My da|ra Login

Detailed view

metadata language: English

A Randomized Impact Evaluation of the No Bully System, California, 2015-2017

Version
v0
Resource Type
Dataset : survey data
Creator
  • Hanson, Thomas
Other Title
  • Archival Version (Subtitle)
Publication Date
2019-05-28
Publication Place
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Publisher
  • Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research
Funding Reference
  • United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice
Language
English
Free Keywords
Schema: ICPSR
bullying; harassment; intervention; intervention strategies; program evaluation; school age children; school violence; victimization
Description
  • Abstract

    These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. Bullying affects large numbers of U.S. students in elementary schools and is associated with short and long-term harms for both victims and bullies. Although prevention is critical, schools also need effective interventions for dealing with bullying once it occurs. Funded by the National Institute of Justice, and in collaboration with the Oakland Unified School District and No Bully, WestEd conducted a two-year study of the impacts of the No Bully System (NBS) - a set of interventions designed to activate adult and peer support systems within the school for the targets of bullying. No Bully trains staff to prevent and interrupt student harassment and bullying and ensure school-wide antibullying policies are in place. The core component of NBS is the Solution Team where a trained adult facilitator (Solution Coach) brings together a group of 6-8 students (Solution Team) that includes the bully or bullies, bystanders and pro-social peers, and leads the team through a series of three brief meetings to end the bullying of one of their peers by cultivating empathy and developing peer-driven solutions. The target is not included in the initial meetings though s/he is invited to attend the final session. The collection contains 2 SPSS data files: NoBully_ST-Log-Data_final_archive.sav (n=94; 47 variables) and No-Bully_Survey-Data_final.sav (n=6410; 204 variables).
  • Abstract

    The purpose of this study was to conduct an evaluation that will add to the literature on promising antibullying programs that improve school safety and climate, reduce bullying, and improve outcomes for the targets of bullying. This randomized controlled trial provides the first rigorous test of the No Bully System (NBS) to determine if its promise holds up in a rigorous evaluation. The study was designed to address the following research questions: Does NBS reduce the recurrence of bullying perpetration and victimization among students involved in incidents targeted by Solution Teams?; Does NBS reduce bullying perpetration and victimization among students at risk of bullying involvement (victims and perpetrators)?; Does NBS improve perceptions of school safety, peer support, and other indicators of school climate among all students in schools?;
  • Methods

    To examine the first research question, data come from Solution Team Logs that Solution Coaches completed as required by the No Bully System (NBS) program. In addition to capturing program fidelity information (i.e., how closely Solution Coaches followed the suggested process), the logs contain questions that the Solution Coaches ask the victim of bullying about the frequency, intensity and perceptions of school safety at four timepoints: Initial assessment prior to a Solution team (pre-intervention),; After the first Solution Team meeting (during intervention),; Near the end of the Solution Team (2-3 weeks later, or at the end of the Solution Team intervention), and; Two to three months after a Solution Team has been completed (post-intervention).; Victims of bullying who agreed to participate in Solution Teams (n=83) comprise the analytic sample. Research questions two and three rely on self-report survey data collected from participating grade 4-5 students at two time points: in the Fall or Spring of the 2015/16 academic year and in the Spring of the 2016/17 academic year, the second year of implementation. Research question 3 relies on self-report survey data collected from all grade 3-5 students in the Spring of the 2016/17 academic year.
  • Methods

    This data collection includes variables on bullying perpetration (e.g., "I call other students bad names") and victimization (e.g., "I am hit or kicked by other students"), as well as demographic variables. The collection contains 2 SPSS data files: NoBully_ST-Log-Data_final_archive.sav (n=94; 47 variables) and No-Bully_Survey-Data_final.sav (n=6410; 204 variables).
  • Methods

    Presence of Common Scales: Victimization (VICTIM) and perpetration (PERPET) subscales
  • Methods

    Response Rates: Not available
  • Abstract

    Datasets:

    • DS1: Dataset
Temporal Coverage
  • Time period: 2015-09-01--2017-06-30
  • 2015-09-01 / 2017-06-30
  • Collection date: 2015-09-01--2017-06-30
  • 2015-09-01 / 2017-06-30
Geographic Coverage
  • California
  • United States
Sampled Universe
Students in grades 3-5 in the Oakland (California) Unified School District. Smallest Geographic Unit: County
Sampling
To examine the impact of No Bully System (NBS), this study used a cluster randomized experimental design involving 24 elementary schools served by Oakland Unified School District. In the summer of 2015, schools were randomly assigned to either an experimental group or a wait-listed control group--with 12 schools per group. Prior to randomization, the sample was stratified by types of school-wide programming being implemented (no program, Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports, Social-Emotional Learning or Restorative Practice, or a combination of 2 or more of these programs). Schools were then randomized within each stratum. Treatment schools began implementing NBS in Fall 2015 and continued to do so until the end of the second academic year in Spring 2017. During the same time-period, control schools conducted business as usual (e.g., continued to address bullying as they usually do/had done in the past).
Note
Funding institution(s): United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice (2014-CK-BX-0007).
Availability
Delivery
One or more files in this study are not available for download due to special restrictions; consult the study documentation to learn more on how to obtain the data.
Alternative Identifiers
  • 37268 (Type: ICPSR Study Number)
Relations
  • Is previous version of
    DOI: 10.3886/ICPSR37268.v1

Update Metadata: 2019-05-28 | Issue Number: 2 | Registration Date: 2019-05-28

Hanson, Thomas (2019): A Randomized Impact Evaluation of the No Bully System, California, 2015-2017. Archival Version. Version: v0. ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37268