Espelage, D. (2013). Why are bully prevention programs failing in U.S. Schools?. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 10(2), 121–124.

Abstract

Bullying among school-age children is highly prevalent, reduces academic achievement, and results in psychosocial problems that extend into adulthood (Copeland, Wolke, Angold, & Costello, 2013; Espelage, Low, & De La Rue, 2011). Despite the costs of bullying, the impact of bullying prevention programs in the United States has been disappointing, especially in middle schools. Two meta-analyses found that effects were non-existent or too small to be practically helfpul (Smith, Schneider, Smith, & Ananiadou 2004; Merrell, Gueldner, Ross, & Isava, 2008). A third found that programs reduced bullying in non-U.S. countries by 23% but effects for U.S. studies were significantly lower (Ttofi & Farrington, 2011). The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP) is considered the “gold standard” of bully prevention and is found in thousands of U.S. school districts and supported by a number of State Departments of Education. However, the efficacy of this program is questionable (Espelage, 2012). Studies conducted by the OBPP itself have been methodologically limited and only marginally positive. A 1998 evaluation of the OBPP in six South Carolina districts did not include random assignment and did not include a long-term follow-up. Although the original design called for a two year eavluation, pre-post data were only collected in the first year because implementation was inadequate during year two (Olweus & Limber, 2010). And, the pre-post data have yet to appear in a peer-reviewed publication. Since then, only one U.S.-based randomized controlled trial (RCT) study of the OBPP has been published and that included an RCT of 10 schools, where reductions of bullying were reported only for White students (Bauer, Lozano, & Rivara, 2007). Given the dearth of support for this program, the OBPP is no longer on the Substance and Mental Health Services Health Administration (SAMSHA) National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs (www.nrepp.samhsa.gov). Thus, the “blue-print” designation for the OBPP program in U.S. schools seems premature given the following three criteria set-forth by the blue-print committee (Elliott, 1997): (1) That the program had produced positive effects on relevant target groups (students in this case) in a relatively rigorous scientific evaluation; (2) That the effects had lasted for at least one year; (3) That the program had produced positive results in at least one site beyond the original one. Hence, it is curious that the National Educational Association and a number of State Departments of Education endorse the OBPP.