hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Lessons From a Concurrent Evaluation of Eight Antibullying Programs Used in Sweden
School of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden .
University of Gävle, Faculty of Education and Business Studies, Department of Culture Studies, Religious Studies and Educational Sciences, Education.
School of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden .
2013 (English)In: American Journal of Evaluation, ISSN 1098-2140, E-ISSN 1557-0878, Vol. 34, no 2, p. 170-189Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Sweden has a low prevalence of bullying and Swedish schools are legally obliged to have anti-bullying policies. Many commercial programs are available. A mixed methods, quasi-experimental, concurrent evaluation of 8 programs, chosen from a pool of 21 widely used anti-bullying programs, was planned. Preliminary data, based on 835 stakeholder interviews, both individual and group, revealed extensive program-contamination in "treatment" schools (n = 31), and extensive program use in nominally designated control/comparison schools (n = 8). An evolved evaluation strategy focused on arrays of program components, use of which was assessed through detailed qualitative data gathered from principals, teaching and non-teaching staff, anti-bullying teams, and pupils. Bullying victimization, Grades 4-9, in 39 schools, was assessed by questionnaire, administered in three waves. Responserates were 76.1% (with N = 10,919) at the first wave, 74.3% (of 10,660) at the second wave, and

70.6% (of 10,523) at the final wave. Longitudinal aggregate and individual outcomes (3,487 pupils answered all three questionnaires) were assessed. Prevalence of victimization was 8.1% at first wave and (7.4% at last). Based on individual data, persistent victimization (bullied at both waves) was estimated at 1.5% with 4.7% experiencing a worsening situation (not bullied at the first wave but bullied at last) and 4.8% with an improved situation. Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to designate intervention types (shared arrays of strong, weak, or absent component use) and schools with similar approaches. A quasi-experimental, longitudinal design with individual data and an aggregate cross-sectional follow-up indicated differences in effective, ineffective, and iatrogenic components, component clusters (intervention types), and successful schools.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 34, no 2, p. 170-189
Keywords [en]
hierarchical cluster analysis, program contamination, bullying prevention, Swedish schools
National Category
Social Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-14297DOI: 10.1177/1098214012471886ISI: 000209634000002Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84877096990OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-14297DiVA, id: diva2:622963
Available from: 2013-05-23 Created: 2013-05-23 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Gill, Peter Edward

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Gill, Peter Edward
By organisation
Education
In the same journal
American Journal of Evaluation
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 968 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf