Applying the Latest Research to Prevent Bullying: 

Empowering Schools to Change Behavior and Attitudes 

Today’s Presenters: 

Tracy Waasdorp, Senior Research Scientist Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Center for the Study and Prevention 

of Violence 

Amanda Nickerson, Professor and Director, Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention, University at Buffalo 

Discussants: 

Christina Weeter, Director, Division of Student Success, Kentucky Department of Education 

Mary Poulin Carlton, Ph.D., Social Science Analyst 

Date: December 3, 2019 | 2:00 PM EST 
 

 

Combining SEL* and Technology to Improve 

Bullying Detection and Intervention 

Tracy Evian Waasdorp, Ph.D M.S.Ed 

Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia 

Center for the Study & Prevention of Violence 

waasdorpt@email.chop.edu 

* SEL = Social Emotional Learning 
 

 

Acknowledgements 

 Co-developers of the BCCU: Catherine P. Bradshaw & Elise T. 

Pas 

 Developers of the CCU: Wendy Reinke & Keith Herman 

 Developers of TeachLivE ©: Lisa Dieker 

 Coaches: Stacy Johnson, Dana Marchese, Kristine Larson, 

Lauren Kaiser 

 Funding: National Institute of Justice (Award Number 2015-

CK-BX-0008, PIs: Bradshaw, Pas, Waasdorp) to UVA, Johns 

Hopkins and Sheppard Pratt 

 Disclaimer: Ideas expressed here do not represent the position or 

policy of the National Institute of Justice. 
Why Focus on Bullying? 

“A person is bullied when they

are exposed, repeatedly and 

over time, to negative actions

on the part of one or more 

other persons. Bullying often 

occurs in situations where 

there is a power or status

difference. Bullying includes 

actions like threatening,

teasing, name-calling,

ignoring, rumor spreading,

sending hurtful emails and text

messages, and leaving 

someone out on purpose” 

(Gladden et al., 2014; Olweus, 1993) 

• Bullying has far- reaching mental health,

behavioral, and

academic impacts 

• Also negatively impacts

bystanders and school 

climate 
 

 

 

Student vs. Staff Perceptions 

15,185 STUDENTS 

 Witness adults at school watching 

bullying and doing nothing 

◦ 43% 

 Believe adults at their school are 

NOT doing enough to stop or prevent 

bullying 

◦ 58% 

 Believe that teachers who tried to 

stop bullying only made it worse 

◦ 61% 

1,547 STAFF 

 Said they would intervene if 

they saw bullying 

◦97% 

 Believe they have effective 

strategies for handling 

bullying 

◦87% 

 Believe they made things 

worse when they intervened 

◦7% 

(Bradshaw et al., 2007) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Why Target Teachers? 

 High prevalence of bullying in schools 

 Students have more opportunity to experience 

bullying in the classroom (between 11-25%) 

 Teachers are on the front lines 

 Students rarely report bullying to teachers 

 Sample of 69,513 middle and high school youth only 

5.5% told an adult at school 

 Meta-analyses show effective bullying prevention 

programming includes: 

 Consistent discipline, classroom management, class rules 

specifically related to bullying, and training of teachers 
 

 

 

 

 

Why Target Teachers? 

 Teachers struggle to detect and intervene with 

bullying 

 Non-response, delayed responding, or ineffective 

responses worsen the situation 

 Students feel teachers “don’t care” about bullying 

 Difficulty discriminating between typical peer conflict 

and bullying 

 Teachers feel there isn’t time in the day to address 

bullying; students also recognize time as a problem 
 

 

 

 

Project Framework 

 Helping teachers focus on relationships with students 

 Students need to know that while teachers may not have 

time, they do care. 

 Open communication between students and teachers 

regarding peer relationships 

 Helping teachers shift from simple behavioral 

responses to SEL focused responses 

 Stop treating bullying as disruptive behavior...instead 

validate student emotions/experiences, use modeling, and 

take students’ perspectives 
Bullying Classroom Check-Up (BCCU) 

(Pas, Waasdorp, Bradshaw, 2019) 
 

BCCU Original Components 

Adapted Classroom Check-Up (CCU) 

 Reinke, 2006; Reinke, Herman, et al., 2011 

TeachLivE mixed-reality simulator to 

provide teachers with guided practice 

and feedback. 

 Dieker, et al., 2007; Dieker et al., 2014 

Bullying Bulletins 
 

Detecting Bullying 

 Educate teachers about bullying 

 Practice in the simulator 

 Promote monitoring and data-based decisionmaking 

 Develop classroom management strategies 

(e.g., active supervision) 

 Foster relationships and trust so students 

help teachers know when it is happening 
 

 

 

 

 

Examples to Foster

Teacher-Student Relationships 

 Regular non-contingent positive interactions 

and showing care 

 Let the students get to know you; You get to 

know your students 

 Give students a voice 

 Get to know/share with families 

Observe students and acknowledge when they might be having a 

bad day or a problem, and let students know you are there to help 

or talk. 

(Pas, Waasdorp, Bradshaw, 2019; Bradshaw & Waasdorp, 2019) 
 

 

 

Preventing Bullying 

 Effective classroom management 

 Target positive behavioral supports that 

include social behaviors (e.g., setting, teaching, 

and reinforcing expectations) 

 Build teacher-student and student-student 

relationships 

 Engaging and well-paced instruction 

 Take note of higher risk times 
 

 

 

 

 

Examples of Prevention 

 Setting/displaying clear expectations regarding 

positive social behaviors 

 At the start of each year, and strategically throughout 

 Reinforcing positive social interactions 

 Modeling 

Draw attention to positive peer behaviors occurring, label the 

specific positive interaction: 

• “I like what I just saw between Jessie and Sarah, even though it 

seemed you guys did not agree about that project, you worked it 

out respectfully” 

• “I really like how you included Jake into your group. You guys are 

working together really well” 

(Pas, Waasdorp, Bradshaw, 2019; Bradshaw & Waasdorp, 2019) 
 

Responding to Bullying 

 Social-emotional responses 

(e.g., validating student emotions/ 

experiences, modeling, perspective taking) 

 Open discussions with whole class 

 Separate conversations with perpetrator and 

victim 

 Identifying consequences for obvious bullying 

behavior and implementing consistently 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Examples of Responding 

 What to do when you detect bullying in your classroom 

 Discussions after class 

 Talking with the perpetrator 

 Talking with the victim 

 Consistent consequences for clear bullying behavior 

Indicate that you want to help and will discuss the situation with 

each student involved privately outside of classroom time 

• “I did not see what happened here, but it looks like it is frustrating for 

both of you, I would really like to know more about what happened. Let’s 

set up a meeting outside of class so I can separately talk to you both.” 

• “I know he said he was “only kidding,” but I would be hurt if someone 

said something like that to me. While I don’t know the entire situation, 

that did not seem respectful to me. I am here if you want to talk later.” 

(Pas, Waasdorp, Bradshaw, 2019; Bradshaw & Waasdorp, 2019) 
 

 

 

 

Bullying Classroom Check-Up (BCCU) 

•Motivational interview with bullying framework overview 

•Teacher completes classroom ecology checklist 

•Coach conducts classroom visits 

Step 1: 

Assess 

•Coach provides personalized feedback Step 2: 

Feedback 

• Coach and teacher engage in collaborative 

problem solving and goal setting 

Step 3: Goal 

Setting 

• Guided practice of prevention, detection, and 

responding in TeachLivE© simulator 

Step 4: Guided 

Practice 

• Teacher monitors daily implementation 

• Faded support from coach 

Step 5: 

Maintenance 
Mixed-Reality Simulator 

Developed by Lisa Dieker, Michael Hynes, & 

Charles Hughes (UCF) 
 

 

What is a ‘simulator’? 

•TeachLivE mixed-reality simulator 

•A small classroom of 5 ‘student’ avatars responding in real 

time 

•Developed as a tool for training pre-service teachers 

•Participants/learners can receive coaching following the 

session 


 

Study Design 

 Teacher-randomized controlled trial 

with 80 middle school teachers (grades 

6-8) in 5 schools. 

40 randomized to intervention/40 

control 

 Initial coaching across 2016-17 school 

year, with 2017-18 follow-up support 
 

 

__________________________ 

Summary of Results 

 100% of teachers agree/strongly agree that they 

should intervene with bullying 

 86.1% of teachers agree/strongly agree that they 

could benefit from coaching to improve how to 

address bullying in the classroom 

 Coached teachers more likely to recognize that adults 

at school are not doing enough to address bullying. 

 The BCCU was very low burden and only required 

about 4 hours of active teacher time. 
 

 

 

Summary of Results 

 Improved teachers’ reports of responding to, and 

improved the detection of, bullying. 

 More likely to witness all forms of bullying 

 More likely to talk to other school staff, refer to a guidance 

counselor, and intervene both with the perpetrator and 

victim. 

 Observers weren’t more likely to tally aggression in 

coached teacher’s classrooms 
 

 

 

Take Home Concepts 

Understand the roles of bullying, focus on 

all involved 

 Recognize all forms as aggression and 

bullying 

Model desired behaviors 

 Show that these behaviors matter! 

 Positive bystander 

 Seeking appropriate help 

(See Bradshaw & Waasdorp, 2019 for more ) 
 

 

How is BCCU Different? 

 Fully teacher focused, not student focused 

 Emphasizes classroom management and 

teacher SEL capacity 

 Balances needs to address bullying and cover 

academic content 

 We can train teachers to respond to bullying 

without substantially increasing burden on their 

time 
 

 

 

How is BCCU Different? 

 Provides guided practice using mixed-reality 

simulation 

 Building skills in an accelerated fashion, in a 

controlled environment can help overcome skill 

deficits, build buy-in, and promote uptake of 

interventions 

 Allows for building “muscle memory”: 

 Teachers shared in focus groups that they really liked having 

a simulator to test out and practice new strategies 

 TeachLive feels real: 

 Teachers shared in focus groups that they “have a 

relationship with these five kids” 
 

 

Future Directions 

 Examine effectiveness of BCCU with: 

 Larger 40 school trial 

 Late-elementary school focus 

 Expanded Psychoeducational Component for school-wide 

professional development (PDs) 

 Student self-report data 

 Schools in Pennsylvania seeking PDs and certification 

 There are no evidence-based, stand alone PDs 

 Use of the TeachLive technology to assist bystanders 

or victims of bullying. 
 

 

 

 

 

References Related to the BCCU 

 Manuscripts: 

 Pas, E. T., Waasdorp, T. E., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2019). Coaching

Teachers to Detect, Prevent, and Respond to Bullying Using Mixed- Reality Simulation: An Efficacy Study in Middle Schools.

International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 1-12. 

doi:doi.org/10.1007/s42380-018-0003-0 

 Bradshaw, C. P., Waasdorp, T. E., Pas, E. T., Larson,K. E., & Johnson, S.

(2018). Coaching teachers in detection and intervention related to

bullying. In J. Gordon (Ed.), Bullying Prevention and Intervention at 

School: Integrating Theory and Research into Best Practices. (pp. 

53-72): Springer. 

 Book on an SEL approach for bullying prevention: 

 Bradshaw, C. P., & Waasdorp, T. E. (2019). Preventing Bullying in 

Schools: A Social and Emotional Learning Approach to Prevention and 

Early Intervention. New York: Norton Publishing (available on 

Amazon.com) 
30 

‘-

 

 BYSTANDER INTERVENTION IN 

BULLYING 

Amanda B. Nickerson, Ph.D. 

Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention 

ed.buffalo.edu/alberti 

nickersa@buffalo.edu 

@DrAmandaNick @UB_BullyPrevCtr 
‘-

 

 

 

 

Learning Objectives 

• Identify roles of youth in bullying interactions 

• Describe the five-step bystander intervention model as applied to 

bullying 

• Learn about the individual and situational variables that predict 

bystander intervention 

• Identify the implications of the role of bystanders in bullying 

prevention and intervention 

31 
‘-

 

 

 

Bullying Roles 

Role Fluidity: Moderate Involvement (46%), Victimized Defender 

(46%), Aggressive Victimized Defender (6%), High Involvement (2%) 

Jenkins, Snyder, & Miller, 2018; Salmivalli et al.,1996 32 
‘-

 

Importance of Bystander Reactions 

Assisting and reinforcing Defending 

• rewards bullying • provides negative feedback to bully 

• gives power/attention to the • makes victims less 

perpetrator anxious/depressed 

Sainio, Veenstra, Huitsing, & Salmivalli, 2011; Salmivalli, 2010 

33 
‘-

 

 

 

Why Don’t More Bystanders Intervene? 

Present > 80% of the time; Intervene <20% of the time 

“No one else is 

doing anything” 

(diffusion of 

responsibility) “It’s going to get 

turned on me” 

(fear of 

retaliation) 

“Everyone else 

must think it’s 

OK” (pluralistic 

ignorance) “He/she got 

what was 

coming” 

(blame the 

victim; just 

world) 

Barhight, Hubbard, & Hyde, 2013; Cappadocia, Pepler, Cummings, & Craig, 2012; 

Lodge & Frydenberg, 2005; Rigby & Johnson, 2006 

34 
‘-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Defenders: What We Know 

• High social status1 

• Social skills2,3,4 

• assertion, but less cooperation 

• High affective empathy 1, 9 

• Internalizing problems6,7 

• Likely to be victimized8,9 

Context, peer group influence, and relationships matter 

1Nickerson & Mele-Taylor, 2014; 2Jenkins, Demaray, Fredrick, & Summers, 2016; 

3Tennant & Jenkins, under review; 4 6Demaray, Summers, Jenkins, & Becker, 2014; 

7Jenkins, Demaray, & Tennant, 2017; 8Tennant & Jenkins, under review; 

9Jenkins, Snyder, Miller, under review; 9 Nickerson, Aloe, & Werth, 2015 35 
‘-

 

 

 

Process of Bystander Intervention: 5 Step Model 

Latané & Darley, 1970 Note: neque digni 

and in aliquet nisl 

et a umis varius. 36 
‘-

 

 

 

Bystander Intervention 5 Step Model Applied to

Bullying and Sexual Harassment 

RMSEA = 0.05, CFI = 0.98, GFI = 0.94 (N = 562 high school students) 

Nickerson, Aloe, Livingston, & Feeley, 2014 

Confirmatory factor analysis (with measure applied to bullying) has 

supported five-factor structure, internal consistency of subscales, 

measurement equivalence across grade and gender, and convergent 

validity with 4th-8th graders 

Jenkins & Nickerson, 2017; Jenkins, Fredrick, & Nickerson, 2018 

37 
‘-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Predictors of the 5 steps 

Notice 

• Victimized youth more likely to notice bullying1 

Interpret 

• Victimized boys were more likely to interpret bullying as an emergency; opposite for girls2 

• Boys lacking affective empathy were less likely to interpret bullying as an emergency 3 

Accept 

• Boys lacking affective empathy were less likely to see it as their responsibility to intervene3 

Know 

•Boys who ignored bullying knew more about how to intervene than boys who did not ignore1 

•Girls who ignored bullying knew less about how to intervene than girls who did not ignore1 

Act 

•Boys with low affective empathy were less likely to intervene3 

•Internalizing problems can inhibit youth from intervening, even if they have the skills to do so4 

1Jenkins & Nickerson, 2017; 2Jenkins & Nickerson, 2019; 3 Menolascino & Jenkins, 2018; 4 

Jenkins & Fredrick, 2017 

38 
‘-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is Bystander Intervention Effective? 

Bystander intervention 

• Abates victimization 50% of the time 

• Decreases frequency of bullying in classroom 

• Associated with higher sense of safety 

School-based bullying prevention programs successful in increasing

bystander intervention (Polanin, Espelage, & Pigott, 2012) 

• Effect size of .43 for high school; .14 for elementary school 

Craig, Pepler & Atlas (2000); Gini, Pozzoli, Borghi, & Franzoni (2008); O’Connell,

Hawkins et al. (2001); Pepler, & Craig (1999); Salmivalli, Voeten, & Poskiparta (2011) 39 
‘-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current Work (NIJ) 

• Training 3rd. 6th, and 9th grade student “brokers” (25-30 per grade) 

• Bystander intervention training (teach and practice 5 steps,

emphasize multiple options for intervening) 

• Report to trusted adult 

• Speak up if safe to do so 

• Band together with others 

• Distract or interrupt 

• Help target get away 

• Comfort, support, reach out to target 

• Meet twice a month with counselor and peers for Bully 

Proofing curriculum 

National Institute of Justice Award 2016-CK-BX-0009 PI: Dr. Richard Gilman The content is solely the 

responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIJ.. 

40 
‘-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preliminary Findings (NIJ) 

• 1 year later, students in the intervention condition compared to 

students who did not receive the intervention (after controlling for

baseline scores as covariate) 

• Did not differ significantly in noticing and interpreting it as a 

problem 

• Had significantly higher self-reported scores in accepting 

responsibility, knowing what to do, and acting to intervene 

National Institute of Justice Award 2016-CK-BX-0009 PI: Dr. Richard Gilman The content is solely the 

responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIJ.. 

41 
‘-

 

 

Preliminary Findings (NIJ) 

Reported Incidents 

35 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

Baseline Intervention Year 1 Intervention Year 2 

Bullying Inappropriate/Cruel Teasing 

National Institute of Justice Award 2016-CK-BX-0009 PI: Dr. Richard Gilman The content is solely the 

responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIJ.. 42 
‘-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current and Future Work 

• Developing and testing an intervention that combines social norms

campaign on bullying, sexual harassment, and bystander intervention

with bystander intervention training of select students in high schools 

95% of students at xx high school agree that 

students should NOT call others hurtful names 

Need to know more about which bystander interventions are most effective 

in different situations (relationships, bullying vs. sexual harassment, etc.) 

The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of 

Education, through Grant R305A190139 to the State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo (PI: 

Amanda Nickerson). The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the 

Institute or the U.S. Department of Education. 

43 
44 

‘-

Thank you for your interest and for making a difference. 

Questions?