Posttraining Outcomes, Acceptability, and Technology-Based Delivery of the STAC Bystander Bullying Intervention Teacher Module: Mixed Methods Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Bullying is a significant problem for youth associated with wide-ranging negative consequences. Providing students who witness bullying with intervention strategies to act as defenders can reduce bullying and negative associated outcomes for both targets and bystanders. Educating teachers about bullying and training them to support students to intervene as defenders may increase the efficacy of bystander programs as teachers' attitudes and responses to bullying relate to bystander behavior. This is particularly important in middle school, when bullying peaks and rates of reporting bullying to teachers begin to decline. Reducing implementation barriers, including limited time and resources, must also be considered, particularly for schools in low-income and rural areas. Technology-based programs can increase access and scalability but require participant buy-in for adoption. OBJECTIVE: We used a mixed methods design to inform the development of the STAC teacher module, a companion training to a brief bullying bystander intervention. STAC stands for the four bystander intervention strategies: Stealing the Show, Turning it Over, Accompanying Others, and Coaching Compassion. Objectives included examining the effectiveness of the STAC teacher module and informing the translation of the training into a technology-based format that can be used as a companion to the technology-based STAC. METHODS: A sample of 17 teachers recruited from 1 middle school in a rural, low-income community completed pre- and posttraining surveys assessing immediate outcomes (ie, knowledge, confidence, comfort, and self-efficacy), intention to use program strategies, and program acceptability and relevance, followed by a qualitative focus group obtaining feedback regarding program appropriateness, feasibility, content, perception of need, and desire for web-based training. Descriptive statistics, 2-tailed independent-sample t tests, and thematic analyses were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Assessment of pre- and posttraining surveys indicated that teachers reported an increase in knowledge and confidence to support defenders, confidence and comfort in managing bullying, and bullying self-efficacy. Furthermore, most participants reported that they were likely or very likely to use STAC strategies to support students who intervene in bullying. Quantitative and qualitative data revealed that participants found the training easy to use, useful, relevant, and appropriate. Qualitative data provided feedback on ways of improving the program, including revising role-plays and guidance on understanding student behavior. Participants shared positive perceptions regarding program feasibility and need for bullying-specific prevention, the most significant barriers being cost and parent buy-in, suggesting the importance of including parents in the prevention process. Finally, participants shared the strengths of a web-based program, including ease of implementation and time efficiency, while indicating the importance of participant engagement and administration buy-in. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the effectiveness of the STAC teacher module in increasing knowledge and bullying self-efficacy and provides support for developing the module, including key information regarding considerations for web-based translation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».