentiments on this idea comes from

Graham. “I feel like if it happens early enough the person only really has to come for the parents

once and then the parents can keep after it. It'll stick all four years and if they have siblings going

through school they might keep it up as well so the parents are invested in the schools and the

kids essentially,” Graham said. Another participant, Sean, also said, “I think that having a parent

tell you not to do this is way more influential than having a random stranger come up and say

"this isn't cool." Like, having parents saying "you don't do this,"” when speaking about the role

that parents could play in student bullying. These comments were in response to the moderator

asking what they would suggest anti-bullying organizations should change. Earlier in the focus

group, participants agreed that anti-bullying organizations were semi-effective at raising, but

ineffective at stopping bullying. Taylor suggested to, “talk to parents.”

Conclusion: Parents can play a key role in stopping bullying. In particular, participants

believe that parents could effectively set clear boundaries and principles to prevent their children

from participating in bullying behaviors. Participants believe that this is crucial to preventing

bullying. They also suggest that anti-bullying organizations such as the NAPAB engage parents

to increase their involvement and to have them take a more active role in the issue.

Category Conclusion: In this category, participants shared how they felt teachers’ and parents’

roles in the issue could be enhanced. Information from codes show that teachers and parents are

two stakeholders that play crucial roles in prevention and intervention. Because of this, education

and engagement for these stakeholders should be increased in order to more effectively address

bullying. If the NAPAB is to effectively increase awareness and address the issue of bullying,

these stakeholders must be engaged and educated further to understand bullying in a modern

context and to increase their effectiveness in bullying prevention.

Category 5

Bullying in the media

This category focuses on the participants views on bullying in the media. This also includes how

the media portrays and impacts bullying. In this category, the participants discussed different

media platforms that are used in bullying scenarios.

Code 1

Name of code: Bullying is seen in politics

Introduction: This code includes participants views on how bullying is used in politics.

Quotes: When the moderator asked, “have you noticed bullying in the media? And how is it

portrayed?” one participant responded her take on the presidential election. Taylor said, “Donald

Trump is a huge bully. That’s how he won his presidential campaign. He was putting down other

people and putting down his opponents.” She also stated, “It got him a lot of tag words. It got

him a lot of publicity which he utilized.”

Conclusion: When it comes to politics, many politicians use verbal bullying to put down

their opponents and gain exposure. More people notice them when they make themselves seem

superior to others.

Code 2

Name of code: Bullying shown on TV is unrealistic

Introduction: This code focuses on how TV programs and movies portray bullying in an

unrealistic fashion. The participants all agreed on how bullying in media television was

inaccurate compared to bullying in real life scenarios.

Quotes: When the participants were asked, “Besides I guess social media because that is

mostly what you were talking about have you seen it on TV shows or in movies or on other areas

of social media besides twitter?” the respondents were all in agreement on how TV media

portrays bullying. “I think TV shows try to address it to acknowledge the importance of stopping

bullying when you see it but I don't feel like the situations they portray on TV are real life,” said

Taylor. Sean agreed by saying, “Yeah, a lot of the situations that they portray in movies and TV's

are over exaggerated that people kinda miss the point of like "oh this person is punching me in

the face everytime he sees me but that's not what really like what bullying is anymore, it's more

like name calling and stuff like that and a lot of media just kinda adds that in as just like joking

with your friends not bullying.”

Conclusion: TV shows definitely acknowledges bullying and the importance of putting

an end to bullying. Although they acknowledge bullying, the situations they portray are overdone

and inaccurate to what bullying is like in the real world. The participants agreed on how

television shows more physical bullying when there are more cases of verbal bullying in real life.

Code 3

Name of code: Cyberbullying happens on social media

Introduction: In this code, the participants talk about how cyberbullying is very

common on popular social media sites. Living in a generation full of social media, bullying is

seen more online versus face-to-face contact.

Quotes: When asked about social media platforms and bullying, Graham responded,

“Yeah I don’t think it’s physical bullying anymore, it’s bullying on social media and other stuff”

in which Taylor agreed by saying “Yeah social media.” Sean said, “I guess just like how much

social media has changed the world and everyone’s on it, all the time, non-stop, it’s kind of the

new thing”. Taylor also said, “People want to clap-back online. Get lots of favs and stuff.”

Conclusion: Social media has changed our perceptions about the world. With everyone

on social media constantly, it is easier to see cyberbullying. Participants agreed with everyone

having twitter, facebook and instagram accounts, you see more “clap-back.” It is easier to

favorite someone's comment or reply to something in seconds not thinking about the

consequences or the impact of those comments and how many people will see them.

Category conclusion: In this category, participants shared their opinions on bullying in media.

The participants feel like bullying is most commonly seen in media but isn’t always portrayed

right. Politicians use forms of bullying to get ahead of their opponents and gain publicity.

Television shows try to show the importance of bullying awareness and stop bullying but could

portray their scenarios in an unrealistic way making the effectiveness of their messages unclear.

With so many social media accounts, bullying is most common online where users can reply to

comments or comment mean things about others within seconds. Anti-bullying organizations like

NAPAB could use these responses to educate students, teachers and parents in a more effective

way on the importance of recognizing bullying in the media.

Category 6

Gender differences in bullying

In this category, participants share their thoughts on how bullying varies between genders. They

share how they think their is a difference in what bullying is considered to be between both

genders.

Code 1

Name of code: Teasing is different than bullying between friends of all genders

Introduction of code: This code illustrates the misrepresentation of teasing amongst

friend groups as bullying. The participants share how they feel it is hard to detect bullying when

it is often seen as just teasing between friends.

Quotes: Graham states, “yeah.. I feel like physical bullying might be a bit harder now

like if you just see and you don't know anybody, like their obvi bullying each other but if they

are really good friends and you might not have known that” in which Taylor responded, “yeahh..

then it's just awkward.”. Talking about teasing in male friendships, Sean says, “ I think great

friendship at least for guys has pretty much evolved to like bullying each other but guys just

accept it or are okay with it.” Taylor responded, “I think that's even in girl friend-groups too like

everyone messes with each other and it's open target practice.”

Conclusion: In the conclusion of this code, it can be inferred that teasing happens in both

male and female friend groups. Although it can be viewed as bullying amongst friends, the

participants agreed that most of the time it is just fun teasing rather than bullying.

Code 2

Name of code: Verbal bullying is the most common form of bullying amongst females

Introduction: This code highlights the participants conclusion that verbal bullying is the

main form of bullying with females. The participants agree that females are less likely to get in

physical altercations and more likely to be caddy towards another.

Quotes: The moderator asks, “I guess going along with that, do you think bullying is

more intense among males or females?” in which the participants shared their thoughts on verbal

bullying amongst females. Ryan said, “I think verbal bullying is higher in females, but the actual

physical bullying is a lot higher in males” and Graham responded, “I feel like girls also like

social bullying as well.” Taylor said, “Girls are very caddy” and both Ryan and Sean agreed.

Conclusion: This code concludes that females participate in more verbal forms of

bullying. All participants are in agreement that females can be “caddy” when it comes to

bullying in-person and online. Females would rather hurt someone's feelings than get into a

physical argument.

Code 3

Name of code: Physical bullying is more prevalent in among males

Introduction: All of our participants agreed that physical bullying happens more among

males. Participants shared their thoughts on how males are more aggressive in situations of

bullying.

Quotes: The moderator asked, “Umm... do you think, sort of going back to the female

versus male thing, do you think there's a reason physical bullying is more prevalent in males than

verbal among females?” in which Taylor immediately responded, “More testosterone, more

aggressive.” Graham agreed with Taylors comment and stated, “They'll just say 'boys being

boys.” Ryan agreed with both statements.

Conclusion: Because of high levels of testosterone and aggression, physical bullying is

more prevalent with males versus females. All members of the focus group agree that males

would rather fight or get physical than verbal. We can conclude that there is less cyberbullying

among males than females.

Category conclusion: Anti-bullying organizations such as NAPAB can use these participants

responses to push for more bullying education on the difference between bullying in both

genders. Females are more likely to experience verbal forms of bullying and males are more

likely to experience physical bullying. Being aware of both genders and the forms of bullying

between them, organizations can better educate and spread awareness on the importance of

putting a stop to both verbal and physical bullying.

Part V. Conclusion (Addie, Joe, Natalie)

Our focus group helped us gain more information on how 18 and 19 year olds view

different aspects of bullying. We discovered that our participants think cyberbullying is the most

popular kind of bullying, but that in-person bullying is easier to detect. We also learned that our

participants see bullying in the media in a variety of forms, such as news, movies and television

shows. They also acknowledge the fact that parents and teachers need more bullying education to

better assist in cases of bullying.

NAPAB’s main goal is to raise awareness about bullying. They want to educate children,

teens and other key audiences such as teachers and parents. After performing our focus group,

we think NAPAB should consider a few options. First, the participants in our focus group all

agreed that parents and teachers do not have enough education on bullying to effectively assist a

student or child when they are getting bullied. NAPAB could create a program to implement in

schools, such as a presentation for the PTA or provide a yearly bullying prevention training for

teachers and students. The participants in our focus group said they would report bullying more

often if they had teachers and parents to go to. They also agreed on the fact that they would like

the reporting process to be less public and more accessible in schools. NAPAB should also start

to focus on cyberbullying. All of our participants think that cyberbullying is the most common

form of bullying now. NAPAB’s installation of the Cool2BeKIND Club directly addresses in-

person bullying, but NAPAB does not have anything addressing cyberbullying. Our group thinks

it would beneficial for NAPAB to develop a campaign to directly address cyberbullying. This

would help them achieve their goal of raising awareness about bullying, as well as putting an end

to bullying. NAPAB also needs to be aware of the different types of bullying that affects each

gender. As discussed above, some forms of bullying are more prevalent among females and

males. Exclusion and cyberbullying are the worst among females and in-person, physical and

cyberbullying are the worst among males, according to our focus group participants. To raise

awareness about bullying, NAPAB should consider developing targeted campaigns towards

males and females of their desired age groups. By taking these steps, NAPAB will be able to

raise more awareness about bullying in all of its forms, as well as eventually put an end to

bullying.

We gathered an abundance of information in our focus group process. Majority of this

information was very useful for our research and marketing objectives. Additionally, we

gathered information on topics we weren’t expecting from our focus group members. When

asked about bullying in the media, one participant brought up politics and how there can be

bullying in political campaigns. When students see leaders of our country putting down their

opponents in forms of verbal bullying, it can impact their perceptions of bullying, concluding

that is normal to put down others you feel you are superior to. During our discussion of parent/

teacher awareness, participants shared their thoughts on how parent education on bullying

correlates with their children feeling more comfortable about reporting bullying. The more

teachers and parents are aware of bullying and educated on the topic, the more comfortable

students feel in approaching them. Most of the participants in our focus group shared how they

had student leaders at their school. These leaders were responsible for spreading messages on

anti-bullying and set up communities for students to come to if they needed to talk about their

bullying experiences. Taylor said, in her high school had a student leader per grade, who anyone

could come to and they would reach out and help or notify a teacher or counselor if it was out of

their reach. In Sean's experience of reporting bullying in high school, he mentioned that it was a

difficult process to report bullying. He mentioned how a student would have to get a pass to

leave class to go talk to a teacher or administration about bullying. Trying to meet with the

principle was very difficult according to Sean. NAPAB could use this information in their

campaigns to set up better systems in schools to report bullying and educate teachers, students

and parents on this process. Having a better system in place could potentially put an end to more

bullying.

The main limitations to this focus group were sampling and number of participants. Our

team had to rely on convenience sampling mostly from people who were at least slightly

connected to us through our social connections. Given our limited pool of potential participants,

we were only able to have four participants. Higher-quality sampling could have led to a few

more participants that could have provided us with insights that would benefit our client. Better

recruitment also could have led to participants that were more representative of the audience that

we were aiming to study in this focus group. Our secondary research had led us to conclude that

teenage females were more prone to the negative effects that can result from being bullied.

Because of this, our group decided that they would be best to study in this focus group, but only

one of the four participants was female. If we were able to get a group more representative of our

desired demographic, this could have potentially led to more useful information for our client.

Another limitation is that two group members spoke noticeably less than others toward

the end of the focus group. This sometimes led to continued stretches of back-and-forth between

two participants. Though the information that came from these moments of conversation was

useful to answering our research question, further information could have been acquired if we

had also gathered the same amount of information from our two other participants near the end

of the focus group.

Probes and follow-up questions are another way that we could have gained more useful

information. This is a direct result of our lack of experience with this research method, given that

this was every group members’ first time conducting a focus group. Lack of experience amongst

our group members is, in itself, another limitation to this focus group. More experience and

practice with this research method prior to this focus group could have led to more follow-up

questions and more useful information as a result. More experience with conducting focus

groups could have also led to a better design of our moderator guide. This could have then led to

better questions that would collect more and better data to answer our research question.

Part VI. Reflection (All group)

Hannah - After finishing the focus group and the focus group report, I feel good about our

findings. We were able to collect a lot of information without any trouble from participants and

after analyzing our transcription we were able to find some useful data on the topic of bullying

and anti-bullying foundations. All of our participants contributed some great insights regarding

bullying and they were incredibly engaged in the focus group. All in all, I believe our focus

group went smoothly and allowed us to gather the information we needed.

Addie - After finishing this process, I feel good about the information we found. I think we

found a lot of useful information for our client on education and bullying awareness among

teachers, parents and students. I learned a lot from our focus group and found it interesting the

difference in perspectives on bullying from each member. It was an eye-opening experience to

transcribe our focus group meeting and organize into categories and subcategories. In doing that,

I really got to see how much information we gathered from this process and how much I have

learned.

Joe - Despite our recruiting, I believe that our group was able to collect useful information for

our client, as well as what bullying looks like in a modern context. I believe that our focus group

has found steps that our client can take in order to fulfill its goals as an anti-bullying advocate.

Currently, much is needed from these organizations if they are to make any noticeable

differences in the world of bullying. Schools’ approaches to the issue need to be changed, and

parents need to be engaged. A lot of work needs to be done, but our focus group has outlined

some measures that our client can take to achieve their goals.

Natalie - I think our focus group went well, despite our issues with recruiting. The information

we have illustrated above shows that we have gathered information we did not previously know

in our secondary research report. This focus group experience has shown me the benefits of

triangulating data and collecting data in a variety of forms. I also think our focus group report

has clearly outlined ways for NAPAB to increase the awareness of bullying, as well as take steps

towards eventually ending bullying. Our focus group participants provided us with a wide range

of information. I think the most interesting piece was how they all thought that cyberbullying is

the most popular form of bullying, yet they all think in-person bullying is easier to detect. As the

moderator for this focus group, I gained more insight into how other people view bullying and I

think these insights will positively benefit NAPAB and other anti-bullying organizations.

Part VII. Appendices (All group)

Moderator Guide

Transcription

Notes

Self-Debriefings

Joe: My main concern during the planning phase of our focus group was gathering enough

participants. I was confident that our team had collectively tried to recruit from a large enough

pool of people, but was nervous as time went on that we only had a few that had confirmed with

us that they were willing to participate. Luckily, we eventually got enough confirmations before

the day of our focus group. Once the focus group began, I felt that each participant was

contributing equally in terms of quantity and quality in their responses. When we were starting to

get to the questions about teacher and parent awareness, I started to notice that Graham was

starting to speak less, and that conversation was slightly dominated by Taylor and Ryan. As a

notetaker, I wasn’t sure how to address this without disrupting the moderator or the participants.

I also did not want to disrupt the flow of responses given that the participants were providing

good feedback that would be helpful for our organization. In particular, I thought that the

responses about focusing bullying-education early on in a child’s education would be useful.

But, overall, I felt that we were able to run an effective focus group that would give useful

suggestions to our organization.

Natalie - Before the focus group started, I was afraid that the participants would not want to say

much. I was the moderator, so it was my job to keep the conversation going. If the participants

were not interested in the topic and were not responding, it was my job to come up with a way to

continue the conversation. I think we had four very capable and talkative participants. They all

participated and spoke out. I would have prefered more participants, but the group we had was

solid. As the moderator, I was nervous that the participants would not respond well to some of

the questions, but they were all open to the different topics surrounding bullying. Everyone also

respected each other during the focus group, even if there were varying opinions. The

participants did not have any trouble talking about bullying or different topics surrounding

bullying. Although there were times where I felt out of my element leading the conversation, the

participants were all respectful and willing to dive in deeper into parts of the conversation. Addie

and Joe did a good job of taking notes and picking up on body language throughout the focus

group. Overall, I think the focus group went well, as it was the first time I have ever performed

research like that.

Hannah: When we began planning our focus group I was skeptic about how we were going to

recruit people willing to participate. I wanted to be able to collect enough data and opinions from

the participants and I was scared that the participants would be timid to share their opinions on

this topic. Bullying is not an easy subject for some people to talk about and so the thought that

someone may not want to share their personal experience or opinions is not far fetched. After the

focus group was conducted, my mind was put at ease. Although I was unable to attend our focus

group due to a timing conflict, my group members ended up collecting a lot of great information

from our participants. Each participant was very willing to share their opinions and experiences

with us. They had no trouble going into in-depth conversations about each topic presented and

they were very willing to keep each conversation flowing. I got great feedback about the focus

group from my group members and we all felt that, given the information that we collected, our

focus group was executed well.

Addie: Going into the focus group, I was worried about the participation of the group members. I

wanted to be able to get enough information to get a good idea on their thoughts and opinions on

bullying and bullying awareness. The focus group went well and each member of the focus

group contributed to the conversation. They did a good job responding off each other and taking

turns talking. I felt like we provided a safe and open environment for them to share their opinions

and respond to the questions the moderator asked. I was observer during this process. I felt like

everyone was very relaxed during the duration of the focus group. I also assisted in taking some

notes on topics and quotes I thought were important to note/ document. I noticed some pauses

and hesitation to answer after being asked some questions but after observing the participants

body language, I concluded they were just thinking about their responses rather than feeling

uncomfortable about answering the questions.

Mandatory Signature:

I have read my team’s focus group preliminary findings report and have shared my edits, when

necessary, for the parts I was not directly responsible for. I approve the version of this report for

submission.

Natalie Gibson 11/16/18

Hannah Wilhelm 11/16/18

Addie Sjogren 11/16/18

Joe Carney 11/16/18