This article presents findings from a meta-analysis of 213 school-based, universal social and emotional learning (SEL) programs involving 270,034 kindergarten through high school students. Compared to controls, SEL participants demonstrated significantly improved social and emotional skills, attitudes, behavior, and academic performance that reflected an 11-percentile-point gain in achievement. School teaching staff successfully conducted SEL programs. The use of 4 recommended practices for developing skills and the presence of implementation problems moderated program outcomes. The findings add to the growing empirical evidence regarding the positive impact of SEL programs. Policy makers, educators, and the public can contribute to healthy development of children by supporting the incorporation of evidence-based SEL programming into standard educational practice.

http://explorefhp.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Durlak-Weissberg-Child-Development-Meta-Analysis.pdf

The Impact of Enhancing Students’ Social and Emotional Learning: A Meta‐Analysis of School‐Based Universal Interventions

Etude de la coherence entre differentes sources (269 echantillons utilisees dans 119 etudes) concernant les evaluations des problemes affectifs et comportementaux d'enfants et d'adolescents âges de 1 1/2 a 19 ans

Child/adolescent behavioral and emotional problems: implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity.

The first purpose of this review was to assess the impact of implementation on program outcomes, and the second purpose was to identify factors affecting the implementation process. Results from over quantitative 500 studies offered strong empirical support to the conclusion that the level of implementation affects the outcomes obtained in promotion and prevention programs. Findings from 81 additional reports indicate there are at least 23 contextual factors that influence implementation. The implementation process is affected by variables related to communities, providers and innovations, and aspects of the prevention delivery system (i.e., organizational functioning) and the prevention support system (i.e., training and technical assistance). The collection of implementation data is an essential feature of program evaluations, and more information is needed on which and how various factors influence implementation in different community settings.

/pdf/implementation-matters-a-review-of-research-on-the-influence-1wt0xfs3gm.pdf

Implementation Matters: A Review of Research on the Influence of Implementation on Program Outcomes and the Factors Affecting Implementation

BULLYING AMONG SCHOOL-AGED youth is increasingly being recognized as an important problem affecting well-being and social functioning. While a certain amount of conflict and harassment is typical of youth peer relations, bullying presents a potentially more serious threat to healthy youth development. The definition of bullying is widely agreed on in literature on bullying.1–4 Bullying is a specific type of aggression in which (1) the behavior is intended to harm or disturb, (2) the behavior occurs repeatedly over time, and (3) there is an imbalance of power, with a more powerful person or group attacking a less powerful one. This asymmetry of power may be physical or psychological, and the aggressive behavior may be verbal (eg, name-calling, threats), physical (eg, hitting), or psychological (eg, rumors, shunning/exclusion).

The majority of research on bullying has been conducted in Europe and Australia. Considerable variability among countries in the prevalence of bullying has been reported. In an international survey of adolescent health-related behaviors, the percentage of students who reported being bullied at least once during the current term ranged from a low of 15% to 20% in some countries to a high of 70% in others.5,6 Of particular concern is frequent bullying, typically defined as bullying that occurs once a week or more. The prevalence of frequent bullying reported internationally ranges from a low of 1.9% among 1 Irish sample to a high of 19% in a Malta study.1,7–12

Bullying takes many forms, and findings about the types of bullying that occur are fairly similar across countries. A British study involving 23 schools found that direct verbal aggression was the most common form of bullying, occurring with similar frequency in both sexes.13 Direct physical aggression was more common among boys, while indirect forms were more common among girls. Similarly, in a study of several middle schools in Rome, the most common types of bullying reported by boys were threats, physical harm, rejection, and name-calling.14 The most common forms for girls were name-calling, teasing, rumors, rejection, and taking of personal belongings.

Research examining characteristics of youth involved in bullying has consistently found that both bullies and those bullied demonstrate poorer psychosocial functioning than their noninvolved peers. Youth who bully others tend to demonstrate higher levels of conduct problems and dislike of school, whereas youth who are bullied generally show higher levels of insecurity, anxiety, depression, loneliness, unhappiness, physical and mental symptoms, and low self-esteem.1–4,8,15–25 Males who are bullied also tend to be physically weaker than males in general.2 The few studies that have examined the characteristics of youth who both bully and are bullied found that these individuals exhibit the poorest psychosocial functioning overall.15,17,19,26

The current research provides a foundation for an understanding of the bullying problem. However, it is insufficient to guide intervention and policy development. Moreover, little is known specifically about bullying among US youth.6 In one county-wide middle school survey, 24.1% of youth reported bullying others at least once in the past semester26; it is not known whether this is characteristic of the rest of the nation.

The purpose of this study was to report the prevalence of bullying in a nationally representative sample of US youth in grades 6 through 10, along with information on differences in the prevalence of bullying by sex, grade, and race. In addition, the relationships among bullying, being bullied, and psychosocial adjustment are explored for 3 distinct groups: bullies only, those bullied only, and those who both bully and are bullied.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/193774/JOC01746.pdf

Bullying Behaviors Among US Youth: Prevalence and Association With Psychosocial Adjustment

Prior studies of childhood aggression have demonstrated that, as a group, boys are more aggressive than girls. We hypothesized that this finding reflects a lack of research on forms of aggression that are relevant to young females rather than an actual gender difference in levels of overall aggressiveness. In the present study, a form of aggression hypothesized to be typical of girls, relational aggression, was assessed with a peer nomination instrument for a sample of 491 third-through sixth-grade children. Overt aggression (i.e., physical and verbal aggression as assessed in past research) and social-psychological adjustment were also assessed. Results provide evidence for the validity and distinctiveness of relational aggression. Further, they indicated that, as predicted, girls were significantly more relationally aggressive than were boys. Results also indicated that relationally aggressive children may be at risk for serious adjustment difficulties (e.g., they were significantly more rejected and reported significantly higher levels of loneliness, depression, and isolation relative to their nonrelationally aggressive peers).

/pdf/relational-aggression-gender-and-social-psychological-25c5pt974c.pdf

Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment.

VioLit Summary: OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper by Olweus was to review the literature that examined bullying in school. METHODOLOGY: The author reviewed both literature dealing with the incidence of bullying in schools in Norway and Sweden and the results of an evaluation of a school intervention program aimed at bullying. FINDINGS/DISCUSSION: The author began by defining bullying and supplying general information. He defined bullying as being when a student is "exposed repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other students" (p.1173). In one study, it was reported that in the majority of cases, the victim is harassed by a group of at least two or three students. The author next supplied some basic facts about bully/victim problems. In a Norwegian study of 130,000 students, 15% of students in elementary and secondary/junior high school were involved in bully/victim problems on a regular basis. The studies showed that the percentage of students who reported being bullied decreased with higher grade levels. The studies also showed that bullying was carried out by older students, while victims were younger. The trend appeared to be that boys were more exposed to bullying than girls. However, girls were more exposed to indirect and more subtle forms of bullying (social isolation, etc...) than to bullying with open attack. Boys carried out a large portion of the bullying to which girls were subjected. But, in general, boys were more often both victims and perpetrators of direct bullying. The author next looked at what the literature revealed about three common myths about bullying. The author stated that the first myth is that bullying is a consequence of large classes and schools. The literature refuted this. Next, the author reported that the second myth is that bullying is a consequence of competition and striving for grades. LISREL analysis of the data showed that this was not correct. Finally, the author examined the myth that explained victimization as caused by external deviation (physical appearance, etc...). But, once again, the author found no empirical support of this in the literature he reviewed. In the next section of the paper, the author examined typical victim characteristics. Studies showed that typical victims were more anxious, lonely, and insecure than other students. Victims also had fewer friends. This type of victim was called a passive or submissive victim, characterized by an anxious or submissive reaction pattern combined with physical weakness. A smaller group, provocative victims, were characterized by a variety of both anxious and aggressive reaction patterns. The studies also revealed that bullies were characterized by aggression toward both their peers and, in some cases, adults. They had more positive attitudes toward violence. They expressed impulsivity and a strong need to dominate others. Although passive bullies exist (people who participate in bullying but do not take the initiative), typical bullies were described as being very aggressive and physically strong. The author next identified four factors that have been found to be important in terms of the upbringing and other conditions that were present that may have been conducive to the development of an aggressive reaction: basic emotional attitude of the caretaker(s) toward the child during the early years, permissiveness towards aggressive behavior by the child, use of power-assertive child rearing practices, and the general temperament of the child. Finally, the author identified some group mechanisms that appear to be at work when bullying is done in groups: social contagion, weakening of the controls and inhibitors against aggressive tendencies, diffusion of responsibility, and gradual cognitive changes in the perceptions of bullying and the victim. In the last section of the paper, the author described results of an evaluation of an intervention program he developed and implemented against bullying in school. The evaluation was on the effects of an intervention program based on data from 2,500 students belonging to 112 grade 4-7 classes in 42 primary and secondary/junior high schools in Norway. The data was collected four months after the introduction of the program and then one year and two years later. The author stated the following results(1) marked reductions in levels of bully/victim problems for the time periods studied, (2) similar reductions obtained for the aggregated peer rating variables, (3) no displacement of bullying to before or after school, (4) clear reduction in general antisocial behavior, (5) improved social climate of the school, and (6) increased student satisfaction with school life in general. The author concluded that the above results were likely to be mainly a consequence of the intervention program implemented. (CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado) KW - Blueprints Model Reference KW - Bullying Prevention KW - Bullying Intervention KW - School Based KW - Intervention Program KW - Juvenile Offender KW - Child Offender KW - Bully Offender KW - School Violence KW - Norway KW - Sweden KW - Countries Other Than USA KW - Bully Victim KW - Victim Characteristics KW - Offender Characteristics KW - Child Victim KW - Juvenile Victim KW - Violence Intervention KW - Program Evaluation KW - Program Effectiveness KW - Victim Characteristics KW - Child Violence KW - Juvenile Violence KW - Literature Review KW - Prevention Program KW - Juvenile Bully KW - Child Bully KW - Early Adolescence KW - Late Childhood KW - Elementary School Student KW - Junior High School Student KW - Grade 4 KW - Grade 5 KW - Grade 6 KW - Grade 7 Language: en

Bullying at School: Basic Facts and Effects of a School Based Intervention Program

Bullying among schoolchildren is certainly a very old phenomenon. The fact that some children are frequently and systematically harassed and attacked by other children has been described in literary works, and many adults have personal experience of it from their own school days. Though many are acquainted with the bully/victim problem, it was not until fairly recently, in the early 1970s, that efforts were made to study it systematically (Olweus, 1973a, 1978). For a considerable time, these attempts were largely confined to Scandinavia. In the 1980s and early 1990s, however, bullying among schoolchildren has received some public attention in Japan, England, Australia, the United States, and other countries. There are now clear indications of an increasing societal as well as research interest into bully/victim problems in several parts of the world.

Bullying at School

:::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::: : The key aim of the present research was to study the ‘‘functionality’’ of two global variables in the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire and to examine the appropriateness of different cutoff points of these variables for prevalence estimation. Several empirical and conceptual analyses strongly attested to the functionality of the two selected variables in terms of construct validity and selected measurement properties. Similarly, a number of analyses indicated that (having been bullied/having bullied other students) ‘‘2 or 3 times a month’’ was a reasonable and useful lower-bound cutoff point. With this cutoff point, ‘‘involved’’ students, victims, and bullies differed very markedly and in clearly different ways from ‘‘non-involved’’ students in conceptually related variables. Prevalence estimates derived in this way can be conveniently obtained, have a reasonably well-defined meaning, can be easily understood by users, and can be reproduced unambiguously by different researchers/administrators and at different times. An important background for the article is the fact that several common methods, including peer nominations, are not well suited for prevalence estimation. Prevalence data for victims, bullies, and bully-victims are also presented. All data were derived from the New Bergen Project Against Bullying, comprising a sample of 5,171 students from 37 schools in the town community of Bergen, Norway. At the time of the data collection, the spring of 1997, the 2,544 girls and 2,627 boys were in grades 5 through 9, with modal ages of 11 through 15 years. Aggr. Behav. 29:239–268, 2003. r 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Dan Olweus

Papers

Bullying at School: Basic Facts and Effects of a School Based Intervention Program

Bullying at School

Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire

Aggression in the schools : bullies and whipping boys

Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren : Basic facts and effects of a school-based intervention program