No abstract

Students’ perceptions of school safety and experiences with bullying were examined in a large Canadian cohort of 5,493 girls and 5,659 boys in Grades 4 to 12. Results indicate notable differences in when and where students felt safe based on their own perceptions of safety and their own experiences with bullying, particularly across elementary and secondary schools. For elementary students, especially those involved in bullying, the playground/school yard and outside recess/break time were particularly hazardous, whereas for secondary students involved in bullying, the hallways, school lunchroom/cafeteria, and outside recess/break were considered especially dangerous. The commonality across student-identified unsafe areas is that they tend to not be well supervised by school personnel. Accordingly, the present results underscore the need to increase adult supervision in areas in which an overwhelming majority of students report feeling unsafe.

We used discrete choice conjoint analysis to model the bullying prevention program preferences of educators. Using themes from computerized decision support lab focus groups (n=45 educators), we composed 20 three-level bullying prevention program design attributes. Each of 1,176 educators completed 25 choice tasks presenting experimentally varied combinations of the study's attribute levels. Latent class analysis yielded three segments with different preferences. Decision Sensitive educators (31%) preferred that individual schools select bullying prevention programs. In contrast, Support Sensitive educators (51%) preferred that local school boards chose bullying prevention programs. This segment preferred more logistical and social support at every stage of the adoption, training, implementation, and long term maintenance processes. Cost Sensitive educators (16%) showed a stronger preference for programs minimizing costs, training, and implementation time demands. They felt prevention programs were less effective and that the time and space in the curriculum for bullying prevention was less adequate. They were less likely to believe that bullying prevention was their responsibility and more likely to agree that prevention was the responsibility of parents. All segments preferred programs supported by the anecdotal reports of colleagues from other schools rather than those based on scientific evidence. To ensure that the bullying prevention options available reflect the complex combination of attributes influencing real world adoption decisions, program developers need to accommodate the differing views of the Decision, Support, and Cost Sensitive segments while maximizing the support of parents and students.

This study examined the effects of a student-mediated conflict resolution program on primary school (junior kindergarten to grade 5) playground aggression. Mediation teams of grade 5 students (approximately age 10) participated in 15 hours of training according to the model developed by Cunningham, Cunningham, and Martorelli (1997). Following baseline observations, mediation was introduced onto the playgrounds of three schools according to a multiple baseline design. Mediators successfully resolved approximately 90% of the playground conflicts in which they intervened. Direct observations suggest that the student mediation program reduced physically aggressive playground behavior by 51% to 65%. These effects were sustained at 1-year follow-up observations. Teacher and mediator satisfaction questionnaires provided strong support for impact, feasibility, and acceptability of this program.

We used a discrete choice conjoint experiment to model the bullying prevention recommendations of 845 students from grades 5 to 8 (aged 9-14). Students made choices between experimentally varied combinations of 14 four-level prevention program attributes. Latent class analysis yielded three segments. The high impact segment (27.1%) recommended uniforms, mandatory recess activities, four playground supervisors, surveillance cameras, and 4-day suspensions when students bully. The moderate impact segment (49.5%) recommended discretionary uniforms and recess activities, four playground supervisors, and 3-day suspensions. Involvement as a bully or bully-victim was associated with membership in a low impact segment (23.4%) that rejected uniforms and surveillance cameras. They recommended fewer anti-bullying activities, discretionary recess activities, fewer playground supervisors, and the 2-day suspensions. Simulations predicted most students would recommend a program maximizing student involvement combining prevention with moderate consequences. The simulated introduction of mandatory uniforms, surveillance cameras, and long suspensions reduced overall support for a comprehensive program, particularly among students involved as bullies or bully-victims.