This document summarizes several studies on bullying prevention programs implemented in schools. It finds that programs like the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP), Bully Prevention in Positive Behavior Supports (BP-PBS), and Steps to Respect (STR) can effectively reduce bullying when properly implemented. The studies show decreases in bullying behaviors and increases in teacher intervention after these programs were used. However, sustained efforts are needed as bullying may rise again without continuous support. A positive school climate also enhances the impact of anti-bullying programs. While no group is singled out as targets, boys and older students tend to bully more. Implementing multi-component programs seems to best address bullying as a school-wide issue.

1. 1
BULLYING PREVENTION
Bully Policy and Prevention
Jennifer Silkenson
California State University of Fullerton

2. 2
BULLYING PREVENTION
Bullying is broadly defined as intentional and repeated acts that occur through direct
verbal (e.g., threatening, name calling), direct physical (e.g., hitting, kicking), and indirect (e.g.,
spreading rumors, influencing relationships, cyber bullying) forms, and it typically occurs in
situations in which there is a power or status difference (Olweus, 1993). The prevalence of
bullying has become an ongoing issue, with the addition of social media, which has perpetuated
the problem. Many schools across the United States and other countries have adapted bully
prevention programs such as the Olweus Bully Prevention Program (OBPP), the Bully
Prevention in Positive Behavior Supports (BP-PBS), or Steps to Respect (STR). Do the
intervention programs give school administration the resources to reduce and illuminate
bullying? If so, how are the programs implemented and do the programs work? Various peer
reviewed articles were examined to determine whether bully intervention programs reduce
bullying through diverse tactics.
In a study by Olweaus, the first author to define the term bullying started to examine
bullying in the mid 1980’s by surveying 130,000 Norwegian students utilizing his initial Olweus
Bully/Victim Questionnaire. He found that one out of seven students in elementary grades or
lower was a bully, bully and victim, or just a victim. As he continued his research he found that
children who were bullied would be more likely to suffer from psychological conditions of
depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, social isolation, and suicidal tendencies. He soon began to
see bullying as an issue of human rights and thought students had the right to feel safe at school.
Consequently, three young boys committing suicide in Norway, due to the assumption of severe
bullying the OBPP was first implemented across 2,500 schools over a 2.5 year period. As a result

3. 3
BULLYING PREVENTION
the reduction of students being bullied went from 10% to 3.6% and those who bullied others
reduced from 7.6% to 3.6%. The classes in which essential components of the program had been
implemented experienced greater reductions in bullying problems (Olweus, 2010). As the study
continued the OBPP had been implemented into the United States in the mid 1990’s in states
such as South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Washington, and California. Overall there was a decrease
in students bullied, an increase in students telling a teacher they were bullied, and an increase in
the perception from teachers that there were clear defined rules about bullying. After the results
of the studies in the United States were revealed the use of the OBPP was enormous but the
toughest challenge for the OBPP to be effective was getting the school administration and
parents to come on board with the program, since either felt it was not an issue or it was
considered something all adolescents should endure. Lastly, according to (Olweus, 2010) to the
extent that bullying is viewed and addressed as an issue of public health (and not just an issue of
education), we are hopeful there will be increased will and resources to support the efforts.
In another study by O’Brennan who utilized the National Education Association to
survey over 5,000 teachers, the survey was geared towards school staff connectedness and bully
intervention. There were four target areas of connectedness; personal connectedness to the
school, student-staff connectedness, staff connectedness to administrators, and staff relationships
to fellow employees. The Structural Equation Model (SEM) was used to examine the
relationship between staff connectedness and comfort level of intervening in situations of
bullying. Additionally, specific groups and situations were examined to determine the staffs
comfort level of intervening, such as general bullying or bullying against specific populations. It
was hypothesized that staff who report clear policies and prevention efforts had access to

4. 4
BULLYING PREVENTION
available resources and were involved in the training efforts would be more comfortable
intervening (O’Brennan, 2014). The schools were in various areas of the United States and the
schools ranged from elementary, middle, and high school. The bulk of staff members reported
interacting with students constantly, with a rate of 74%, and 18.6% said they interacted with
students a great deal. Of the four areas of connectedness staff relationships with administration
was not foretelling of comfort in intervening in general or special group bullying. It was evident
that staff relations with students and their fellow workers had an encouraging impact on the
comfort level of intervening in a bullying situation. There were two additional variables, comfort
intervening of special populations, and comfort of intervening with general bullying. The special
population consisted of sexual orientation, disability, overweight, sexist comments, racist
comments, and negative comments about religion. Of those groups sexual orientation was the
least intervened and racist comments were the most intervened. The second variable was general
bullying which contained physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. The most intervened was verbal
and the least intervened was cyber. But overall, the staff felt comfortable intervening in any
situation. Furthermore, the results suggest that connectedness maybe an important target for
bullying prevention programming and climate promoting efforts (O’Brennan, 2014).
To further support the idea of bullying intervention programs a study was conducted by
Dr. Rhonda Nese from the University of Oregon. The goal of this study was to assess the
analysis from a previous study of The Bully Prevention in Positive Behavior Supports (BP-PBS)
that was implemented in three elementary schools with observation of playgrounds over 60 days.
The Expect Respect program was used in the current study which had the same basic ideas and
objectives as the previous program and all data was collected from observations in the cafeteria.

5. 5
BULLYING PREVENTION
Additionally, the students were given a survey the first and last week of the program to assess
multiple areas such as school safety or do you respect other students and adults. The study took
place in the Pacific Northwest at three middle schools and observation and data was collected
from the 2011-2012 school year. The program consisted of three components. The first was a
student focus group to inform students the terms that would be used to intervene in bullying
situations. The second was a one hour lesson plan to show students how to use the terms when a
situation arose. The terms were stop, stopping, bystander, and seeking support. The third aspect
was the behavior from staff and their ability to make certain that students understood the
expectations of discourteous behavior being reported. Of the three schools the population was
dominantly Caucasian with students of other races ranging from 26%-32%. Overall the results
indicated that teachers 82% of the time intervened bullying, 91% said they reflectively listened
when students reported bullying behavior, and 91% of teachers said they praised students for
reporting any bullying behavior. One of the most significant findings was the drop off of
bullying situations before and after spring break, they fall to almost zero across all three schools
and with the approach of summer break the incidents dropped of as well. After the intervention
program students were more inclined to feel safe at school, but not a significant change in
numbers. According to Nese, though the reduction in bullying was conveyed, but is important to
use a whole-school approach, the value of student survey information, and the sustainability of
the effects (Nese, 2014).
In continuum Dr. Karin Frey from the University of Washington conducted a study to
assess adult and systematic factors through school policy development and training and promote
prosocial beliefs and social-emotional learning through a classroom curriculum. Although

6. 6
BULLYING PREVENTION
teachers perceive themselves as intervening often against bullying, observational research shows
teachers intercede in only 15% to 18% of classroom bullying episodes (Frey, 2005). Due to this
statistic and many others the aim of the study was to reduce bullying and destructive bystander
behavior, increase prosocial beliefs related to bullying, increase social-emotional skills.
Additionally, gender, grade, and behavior were examined. Six schools, grades 3-6, in the Pacific
Northwest was the target population using randomized control design. Data was collected over a
two and a half month period from October to December and April to June, via survey and
playground observation employing the Steps to Respect program. With the implementation of
the program, a majority of results were predictive. When referring to grade and gender younger
students were targeted more often and older students reported more direct and indirect
aggression, and were less likely to intervene. Overall both bullying and attitude beliefs that
supported the effect were reduced and the bystander support of playground bullying was
reduced. If schools are able to alter peer norms and behavior, increase student skills, and sustain
adult prevention, the positive effects of their work may gather momentum and strengthen over
time (Frey, 2005).
Lastly, a study by Dr. Sabina Low of Arizona State University was to examine the
relationship between school climate and bullying. School climate refers to the culture, milieu, or
character of a school, capturing its sense of community and overall organizational health (Low,
2014). The study used the Steps to Respect program (STR) and data from a prior study of a one
year trial using the STR. The current study conducted trials across 33 schools in central
California representing over 3,000 students who were dominantly Caucasian and male, but with
a significant amount of Hispanic students. Student ages ranged from 7-11 and 90% of the school

7. 7
BULLYING PREVENTION
staff was female. Data was collected pretest (fall) and posttest (spring). It was expected climate
would contribute to overall outcome irrelevant to intervention and schools with interventions
would have a more positive climate than those without. However, the policy and procedures
already in place were not anticipated to have an impact on school climate. With the data from the
previous study and the findings from the current study was consistent showing a more positive
school climate with the use of the STR. For example, students, regardless of intervention were
more inclined to intervene and less likely to maintain a bystander behavior. Additionally, data
suggest schools with more psychological support will have a larger impact on victimization; it
will provide better levels of coping skills and allow relationships to build among students and
staff in a more caring nature. A positive psychological climate appears to not only elevate the
skill levels among students, but in some cases, may enhance (or facilitate), behavioral changes
from stand-alone programs such as STR (Low, 2014).
In Conclusion, it is evident from these studies no one specific group is focused on as a
target, but that student populations are treated as a whole when bullying behaviors occur. Boys
are more likely to bully than girls and a majority of students were dominantly Caucasian.
Programs seem to be implemented for an extended period of time, and then left to whatever
remains in place. The grade level mattered, students who were in high school or higher grades
were more aggressive and likely to bully than those in elementary schools. As shown, after
intervention programs were implemented bullying was reduced, and teachers and staff were
more likely to intervene. As a final point, said prior bullying should be viewed as a human right
and not an issue of education (Olweus, 2010).

8. 8
BULLYING PREVENTION
Works Cited
Frey, K. S., Hirschstein, M. K., Snell, J. L., Edstrom, L. S., MacKenzie, E. P., & Broderick, C. J.
(2005). Reducing Playground Bullying and Supporting Beliefs: An Experimental Trial of
the Steps to Respect Program. Developmental Psychology, 41(3), 479-490.
Low, S., & Van Ryzin, M. (2014). The moderating effects of school climate on bullying
prevention efforts. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(3), 306-319.
Nese, R. T., Horner, R. H., Dickey, C. R., Stiller, B., & Tomlanovich, A. (2014). Decreasing
bullying behaviors in middle school: Expect Respect.School Psychology
Quarterly, 29(3), 272-286. doi:10.1037/spq0000070
O’Brennan, L. M., Waasdorp, T. E., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2014). Strengthening bullying
prevention through school staff connectedness. Journal Of Educational
Psychology, 106(3), 870-880.
Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2010). Bullying in school: Evaluation and dissemination of the
Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. American Journal Of Orthopsychiatry, 80(1), 124-
134.