Cyber bullying has become a growing concern among students, parents and educators. In a national representative survey of 10-17 year-olds, twice as many children and youth indicated that they had been victims and perpetrators of online harassment in 2005 as compared to 1999/2000. The 2006 NCMEC report estimated that of the 24 million internet users between ages 10-17, nearly ten-percent have reported some form of online harassment. The Pew Internet and American Life Project supported these findings, indicating 32% of online teens had experienced some form of online harassment. Their report also indicated that 38% of all online girls reported experiencing some type of online bullying. Additionally, teens that used social network sites like MySpace and Facebook, and teens that used the internet daily were more likely to say that they have been cyberbullied. The study also revealed the majority (59%) of Internet harassment comes from other minors. The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University's study, Enhancing Child Safety & Online Technologies concurs with these findings. The 2008 report concluded that bullying and harassment, most often by peers, are the most frequent threats that minors face, both online and offline.

One approach to reducing negative online behavior and reducing chances of becoming a victim of cyberbullying is prevention through education, such as the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit couched within the D.A.R.E. program. Educating youth about the consequences, teaching them the value of respecting others, and making them aware of effective steps to manage and resolve cyberbullying issues are critical to a comprehensive cyberbullying awareness program.

This evaluation focuses on the effectiveness of the extension unit offered to assist educators and students in addressing Internet safety/cyberbullying risks. An impact study on the long term behavioral changes is beyond the scope of this extension unit evaluation. The study assessed whether the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit was successful in encouraging youth in Grades 5 and 6 to: (1) understand the 3 KEEPs of internet safety (Keep Safe, Keep Away and Keep Telling) as applied to cases of cyberbullying, (2) apply strategies to reduce chances of being a cyberbullying victim, and (3) understand the dangers of revealing personal information through online communication. The evaluation was accomplished through: (1) surveys of students who watched the Faux Paw Meets the First Lady movie (treatment group) and those who did not watch the movie (control group), (2) interview feedback of the D.A.R.E. officers delivering the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit, and (3) information from the classroom teachers of students participating in the extension unit.

The evaluation was performed within a pre-test/post-test design, with both a treatment and a control group. Following the control surveys, students were given the same cyberbullying training as the treatment group. A follow-up survey is planned to examine knowledge retention of a sample of the original treatment group, and will take place 6-8 months after the delivery of the cyberbullying extension unit. Additionally, we plan to compare the efficacy of the multi-media presentation of the material, versus a traditional lecture style format. A small sample of students received content without the media (Faux Paw Meets the First Lady). Part II follow-up will compare knowledge retention of the material/content 6-8 months after delivery of content delivered in this lecture format vs. a multi-media format delivered with the same office.

Data were collected from 510 treatment students and 646 control students, in 41 classes chosen from sixteen schools, comprised of three private and thirteen public schools in 4 states: Missouri, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and Louisiana. Three of the schools served an urban region, nine suburban regions and four were located in a rural area. Approximately 45% were African-American, 53% were White, 1% were Native American/Alaskan Native, and 1% were Hispanic. The schools were broken into groups that would receive the additional training (treatment) and those which did not receive the extension unit (control). Approximately half the schools were used as control groups and half were used as treatment groups. The program was delivered to classrooms of students, and the analysis was performed at the individual level. The evaluation was conducted after student assignment to classrooms and D.A.R.E. assignment to schools had already taken place.

The examination of the pre-test responses for Internet safety knowledge related to Cyberbullying indicated that, in this sample of Grade 5 and 6 students, their knowledge was limited to the response to tell a trusted adult, and in some cases their responses included tell the person to stop. Very few pretest differences between the control and treatment group were noted. This is important because it suggests that the control and treatment groups were very similar at the pre-test in terms of the variables of interest.

Findings

The D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit has met the needs of educators and D.A.R.E. officers who shared its importance in conveying this current and relevant topic to today's students. The guide and resources have filled the gap in meeting their immediate training needs. It has proven to be an effective way to bring up stimulating conversation about cyberbullying and kept students' attention and interest. It is very encouraging that differences were noted between the control and treatment group.

Key findings from the D.A.R.E. Cyberbullying Extension Unit treatment group:

The number of students describing multiple positive reactions to cyberbullying scenarios increased by over 43%.
Student recognition that they should tell a trusted adult when someone else was being cyberbullied went up 77%.
Students recognized the 3 Keeps of Internet Safety, including not giving out personal information; they were taught the dangers of revealing personal information through online communication.
Students recognized the 3 Keeps of Internet Safety, including not giving out personal information; they were taught the dangers of revealing personal information through online communication.
The cyberbullying unit compared to the bullying unit, gave a more complete picture of cyberbullying responses including technical solutions.
Students used references to the Faux Paw Meets the First Lady movie when describing responses to a cyberbullying situation.
The unit was essential to providing D.A.R.E. officers with the instructional materials they required to teach cyberbullying.
Teachers found the content relevant and timely, D.A.R.E. officers' depth and breathe of knowledge valuable in answers students questions, and students highly motivated and engaged during the movie and with the follow up discussion and group work.

Recommendations

Data indicate that there is an overlap in the instruction between the D.A.R.E. Bullying and Cyberbullying Units. However, although the D.A.R.E. Bullying Unit results in a modest increase in knowledge applicable to Cyberbullying, the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit is effective particularly with regards to technological aspects of cyberbullying, and provides insight about positive responses when someone else is cyberbullied. In addition, the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit helps students understand negative actions such as tell them to stop which may serve to antagonize the cyberbully into continuing their behavior, or delete the message which can eliminate a source of evidence and a means to track the perpetrator.

Three recommendations are listed:

Instructions regarding the use of PowerPoint and the PowerPoint resources should be provided to the D.A.R.E. officers.
Encouragement to use the PowerPoint should be included in the D.A.R.E. instructor workbook and during training
Extended time to cover the topic more in depth. Cyberbullying is such a current topic, that students were engaged and enthusiastically participated in the lessons. Extra time and material could be used to expand the topic even further.

Introduction

Cyber bullying has become a growing concern among students, parents and educators. In a nationally representative survey of 10-17 year-olds, twice as many children and youth indicated that they had been victims and perpetrators of online harassment in 2005 compared with 1999/2000 (Wolak, Mitchell, & Finkelhor, 2006). The Crimes Against Children Research Center and The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children's 2006 report Online Victimization of Youth: Five Years Later estimated that of the 24 million internet users between ages ten and seventeen, nearly ten-percent have reported some form of online harassment. Just a year later, the Pew Internet and American Life Project Parents and Teens Survey Study indicated 32% of online teens have experienced some form of online harassment. The report also indicated that 38% of all online girls and 39% of teens who used social network sites like MySpace and Facebook reported experiencing some type of online bullying. Additionally, teens that used the internet daily were more likely to say that they have been cyberbullied. The study also revealed the majority (59%) of Internet harassment comes from other minors. The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University's study, Enhancing Child Safety & Online Technologies concurs with these findings. The 2008 report concluded that bullying and harassment, most often by peers, are the most frequent threats that minors face, both online and offline. As noted, offline bullying tends to peak in middle school (Devoe et al. 2005), but online harassment tends to peak later and continue into high school (Smith et al. 2008, Wolak et al. 2006) Additionally, as shared by Ybarra (2005), youth who report being harassed online report a myriad of concurrent psychosocial problems offline to include an increase in suicidal attempts, injuries requiring hospital stay or surgery, drug and alcohol abuse, runaway episodes, serious absenteeism and poor academic performance.

D.A.R.E. defines bullying as: Bullying is when someone uses his or her strength or power to control someone else. The D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe definition of cyberbullying is defined as: when someone uses his or her strength or power to control someone else using technology, such as websites, emails, IMs or cell phone text messages.

The D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit is a supplemental lesson delivered through the existing D.A.R.E. program. The cyberbullying unit includes a short video/movie presentation, Faux Paw Meets the First Lady, designed to encourage youth to apply the 3 KEEPs of internet safety (Keep Safe, Keep Away and Keep Telling) to cases of cyberbullying. The D.A.R.E. program has the philosophy to highlight prevention and awareness efforts emphasizing resistance skill training and personal and social skill training approaches. The extension unit evaluation focuses on assisting educators and students in addressing Internet safety/cyberbullying risks. Data collected serves to reveal the potential impact, and curriculum strengths and weaknesses for improved design and implementation. The extension unit evaluation also wants to reveal the value added by the cyberbullying lesson, and the impact of the multimedia presentation format.

The study assessed whether the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit was successful in encouraging youth in Grades 5 and 6 to: (1) understand the 3 KEEPs of internet safety (Keep Safe, Keep Away and Keep Telling) as applied to cases of cyberbullying, (2) apply strategies to reduce chances of being a cyberbullying victim, and (3) understand the dangers of revealing personal information through online communication. The evaluation was accomplished through: (1) surveys of students who watched the Faux Paw Meets the First Lady movie (treatment group) and those who did not watch the movie (control group), (2) interview feedback of the D.A.R.E. officers delivering the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit, and (3) information from the classroom teachers of students participating in the extension unit.

The survey assessment of the effectiveness of the unit was performed within a pre-test/post-test design, with both a treatment and a comparison group. Following the control surveys, students were given the same cyberbullying training as the treatment group. A follow-up survey is planned to examine knowledge retention of a sample of the original treatment group, and will take place 6-8 months after the delivery of the cyberbullying extension unit. Additionally, we plan to compare the efficacy of the multi-media presentation of the material, versus a traditional lecture style format. A small sample of students received content without the media (Faux Paw Meets the First Lady). Part II follow-up will compare knowledge retention of the material/content 6-8 months after delivery of content delivered in this lecture format vs. a multi-media format delivered with the same office.

Program Background

About iKeepSafe: Internet Keep Safe Coalition

The Internet Keep Safe Coalition is a registered 501(c)3, non-profit organization founded by Jacalyn S. Leavitt, former First Lady of Utah (1993-2003). iKeepSafe is a broad partnership of governors and/or first spouses, attorneys general, public health and educational professionals, law enforcement, and industry leaders working together for the health and safety of youth online. iKeepSafe uses these unique partnerships to disseminate safety resources to families worldwide. The mission statement for iKeepSafe is To give parents, educators, and policymakers the information and tools which empower them to teach children the safe and healthy use of technology and the Internet.

iKeepSafe educational resources teach children of all ages in a fun, age-appropriate way, the basic rules of Internet safety, ethics, and the healthy use of connected technologies. Through the storybook adventures of Internet safety icon, Faux Paw the Techno Cat, elementary school children learn about: Internet safety basics, cyber-bullying, screen time, and risks and dangers of downloading.

As of February 2009, three books accompanied with short video clips, have been produced. The first, Faux Paw's Adventures in the Internet, promotes keeping children safe online. The second in the series, Faux Paw Meets the First Lady, helps children learn how to handle cyberbullying and the third Faux Paw Goes to the Games, encourages children to balance real life with screen time. The iKeepSafe.org website reinforces the lessons taught in the books with educational materials, including PowerPoint presentations, activity sheets, coloring pages, quizzes, and educational games available for free download. Resources for teens include, Comcast's Emmy award-winning Student Voices on cyber-bullying and Tween and teen video presentations and tutorials. Parent resources are available in the iKeepSafe.org Parent Resource Center, including: 10 Actions Parents Must Take, Social Networking Sites, How to Handle Cyber-bullying, and MySpace Safety Know-how. Family Fun Lessons: to help parents teach Internet safety at home are also available.

The Faux Paw curriculum is based on research from Harvard's Center on Media and Child Health and created in partnership with the iKeepSafe Global Research Team, Penn State University Department of Education. iKeepSafe curriculum initiatives are part of a growing nationwide Internet safety campaign with pilot programs running in Australia, China, and India. Faux Paw stories are also available in Spanish, French, Mandarin, Cambodian, Vietnamese and other languages.

About D.A.R.E.

D.A.R.E. AMERICA is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit organization. D.A.R.E. America is the national umbrella organization under the auspices of which all D.A.R.E. programs are implemented and carried out. D.A.R.E. America, among other responsibilities, is charged with: development, promulgation and evaluation of D.A.R.E. curricula and student materials, instructor training and instructional materials, oversight and administration of D.A.R.E. programs in 10,000 US communities and 43 other countries, providing support and technical assistance to State D.A.R.E. Training Centers and local D.A.R.E. programs delivery of the curricula, and creating national awareness for D.A.R.E. and D.A.R.E. implementations.

The new D.A.R.E. 5^th / 6^th grade curriculum was developed with the assistance of key leadership from the Association for Supervision and Curriculum development, prevention research experts and D.A.R.E. America staff and consultants. The new 5^th / 6^th grade curriculum was based on principles of effective prevention programs and principles of effective teaching and learning to include National Health Standards.

The overarching goal of the entire D.A.R.E. program is to significantly reduce/eliminate the use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs and the use of violent behavior by young people. The primary objectives of the D.A.R.E. 5^th / 6^th grade curriculum are directed towards developing the capacities needed to enable students to take charge of their lives with particular emphasis on healthy, pro-social decision making skills regarding non-substance use and abuse.

A panel of experts convened to design the D.A.R.E. 5^th / 6^th grade curriculum. The considered a variety of dimensions in planning the overall curriculum including principles of effectiveness and identified by the Safe and Drug Free Schools Office in the Department of Education, Office of National Drug Control Policy, risk and protective factors, and science based principles of prevention outlined by the National Institute on drug Abuse. The particular principles from these various sources empathized in the new D.A.R.E. 5^th / 6^th grade curriculum include:

Beginning early and particularly in periods of transitions can improve outcomes
Developmentally appropriate programs can improve outcomes. This program begins in 5^th/ 6^th grade and was specifically designed with developmental considerations and reading levels.
Use of interactive methods can improve outcomes. All of the lessons involve student participation using a variety of methods.
Training improves outcomes; D.A.R.E. officers have been given intensive training in the use of the curriculum.
Decision making skills can improve outcomes.
Knowledge of risk can improve outcomes.
Healthy attitudes towards substances can improve outcomes.
Accurate normative awareness can improve outcomes.
Media Literacy can improve outcomes.
Media Literacy can improve outcomes.
Good communication skills can improve outcomes.
Good refusal skills can improve outcomes.
High self-efficacy (perceived ability to use a skill) can improve outcomes.

D.A.R.E. is universally credited with introducing the topic of substance abuse prevention into the classroom and the home, but has expanded to include internet safety, bullying prevention, Rx (prescription) and OTC (over the counter) drug abuse prevention, and gang involvement prevention programs. D.A.R.E. programs are delivered in 72% of US school districts. D.A.R.E. curricular materials are available in English, Spanish, French, German, Portuguese, Misquito, Papamiento, Hungarian and Braille.

D.A.R.E. is unique in using law enforcement officers to deliver the D.A.R.E. curricula. Law enforcement officers are specially trained to deliver the D.A.R.E. curricula. D.A.R.E. inherently has a strong mentoring component. Students are given a unique opportunity to bond over an extended period with the respected and stable adult role model, the D.A.R.E. instructor. The D.A.R.E. instructor facilitates student learning by using innovative and sound interactive educational techniques, guiding students as they work in small cooperative learning groups developing healthy decision-making skills that require high level critical thinking abilities.

Another central and distinguishing feature of this curriculum design is the overarching organizer which is a D.A.R.E. Decision Making Model. The information, principles, and skills and the activities within the lessons are all designed to build students' capacities to solve difficult personal and social problems related to substance use and abuse and to make and act on decisions that are informed and in their best interest.

Students build skills to:

D - Define problems and challenges

A - Assess available choices

R - Respond by making a choice

E - Evaluate their decisions

The D.A.R.E. Instructor, using techniques of facilitation, guides students as they work in small cooperative learning groups using the D.A.R.E. decision making model to apply to real life situations.

Only certified D.A.R.E. law enforcement officers may deliver the curriculum. D.A.R.E. Officer training includes a two week, eighty hour program. The D.A.R.E. Officer Training (DOT) model certifies each new D.A.R.E. officer to teach the K-4 Visitation Program, the Elementary curriculum, and the Middle School curriculum. Every officer who successfully completes the DOT is provided with a curriculum guide, instructor's workbook, charts, videos and all of the other educational materials that are required to teach the D.A.R.E. Program.

Additionally, each year D.A.R.E. America sponsors an International Training Conference offering the latest updates in the D.A.R.E. curriculum and other school based law enforcement subjects. D.A.R.E. Officers also have access to the D.A.R.E. website located at www.dare.org. The D.A.R.E. website delivers up-to-date information on state, national and international training opportunities, helpful tips for dealing with classroom issues, drug identification information, updates on the latest drug trends and information on other items of interest to D.A.R.E. Officers. In the hometown section officers can send the D.A.R.E. America webmaster news articles, photos and events of local interest in their city or state.

About the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe

Cyberbullying Prevention Extension Unit

The D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Supplemental Unit is covered after the full D.A.R.E. content, usually at week 10 or 11. The lesson follows the D.A.R.E. bullying lesson. The Faux Paw Meets the First Lady supplemental lesson is targeted for upper elementary students (through 5^th /6^th grade). Studies show that by middle school, students begin to engage in risky online behavior. In Faux Paw Meets the First Lady, the main character, Faux Paw makes a poor decision and engages in risky online behavior even though she knows it may be dangerous or have negative consequences.

The Cyberbullying Supplemental Extension Unit includes a number of resources to be used by the D.A.R.E. officers. Resources include a scripted lesson plan with accompanied PowerPoint presentation, the 8 minute movie Faux Paw Meets the First Lady, supplementary discussion questions and group activities, and take home parental materials. Additional print and multimedia materials related to internet safety are also provided.

The supplemental lesson begins by the D.A.R.E. officer introducing the topic of cyberbullying. Students are walked through the discussion about what the internet is and how people use the internet. This is followed by a discussion of safe practices on the internet. Students share examples and the officer complements the list, assuring that the 3 rules of Internet Safety are covered: Keep Safe, Keep Away and Keep Telling. Next, students discuss the definition and different types of cyberbullying, comparing it to the earlier D.A.R.E. bullying unit. Students receive a Movie Discussion Question Worksheet. Three questions are listed: What is the first thing Faux Paw does that goes against one of the three rules? Who helps Faux Paw after she makes her choices? and What did they do? Students are to jot down notes while watching the video.

Faux Paw Meets the First Lady tells the story of Faux Paw the techno cat who visits her cousin Six-Toe-Ernie in the capital. While emailing her Governor to give updates, she receives a message from someone claiming to be Six-Toe-Ernie. The imposter shares personal and embarrassing information about Faux Paw in a community chat room. Upset, Faux Paw replies back, giving out additional personal information in the reply. Now the cyberbully also knows where Faux Paw is currently located. With the help of Cousin Ernie and Curser, Faux Paw turns off the monitor and tells a trusted adult. With the help of an adult, the text dialogue between Faux Paw and the cyberbully is saved and printed out, which helps authorities track down the cyberbully. The movie is 8 minutes in length.

After students watch the movie, students are asked to work in small groups or pairs and complete the Movie Discussion Question Worksheet. Guided discussion follows. While not covered in the movie, the scripted supplemental resource asks the officers to also cover additional information. This includes: 1) everything you post online can stay there forever, 2) material posted online can potentially be seen by anyone-it can be public one day, 3) material posted online can be spread or copied, 4) nothing is ever guaranteed to be private, 5) if someone bullies you, a first line of defense is to block the bully (block the IM, email address), and 6) cyberbullies can be reported to the internet service provider (usually the adult who does this).

Objectives

The D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit was designed to persuade groups of students that replying to a cyberbully can be a dangerous online behavior with negative consequences. Alternative steps to manage and resolve being a victim of online harassment are presented. The 3 KEEPS/3 Internet Safety Steps delivered through the D.A.R.E. decision making process model are the main objectives of the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit. In Faux Paw Meets the First Lady, personal information that Faux Paw has posted earlier is shared in the chat room by the imposter. The imposter also includes mean remarks about Faux Paw. Faux Paw makes a poor decision and retaliates by posting mean things back and gives out personal information (where she is located) in the process.

Objective 1: Keep Safe

The D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit was designed to help students recognize the ways others can use or misuse information you post or give out online. Students are encouraged to not give out personal information. The consequences to giving out small pieces of information which can be pieced together and misused are played out in the Faux Paw Meets the First Lady movie. It is also suggested that a first line of defense would be to block the bullies email account or phone/cell phone. Text messages from specific recipients should not be opened. Alternatively, one could change their email address or phone numbers. As a matter of practice, both the D.A.R.E. officers and the movie share the importance of saving all correspondence in case it is needed for evidence, or to track down the perpetrator.

Objective 2: Keep Away

Students are encouraged to keep away from cyberbullies and not to respond back to mean online messages. Students are also introduced to the term and concept of flaming. At the beginning of the movie, McGruff the Crime Dog introduces the movie topic by explaining what flaming is and how Faux Paw the Techno Cat learned the hard way not to respond to mean or flaming messages. Cyberbullies gather information from your responses, and are often encouraged by receiving a reaction from their targets. Students are encouraged not to fall into this trap, and should not respond. They should turn off the monitor and/or exit the website. Additionally, it is pointed out that if the student is drawn into the activity, they may be held accountable for their actions even if they were provoked.

Objective 3: Keep Telling

Students are encouraged to tell parents/guardians or a trusted adult about cyberbullying or anything they see that makes them feel uncomfortable. In spite of the fact that the contact may be embarrassing, one cannot receive help without making someone aware of the issue. Additionally, the internet service provider and website host should be notified, as the person may be violating their Terms of Use Agreements, and they may be able to shut off their access, and assist in identifying the cyberbully.

Method

This extension unit evaluation focuses on the effectiveness of the extension unit offered to assist educators and students in addressing Internet safety/cyberbullying risks. An impact study on the long term behavioral changes is beyond the scope of this extension unit evaluation, and would be difficult to measure and correlate with a solitary lesson plan. Data collected serves to reveal the knowledge acquisition, and can reveal curriculum strengths and weaknesses for improved design and implementation. This evaluation measures how well the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit teaches a selected group of grades 5 and 6 students to: (1) understand the 3 KEEPs of internet safety (Keep Safe, Keep Away and Keep Telling) as applied to cases of cyberbullying, (2) apply strategies to reduce chances of being a cyberbullying victim, and (3) understand the dangers of revealing personal information through online communication.

The extension unit evaluation also wants to reveal the value added by the cyberbullying lesson, and the impact of the multimedia presentation format.

Design and Procedure

The assessment of the effectiveness of the cyberbullying extension unit was performed within a pre-test/post-test design, with both treatment and a comparison control groups. The D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Supplemental Extension Unit evaluation was accomplished through: (1) pre-assessment surveys for both the treatment and control groups, (2) control post-assessment surveys and treatment post-assessment surveys, (3) surveys of classroom teachers, and (4) interviews with D.A.R.E. officer facilitators.

Sixteen schools participated, comprised of three private and thirteen public schools in 4 states: Missouri, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and Louisiana. Three of the schools served an urban region, nine suburban regions and four were located in a rural area. Approximately 45% were African-American, 53% were White, 1% were Native American/Alaskan Native, and 1% were Hispanic. The schools were broken into groups that would receive the additional training (treatment) and those which did not receive the extension unit (control). Approximately half the schools were used as control groups and half were used as treatment groups. The program was delivered to classrooms of students, and the analysis was performed at the individual level. The evaluation was conducted after student assignment to classrooms and D.A.R.E. assignment to schools had already taken place.

Data collection occurred in the Fall/Winter 2008/09 between October 2008 and January 2009.

1156 fifth and sixth grade students, from 41 classes, participated in the study. The pre-assessment survey was administered to both the control and treatment groups before the supplemental D.A.R.E. Bullying Extension Unit was introduced. The control group took the post assessment survey immediately after completion of the Bullying Unit. The treatment group continued on to participate in the Cyberbullying Unit, and then completed the Treatment post-assessment survey. The time to complete the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit averaged about 40-60 minutes. D.A.R.E. officers had the opportunity to deliver the Cyberbullying extension unit with the control classes following the administration of the post-assessment survey.

Surveys were distributed by D.A.R.E. officers with the aid of the classroom teacher. The objective of the evaluation was explained in detail with the D.A.R.E. officers. Each officer also received detailed instructions on the evaluation by email, phone conversation and a follow up letter which also included a graphic explaining the steps and timeline.

Measures

The cyberbullying survey was organized around the D.A.R.E. and iKeepSafe frameworks with questions derived from the Cyberbullying Extension Unit content, including the scripted content, the movie, Faux Paw Meets the First Lady, and supplemental resources. In addition, basic demographic questions were included. Input was added from two focus groups with 5^th and 6^th grade children, and D.A.R.E. and iKeepSafe curriculum specialists. Numerous edits and several revisions were made before a pilot was tested with a select sample of 5^th and 6^th graders who completed the pre-assessment survey, participated in the extension unit content including watching the Faux Paw Meets the First Lady movie, and completed the post assessment survey. Analysis and feedback gave rise to a new edition. Additionally, a pilot test and modifications were made before the final version was designed.

Both the treatment classes and the control classes were administered the same pre-assessment survey. Both groups received the same post-assessment survey questions, but in addition, the treatment group had four additional questions related directly to the Faux Paw Meets the First Lady movie. Both the pre-assessment and post-assessment survey instruments contained items assessing understanding of the 3 KEEPS of internet safety, understanding about what cyberbullying is and strategies to mange and resolve cyberbullying issues, and understanding of the dangers of revealing personal information. The surveys included 8 Likert style questions (Table 1) where the students were asked to reply False (1), Probably False (2), Probably True (3), and True (4), which were designed to gain baseline content knowledge about basic internet safety and cyberbullying. This was followed by 3 multiple response questions to examine what components they believed were part of cyberbullying. Additionally, students were asked to answer how they would respond to two cyberbullying scenarios. One scenario involved a student receiving mean email/text messages and the other scenario involved a website posting mean and inappropriate things about a classmate. A counterbalancing technique was used in order to equalize the possibilities for order effects within the survey. For some students the open ended questions appeared at the beginning of the survey, for others it appeared at the end. The text answers to the open ended questions were coded based on the content of their responses to allow numerical comparisons. For example, in the first scenario the description indicates this was not the first mean message sent by the same person. Therefore, telling any trusted "adult" (parent, teacher, etc.), turning off the monitor or not replying received a score of 1. These are positive, desired reactions to the situationsóone of the main objectives of the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying curriculum. A negative value (-1) was given to unsafe practices such as replying-sending back a message. The value -999 was used to indicate no response to flag that person as non-responsive for calculation purposes. A zero could have indicated both a positive and negative response and therefore was not used for this purpose. Additionally, the open ended question responses were categorized into the three iKeepSafe objectives: Keep Safe (e.g.,block, don't give out information, change account, save/print), Keep Away (e.g., don't respond, turn off monitor), and Keep Telling (e.g., tell trusted adult, website host, ISP). Classification and coding were done by three independent raters. Disagreements between classification categories or values, where solved through group consensus.

Table 1: Likert Style Evaluation Questions

Likert Style Questions

1 - The Internet is useful?^*

2 - It is important to treat people how you would want to be treated, even online?

3 - It is important to always protect your name online?

4 - Something posted online can be traced back to the person who sent it?

5 - Cyberbullying is the same as bullying?

6 - Cyberbullying and normal bullying can have the same effect on someone?

7 - Cyberbullying and flaming can have the same effect on someone?

8 - What you post online can only be viewed by people you want to view it?

* the first question was used as a comfort filler question to begin the survey.

In order to understand whether there were differences between the control and treatment groups, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) calculations were completed. ANOVA investigations enable one to detect pre-treatment differences to be detected, and subsequently controlled for in follow-on analysis.

Pre-assessment Survey Comparison

Data from 510 treatment students and 646 control students were examined. Instruction and testing were conducted by 5 D.A.R.E. officers. For purposes of our survey, a p-value of 0.01 is used as the level of statistical significance. When comparing the first eight Likert style questions of the treatment and control group pre-assessments (Table 2), question 5 (Cyberbullying is the same as bullying?) and question 7 (Cyberbullying and flaming can have the same effect on someone?) show a statistically different response in the two groups during the preassessment. However, the absolute understanding indicated by the difference is small. On question 5, average response went from just below probably true (2.896) to just above probably true (3.15). The small difference in averages in question 7 (2.763 to 2.912) indicates a correspondingly small difference in the population under study. In both cases, the difference is approximately one quarter of a standard deviation apart, thereby showing the means are close, and the population distributions overlap. This difference needs to be considered when doing further analysis, but is not an overall concern, as both the control and treatment groups are statistically similar. This is important because it suggests that the treatment group and control group were quite similar at the time of the pre-assessment survey in terms of the variables of interest.

Table 2: Comparison of Preassessments for Entire Survey Group

Question Number	Mean	Std Dev	F	p-value
1 - Pre	3.573	3.573	0.000	0.989
1 - Control	3.573	3.573
2 - Pre	3.730	0.675	2.137	0.144
2 - Control	3.669	0.715
3 - Pre	3.653	0.764	0.554	0.457
3 - Control	3.684	0.685
4 - Pre	3.383	0.724	2.281	0.131
4 - Control	3.447	0.703
**5 - Pre	2.896	1.166	11.487	0.001
**5 - Control	3.116	1.019
6 - Pre	3.384	0.855	1.370	0.242
6 - Control	3.441	0.780
**7 - Pre	2.763	0.926	6.906	0.009
**7 - Control	2.912	0.940
8 - Pre	2.245	1.256	1.110	0.292
8 - Control	2.324	1.242
** p<.01

Students were also asked to answer how they would respond to two cyberbullying scenarios. The text answers to the open ended questions were coded based on the content of their responses to allow numerical comparisons. Each positive desired reaction to the situation received a (+1) value. A negative value (-1) was given to unsafe practices. In Table 3, the short answer pre-assessment responses are shown for these two questions for both the treatment and control groups. The first question does not show a statistically significant difference between the two groups. The second question does show a statistically significant difference, although like the Likert questions, this difference is numerically small, and in this case amounts to approximately one third of a standard deviation.

Table 3: Comparison of Short Answer Pre-Survey

	Mean	Std Dev	% <=1		% >1		F	p-value
Vonda is at home, working on a school project, when she receives an email that says mean things about her. She has received other mean emails and text messages from the same sender address. What should she do?
Pre Treatment	0.917	0.868	78.7%		21.3%		0.004	0.948
Pre Control	0.913	0.902	80.5%		19.5%
Jordan is using the Internet to research a project for school. He happens to find a website that someone in his class made and sees something on it that is mean and threatening to another classmate. He doesn't really know either of these students very well. What should he do?
Pre Treatment	0.594	0.716	97.7%		2.3%	18.097		0.000
Pre Control	0.384	0.898	90.3%		9.7%
				p<.01

Post Survey Results

Statistics from both pre and post-assessments for the first eight questions are shown in Table 4. As described above, these were Likert style questions where the students were asked to reply False (1), Probably False (2), Probably True (3), and True (4). In all cases, the control group made a statistically significant change in response after testing. For the treatment group, statistically significant changes on the Likert questions were indicated in questions 3,4,7, and 8, while questions 5 and 6 had changes at the p<0.05 level. Question one was chosen to understand whether they thought the internet was useful to gather a baseline of whether the students had positive or negative views toward the Internet, and in turn, may or may not be knowledgeable about Internet Safety. The first question was also used as a comfort filler question to begin the survey. Most thought it was. Interestingly, the control group's view of the Internet improved after their instruction, but they already viewed it as useful. Question two asked whether they thought they should treat others the way they wished to be treated, even online. Both groups' opinion raised by ~0.1 after instruction. For question three, which asked if it was important to always protect your name online, both groups came away with a statistically significant change (p<0.01) in knowledge, and both changed by 0.198. Question four examined whether the group thought something posted online could be traced back to the person who sent it. In this case the treatment group increased by 0.322, and the control group by 0.256. On question five, the treatment group's understanding that cyberbullying and bullying are the same increased by 0.150 (at the p<0.05 significance level), while the control group increased by 0.260. On question six, the treatment group's change was only statistically significant at the p<0.05 level and increased by 0.124, while the control group increased by 0.242. For questions five and six, it appears that both groups realized cyberbullying and bullying were similar, but the extra information provided by the Cyberbullying Extension Unit added nuances to their understanding that precluded more students from indicating four (4) as their response.

Table 4: Average Likert Responses

					Diff	F
Question Number		Mean	Std Dev		% of SD	p-value
1 - The Internet is useful?
Pre Treatment		3.573	0.751		-0.015	0.100
Post Treatment		3.557	0.788		1.9%	0.752
Pre Control		3.573	0.742		0.206	32.230
Post Control		3.780	0.553		27.8%	0.000
2 - It is important to treat people how you would want to be treated, even online?
Pre Treatment		3.644	0.771		0.086	3.543
Post Treatment		3.730	0.675		11.1%	0.060
Pre Control		3.669	0.715		0.140	15.409
Post Control		3.809	0.554		19.5%	0.000
3 - It is important to always protect your name online?
Pre Treatment		3.653	0.764		0.198	22.269
Post Treatment		3.850	0.557		25.9%	0.000
Pre Control		3.684	0.685		0.198	36.197
Post Control		3.882	0.478		28.8%	0.000
4 - Something posted online can be traced back to the person who sent it?
Pre Treatment		3.383	0.724		0.322	59.146
Post Treatment		3.705	0.603		44.5%	0.000
Pre Control		3.447	0.703		0.256	48.750
Post Control		3.703	0.613		36.5%	0.000
5 - Cyberbullying is the same as bullying?
Pre Treatment		2.898	1.168		0.158	4.801
Post Treatment		3.057	1.122		13.6%	0.029
Pre Control		3.116	1.019		0.260	21.138
Post Control		3.376	1.008		25.5%	0.000
6 - Cyberbullying and normal bullying can have the same effect on someone?
Pre Treatment		3.384	0.855		0.124	5.848
Post Treatment		3.508	0.769		14.5%	0.016
Pre Control		3.441	0.780		0.242	36.938
Post Control		3.682	0.639		31.0%	0.000
7 - Cyberbullying and flaming can have the same effect on someone?
Pre Treatment		2.763	0.926		0.631	128.719
Post Treatment		3.394	0.823		68.2%	0.000
Pre Control		2.912	0.940		0.572	70.924
Post Control		3.484	1.420		40.3%	0.000
8 - What you post online can only be viewed by people you want to view it?
Pre Treatment		2.241	1.248		-0.463	36.854
Post Treatment		1.777	1.170		37.1%	0.000
Pre Control		2.324	1.242		-0.308	18.873
Post Control		2.016	1.302		23.7%	0.000
	p<.05			p<.01

Question seven indicated both groups became more aware that cyberbullying and flaming could have a similar effect on people. In fact, on this question, responses went up the most: 0.631 for the treatment group, and 0.572 for the control group. Both groups indicated in question eight that they believed material posted online could (therefore, based on the wording of the question, the correct answer was false) be viewed by more than the intended recipient, with the treatment group showing a larger change (-0.463) than the control group (-0.308).

It is important to realize the progression of intervention included both treatment and control groups receiving the standard D.A.R.E. Bullying Unit. The control group then took their post-assessment. The treatment group received the Cyberbullying Extension Unit content, and then took the post-assessment. Although the D.A.R.E. Bullying Unit focused on standard face-to-face bullying, the instructors noted that the preponderance of stories about Cyberbullying in the news resulted in questions regarding this topic during the standard unit. Combining the results from the Likert results with qualitative results leads one to the belief that although they had similar results, this may be a result of the gradual Likert scale indicating that both groups have a basic understanding of the issues. Qualitative examination of the data argues the treatment group may have a more subtle and arguably long lasting understanding of the issues. Some of these qualitative responses will be discussed later in this report.

Respondents were also given multiple response questions to explore their understanding of what items constituted cyberbullying. After instruction, both groups understood that emails could be a source of cyberbullying, but more in the control group thought that written notes could be a source of cyberbullying. Overall both groups saw increases in understanding of cyberbullying methods. The students were next asked to choose which items could be considered cyberbullying. Students who received the cyberbullying instruction correctly realized that pushing someone and calling and hanging up were not cyberbullying, whereas the control group's identification of these items, although low, was larger than the treatment group. In fact, the bullying group's identification of calling and hanging up increased from 18.9% to 31.7%. Both groups showed an increase in percent correctly identifying other items as cyberbullying.

Students were also asked to identify which choices they should take if they receive a mean message from a cyberbully. Both groups showed the knowledge to identify these items, with the most dramatic changes and greatest percentage identification in the treatment group being the responses, Turn your screen or monitor off, Do not respond, and Tell a trusted adult, which saw increases of 39%, 17%, and 10% in the treatment group and 39.2%, 24.9%, and 16% in the control group. These are the most important items to remember. It is important to realize that these topics focused on items which, although cyberbullying, could also clearly be identified as bullying.

Retention of Faux Paw Material

Students receiving the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit were also asked four questions regarding the lesson/movie content. These were multiple response types, where there was a question, possible choices, and more than one response could be correct. These questions were designed to see if they understood and remembered the basic information presented to them. In Figures 1 through 4, the striped columns represented the responses desired after watching the movie and receiving the instruction. It should be noted, in some cases the answers were left blank, or appear to have been rushed. In the future, it is important that careful supervision of the students may be necessary to ensure they understand the directions and answer each question to the best of their ability.

In Figure 1, the treatment group was asked to choose which actions Faux Paw participated in that went against the three rules of Internet Safety. They chose the correct three answers in most cases, with the wrong two answers only being chosen by 16.7% and 26.2% of the students. In order to answer these questions correctly, the students had to understand the three rules, comprehend the media piece, and make choices.

Figure 1: Faux Paw's Mistakes

The students were next asked to indicate which would have been the proper responses for Faux Paw to have made in her situation. They most often chose Turn off the monitor (77.7%), Tell a trusted adult (69.3%), Not Responded (65.0%), and Blocked (64.3%). Reported to the Internet Provider (55.0%) was also chosen although not as often as the others. Although correct, this is not as obvious as the other correct answers, as Faux Paux makes the point telling a trusted adult, turning off the monitor, and not responding are the three immediate responses. This question was more subtle, and the distinctions between choices, could have been confusing at the 5^th and 6^th grade level.

Figure 2: Proper Responses

The Cyberbullying Extension Unit presented the students with the goals of cyberbullies in a manner which sought for the students to understand the motivations of the cyberbully, the reactions they sought to elicit, and therefore understand why certain responses made sense. Students correctly picked out three of the desired reactions in over 60% of the cases: they want you to get upset, they want you to react, and they want you to reveal personal information. Incorrect responses, such as they want you to report them, were chosen less than one quarter of the time.

The final question students were asked with respect to the Faux Paw video was to identify the three rules for Internet Safety. Choices, do not respond to a cyberbully, tell a trusted adult, and protect your personal information were chosen by 64.3%, 75.3%, and 73.6% of the students, and meet a stranger in person, and turn off the monitor were only chosen by 18.1% and 45.8% of the children. Thus, they understood the message which the curriculum content and video sought to convey. Although turn off the monitor is a valid response, it is not one of the three rules.

Figure 3: Three Rules of Internet Safety

Short Answer Questions

Both groups of students were also asked two short answer questions in both the pre and post survey. The two questions were:

1. Vonda is at home, working on a school project, when she receives an email that says mean things about her. She has received other mean emails and text messages from the same sender address. What should she do?

2. Jordan is using the Internet to research a project for school. He happens to find a

website that someone in his class made and sees something on it that is mean and threatening to another classmate. He doesn't really know either of these students very well. What should he do?

The short answer responses were coded based on the content of their responses to allow numerical comparisons. For example, in the first scenario the description indicates this was not the first mean message sent by the same person. Therefore, telling any trusted "adult" (parent, teacher, etc.), turning off the monitor or not replying received a score of 1. These are positive, desired reactions to the situationsóone of the main objectives of the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying curriculum. A negative value (-1) was given to unsafe practices such as replying-sending back a message.

In this manner, the evaluation sought to capture students' correct responses, offset by wrong responses to see if instruction helped the students better understand how to correctly manage a cyberbullying situation. Table 5 contains the statistical summary of data from this data coding.

Table 5: Short Answer Response Coding

	Mean	Std Dev	% <=1		% >1		F	p-value
Vonda is at home, working on a school project, when she receives an email that says mean things about her. She has received other mean emails and text messages from the same sender address. What should she do?
Pre Treatment	0.917	0.868	78.7%		21.3%		145.005	0.000
Post Treatment	1.866	0.864	35.1%		64.9%
Pre Control	0.913	0.902	80.5%		19.5%		81.422	0.000
Post Control	1.343	0.816	62.1%		37.9%
Jordan is using the Internet to research a project for school. He happens to find a website that someone in his class made and sees something on it that is mean and threatening to another classmate. He doesn't really know either of these students very well. What should he do?
Pre Treatment	0.594	0.716	97.7%		2.3%	129.557		0.000
Post Treatment	1.172	0.870	72.3%		27.7%
Pre Control	0.384	0.898	90.3%		9.7%	183.867		0.000
Post Control	0.992	0.710	81.8%		18.2%
				p<.01

Both treatment and control groups average response went up a statistically significant amount (p<0.01). For the first question, the control group went from an average of 0.913, to an average of 1.343, and the treatment group went from an average of 0.917 to an average of 1.866. Standard deviations only changed a small amount. In the treatment group, it went from 0.868 to 0.864, so one could surmise that the distribution moved higher without a change in shape. The control group went from a standard deviation of 0.902 to 0.816, and therefore both shifted higher and grouped a little closer together. Table 5 also shows that for the treatment group, in the pre-assessment, 78.7% of the respondents scored no higher than a one, whereby in the pre-assessment, 64.9% of the respondents had a score above two. Thus, after the Cyberbullying Extension Unit, 65% of the students were able to produce at least two positive reactions to cyberbullying. The control group increased slightly from pre to post assessment, but only reached 37.9% producing two or more positive reactions.

For the second question, the control group went from an average of 0.384 to an average of 0.992, and the treatment group went from an average of 0.594 to an average of 1.172. This question seemed to result in more confusion by the students since the cyberbullying wasn't directed at the individual person, but instead, to a classmate. This situation may need to be addressed more directly in the future. The treatment groups responses to the pre-assessment resulted in 97.7% receiving a one or less, with slightly more than 50% indicating the desired response tell a trusted adult. Other correct responses were rare. This was also true of the control group, where 90.3% received one or less. For the post-assessment of the control group, these numbers rose, but still only 18.2% came up with two or more correct responses to the situation. The treatment group showed a more dramatic change, and 27.7% of the groups were able to produce multiple correct responses.

Additional analysis was done by classifying student responses into three broad categories based on the objectives of the iKeepSafe/D.A.R.E. Cyberbullying Extension: Keep Safe, Keep Away and Keep Telling. Items that were classified in the Keep Safe category were those behaviors where the student had made active choices on how they use technology to either deny access to the cyberbully, or change their own information. Items in the Keep Away category focused on positive decisions to stay away from the messages. The final category involved alerting individuals about the activities. Additionally, responses were classified as negative if they were not desired behaviors such as send back a nasty message, beat them up or don't get involved (Q-14). Examples of responses and categories are listed below, and the summary of their responses is shown in Table 6.

Objective 1: Keep Safe

Key terms included:

Block
Do not give out personal information
Save/Print
Change account/email

Objective 2: Keep Away

Key terms included:

Don't respond
Turn off monitor
Exit website

Objective 3: Keep Telling

Key terms included:

Tell trusted adult
Tell parent/administrator/guardian/mom/dad/teacher/police
Tell website (host), ISP
Tell Police
Tell classmate (Q-14)

Negative Responses:

Key terms included:

Stay out of it if it doesn't involve you
Delete/erase
Text, send, or email back telling them to stop (their a jerk/bully)
Fight

Table 6: Summary of Category Responses

Short Answer 1
	Pre - Treatment	Post - Treatment	Pre - Control	Post-control
Keep Safe	56	123	92	74
Keep Away	77	204	84	222
Keep Telling	280	386	476	507
Negative Responses	58	3	46	26
Short Answer 2
	Pre - Treatment	Post - Treatment	Pre - Control	Post-control
Keep Safe	4	32	8	15
Keep Away	17	60	17	46
Keep Telling	249	431	498	533
Negative Responses	76	20	88	69

From the table, one can extract some key patterns. In both questions, and for both groups, many of the respondents already knew one of the key responses - Keep Telling. For the first short answer question, the number of additional respondents who learned that behavior grew by 38% in the treatment group, but only by 6% in the control group. For the second short answer, when Cyberbullying was not directed at the respondent, the number of students who realized that telling was important, grew by 73%, while the control group didn't grow appreciably (7%). For the Keep Away behaviors, both groups grew by over 160%. These are non-technological behaviors, which simplify to don't reply and are topics of both lessons. For Keep Safe behaviors, the control group actually showed a decrease in students who responded with positive responses, while the treatment group grew by 120%. For short answer two, the control group increased, although not as much as the treatment group, and numerically, this behavior was not chosen a great deal. In the Negative Response category, the control group decreased the number of negative responses, but the treatment group almost eliminated these responses altogether. The control group bullying unit instruction may have discussed negative responses, but it doesn't appear this group was informed of the full range of items to avoid.

Reading over the responses also indicated that the treatment group included descriptions of the Faux Paw video within their answers. They would say, just like in the movie, or just like Faux Paw did. Psychology literature indicates the importance of visualization and mnemonics in memorizing and comprehending information. Therefore, the video may provide students with a means to easily visualize proper responses if placed in a cyberbullying situation. Part II of this evaluation and a follow-on study could examine whether students still retain this information, and whether they continue to make references to the movie in their responses.

D.A.R.E. Officer and Educator Feedback

The D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit Evaluation gathered data from five D.A.R.E. officers and forty-one classroom teachers about the content, process, media and resources related to the cyberbullying unit. Additionally, we were interested in the perceived student motivation and interest in the unit materials and group discussions. All five D.A.R.E. officers and 41 teachers gave overwhelming positive feedback regarding the cyberbullying unit. The top three positive advantages shared by D.A.R.E. officers about the unit included: 1) content relevance, 2) detailed resource materials/lesson plans and 3) the movie. D.A.R.E. officers follow a pre set curriculum and scripted lesson plan on each of the units. Flexibility however is given for impromptu discussions of topics and current events. D.A.R.E. officers are law enforcement officers, and come with a depth and breadth of insight and stories. They are able to share positive situational outcomes, as well as, consequences for students' proposed hypothetical circumstances. While certainly, the bullying unit content overlaps with the cyberbullying content, D.A.R.E. officers reveal it is hard to devote the time and detail needed to the topic of cyberbullying, unless that's the unit by itself. Another shared, the content is critical. We have had several instances of cyberbullying this year and students need to know what options are available if the instances continue to happen. Having the chance to share and walk through with students, how to block and that blocking or changing your account is even an option is extremely important. The resources, including a PowerPoint with talking points, and materials and workbook resources already organized that we can run off makes it a lot easier to deliver. D.A.R.E. officers found the pre-packaged materials convenient. An interesting point shared by officers, was that although content information is available on the Internet to use with students, the lessons plans are difficult to locate and not necessarily in a coherent package. Additionally, they mentioned that more often then not resources list talking points, but few have activities to share with students. Officers also felt the content, seemed to reach each child because they all have access to the internet through home or school and some through cell phones. All officers commented on the lively discussion with the material. Although two officers mentioned they originally were concerned with the reception of the cartoon movie for the 6^th graders, they both reported that all students seemed engaged. One officer shared, even the 6^th graders enjoyed it and learned a lot from it. I was surprised they were able to have such a great discussion after the video as well. They were able to easily link the DARE Decision making Model to the events in the video.

Teachers listed content relevance, as the number one benefit of the unit, followed by the D.A.R.E. officers' delivery, and the movie. Some educator feedback included:

I think the DARE lesson on cyber-bullying was great! This age group needs lessons that are relevant to what is going on in their lives at the present moment. There were several (especially girls) that appeared guilty of cyber-bullying. At least they may think twice before doing this the next time. Parents also need to be made aware how dangerous the internet can be for their children. Some parents don't have a clue.
I believe the lesson on cyberbullying was very informative and extremely helpful. I believe that some of my students took this lesson to heart.
I believe they have a better understanding of what steps to take to help avoid being a victim and what steps can be taken if you become a victim. The movie also was helpful in highlighting the points.
I wish we had more time for this. Students really enjoyed the discussion and several students who are usually not active in discussions really became engaged.
I as a teacher realized that I had been a victim of cyberbullying. I simply reported the incident at the time and then ignored the message.
Understanding not to delete the messages is important as students seem to think this is what to do. If it continues it makes it hard to follow up on.
The engaging discussion with the D.A.R.E. officers is extremely beneficial It is important for students to hear the answers to their questions that in some cases only the officers can answer.
I hope the lesson is continued with the DARE program. It is important that children understand both sides of cyberbullying. The cartoon characters make it easy to understand and the children seemed to comprehend the big ideas.

Popularity of the materials notwithstanding, two comments should be noted for future consideration. Two officers had difficulty using the optional PowerPoint created for their use. They could follow a scripted message storyline or make use of the script through a PowerPoint. The content was still covered and other materials including the DVD movie were used. However, one officer shared, there are so many officers who do not have the luxury of PowerPoint at their departments or schools and there are officers who do not feel comfortable using it this might serve as a kink in some placing. While the PowerPoint was an optional resource, it did overlap with and in many instances duplicate what was presented through the movie Faux Paw Meets the First Lady. In order to encourage more D.A.R.E. officers to make use of the Extension Unit, details should be added showing how best to use the PowerPoint. Additionally, a message indicating that while not mandatory, it is encouraged to use the PowerPoint, should be included in the D.A.R.E. instructor workbook and during training.

Officers also shared that since the topic was current, the students were more engaged and extra time could be used to expand on the activity. Two officers felt the unit needed to be expanded to two days.

Limitations

As with all research and evaluation endeavors, this program evaluation was bounded by several limitations. First, while the unit of analysis was the individual student, the intervention was delivered to classrooms. Control and treatment groups were determined by best matching schools through school characteristics, however, student assignment of classrooms, D.A.R.E. officers to schools and the schools chosen to participate were predetermined. Additionally, this group does not meet the rigor of a representative national population sample; only four states were available to participate and are not representative of the US demographics as, for example, there were few Hispanics. Baseline differences in behavioral, attitudinal and detailed demographics were outside the scope of this evaluation; however, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) calculations were completed to detect pre-treatment differences and subsequently controlled for in follow-on analysis.

Key Findings and Recommendations

It is important to understand that this extension unit evaluation is not a rigorous, controlled statistical study, although rigorous statistical methods were used to evaluate the data collected. Additionally, qualitative analyses were used to examine the content of students responses, from which several conclusions could be drawn. While an impact study on the long term behavioral changes is beyond the scope of this evaluation, and would be difficult to measure and correlate with a solitary lesson plan, the data collected were able to reveal curriculum strengths and weaknesses, and were able to measure how well the D.A.R.E./iKeepSafe Cyberbullying Extension Unit taught a select group of grades 5 and 6 students to: (1) understand the 3 KEEPs of internet safety (Keep Safe, Keep Away and Keep Telling) as applied to cases of cyberbullying, (2) apply strategies to reduce chances of being a cyberbullying victim, and (3) understand the dangers of revealing personal information through online communication.

The examination of the pre-test responses for Internet safety knowledge related to Cyberbullying indicated that, in this sample of Grade 5 and 6 students, their knowledge was limited to the response to tell a trusted adult, and in some cases their responses included tell the person to stop. Very few pretest differences between the control and treatment group were noted, with a few exceptions where the differences were statistically significant, but numerically small. This is important because it suggests that the control and treatment groups were very similar at the pre-test in terms of our three above variables of interest.

Key findings from the D.A.R.E. Cyberbullying Extension Unit treatment group:

The number of students describing multiple positive reactions to cyberbullying scenarios increased by over 43%.
Student recognition that they should tell a trusted adult when someone else was being cyberbullied went up 77%.
Students recognized the 3 Keeps of Internet Safety, including not giving out personal information; they were taught the dangers of revealing personal information through online communication.
Students recognized the 3 Keeps of Internet Safety, including not giving out personal information; they were taught the dangers of revealing personal information through online communication.
The cyberbullying unit compared to the bullying unit, gave a more complete picture of cyberbullying responses including technical solutions.
Students used references to the Faux Paw Meets the First Lady movie when describing responses to a cyberbullying situation.
The unit was essential to providing D.A.R.E. officers with the instructional materials they required to teach cyberbullying.
Teachers found the content relevant and timely, D.A.R.E. officers' depth and breathe of knowledge valuable in answers students questions, and students highly motivated and engaged during the movie and with the follow up discussion and group work.

Three recommendations are listed:

Instructions regarding the use of PowerPoint and the PowerPoint resources should be provided to the D.A.R.E. officers.
Encouragement to use the PowerPoint should be included in the D.A.R.E. instructor workbook and during training.
Extended time to cover the topic more in depth. Cyberbullying is such a current topic, that students were engaged and enthusiastically participated in the lessons. Extra time and material could be used to expand the topic even further.

References

Berkman Center for Internet & Society. (2008). Enhancing Child Safety & Online Technologies. Retrieved February 2, 2009 from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/pubrelease/isttf/

Devoe, J. F., Peter, K., Noonan, M., Snyder, T., and Baum, K. (2005). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2005. U.S. Department of Justice, November. Retrieved January 5, 2009 from http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=210697

Lenhart, A., Simon, M., and Graziano, M. (2006). Pew internet and american life project: parents and teens survey study. Retrieved January 5, 2009 from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/19/51/93.pdf

Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho,M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., and Tippett, N. (2008). Cyberbullying: its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 49(4): 376-385.

Wolak, J., Mitchell, K., and Finkelhor, D. (2006). Online victimization of youth: five years later. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, #07-06-025. Retrieved January 5, 2009 http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/CV138.pdf

Ybarra. M., Mitchell, K., Wolak, J. and Finkelhor. (2005). Examining characteristics and associated distress related to internet harassment: Findings from the second youth internet safety survey. PEDIATRICS,118(4), Retrieved February 2, 2009 from http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/CV141.pdf