Effects of antibullying programs on teachers’ interventions in bullying situations. A meta‐analysis

Abstract

Even though teachers are key figures of a program's effectiveness, most intervention studies have not focused explicitly on the effects of antibullying programs at teacher level. We conducted a meta‐analysis into the effects of school‐based antibullying programs on determinants of teacher intervention, including teachers’ attitudes towards bullying, their self‐efficacy and knowledge regarding intervention strategies, and the effects on teachers’ bullying intervention itself. Following the PRISMA guidelines, 13 peer‐reviewed papers were retrieved that reported outcomes on teachers, staff, and students (N = 948, 2,471, and 138,311, respectively). Antibullying programs had a significant moderate effect on determinants of teacher intervention (g = 0.531) and a significant small to moderate effect on teacher intervention in bullying situations (g = 0.390). Results of the meta‐analysis indicate that the effectiveness of antibullying programs may increase when components are included to reinforce teachers’ attitudes, subjective norms, self‐efficacy, knowledge, and skills towards reducing bullying in the school.

The P.E.A.C.E. Pack Program in Italian High Schools: An Intervention for Victims of Bullying

“…Based on these considerations, our study seems to emphasize the importance of making teachers’ actions more frequent, effective and visible for pupils, since it is very crucial that teachers can be a trusted point of reference for dealing with bullying, especially for victims [ 57 ]. In addition, as revealed by a recent meta-analysis [ 7 ], although teachers are involved in the bullying phenomena, most studies have not analyzed the possible effects of anti-bullying programs on teachers’ intervention practices. However, even if anti-bullying programs can improve teachers’ self-efficacy in dealing with bullying, as well as their knowledge of the phenomenon, when students’ perceptions of their teachers in dealing with bullying have been analyzed [ 7 ], only small effects have been found.…”

“…Furthermore, bullying is a risk factor for suicide attempts among adolescents globally, as revealed by a recent study involving 48 countries [5], which showed that the prevalence of suicide attempts increased as a function of the frequency of bullying in the past month. Given the significance of the bullying phenomenon in society, it is not surprising that many scholars have dedicated their efforts to setting up and evaluating the effectiveness of anti-bullying interventions (for a meta-analytical review [6]).…”

“…Notwithstanding that most anti-bullying programs are commonly conducted in the school context, since it is precisely in school that most bullying episodes occur, many of them rely on professionals external to the school to deliver the intervention. Indeed, only a few teacher-led interventions, showing contrasting results, have been reported in the literature [ 7 ]. An example of a teacher-based anti-bullying program with promising results was the BIAS (Bullying in Sicilian Schools) study [ 8 ], implemented by the teachers of the first grade of secondary schools, revealing a decrease in the number of bullying episodes among students.…”

“…Indeed, the cost–benefit analysis of anti-bullying programs is crucial in convincing policy makers and practitioners to implement interventions [ 16 ]. Second, involving teachers in training paths focused on the bullying phenomena and in delivering anti-bullying programs for students could potentially strengthen their ability to directly deal with bullying in their everyday classroom practices [ 7 , 17 ]. This may foster teachers’ self-efficacy [ 7 ] that in turn may positively impact on their recruitment and retention, and more broadly on improvements in self-esteem, or good citizenship among students [ 18 ].…”

Methodological Analysis of the Effect of an Anti-Bullying Programme in Secondary Education through Communicative Competence: A Pre-Test–Post-Test Study with a Control-Experimental Group

“…In the education community, training and prevention actions must be implemented to involve families and all community members [39]. A number of authors have carried out multiple studies based on the effect of intervention programmes to reduce bullying prevalence with students [40,41], with students and teachers [42,43], and with family intervention [39,44,45]. Nevertheless, very few studies have focused on improving the cohesion levels of students through the promotion of language proficiency.…”