1Universidad Estatal de Milagro, Milagro, Ecuador

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71068/gp000041

Keywords:

school bullying, prevention, educational intervention, school climate, academic achievement, basic education

Abstract

School bullying is an educational problem that affects school coexistence, perceived safety, and the conditions required for learning; consequently, prevention requires sustained institutional responses. The general objective was to evaluate the incidence of intervention strategies for preventing school bullying on academic achievement among upper-basic-education students. A quantitative quasi-experimental study with pretest-posttest measurement and a comparison group was conducted with an analytical sample of 180 students over four weeks. A 12-item five-point Likert instrument was administered, with six items addressing participation in prevention and six addressing academic achievement. Analyses included descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s alpha, Welch’s t test, Cohen’s d, and a linear model adjusted for pretest scores. Participation in prevention reached M = 3.354 (SD = 0.813), academic achievement reached M = 3.391 (SD = 0.537), and overall internal consistency was α = .877. At posttest, the intervention group obtained M = 71.405, whereas the comparison group obtained M = 64.230; the difference was statistically significant, t = 4.746, p < .001, with d = .708. After controlling for pretest scores, intervention condition was associated with an additional 7.481 points, 95% CI [6.061, 8.901]. The findings indicate that the preventive strategies were associated with better final academic performance and greater preventive participation. Nevertheless, the absence of random assignment requires interpretation within the limits of the quasi-experimental design and prevents definitive causal conclusions.

References

1. Hosozawa M, Bann D, Fink E, Elsden E, Baba S, Iso H, Patalay P. Bullying victimisation in adolescence: Prevalence and inequalities by gender, socioeconomic status and academic performance across 71 countries. eClinicalMedicine. 2021;41:101142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101142.

2. Samara M, Da Silva Nascimento B, El-Asam A, Hammuda S, Khattab N. How can bullying victimisation lead to lower academic achievement? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the mediating role of cognitive-motivational factors. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(5):2209. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052209.

3. Laith R, Vaillancourt T. The temporal sequence of bullying victimization, academic achievement, and school attendance: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 2022;64:101722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2022.101722.

4. Fraguas D, Díaz-Caneja CM, Ayora M, Durán-Cutilla M, Abregú-Crespo R, Ezquiaga-Bravo I, Martín-Babarro J, Arango C. Assessment of school anti-bullying interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA Pediatrics. 2021;175(1):44-55. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.3541.

5. Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2021a). Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying perpetration and victimization: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 17(2), e1143. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1143

6. Lan M, Law N, Pan Q. Effectiveness of anti-cyberbullying educational programs: A socio-ecologically grounded systematic review and meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior. 2022;130:107200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107200.

7. Moore SE, Norman RE, Suetani S, Thomas HJ, Sly PD, Scott JG. Consequences of bullying victimization in childhood and adolescence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World Journal of Psychiatry. 2017;7(1):60-76. https://doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v7.i1.60.

8. Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2021b). What works in anti-bullying programs? Analysis of effective intervention components. Journal of School Psychology, 85, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.12.002

9. Guzman-Holst C, Zaneva M, Chessell C, Creswell C, Bowes L. Research review: Do antibullying interventions reduce internalizing symptoms? A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression exploring intervention components, moderators, and mechanisms. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2022;63(12):1454-1465. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13620.

10. Hensums M, de Mooij B, Kuijper SC, Fekkes M, Overbeek G. What works for whom in school-based anti-bullying interventions? An individual participant data meta-analysis. Prevention Science. 2023;24:1435-1446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-022-01387-z.

11. UNESCO. (2019). Behind the numbers: Ending school violence and bullying. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54675/TRVR4270

12. Salmivalli C. Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 2010;15(2):112-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2009.08.007.

13. Arseneault L. Annual Research Review: The persistent and pervasive impact of being bullied in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2018;59(4):405-421. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12841.

14. Kärnä A, Voeten M, Little TD, Poskiparta E, Alanen E, Salmivalli C. Going to scale: A nonrandomized nationwide trial of the KiVa antibullying program for grades 1–9. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2011;79(6):796-805. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025740.

15. Kärnä A, Voeten M, Little TD, Poskiparta E, Kaljonen A, Salmivalli C. A large-scale evaluation of the KiVa antibullying program: Grades 4–6. Child Development. 2011;82(1):311-330. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01557.x.

16. Bradshaw CP. Translating research to practice in bullying prevention. American Psychologist. 2015;70(4):322-332. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039114.

17. Cook CR, Williams KR, Guerra NG, Kim TE, Sadek S. Predictors of bullying and victimization in childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic investigation. School Psychology Quarterly. 2010;25(2):65-83. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020149.

18. Espelage, D. L., & Hong, J. S. (2017). School climate, bullying, and school violence. In K. H. Mayer & H. M. O’Neill (Eds.), School safety and violence prevention. Routledge.

19. Evans CBR, Fraser MW, Cotter KL. The effectiveness of school-based bullying prevention programs: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 2014;19(5):532-544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2014.07.004.

20. Farrington DP, Ttofi MM. School-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization. Campbell Systematic Reviews. 2009;5(1):1-148. https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2009.6.

21. Hall WJ. The effectiveness of policy interventions for school bullying: A systematic review. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research. 2017;8(1):45-69. https://doi.org/10.1086/690565.

22. Hymel S, Swearer SM. Four decades of research on school bullying: An introduction. American Psychologist. 2015;70(4):293-299. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038928.

23. Jiménez-Barbero JA, Ruiz-Hernández JA, Llor-Esteban B, Pérez-García M. Effectiveness of antibullying school programmes: A systematic review by evidence levels. Children and Youth Services Review. 2012;34(9):1646-1658.

24. Menesini E, Salmivalli C. Bullying in schools: The state of knowledge and effective interventions. Psychology, Health & Medicine. 2017;22(sup1):240-253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2017.1279740.

25. Nakamoto J, Schwartz D. Is peer victimization associated with academic achievement? A meta-analytic review. Social Development. 2010;19(2):221-242. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00539.x.

26. Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Blackwell.

27. Polanin JR, Espelage DL, Pigott TD. A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review. 2012;41(1):47-65.

28. Smith PK. Bullying: Definition, types, causes, consequences and intervention. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2016;10(9):519-532. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12266.

29. Ttofi MM, Farrington DP. Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology. 2011;7:27-56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-010-9109-1.

30. UNESCO. (2022). The key role of teachers in ending school violence and bullying: Technical brief. UNESCO.

31. Waasdorp TE, Bradshaw CP. The overlap between cyberbullying and traditional bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2015;56(5):483-488.

32. Wolke D, Lereya ST. Long-term effects of bullying. Archives of Disease in Childhood. 2015;100(9):879-885. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2014-306667.

33. Zych I, Ortega-Ruiz R, Del Rey R. Scientific research on bullying and cyberbullying: Where have we been and where are we going. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 2015;24:188-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2015.05.015.

Downloads

Published

2024-10-10

How to Cite

Bastidas González, L. D. (2024). 1Universidad Estatal de Milagro, Milagro, Ecuador. Genius-Pro Ciencia Y Sociedad, 2(4), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.71068/gp000041