essay about bullying and discrimination

Essay Service Examples Social Issues Bullying

Bullying And Discrimination At Workplace

Proper editing and formatting
Free revision, title page, and bibliography
Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Alex Diaz, G. (2017, December 22). disabilities and bullying in the workplace. Retrieved from ISHN: https://www.ishn.com
Anonymous. (2016, April 20). workplace bullying essay. Retrieved from studymoose: https://studymoose.com/workplace-bullying-2-essay
Last Name, F. M. (Year). Article Title. Journal Title, Pages From - To.
Last Name, F. M. (Year). Book Title. City Name: Publisher Name.
Leymann, H. (2015, 11 20). Workplace Bullying. Retrieved from naswpress: https://www.naswpress.org
Veazie, J. (2019, march 10). Workplace Conflict and Social Media. Retrieved from ProQuest: https://search-proquest-com.libraryservices.yorkvilleu.ca

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

Cite this paper

Join our 150k of happy users

Get original paper written according to your instructions
Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!

Bullying And Discrimination Essay

Show More Help Fight Bullying/Discrimination in Our Schools Now! We all have been bullied or witnessed some form of bullying or discrimination in our life. It is something we can all agree is not moral but still happening in every society around the world. Bullying affects everyone one of any age, gender, and race. It even effects those with physical and mental disabilities. Bullying /discrimination can be caused by multiple reasons whether that be because of a person’s hair color, skin color or sexual orientation. There are many effects that bullying/discrimination can cause. The effects of this bullying can be drastic. In this paper I will be discussing how bullying/discrimination is unacceptable because it can cause harm both physically and mentally. …show more content… The writer of The Health Benefits of Bullying says, “Bullies may actually reap long-term health benefits from elevating their own social status at the expense of others” (Sullivan). While there are few benefits a bullied child has, there are also few benefits that the bully has. It is said that bullies tend to suffer less from tissue issues and immune disorders while maintaining a higher level of confidence. “Bullied children suffered more from chronic low-grade inflammation in adulthood while bullies suffered less. Adult bullies had lower levels of chronic low-grade inflammation than peers who weren’t part of bullying at all” (Sullivan). “Inflammation is a biological process linked to higher risks of chronic diseases such as heart trouble and cancer” (Park). It has been scientifically proven that bullies benefit from their atrocious behaviors but like previously stated it is common knowledge that these bullies are physically hurting their peers later in life …show more content… I am against it. To me, bullying is bad all around, even though it is proven to be healthy for the bully. In this paper, I informed you, the reader, about the effects bullying can have on children. Effects like depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts. I showed you why teachers and parents need to be more observant (to be able to spot bullies and their victims) and lastly, scientific proof that bullies benefit from being a bully while their victims suffer immensely. There will always be some form of bullying somewhere. Bullying will never be one hundred percent gone but things can be done to help it not be so

John Greenya Bullying Summary

As we become more knowledgeable on the subject of bullying, we can notice how the effects it has on both the victim and the bully can be dangerous. In his article, “Bullying”, John Greenya suggests that the connection between bullying and school violence has become a growing problem that schools aren't doing enough to prevent. He does this by first explaining that “today, bullying is widely regarded as a serious problem in the United States”, then by stating “bullying not only begets depression and suicide but also serious crime, researchers say, not to mention poor academic performance, truancy and higher dropout rates” (Greenya). Greenya finally describes how “in the past, bullying has simply been dismissed as ‘Kids will be kids,’ but the findings from this study suggest that…

Analysis Of Ender's Game, By Orson Scott Card

Everyday thousands of children are filled with dreadful feelings of sorrow and anguish from the horrors of bullying. One hundred and sixty thousand students skip school in fear of bullying. Two hundred and eighty two thousand students in secondary schools are left traumatized as they are physically attacked by their bullies each month. Half of suicides amongst young children are associated with bullying. Today, a bully is known to be the harasser of the weak; to possess power and victory over their victims.…

Bully Myth Essay

The Bully Breed Myth There are many breed of dogs throughout the world. The bully breed of dogs such as, the American Pit bull Terrier, Staffordshire terrier, and Staffordshire bull terrier are all descendants of the ancient molosser dog from the British Isles. These medium size dogs were bred for hunting, protection, fighting, and bull baiting activities. These dogs served in the military, were presidential pits, and nanny dogs for parents.…

Annotated Bibliography

Formally Charging Students for Bullying: What Doesn’t Kill You, Does Not Make You Stronger I think that bullying is a situation that is not taking as seriously as it should. Whether or not students should be formally charged for bullying is a very controversial topic right now. Many people believe that bullying is one of the biggest contributors to youth suicide and studies have proved this to be true (“Bullying and Suicide”).…

Bullying: Article Analysis

Bullying has been a constant problem in school systems for many years. While it’s form has changed it’s harmful abilities has not. There are many articles and opinions about what bullying is and how to fight it. Some believe it to be physical, others consider it to be more than that. In the end bullying is still inherently subjective.…

It's Time To Stop Bullying In The United States

Bullying has been a difficult problem for generations, not only in an isolated area but throughout the entire world population. This is a widespread dilemma for many individuals, groups and societies. No one is totally exempt from bullying if someone decides to be the bully. Bullying is one of the most common forms of aggression: 27% of middle school students, 16% of high school students, and one-quarter of workers are bullied (Nansel, Lutgen-Sandvik). Bullying is any repeated act or speech that subjects someone to hurt, indignity, humiliation, intimidation, physical abuse or threat of physical abuse, social or other isolation, shame or disgrace.…

Example Of NICHD Research

How would you feel if your child was suicidal or depressed due to the bullying that they face at school or online over things that are out of their control? The most important social issue teens face today would be bullying. Bullying can be the cause of many mental illnesses. NICHD research has showed that anybody involved with bullying, whether it’s the bully or the kid being bullied, and the teenagers who bully and are bullied by others are at a higher risk for depression than those who have no involvement with bullying whatsoever.…

Bully Documentary Analysis

Some of the most prominent effects bullying has on adolescence and even adults, comes in the form of depression and anxiety, an overall decrease in mental health, decreased desire to succeed in school and life, and suicide. Children who are exposed to bullying are more likely to become depressed and experience anxiety currently or in the future, with symptoms such as excessive sadness, discontent, loss of interest in generally enjoyed activities, loss of appetite, etc. There are several symptoms of depression that make it difficult to face each day. These symptoms can lead to a decrease in a child’s mental health, making them more susceptible to the words and actions of others, increasing the likelihood of childhood or teenage suicide, or a decreased desire to succeed in school or life. Bullying can negatively impact a student’s school and home life.…

Bullying: The Really Big Problem In America

Have you ever been bullied in your life before? Bullying has become a big problem in America for many years now (The Really Big Problem Behind The Really Big Problem). This is important because lots of people can get injured (mentally and physically) from just one person being bullied. People such as parents, teachers, siblings, friends, classmates, and loved ones can get involved in bullying. Bullying tends to change the lives of many people and even take some lives as well.…

Bullying Should Be Banned In Australia

Bullying is direct or indirect discrimination towards another person, whether it be for their colour, looks, personality, disability or even as far as sexual identification or preference. The act of bullying has been around since the dawn of man, however in the past few years, there has been conflict over whether the act of bullying should be considered an offence, especially due to the unsurprising and intrinsic evolution of technology, since the dawn of cyberbullying, which is “the use of electronic communication to bully a person, typically by sending messages of an intimidating or threatening nature.”. Cyberbullying may not be as fierce or upfront, however it can impact persons just the same. Today the question lies, should bullying merely…

Kohlberg's Theory Of Bullying Essay

This essay will examine the theories associated with bullying and what can be done to prevent bullying from taking place in the school system. Recently, the detrimental effects of bullying in schools have been considered…

Bullying Injustice

School bullying is an epidemic and often times when victims disclose they are bullied, intervention does not occur. Victims of bullying have human rights, and these rights should be considered and advocated for. Multiple studies suggest that bullying is a social injustice issue. (Polanin, M. & Vera, E., 2013) suggest that, because bullying may be considered the exercise of perceived authority or superiority in a cruel and unjust manner, it exists as an example of oppression in society. Any oppression in society against a person, group or class of people is considered a social justice issue.…

Persuasive Speech Outline On Bullying

It is now recognized that bullying has enduring adverse effects on both the bully and the victim (Sampton 2009). This aggression is especially harmful to the bullied students. The targets are more likely to experience low self-esteem issues, depression, loneliness, and anxiety. Further, they may resort to self-medication (substance abuse), become suicidal and withdraw socially (Ball 2011). Their victimization may make them lose interest in schoolwork, attain low grades, avoid school more often or even drop out altogether.…

Bullying Informative Speech Outline

INFORMATIVE FULL SENTENCE OUTLINE SPEECH TITLE: Bullying SPECIFIC PURPOSE: To inform my audience about the types of bullying, explain how you can prevent bullying, and how bullying affects people. THESIS/CENTRAL IDEA: Bullying has a negative outcome on teenagers because it causes stress, makes their self-confidence low, and causes more suicides INTRODUCTION: 1.…

The Broad Impact of School Bullying, and What Must Be Done

Major interventions are required to make schools safe learning environments..

Posted May 2, 2021 | Reviewed by Hara Estroff Marano

How to Handle Bullying
Take our Anger Management Test
Find a therapist to support kids or teens
At least one in five kids is bullied, and a significant percentage are bullies. Both are negatively affected, as are bystanders.
Bullying is an epidemic that is not showing signs of improvement.
Evidence-based bullying prevention programs can be effective, but school adoption is inconsistent.

According to the U.S. federal government website StopBullying.gov :

There is no federal law that specifically applies to bullying . In some cases, when bullying is based on race or ethnicity , color, national origin, sex, disability, or religion, bullying overlaps with harassment and schools are legally obligated to address it.

The National Bullying Prevention Center reports data suggesting that one in five children have been bullied. There are many risk factors for being targeted, including being seen as weak, being different from peers including being LGBT or having learning differences or visible disabilities, being depressed or anxious, and having few friends. It's hard to measure how many engage in bullying, but estimates range from one in twenty, to much higher .

The American Association of University Women reports that in grades 7-12, 48 percent of students (56 percent of girls and 40 percent of boys) are sexually harassed. In college, rates of sexual harassment rise to 66 percent. Eleven percent are raped or sexually assaulted.

Silence facilitates traumatization

Only 20 percent of attacked young women report sexual assault . And 89 percent of undergraduate schools report zero sexual harassment. This means that children, adolescents, young adults and their friends are at high risk for being victimized. It means that many kids know what is happening, and don't do anything.

This may be from fear of retaliation and socialization into a trauma-permissive culture, and it may be from lack of proper education and training. Institutional betrayal , when organizations fail to uphold their promises and responsibilities, adds to the problem.

In some states such as New York, laws like “ the Dignity for All Students Act ” (DASA) apply only to public schools. Private, religious, and denominational schools are not included, leaving 20 percent of students in NYC and 10 percent throughout the state unprotected. Research shows that over the last decade, bullying in U.S. high schools has held steady around 20 percent, and 15 percent for cyberbullying.

The impact of bullying

While there is much research on how bullying affects mental health, social function, and academics, the results are scattered across dozens of papers. A recent paper in the Journal of School Violence (Halliday et al., 2021) presents a needed systematic literature review on bullying’s impact in children aged 10-18.

1. Psychological: Being a victim of bullying was associated with increased depression , anxiety , and psychosis . Victims of bullying reported more suicidal thinking and engaged in greater self-harming behaviors. They were more likely to experience social anxiety , body-image issues, and negative conduct. Simultaneous cyberbullying and conventional bullying were associated with more severe depression.

2. Social: Bullying victims reported greater problems in relationships with family, friends and in day-to-day social interactions. They reported they enjoyed time with family and friends less, felt they were being treated unfairly more easily, and liked less where they lived. Victimized children were less popular and likeable, and experienced more social rejection. They tended to be friends with other victims, potentially heightening problems while also providing social support.

3. Academic achievement: Victimized kids on average had lower grades. Over time, they did worse especially in math. They tended to be more proficient readers, perhaps as a result of turning to books for comfort in isolation (something people with a history of being bullied commonly report in therapy ).

4. School attitudes: Bullied children and adolescents were less engaged in education, had poorer attendance, felt less belonging, and felt more negatively about school.

5. What happens with age? Researchers studied adult psychiatric outcomes of bullying, looking at both victims and bullies, reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Psychiatry (Copeland et al., 2013). After controlling for other childhood hardships, researchers found that young adults experience increased rates of agoraphobia (fear of leaving the house), generalized anxiety, panic disorder, and increased depression risk. Men had higher suicide risk.

The impact of bullying does not stop in early adulthood. Research in the Journals of Gerontology (Hu, 2021) found that people over the age of 60 who were bullied as children had more severe depression and had lower life satisfaction.

6. Bullying and the brain: Work reported in Frontiers in Psychiatry (Muetzel et al., 2019) found that victims of bullying had thickening of the fusiform gyrus, an area of the cerebral cortex involved with facial recognition, and sensing emotions from facial expressions. 1 For those with posttraumatic stress disorder, brain changes may be extensive.

7. Bystanders are affected: Research also shows that bystanders have higher rates of anxiety and depression (Midgett et al., 2019). The problem is magnified for bystanders who are also victims. It is likely that taking appropriate action is protective.

Given that victims of bullying are at risk for posttraumatic stress disorder ( PTSD ; Idsoe et al., 2012), it’s important to understand that many of the reported psychiatric findings may be better explained by PTSD than as a handful of overlapping but separate diagnoses. Trauma often goes unrecognized.

What can be done?

The psychosocial and academic costs of unmitigated bullying are astronomical, to say nothing of the considerable economic cost. Change is needed, but resistance to change, as with racism, gender bias, and other forms of discrimination , is built into how we see things.

Legislation: There is no federal antibullying legislation, and state laws may be weak and inconsistently applied. Given that bullying rates are no longer falling, it’s important for lawmakers and advocates to seek immediate changes.

Bullying prevention: Schools can adopt antibullying programs, though they are not universally effective and sometimes may backfire. Overall, however, research in JAMA Pediatrics (Fraguas et al., 2021) shows that antibullying programs reduce bullying, improve mental health outcomes, and stay effective over time. 2

Trauma-informed education creates an environment in which all participants are aware of the impact of childhood trauma and the need for specific modifications given how trauma is common among children and how it affects development.

According to the National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN):

"The primary mission of schools is to support students in educational achievement. To reach this goal, children must feel safe, supported, and ready to learn. Children exposed to violence and trauma may not feel safe or ready to learn. Not only are individual children affected by traumatic experiences, but other students, the adults on campus, and the school community can be impacted by interacting or working with a child who has experienced trauma. Thus, as schools maintain their critical focus on education and achievement, they must also acknowledge that mental health and wellness are innately connected to students’ success in the classroom and to a thriving school environment."

Parenting makes a difference. Certain parenting styles may set kids up for emotional abuse in relationships , while others may be protective. A 2019 study reported in Frontiers in Public Health (Plexousakis et al.) found that children with anxious, overprotective mothers were more likely to be victims.

Those with cold or detached mothers were more likely to become bullies. Overprotective fathering was associated with worse PTSD symptoms, likely by getting in the way of socialization. The children of overprotective fathers were also more likely to be aggressive.

Quality parental bonding, however, appeared to help protect children from PTSD symptoms. A healthy home environment is essential both for helping victims of bullying and preventing bullying in at-risk children.

Parents who recognize the need to learn more positive approaches can help buffer again the all-too-common cycle of passing trauma from generation to generation, building resilience and nurturing secure attachment to enjoy better family experiences and equip children to thrive.

State-by-state legislation

Bullying prevention programs (the KiVA program is also notable)

Measuring Bullying Victimization, Perpetration and Bystander Experiences , Centers for Disease Control

Trauma-informed teaching

US Government Stop Bullying

1. Such differences could both result from being bullied (e.g. needing to scan faces for threat) and could also make being bullied more likely (e.g. misreading social cues leading to increased risk of being targeted).

2. Such programs focus on reducing negative messaging in order to keep stakeholders engaged, monitor and respond quickly to bullying, involve students in bullying prevention and detection in positive ways (e.g. being an “upstander” instead of a bystander), monitor more closely for bullying when the risk is higher (e.g. after anti-bullying trainings), respond fairly with the understanding that bullies often have problems of their own and need help, involved parents and teachers in anti-bullying education, and devote specific resources for anti-bullying.

Sarah Halliday, Tess Gregory, Amanda Taylor, Christianna Digenis & Deborah Turnbull (2021): The Impact of Bullying Victimization in Early Adolescence on Subsequent Psychosocial and Academic Outcomes across the Adolescent Period: A Systematic Review, Journal of School Violence, DOI: 10.1080/15388220.2021.1913598

Copeland WE, Wolke D, Angold A, Costello EJ. Adult Psychiatric Outcomes of Bullying and Being Bullied by Peers in Childhood and Adolescence. JAMA Psychiatry. 2013;70(4):419–426. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.504

Bo Hu, PhD, Is Bullying Victimization in Childhood Associated With Mental Health in Old Age, The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, Volume 76, Issue 1, January 2021, Pages 161–172, https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbz115

Muetzel RL, Mulder RH, Lamballais S, Cortes Hidalgo AP, Jansen P, Güroğlu B, Vernooiji MW, Hillegers M, White T, El Marroun H and Tiemeier H (2019) Frequent Bullying Involvement and Brain Morphology in Children. Front. Psychiatry 10:696. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00696

Midgett, A., Doumas, D.M. Witnessing Bullying at School: The Association Between Being a Bystander and Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms. School Mental Health 11, 454–463 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-019-09312-6

Idsoe, T., Dyregrov, A. & Idsoe, E.C. Bullying and PTSD Symptoms. J Abnorm Child Psychol 40, 901–911 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-012-9620-0

Fraguas D, Díaz-Caneja CM, Ayora M, Durán-Cutilla M, Abregú-Crespo R, Ezquiaga-Bravo I, Martín-Babarro J, Arango C. Assessment of School Anti-Bullying Interventions: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Pediatr. 2021 Jan 1;175(1):44-55. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.3541. PMID: 33136156; PMCID: PMC7607493.

Plexousakis SS, Kourkoutas E, Giovazolias T, Chatira K and Nikolopoulos D (2019) School Bullying and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms: The Role of Parental Bonding. Front. Public Health 7:75. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00075

Note: An ExperiMentations Blog Post ("Our Blog Post") is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice. We will not be liable for any loss or damage caused by your reliance on information obtained through Our Blog Post. Please seek the advice of professionals, as appropriate, regarding the evaluation of any specific information, opinion, advice, or other content. We are not responsible and will not be held liable for third-party comments on Our Blog Post. Any user comment on Our Blog Post that in our sole discretion restricts or inhibits any other user from using or enjoying Our Blog Post is prohibited and may be reported to Sussex Publishers/Psychology Today. Grant H. Brenner. All rights reserved.

Grant Hilary Brenner, M.D., a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, helps adults with mood and anxiety conditions, and works on many levels to help unleash their full capacities and live and love well.

Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Online Therapy
United States
Brooklyn, NY
Chicago, IL
Houston, TX
Los Angeles, CA
New York, NY
Portland, OR
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
Asperger's
Bipolar Disorder
Chronic Pain
Eating Disorders
Passive Aggression
Personality
Goal Setting
Positive Psychology
Stopping Smoking
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
Child Development
Self Tests NEW
Therapy Center
Diagnosis Dictionary
Types of Therapy

It’s increasingly common for someone to be diagnosed with a condition such as ADHD or autism as an adult. A diagnosis often brings relief, but it can also come with as many questions as answers.

Emotional Intelligence
Gaslighting
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience

618 Thought-provoking Discrimination Essay Ideas & Examples

📜 history of discrimination & essay writing tips, 🏆 best discrimination topic ideas & essay examples, 🥇 most interesting discrimination topics to write about, ⚡ shocking discrimination essay examples, 🎓 good discrimination research topic ideas, 📌 discrimination speech topics and prompts, 📝 simple & easy discrimination topics for essay, ❓discrimination research paper question.

Discrimination essays are an essential part of historical and social sciences because of the influence of the practice on past and current humanity. In this article we will reveal the brief lookback to the history of discrimination and its causes, and provide a list of discrimination topics for essay, as well as paper examples on gender, disability, and racial inequality.

Past practices such as slavery were a result of discriminatory racist beliefs, and it took a long time for African Americans to be acknowledged as equal under law to other races.

Even then, the school of thought was not eradicated, and ethnic minorities as well as women would be oppressed by segregation and unequal opportunities until the emergence of the civil rights movement in the second half of the 20th century.

Even today, discriminatory practices arguably continue, and the debate around their existence draws considerable attention. You can use any of these topics to write an outstanding essay by following the guidelines below.

Discussions of slavery as a form of discrimination will usually be historic in nature, as they will discuss the practice as applied in the United States and other countries in the same region, but the notion offers discrimination essay topics for periods including modernity.

Before the Civil War, many people believed that black people were inferior to whites in some way, possibly due to the disparity between the advancement of African and European civilizations.

As such, even free black people would undergo harassment and risk being enslaved again if they did not leave for a territory that did not have the practice. The topic has been well researched, and so you can and should the wealth of information available to paint an accurate picture.

Even after the abolition of slavery, discriminatory views and practices persisted in many places. Examples included segregation practices where black people would be confined to ghettos and not allowed to visit various institutions.

The civil rights movement arose in the 1960s aimed to right that injustice, but eventually expanded to encompass more marginalized groups, such as women. Gender bias was prevalent at the time, with women being seen as housewives who could not work as well as men.

The success of the feminist message changed that perception and enabled women to choose their life freely. The various efforts and successes of the movement can provide you with ideas for an interesting work.

Ultimately, discrimination is being called out to this day, though many people hold the opinion that it has been mostly or completely eliminated in most advanced countries.

Nevertheless, many modern industries are affected by claims of faults such as gender discrimination, expressed as phenomena such as disproportionate hiring of males or a disparity in earnings between the sexes.

Other instances of modern discrimination are more concrete, such as the severe punishments for homosexuality practiced in some Muslim countries to this day. Humanity is still not entirely equal, and to progress towards that goal, we must identify and address issues.

Here are some additional tips that will improve the general quality of your essay:

Surround your discrimination essay body with an introduction and a conclusion. The former describes the topic and provides the reader with a thesis that names the central idea of the essay. The latter sums up the essay and provides some closing words.
Separate different sections of your paper with titles that identify their topics. This practice improves the essay’s structure and appearance, making it easier for the reader to navigate it, especially if you use well-designed discrimination essay titles.

Find excellent discrimination essay examples and other useful samples for your work on IvyPanda!

A Personal Experience of Discrimination It was then that I experience ostracism and discrimination in the hands of the joyous Parisians. My friends had always praised the shopping district in Paris and I finally had a chance to witness the […]
Bipolar Disorder in the Muslim and Discrimination of People With This Mental Illness However, the largest proportion of Muslims believes that there is a significant association of mental illnesses like bipolar disorder and evil spirits.
Causes of Discrimination in Society The main causes of discrimination are racial prejudices, gender, national and religious stereotypes, social categorization, and sexual orientation. Racial profiling is one of the vivid examples of racial discrimination and racial prejudices.
Was Ernest Hemingway a Misogynist? A Sexism Hemingway does not hide the uselessness of Wilson in the eyes of Margot; she only uses him as a toy, and even after they have sex Hemingway still questions it.
Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay This essay will document gender bias and gender discrimination in the context of social and physical and the social confines of the work place that is experienced at work in the context of United States […]
BMW Group’s Pricing Strategy and Discrimination Therefore, the company makes use of this strategy to leverage its products in the market. This strategy is commonly used before the launch of a new product.
Age Discrimination at the Workplace The first step to preventing age discrimination in a company is for the management to understand the meaning of age discrimination and its effects on the company.
Racism and Motherhood Themes in Grimke’s “Rachel” In addition, her mother kept the cause of the deaths of Rachel’s father and brother secret. In essence, the play Rachel is educative and addresses some of the challenges people face in society.
Discrimination Causes, Effects and Types As shown in the above definition, discrimination is unjust because it involves classifying a given group of people based on characteristics that make them look unfit to be part of the rest of the group.
Sociology: Prejudice and Discrimination in India The Dalits and the Adivasis and other classes of Indian Society are pursuing the erasure of the age old caste system with the new Indian socialist revolution.
The Challenges of Racism Influential for the Life of Frederick Douglass and Barack Obama However, Douglass became an influential anti-slavery and human rights activist because in the early childhood he learnt the power of education to fight inequality with the help of his literary and public speaking skills to […]
The Problem of Racism in Brazilian Football Skidmore describes it as the relationships that could result into conflict and consciousness and determination of the people’s status in a community or a particular group. In football, racism damages pride of the players and […]
Social Class Discrimination In this paper, I analyze three articles on social class and inequality to find out whether the authors’ views agree with mine on the negative attitudes towards the poor by the middle class and the […]
Gender Discrimination and Shared Responsibility Therefore, it is of great importance to address the mentioned challenge, and one of the solutions lays in the education of women.
Religious Discrimination in the Workplace It is necessary for the organization’s management to make decisions that are rational and logical so as to ensure that some members of a group do not feel excluded just because they do not belong […]
Discrimination as Part of Society Thus, the authors focus on the analytical analysis of any phenomenon of discrimination: the study of social, historical, political, and other aspects that have an impact on the growth of oppression of certain groups.
Racial Discrimination in American Literature In this way, the author denies the difference between people of color and whites and, therefore, the concept of racism in general.
The Discrimination Disparity Continuum. Bill Macumber Though these guidelines are available and are supposed to be the guide for the justice system, there have been cases when there have been a miscarriage of justice, which has led to the conviction of […]
Anti-discrimination Legislation Under the provisions of the sexual discrimination Act, a person who displays any behavior that is deemed to be sexually harassing in a nature will be held responsible for their behavior.
Racism and Gender in Beyoncé’s Lemonade The album Lemonade by an American singer Beyonce is one of the brightest examples when an artist portrays the elements of her culture in her music. Along with music videos, the album features a number […]
“Going for the Look, but Risking Discrimination” by Steven Greenhouse Reading through the article, it is not easy to establish the position of the writer on the issue of hiring based on looks.
Prejudice and Discrimination What I can say about myself is that being in a group while studying the nature of bias and discrimination was a useful experience.
Racial Discrimination in “A Raisin in the Sun” Racial discrimination is the main theme of the book, strongly reflecting the situation that prevailed during the 1950s in the United States, a time when the story’s Younger family lived in Chicago’s South Side ghetto.
Classism as a Complex Issue of Discrimination Classism is not an issue that affects just a small sector of the population. To facilitate justice in society, the issue of classism needs to be studied.
Manifestations of Gender Discrimination in Insurance In the past, insurance companies have engaged in gender discrimination in the classification, acceptance and rating of risks. This paper provides an in-depth analysis of the concept of gender discrimination and insurance in the world.
“Sexism in English: Embodiment and Language” In this essay, as well as in all of her essays from the collection titled “Sexism and Language,” Alleen Pace Nilsen holds the view that the feminine eponyms identify a woman with her body, while […]
Racism and Discrimination as Social Constructs This is because the concept of race has a negative connotation in the society. For example in some societies, especially the western society; the concept of race implies un-fair treatment and discrimination of a particular […]
Discrimination Definition and Characteristics Any form of discrimination against another is, therefore, immoral and repugnant towards development of the human race. Discrimination and all its forms make this bit of life to be challenging.
Mexican American Discrimination S and European immigrants settled and joined forces with Hispanic Texas to oust the Mexican rule and declare the independence of Texas in 1836.
Sex Workers: Discrimination and Criminalization The essay looks at the problem of discrimination against sex workers and the criminalization of sex work and highlights efforts that have been made towards decriminalization of the activity.
Discrimination and Prejudice Comparison Discrimination is the negative behavior or action toward a person on the accounts of their sexual orientation, race, or social class; it is the expression of prejudice and may lead to harming an individual.
Discrimination. Unequal or Unfair Treatment of Individuals Discrimination is a social determinant of health and is a form of stressor experienced by communities of color and minorities in different parts of the world.
Workplace Discrimination: Impact of Family-Friendly Policies There is a reduction in the number of compulsory working hours, allowing employees more time to spend with their families and children.
Contrast Between Tituba and John Indian and Countering Racism The declaration suggests that Conde believed the story of Tituba’s maltreatment needed to be told to expose the truth she had been denied due to her skin color and gender.
The Fashion Industry: Discrimination Case To conclude, although the fashion industry seeks to contribute to cultural and ethnic sustainability, there are some issues that require discussion.
Social Construction of Race and Racism Although ‘race’ as a description of the physical condition probably dates back to the dawn of the human species, most scholars agree that it was primarily through European expansion in the 16th to the 19th […]
Racial Discrimination at the Workplace The main change that is discussed in this essay is the introduction of legislation that will see the creation of a special authority that is aimed at guaranteeing the freedom of all workers at the […]
Racial Discrimination Effects in Coming of Age in Mississippi by Anne Moody The vivid description of events from the beginning gives the reader a clear picture of a girl who was born in problems and in spite of her intelligence she always became a victim of circumstances.
Colorism as an Act of Discrimination in the United States The Specialization led to the categorization of workers into two groups where we had the field workers who remained in the fields cultivating and digging and the house-helps who worked in the houses of the […]
Discrimination Against Hispanics in America Today, Mexicans and all other Hispanics are still victims of the stereotypes and inequalities faced by their people in the US over a hundred years ago.
Discrimination in Education and Unfair Admission The significance of equality in education is due to the natural development of society and the transition to a civilized order, where any manifestations of bias for various reasons are unacceptable.
Ableism: Bias Against People With Disabilities People concerned with rights advocacy ought to ensure a facilitated awareness of the distressing impacts of ableism through the inclusion of the subject in private and public discussions.
Effects of Discrimination in the Workplace Where an organization has a policy that requires all employees to be examined in a certain way before they can be promoted, the examination process must be seen to be transparent and fair to all […]
Sexism in the English Language Issue The degree of sexism in the attitude of the speaker while using English is also indicative of the cultural differences in attitude towards sexism in language.
Discrimination and Affirmative Action This fact explains why every society should use affirmative action in order to support the rights of its people. In conclusion, affirmative action is a reliable program that can deal with the dangers of discrimination.
Accent Discrimination and the Harmful Effects The learners of English as a second language have been greatly affected because of the discrimination faced from other individuals because of the difference in pronunciation.
Discrimination in School Based on the data in this case, describe the behaviour of the students in this class The children’s behaviour displays racial discrimination owing to their treatment of the new coloured student in class.
Discrimination at Publix Incorporation Despite the claim by the management of Publix Incorporation that the firm is committed to ensuring non-discrimination; the firm has not effectively implemented policies aimed at abating discrimination.
Anti-discrimination Legislation and Supporting Case Law The response to this was the abolition of the quota system and the adoption in 1995 of the Act on Non-Discrimination of the Disabled and a package of additional regulations, in particular, on the education […]
Canada: Discrimination in British North America To analyze women’s discrimination and marginalization in the 17th and 18th centuries, and to investigate whether they were severely discriminated in the social-economic development.
The Roma Problems and the Causes of Racism 3 Is it any wonder that the insular, superstitious, monolithically Catholic or Orthodox communities of Europe and Eastern Europe, eager to recapture the civil order and peace of the golden age of the Roman Empire […]
Racism: De Brahm’s Map and the Casta Paintings However, De Brahm’s map is one of the most striking pieces of evidence of the conquest of space and the entrenchment of the idea of land and people as titular property.
Racism and Inequality in Society The idea of race as a social construct is examined in the first episode of the documentary series “The Power of an Illusion”.
Anti-Racism: Marginalization and Exclusion in Healthcare This essay examines the course’s impact and the concepts of marginalization and exclusion in healthcare. Marginalization is a concept that has profoundly influenced the understanding of race and racism in healthcare.
Workplace Discrimination: Types and Regulations In the 1970s and the 1990s, disability rights evolved with the introduction of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Issue of Racism in the United States The entire history of the United States is permeated with the evolution of the ideas of racism. Turning to history, we can see that the U.S.moved from slavery to using the Black population to solve […]
History of Racial Discrimination in Haiti and America The choice of topic, racial discrimination in Haiti and America, was influenced by beliefs, values, and assumptions emphasizing the importance of equality and justice for all races.
Racism and History of Discrimination As a result, advocacy should be aimed at creating new models in criminal justice that will ensure the protection of all minority groups and due process.
Racial Discrimination and Color Blindness Of the three ideologies, racial harmony is considered the most appropriate for coping with problems of racism and racial injustice due to various reasons.
Race, Racism, and Dangers of Race Thinking While it is true that some forms of race thinking can be used to justify and perpetuate racism, it is not necessarily the case that all forms of race thinking are inherently racist. Race thinking […]
LGBTQ+ (Queer) Military Discrimination in Healthcare Furthermore, the subject is relevant to the field of psychology as the current phenomenon examines discrimination in healthcare both from the psychological outcomes experienced by veterans as well as the perception of LGBTQ+ patients through […]
Discrimination at Work and Persistent Poverty While discrimination remains contributing to persistent poverty, organizations may benefit from blind hiring, an inclusive and accepting culture, and visible leadership to ensure efficient diversity management on a long-term basis. In conclusion, discrimination remains a […]
Racism in the US: Settler Imperialism They prove that colonial imperialism is a structure, not a contextual phenomenon and that, as such, it propagates the marginalization of native people.
Why Empathy in Racism Should Be Avoided Empathy is the capacity to comprehend and experience the emotions and ideas of others. Moreover, empathic emotions are essential to social and interpersonal life since they allow individuals to adapt their cognitive processes to their […]
Discrimination Against African-American Patients The study results are inconsistent due to the selected approach and limited sample size. The study focused on the personal experiences of a small local group of African-American patients, primarily elderly females, not allowing for […]
Racial Discrimination in High Education This peer-reviewed scholar article was found in the JSTOR database through entering key words “race affirmative action” and marking the publication period between 2017 and 2022.
Discrimination Against Survivors of Canada’s Indian Residential Schools According to Schwetizer, such institutions were characterized by poor conditions, heavy workloads, and the oppression of cultural attributes, through the use of which the government expected to adapt the aboriginal people to society’s standards.
Social Sciences: Racism Through Different Lenses A thorough analysis of diversity adds value to social interactions by informing human behavior through a deeper understanding of racism and its impacts on society. Using the humanities lens leads to a better understanding of […]
Successful Bias Lawsuits: Texas Company in Employment Discrimination Case The allegation was filed by the Department of Labor’s office in 2020, after the evidence indicated a shortfall of black and Asian employees at the company.
Racial Discrimination in Dormitory Discrimination is considered to be behavior that restricts the rights and freedoms of the individual. Therefore, it is essential to investigate discrimination in dormitories and propose solutions to this problem, such as disseminating knowledge about […]
Racism and Its Impact on Populations and Society The ignorance of many individuals about other people’s cultures and ethnicities is one of the causes of racism. One can examine the various components of society and how they relate to the issue of racism […]
Eliminating Discrimination: Poems From “Counting Descent” by Clint Smith The poems illustrated how the world is passed, what the ocean said to the black boy, and what the cicada said to the black boy.
Institutionalized Racism and Individualistic Racism Excellent examples of individualistic racism include the belief in white supremacy, racial jokes, employment discrimination, and personal prejudices against black people. Overall, institutionalized and individualistic racism is a perversive issue that affects racial relations in […]
Community Engagement with Racism To enhance the population’s degree of involvement in racism, the study calls for collaboration; this can be seen as a community effort to foster a sense of teamwork.
LGBT Discrimination Research Prospects: An Analysis The aim of this assignment is to summarize the research that has been done on LGBT discrimination, particularly in the workplace and during the recruiting process.
Discrimination Against the Elderly Population in the Medical Field The first week I was preoccupied, being my first time interacting with the older patients and also the fact that it was my first week and I was just getting used to the environment.
The Pricing Policy of Price Discrimination The equilibrium price of a commodity from the point of view of a free market is formed at the intersection of supply and demand, which fluctuates depending on many factors.
Racism Detection with Implicit Association Test Racial bias is deeply rooted in human society and propelled by norms and stereotypic ideologies that lead to implicit bias and the unfair treatment of minority groups.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act The law ADEA, which stands for The Age Discrimination in Employment Act, exhausts assumptions or beliefs that age affects a person’s ability to work.
Identity and Belonging: Racism and Ethnicity In the documentary Afro Germany – Being Black and German, several individuals share their stories of feeling mistreated and excluded because of their skin color.
Policies to Eliminate Racial Disparities and Discrimination The solution to exclusion is to build social inclusion in the classroom and within the school by encouraging peer acceptance, cross-group friendships, and built-in prevention.
Living With HIV: Stigma and Discrimination The mental health and emotional well-being of the population living with this virus are affected due to the humiliation and judgment they face from their fellows around them.
Causes, Facilitators, and Solutions to Racism These theories suggest that racism serves a particular function in society, occurs due to the interactions of individuals from dominant groups, and results from a human culture of prejudice and discrimination.
Racial Discrimination and Justice in Education An example is the complaint of the parents of one of the black students that, during the passage of civilizations, the Greeks, Romans, and Incas were discussed in the lessons, but nothing was said about […]
Empathy and Racism in Stockett’s The Help and Li’s To Kill a Mockingbird To start with, the first approach to racism and promoting empathy is to confront prevalent discrimination and racism, which was often shown in The Help. Another solution to racism and the possibility of promoting empathy […]
Is Troy Maxson (Wilson’s Fences) a Victim of Racism? As a black American, Troy’s childhood experiences have been passed on to his children, making him a victim of an oppressive culture. Therefore, this makes Troy a victim of racism and culture, contributing to his […]
Discrimination in the US Healthcare Sector More than 70% of those who buy insurance plans via the exchanges are also estimated to be entitled to tax credits, which will further lower their rates in addition to the lower premiums.
Racism in the Healthcare Sector In 2020, the cases and instances of racism in healthcare rose by 16% from 2018; there were notable instances of racism in various spheres of health. 9% of blacks have been protected from discrimination and […]
The Airline Industry: Sex Discrimination Although some females and males are fighting these stereotypes, there has been a culture in the airline industry to give females the flight attendant jobs and males the piloting jobs. Similarly, the roles of male […]
Individual and Structural Discrimination Toward LGBT (Queer) Military Personnel Consequently, LGBT military personnel are potentially even more vulnerable to mental health issues due to the combined stress of being LGBT and being in the military.
Racism in Healthcare and Education The mission should emphasize that it promotes diversity and equality of all students and seeks to eliminate racial bias. It is necessary to modify the mission to include the concept of inclusiveness and equality.
Equal Opportunity and Discrimination Thus, if a female individual feels denied a job opportunity due to the employer’s attitude to her possible pregnancy, she can apply to the Equal employment opportunity commission and ask for an investigation. EO serves […]
Institutional Racism in the Workplace Despite countless efforts to offer African-Americans the same rights and opportunities as Whites, the situation cannot be resolved due to the emergence of new factors and challenges.
Racism in Education in the United States Such racial disparities in the educational workforce confirm the problem of structural racism and barrier to implementing diversity in higher medical education. Structural racism has a long history and continues to affect the growth of […]
Individuals With Disabilities: Prejudice and Discrimination I researched that people with persistent medical or physical disorders, such as cerebral palsy or multiple sclerosis, who have speech, articulation, or communication impairments, for example, are sometimes seen as having an intellectual deficiency. Corey […]
Rhetoric in Obama’s 2008 Speech on Racism When the audience became excited, it was Obama’s responsibility to convey his message in a more accessible form. To conclude, Obama’s speech in 2008 facilitated his election as the first African American President in history.
How to Talk to Children About Racism The text begins by referring to recent events that were related to race-based discrimination and hatred, such as the murder of George Floyd and the protests dedicated to the matter.
Care for Real: Racism and Food Insecurity Care for Real relies on the generosity of residents, donation campaigns, and business owners to collect and deliver these supplies. The research article discusses some of the factors that contribute to the creation of racism […]
Racism Towards Just and Holistic Health Therefore, the critical content of the event was to determine the steps covered so far in the fight for racial equality in the provision of care and what can be done to improve the status […]
Discrimination Culture in Saudi Oil and Gas Sector The purpose of this paper is to inspect the interrelationship between the organizational culture and discrimination in the O&G sector in Saudi Arabia.
LGBTQ+ Families: Discrimination and Challenges The family model directly affects the social status of family members and the well-being of children. LGBTQ+ families’ wealth level is lower than that of families in the neighborhood due to labor discrimination.
Public Discrimination Based on the Status of Vaccination from COVID-19 It should be noted that COVID-19 is not a rare or exotic disease, but the rapid spread of this infection from the Chinese city of Wuhan led to the dramatic assignment of pandemic status to […]
LGBTQ Members: Discrimination and Stigmatization What remains unclear from the reading is the notion that before the 1990s, people from the middle class expressed abiding and strong desires to be acknowledged as “the other sex”.
Systemic Racism and Discrimination Thus, exploring the concept of race from a sociological perspective emphasizes the initial aspect of inequality in the foundation of the concept and provides valuable insight into the reasons of racial discrimination in modern society.
The Racism Problem and Its Relevance The images demonstrate how deeply racism is rooted in our society and the role the media plays in spreading and combating racism.
Gender Discrimination in Public Administration The subject of the dispute and the statement of claim was the vacancy of a traffic controller, which was initially offered to Johnson, but then, as part of the program, the place was given to […]
How to Overcome Poverty and Discrimination As such, to give a chance to the “defeated” children and save their lives, as Alexie puts it, society itself must change the rules so that everyone can have access to this ticket to success. […]
Aspects of Socio-Economic Sides of Racism And the answer is given in Dorothy Brown’s article for CNN “Whites who escape the attention of the police benefit because of slavery’s long reach”.. This shows that the problem of racism is actual in […]
Misogyny and Sexism in Policing A solution to solving sexism and misogyny in policing is increasing the number of female police officers and educating on gender bias.
Sexism and Internal Discrimination at Google The recommendation in the case is that the organization should provide justice to all the employees who are victims of discrimination and sexual harassment, irrespective of the perpetrator.
Tackling Racism in the Workplace It means that reporting racism to HR does not have the expected positive effect on workplace relations, and employees may not feel secure to notify HR about the incidences of racism.
Issue of Racism Around the World One of the instances of racism around the world is the manifestations of violence against indigenous women, which threatens the safety of this vulnerable group and should be mitigated.
Discrimination in the United States The paper’s authors see systemic racism as a consequence of segregation in World War I migration, which resulted in distinct communities that were not understandable to white Americans.
Causes of Discrimination Towards Immigrants Discrimination and intolerance against immigrants, and the implications of these inflammatory convictions and conduct, determine the sociocultural and economic destiny of welcoming nations and those who aspire to make these communities their new residence.
Environmental Racism: The Water Crisis in Flint, Michigan The situation is a manifestation of environmental racism and classism since most of the city’s population is people of color and poor. Thus, the water crisis in Flint, Michigan, is a manifestation of environmental racism […]
The “Racism and Discrimination” Documentary The documentary “Racism and Discrimination” is about an anti-racist teacher Jane Elliot who attempts to show the white people the feeling of discrimination. The central argument of the documentary is diversity training to seize the […]
Abortion-Related Racial Discrimination in the US In spite of being a numerical minority, Black women in the U.S.resort to abortion services rather often compared to the White population.
Canadian Society: Sexism and the Persistent Woman Question Equality of work, payments, and respect for women is on the agenda of this party, but they lack a modern look that refers to the problems of harassment and bullying in social networks.
Social Problems Surrounding Racism, Prejudice and Discrimination This kind of discrimination makes the students lose their self-esteem and the traumas experienced affects the mental health of these students in the long term.
Racism and Intolerance: The 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre The 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre: Crafting a Legacy by Messer elaborates on the legacy of the event and its repercussions and offers a profound analysis of the issue, which strengthened my focus of the research.
Discussion of Gender Discrimination in Modern Society In the professional field, women are constantly in discriminatory positions of jeopardy due to their gender. However, women still need to compete in the work environment.
Gender Roles, Expectations, and Discrimination Despite Isaac being the calmest boy in the school, he had a crush on Grace, a beautiful girl in the school who was from a wealthy family.
The Unethical Practice of Racism in a Doctor’s Case The involvement of Barrett in the protest is both unethical for the university’s image and immoral for the community. However, the school would likely face tougher court fines and a direct order to reinstate Barrett’s […]
The Problem of Racism in America One explanation of racism by feminist thinkers is that racism is a manifestation of the agency and power of people of a particular racial identity over others.
Racism: “The Sum of Us” Article by McGhee The economic analysis and sociological findings in America have drawn a detailed picture of the cost of racism in America and how to overcome it together.
Contemporary Sociological Theories and American Racism The central intention of this theory paper is to apply modern theoretical concepts from the humanities discipline of sociology to the topic of racism in the United States.
A Cause-and-Effect Analysis of Racism and Discrimination As a result, it is vital to conduct a cause-and-effect analysis to determine the key immediate and hidden causes of racism to be able to address them in a proper manner.
The Issue of Obesity in the Workplace: Discrimination and Its Prevention The critical detail is that the spread of the negative attitude to obesity in the workplace leads to the segregation of overweight people, stereotypical perceptions of their abilities, and prejudged attitudes toward them.
Employment Discrimination Based on Religion In other words, although both elementary teachers had no formal title of a minister and limited religious training, the religious education and formation of students were the basic reason for the existence of the majority […]
Discrimination Cases and Their Outcomes In the US, noticeable and influential cases tend to occur, and they remind the nation of the existing problem and reduce the effect of discrimination.
Cause and Effect of Racial Discrimination Irrespective of massive efforts to emphasize the role of diversity and equality in society, it is still impossible to state that the United States is free from racial discrimination.
Institutional Racism Through the Lenses of Housing Policy While not being allowed to buy property because of the racial covenants, the discriminated people had to house in other areas.
Social Inequality and Discrimination Gender discrimination is when a person or a group of people is treated unfairly or unfairly because of their gender. Moreover, there is a classification of the thinking model in which a person exalts his […]
Job Discrimination and Harassment Secondly, the strengths of the discrimination suit include the fact that he is the only white employee in his unit and one of the few men, suggesting a certain bias within the hiring department.
Role of Racism in Contemporary US Public Opinion This source is useful because it defines racism, describes its forms, and presents the survey results about the prevalence of five types of racial bias.
The Amazon Warehouse Employee Sexual Orientation Discrimination With the mismatch between the aspects of the work at the Amazon warehouse, the demand for the job, the ability to work successfully, and the wants and desires of the employees, it is worth noting […]
The Mutation of Racism into New Subtle Forms The trend reflects the ability of racism to respond to the rising sensitivity of the people and the widespread rejection of prejudice.
Racism: Healthcare Crisis and the Nurses Role The diminished admittance to mind is because of the impacts of fundamental bigotry, going from doubt of the medical care framework to coordinate racial segregation by medical care suppliers.
Origins of Racial Discrimination Despite such limitations as statistical data being left out, I will use this article to support the historical evaluation of racism in the United States and add ineffective policing to the origins of racism.
Language Discrimination in Modern Society It is necessary to let go of the fear of talking and writing on social networks in a language that is not native to you.
Beverly Greene Life and View of Racism The plot of the biography, identified and formed by the Ackerman Institute for the Family in the life of the heroine, consists of dynamics, personality development and its patterns.
Historical Racism in South Africa and the US One of the major differences between the US and South Africa is the fact that in the case of the former, an African American minority was brought to the continent to serve the White majority.
Gender Stereotypes and Sexual Discrimination In this Ted Talk, Sandberg also raises a question regarding the changes that are needed to alter the current disbalance in the number of men and women that achieve professional excellence.
Capitalism and Racism in Past and Present Racism includes social and economic inequalities due to racial identity and is represented through dispossession, colonialism, and slavery in the past and lynching, criminalization, and incarceration in the present.
Minstrels’ Influence on the Spread of Racism The negative caricatures and disturbing artifacts developed to portray Black people within the museum were crucial in raising awareness on the existence of racism.
How Parents of Color Transcend Nightmare of Racism Even after President Abraham Lincoln outlawed enslavement and won the American Civil War in 1965, prejudice toward black people remained engrained in both the northern and southern cultural structures of the United States.
Bias and Discrimination: Prejudice, Discrimination, and Stereotyping The bias may be automatic, ambiguous, and ambivalent depending on its characteristics and how it manifests in terms of people’s opinions on certain groups of individuals.
A Problem of Racial Discrimination in the Modern World This minor case suggests the greater problem that is unjustly treating people in the context of the criminal justice system. In the book, Stevenson writes about groups of people who are vulnerable to being victimized […]
Beverly Tatum’s Monolog About Injustice of Racism Furthermore, the author’s point is to define the state of discrimination in the country and the world nowadays and explore what steps need to be taken to develop identity.
Discrimination: Trans World Airlines, Inc. vs. Hardison However, the court concluded that TWA made a reasonable effort at accommodating Hardison and granting him the request to work four days a week would detriment the function of his department due to them being […]
Discrimination in the Bostock v. Clayton County Case The examination of the issue by relying on the example of Gerald Bostock was advantageous for establishing proper employment practices in this respect.
Issue of Institutional Racism Systemic and structural racisms are a form of prejudice that is prevalent and deeply ingrained in structures, legislation, documented or unpublished guidelines, and entrenched customs and rituals.
Discrimination: Chalmers v. Tulon Company of Richmond Chalmers, a devoted Christian, saw it her duty to share her Lord’s gospel, and thought it her duty to inform her coworkers of their “improper conduct” in the face of God.
Discrimination: Peterson v. Wilmur Communications The case concerns Christopher Lee Peterson, at the time of events an employee of Wilmur Communications and a follower of the World Church of the Creator.
Racism in America Today: Problems of Today Even though racism and practices of racial discrimination had been banned in the 1960s after the mass protests and the changes to the laws that banned racial discrimination institutionally.
Evidence of Existence of Modern Racism It would be wrong to claim that currently, the prevalence and extent of manifestations of racism are at the same level as in the middle of the last century.
Culture Play in Prejudices, Stereotyping, and Racism However, cognitive and social aspects are significant dimensions that determine in-group members and the constituents of a threat in a global religious view hence the relationship between religion and prejudices.
Latin-African Philosophical Wars on Racism in US Hooker juxtaposition Vasconcelos’ ‘Cosmic Race’ theory to Douglass’s account of ethnicity-based segregation in the U.S.as a way of showing the similarities between the racial versions of the two Americas.
Confronting Stereotypes, Racism and Microaggression Stereotypes are established thought forms rooted in the minds of particular groups of people, in the social environment, and in the perception of other nations.
Racial Discrimination in Dallas-Fort Worth Region Thus, there is a historical imbalance in the political representation of racial minorities in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Nonetheless, the Black population is reported to thrive best in the suburban areas of DFW, where this […]
Healthcare Call to Action: Racism in Medicine
White Counselors Broaching Race and Racism Study
US Federal Anti-Discrimination Laws Response
British Colonial Racism for Aboriginal Australians
Discrimination Against African American Nurses
“Ocean Acidification Impairs Olfactory Discrimination…” by Munday
The Black People: Sexuality and Racial Discrimination Interview Review
Racial Discrimination Through the Cosmetics Industry
Racism Evolution: Experience of African Diaspora
Racial Discrimination and Residential Segregation
Significance of Perceived Racism:Ethnic Group Disparities in Health
Religious Practices and Business Discrimination
Discrimination in Canadian Society
The Sexism Behind HB16 Bill
Social Justice, Diversity and Workplace Discrimination
Racism as Origin of Enslavement
Colorblind Racism and Its Minimization
The Bill H.R.666 Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021
When Men Experience Sexism Article by Berlatsky
Summary of the Issue About Racism
Non-White Experience: Stereotyping and Discrimination
How the Prison Industrial Complex Perpetuate Racism
Social Change Project: Religious Discrimination in the Workplace
Battling Racism in the Modern World
Indian Youth Against Racism: Photo Analysis
Racism: Do We Need More Stringent Laws?
Free Speech vs. Anti-Discrimination Practices Conflict
Problem of Racism in Schools Overview
US Immigration Policy and Its Correlation to Structural Racism
America: Racism, Terrorism, and Ethno-Culturalism
The Pink Tax Issue: Economic Discrimination Against Women
Discrimination and Substance Use Disorders among Latinos’ Article Review
Issue of Racism in Healthcare
Workplace Discrimination Based on Attractiveness
Solving Racial Discrimination in the US: The Best Strategies
Popular Music at the Times of Racism and Segregation
Religious Discrimination Against a Muslim Employee
Temporary Aid Program: Racism in Child Welfare
Wearing Headscarves and Workplace Discrimination
The Discrimination of African Americans
The Issue of Discrimination Within American Ethnicity by Aguirre and Turner
Western Scientific Approach as a Cause of Racism
How Does Racism Affect Health?
Investigating the Discrimination in the Workplace
Citizen: An American Lyric and Systemic Racism
The Reflection of Twain’s Views on Racism in Huck Finn
Black as a Label: Racial Discrimination
Urban Regime Theory in Anti-Black Discrimination
Nike: Workplace Writing and Discrimination
Environmental Discrimination in Canada
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and Racial Discrimination
Flint Water Crisis: Environmental Racism and Racial Capitalism
Cancer Alley and Environmental Racism
Cancer Alley and Environmental Racism in the US
American Healthcare in the Context of Racism
Discrimination and Politics of Gender and Sexuality
Discussion of COVID-19 and Discrimination
Origins of Modern Racism and Ancient Slavery
Discrimination of Employees With Physical and Cognitive Impairments in the Workplace
Root Causes and Solutions to Racism
Contribution of Racism to Economic Recession Due to COVID-19
What Stories Can Teach Us About Racism
Racism in Canadian Medical System
Profit and Racism in the Prisons of the United States
Everyday Sexism in Relation to Everyday Disablism
Discrimination and Health of Immigrants in Canada
Life History Interview: Discrimination as an African American
Discussion of Language Discrimination
Rio Tinto: Case Study About Racism and Discrimination
Discrimination of Black Women During Pregnancy
Racism: US v. The Amistad and Dred Scott v. Sandford
Discrimination in the Workplace: How to Solve It
Race and Color Discrimination Against US Employees
Discrimination Against People of Color and Queer Community
Critical Social Problems Research: Racism and Racial Domination
Discrimination as an External Manifestation of Societal Ills
Business and Corporate Law: Discrimination Case Analysis
Harassment Law – Tennie Pierce Discrimination
Discrimination Against Women and Protecting Laws
Criminal Justice: Racial Prejudice and Racial Discrimination
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)
Work Place Discrimination
The History of Racial Discrimination and Its Effects on the American Races
Protections Against Employment Discrimination
Discrimination Complaint on a Civil Litigation Processes
Racial Discrimination in the US Criminal Justice System
Policing in America: The Issue of Violence and Racism
LGBTQ Rights: Sexual Minority Members Discrimination
Institutional and Interpersonal Racism, White Privilege
Racism and Sexism as a Threat
The Aspects of Discrimination
The Development of a Measure to Assess Symbolic Racism
Syrian Conflict and Women Rights: Way to Equality or Another Discrimination
Racism and Tokenism in Bon Appetit: Leadership and Ethical Perspective
Ethnic Stratification, Prejudice & Discrimination
From “Scientific” Racism to Local Histories of Lynching
Equal Pay Act: Pay Discrimination
Sexism Against Women in the Military
Subjective Assumptions and Medicine: Racism
Anti-Discrimination Laws in the U.S.
Discrimination Against Muslim in the USA
Racism Experiences in the Workplace in the UK
Race and Ethnicity, Other Minorities and Discrimination
The History of Immigration to the United States and the Nature of Racism
Gender and the Problem of Discrimination
Discrimination and the Hiring Process
Legal Process About Discrimination
Race and Racism in the USA: The Origins and the Future
The Life of Muslims in the USA and Discrimination
Genetics of Sexual Orientation: Privacy, Discrimination, and Social Engineering
Environmental Racism in the United States: Concept, Solution to the Problem
Discrimination in Puerto Rico
Protecting George Wallace’s Organized Racism
How Can the World Unite to Fight Racism?
Fighting Anti-Muslim Sentiments
Female Workers Discrimination and Affirmative Action
Ideological Support Arab Muslim Discrimination
The Most Prominent Forms of Discrimination
Discrimination of Women in IT Sphere
Gender Discrimination in the Workplace and Better Management Skills
Racism in America and Its Literature
Race, Class and Gender. Racism on Practice
Racism: Term Definition and History of Display of Racism Remarks
Institutional Discrimination, Prejudice and Racism
Racism in Contemporary North America
Racial and Gender Discrimination in the Workplace and Housing
Racism Without Racists in Patriarchal Society
Discrimination in the United States of America
The Problem of Racism in Canada
Exploring and Comparing Racism and Ethnocentrism
Discrimination Against Black People
Intraracial Discrimination: Grace Hsiang’s Article’s Analysis
Ethics of Gender Identity Discrimination at Work
Racism Cannot Be Unlearned Through Education
Racism in Movies: Stereotypes and Prejudices
Intersectionality Oppression and Discrimination in Latin America
Facing Racism: A Short Story
White Supremacy as an Extreme Racism Group
American Racism: So Why Isn’t Obama White?
Literature on Latina Women and Sexism
Discrimination in Recruiting & Promotional Aspects: Tanglewood Company
Disability Discrimination Laws: Workers’ Compensation
Human Resource Management: US Age Discrimination Act
“Red Lining” – A Type of Discrimination
Racism Issues: Looking and Stereotype
The Problem of Gender Discrimination
Muslim Society, Life Meaning, and Discrimination
Anti-Racism Policy Statement in Australian Schools
Racism, Minorities and Majorities Analysis
Chicano Discrimination in Higher Education
Racism and Ethnicity in Latin America
Racial Discrimination in Song ‘Strange Fruit’
Racism Effects on the Premier League Players
Social Psychology: Racism in Jury Behaviour
Sexism in Walt Disney Animation Studios’ Works
Racism in the United States of the 21st Century
Prejudice and Discrimination Among Students
A Conduct Parameter Model of Price Discrimination
Appiah’s Ideas of Racism, Equality, and Justice
Sexism, Racism, Ableism, Ageism, Classism
Consumer Welfare and Price Discrimination
Racism in Media: Positive and Negative Impact
Racism: Once Overt, but Now Covert
How Racism Makes Us Sick: Public Talk That Matters
Institutions and Gender Discrimination Issues
Environmental Racism and Indigenous Knowledge
Sexism: Gender, Class and Power
Organizational Behavior: Group Size and Discrimination
Rights, Equity and the State: Sexual Orientation and Discrimination
Gender Discrimination on Birth Stage
Scientific Racism: the Eugenics of Social Darwinism
Islam and Racism: Malcolm X’s Letter From Mecca
Prejudice and Discrimination in Policing
Racism vs. “Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself”
Racism in Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals, Transgenders
Price Discrimination and Psychological Techniques
Robert Senske vs Sybase Inc: Labor Discrimination Case
Evian and Aquafina Waters: Stimulus Discrimination Concept
Employment Discrimination and Law Amendment
Bias and Discrimination in Early Childhood Care Centers
Sexism and Presidential Elections in the USA
Legal and Ethical Issues: Discrimination Remedy
Racism in Australian Football League Sporting Clubs
Prejudice and Discrimination in Diverse Organizations
Thomas Jefferson on Civil Rights, Slavery, Racism
Heterosexism and Its Explanation
Racial Discrimination Forms Against Afro-Americas
The Equal Opportunities Approach and Discrimination
Fair Treatment and Discrimination in the Workplace
White Privilege and Racism in American Society
Racism, Privilege and Stereotyping Concepts
Australian Anti-Discrimination Acts and Their Provision
Gender, Size Discrimination and Fatphobia
Racism in the United States: Before and After World War II
Race-Norming and Discrimination Issues
Baldwin’s and Coates’ Anti-Racism Communication
Racism as the Epitome of Moral Bankruptcy
Sports: Discrimination, Match-Fixing and Doping
AIDS Discrimination in “Philadelphia” (1993) by Jonathan Demme
Discrimination Against Refugees in a New Country
Weight Discrimination and Beauty Prejudice in the HRM
Hate Groups as Drivers of Discrimination
Racism in Trump’s and Clinton’s Campaigns
Colin Powell and the Fight Against Structural Racism
Workplace Discrimination and Legislation in the US
Discrimination During the Recruitment Process
Direct, Intentional, Institutional Discrimination
Age Discrimination and Workplace Segregation
Hate Crimes and Anti-Discrimination Laws
California Real Estate Discrimination
Diversity and Discrimination in Hiring Process
Racism Elimination and Sociological Strategies
Discrimination and Profiling in “Crash” Movie
Employment Discrimination and Equal Opportunities
Gender Discrimination in History and Nowadays
Stereotyping and Discrimination in Advertising
Sexual Orientation Discrimination Issue at the Workplace
Racism and Discrimination in Religion Context
Women’s Difference: Sex Discrimination
Workplace Discrimination: Data Collection Methods
US Teachers’ Rights, Dismissal, and Discrimination
Discrimination in the USA: Cases and Policies
Racism: Theoretical Perspectives and Research Methods
Racism in the Setting the Rising Sun Postcard
Eli Lilly & Company’s Discrimination Class Action
Does Racism and Discrimination Still Exist Today?
English Literature Impact on Racism Among Africans
Anthem by Ayn Rand: Discrimination Theme
Discrimination Complaint and the Litigation Process
Jerrell Shofner’s Views on the Racial Discrimination
Prejudice and Discrimination Reduction Prospects
People with Disabilities: The Systemic Ableism
The US Government and Discrimination With Muslims
Asian American Communities and Racism in the USA
Racial Discrimination and Its Effects on Employees
Discrimination of Women and Minorities in Firms
Negative Aspects of Discrimination at the Workplace
Racial Discrimination in Social Institutions
King’s and Obama’s Views on Racism in America
Lanning v. SEPTA: Employment Discrimination and Testing Practices
Girls Discrimination in the Modern Educational System
Racism in USA: Virginia Laws on Slavery
Racism as a Reality of Modern American Society
Homosexual Discrimination in Our Society: Causes and Effects
Racism Issue and Solutions
Addressing Discrimination at Workplace
On Language Grounds: Discrimination of International Students
Intersectionality and Gendered Racism
International Students Discrimination in the USA
Racism and Education in the United States
Discrimination Due to Language Differences
Gender Discrimination in Russian Workplaces
Racism as a Case of Ignorance and Prejudice
Racism and Segregation in American History
Humanism, Racism, and Speciesism
Discrimination Definition, Its Causes and Effects
Racism in American Schools
Racist America: Current Realities and Future Prospects
Sexism in the English Language
Discrimination in the Workplace: Denial of Promotion
Self-Interest and Discrimination in Sociology
Racism Against Native Americans
The Recruitment of Employees and Discrimination
Obama’s First Election and Racism
Adolf Hitler: From Patriotism to Racism
Coca-Cola Discrimination Issues
Problems of Environmental Racism
How Obama’s First Election Has Been Affected by Racism?
How Different Young Australians Experience Racism?
Racial Discrimination in Organizations
Gender-Based Discrimination in the Workplace
In Australia, Are Cultural Rights a Form of Racism?
Racism and Ethnicity in United States
‘Animal Rights’ Activists and Racism
Diversity and Discrimination in the Workplace: The Role in Activities of an Organization
Price Discrimination Economics
Sex Discrimination at Wal-Mart
Religious and Racal Discrimination in Eboo Patel’s “Acts of Faith”
The Racial Discrimination Among Employers
The Discrimination Against Women Employees in the Telecommunication Industry
Theories of Cultural Diversity: Anthropological Theory and Discrimination
Discrimination and Affirmative Action: New Haven Firefighter’s Case
Multicultural Psychology: Cultural Identity and Racism
How Fake News Use Satire as a Medium to Address Issues on Racism?
Young Australians and Racism
Price Discrimination and Monopolistic Competition
Relationship Between Institutionalized Racism and Marxism
Statelessness and Discrimination
Discrimination Against Black Women
Democratic Racism in Canada
Social Construction of “Race” and “Racism” and Its Relationship to Democratic Racism in Canada
Black or White Racism
Age discrimination in Employment
Discrimination in the Labor Market
Racism in Family Therapy by Laszloffy and Hardy
Racial Discrimination in the US
The ‘Peopling’ Process of Australia Since 1788 With Influence of Racism
Discrimination at Places of Work
Poverty, Homelessness and Discrimination in Australia: The Case of the Aboriginal
Globalization and Racism
Clinton Homosexual Discrimination Policy
Discrimination and Fight for Equality
Discrimination at Workplaces
Discrimination, Social Exclusion and Violence among the LGBT Community
Society Moral Standards: Racism and Its Harmful Effects
Problem of the Gender Discrimination in the Workplace
Discrimination of Certain Categories of the Population
The Issue of Racial Segregation in the United States
Family Responsibilities and Discrimination
Diversity and Discrimination: PepsiCo, HCA, and IndyMac Bank
Racism and Male Dominance in Education
Comparison of Racism in the United States and South Africa
Managing in an Inclusive Environment: Discrimination
Discrimination targeting pregnant women
English Racism During World Cup
The Historical Roots of Racism in Australia
Maya Angelou: Racism and Segregation in “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings”
Death Penalty and Discrimination
Racism Is Not All About Individual Attitude
Discrimination, Prejudice and Racism in the United States
Racial or Ethnical Discrimination
Lavin M. A. “Effects of Exposure to Information about Appearance Stereotyping and Discrimination on Women’s Body Images”
The Role of Racism in American Art During the 1930s and 1940s
Promotion of Racism in US Through Sports
Why Is Discrimination a Barrier in the Working Environment?
Racism in U.S. Criminal Justice System
The Employment Discrimination Against Muslims at Work Places
Racism, Colonialism and the Emergence of Third World
Discrimination against Immigrants
Why the Philosophy of King is More Effective in Fighting Racism than Malcolm’s?
African Americans-Prejudice and Discrimination
Employment Discrimination: Race/Ethnicity/Color/National Origin/Religion
Racism and Discrimination: White Privilege
Racism and Segregation in the United States
Segregation and Discrimination in My Left Foot
The Root Cause of Racism and Ethnic Stratification in the US
Race and Discrimination
Racism in the USA
Discrimination in Sarah Baartman’s Life
Sarah Baartman: A Victim of Discrimination
Age and Gender: Discrimination During the Hiring Process
Analysis on Religion, Racism and Family Conflicts
The Concept of Racism
The Policy Status Quo to Prevent Racism in American Schools
Racial Profiling: Discrimination the People of Color
Racism as a Central Factor in Representing Asian American History
Immigration and Discrimination in the Workplace
Reducing Racism in the University of Alberta and University of York
Anti-discrimination laws in America
Achebe’s Views on Racism
Gender Discrimination at the Workplace: A Case of Sexual Harassment
Racial Stereotypes in Movie Industry
Price Discrimination Strategy
Racism in the American Nation
The Civil Rights Movement: Ending Racial Discrimination and Segregation in America
Institutionalized Racism and Sexism
It’s His Right, It’s Her Duty: Benevolent Sexism and the Justification of Traditional Sexual Roles-Journal
The Anatomy of Scientific Racism: Racialist Responses to Black Athletic Achievement
Anti-Islamic Religious Discrimination in the Workplace
Cultural Discrimination Concept in Literature
The Problem of Global Racism in Modern World
Racial Discrimination at the World Bank
Wal-Mart’s Discrimination Difficulties
Racial Discrimination in America
Asian American Discriminations in Colleges
Institutionalized Racism From John Brown Raid to Jim Crow Laws
Racism in America After the Civil War up to 1900
Discrimination at the Workplace: Legislations Regarding Discrimination
Labor Discrimination in US Economy
Have You Experienced Racism in Korea?
Contemporary Racism in Australia: the Experience of Aborigines
Racism By Thomas Jackson
Addressing the Racism in Society
Racism in the Penitentiary
Different Challenges of Racial Discrimination
Slavery, Racism, and the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade
Ethnic Groups and discrimination
Legal Concerns on Discrimination in Promotion and Hiring
Political Discrimination Against Women
Controversy of Gender and Race Discrimination
Discrimination Remedy at Workplace: Affirmative Action Programs, Reverse Discrimination and Comparable Worth
Does Competition Eliminate Discrimination?
Are HIV/AIDS Carriers Suffering From Discrimination?
Does Ethnic Discrimination Vary Across Minority Groups?
Can Competition Among Employers Reduce Governmental Discrimination?
Does Gender Discrimination Contribute to India’s Population Imbalance?
Are Racial Profiling and Police Discrimination an Issue?
Does Health Predict the Reporting of Racial Discrimination or Do Reports of Discrimination Predict Health?
Can Gender-Fair Language Reduce Gender Stereotyping and Discrimination?
Does Market Liberalisation Reduce Gender Discrimination?
Are Spatial Frequency Cues Used for Whisker-Based Active Discrimination?
Does Political Competition Lessen Ethnic Discrimination?
Can Social Contact Reduce Prejudice and Discrimination?
Does Protecting Older Workers From Discrimination Make It Harder to Get Hired?
Are the Processes Underlying Discrimination the Same for Women and Men?
Does Racial Discrimination Exist Within the NBA?
Can Social Media Lead to Labor Market Discrimination?
Does Religious Discrimination Really Exist in Todays America?
Did Fredy Villanueva Face Racial Discrimination?
Does the Stimulus Type Influence Horses Performance in a Quantity Discrimination Task?
Can the Government Deter Discrimination?
Do Anti-discrimination Laws Alleviate Labor Market Duality?
Can the One-Drop Rule Tell Us Anything About Racial Discrimination?
Does Banning Price Discrimination Promote Entry and Increase Welfare?
Have Anti-discrimination Housing Laws Worked?
How Does Discrimination Affect People With Mental Illness?
What Exactly Does Racial Discrimination Mean?
Should the Racial Discrimination Act Be Reformed?
What Are the Causes of Discrimination?
Gender Inequality Research Topics
Racial Profiling Essay Topics
Gender Stereotypes Essay Titles
Indigenous People Research Topics
Oppression Research Topics
Aliens Research Topics
Prejudice Essay Topics
Global Issues Essay Topics
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 26). 618 Thought-provoking Discrimination Essay Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/discrimination-essay-examples/

"618 Thought-provoking Discrimination Essay Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 26 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/discrimination-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '618 Thought-provoking Discrimination Essay Ideas & Examples'. 26 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "618 Thought-provoking Discrimination Essay Ideas & Examples." October 26, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/discrimination-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "618 Thought-provoking Discrimination Essay Ideas & Examples." October 26, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/discrimination-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "618 Thought-provoking Discrimination Essay Ideas & Examples." October 26, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/discrimination-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

Basic site functions
Ensuring secure, safe transactions
Secure account login
Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
Remembering privacy and security settings
Analyzing site traffic and usage
Personalized search, content, and recommendations
Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

Remembering general and regional preferences
Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Chronicle Conversations
Article archives
Issue archives
Join our mailing list

Illustration of a boy crouching in front of a computer screen that says "Delete cyber-bullying; Click with KINDNESS." © Sierra McKenna/ 2011-2016 Mouseleaf

Cyberbullying and Its Implications for Human Rights

About the author, liam hackett.

December 2016, No. 4 Vol. LIII, Human Rights

M ost health professionals would agree that stress is the biggest factor affecting the mortality rate in modern society. If left untreated, stress can have detrimental impacts on both physical and mental health, and can lead to conditions such as heart disease, insomnia and depression. It is no wonder that stress has reached epidemic levels when one considers the sheer volume of stimuli reaching our consciousness on a daily basis, not to mention the increasing demands on our time and volatile changes across political and economic systems.

At a societal level, stress is often regarded as an issue exclusively impacting adults, with young people often being excluded from the conversation. Young people, however, are under an immense amount of pressure to succeed academically, as exams become increasingly challenging and frequent. The growing global talent pool and economic uncertainty further contribute to the pressures placed on young people to succeed and compete directly with their peers.

Aside from academic pressure, young people have even bigger issues to contend with: shifting hormone levels, questions of identity and living their lives publicly online.

Digital identity is a relatively new concept, so there is no real precedent to follow regarding the integration of technology into our daily lives and ways to distinguish between our online and offline personas. While the Internet is a powerful tool that can be used to connect like-minded people and communities, it is also often used as a platform to defame, harass and abuse people within the sanctuary of their own homes.

Research suggests that up to 7 in 10 young people have experienced online abuse at some point. 1 The term ‘cyberbullying’ is often treated as a distinct phenomenon, but it is an extension of bullying, which is an age-old problem. Bullying taps into societal undertones of prejudice and discrimination and often impacts people with protected characteristics of race, religion, sexuality, gender identity and disability the most.

Traditionally, bullying was often exclusively confined to the educational environment, with one’s home being a safe haven. Today, however, it is possible for a young person to be bullied not only at school but also in the family car or at home, alone in their bedroom, and even in clear sight of their parents or guardians without those adults ever being aware. With communication technology being so integral to modern living, some young people have very little opportunity to escape the abuse, and many remain in a constant state of stress and anxiety. One in three victims of bullying have self-harmed as a result, and 1 in 10 has attempted suicide. 2

It is consistently found that approximately one in two young people who experience bullying never tell anyone out of fear, embarrassment or a lack of faith in support systems. Abuse, whether it be online or offline, plays havoc with the mental and physical health of young people and generates additional surges of stress.

Over a four-year period, from the analysis of 19 million tweets, a Ditch the Label and Brandwatch report found that there were almost 5 million cases of misogyny on Twitter alone. Fifty-two per cent of the misogynistic insults recorded were authored by women and typically targeted the appearance, intelligence and sexual preferences of other women. The report found 7.7 million cases of racism, 390,296 instances of homophobia and 19,348 transphobic messages sent on Twitter. 3 Only public data was examined, so when the figures are extrapolated from the entire Internet to include both public and private communication channels, the level of online hate speech is overwhelming.

For all of us, our identity is sacred and something that we spend our entire lives crafting and evolving. For a young person, identity is temperamental and something that still remains largely undiscovered. Identity influences come largely from protected characteristics and as such, young people attach a great deal of importance to their religious and cultural identity, sexuality, gender identity or a disability. These characteristics are frequently used to bully a person online. Abuse often breeds internalized resentment for oneself. A young person who experiences racism online is likely to see their skin colour as the issue, and they may want to change that aspect of his or herself in order to avoid abuse.

The same report found that those discussing politics and sport online were the most likely to receive abuse on the platform, thus highlighting a culture of intolerance and disrespect towards the heterogeneity of opinion. The type of rhetoric employed throughout the 2016 presidential campaign in the United States of America normalized abusive behaviours to a certain extent and sent a clear message: that it is okay to digitally attack those with a different perspective or opinion. This undermines the right to freedom of expression that we should all have, and creates an environment in which the self-expression of others—often marginalized groups—is suppressed.

Appearance-based bullying is one of the most common aspects of abuse both online and offline. In a crowded, celebrity-obsessed world, young people are under an immense amount of pressure from the media, influencers and the content that they consume to look and behave a certain way. The value of attractiveness is something that is learned and reaffirmed continuously from a very early age, so issues such as body dysmorphic disorder and eating disorders increase as young people aspire to look like the edited versions of role models they see in the media. In a recent Ditch the Label survey, it was shown that one in two young people now want to pursue such methods as plastic surgery to change how they look. 4

Many young people turn to social media in the search for validation from their peers. This trend is problematic because self-confidence and self-esteem become conditional traits that are heavily defined from an external perspective. It makes young people vulnerable to appearance-based insults online and creates a superficial culture of appearance-based values. There has been an increase online in subcultures of communities sharing images of people and rating their level of attractiveness. Many young people are willingly subscribing to these communities in hopes of being validated, with their self-esteem on the line. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for abusive messages to be posted, attacking a person’s appearance, with or without their knowledge.

The Internet poses unique challenges in terms of abuse. For instance, there are no geographical restrictions to membership or communication; it is now possible for someone to receive abuse beyond their own offline community. Cyberbullying often suppresses the dignity of recipients in an incredibly public way, where others are able to contribute to and validate the ridicule by liking, responding to and sharing abusive content.

Not all cyberbullying is instigated by people who know the recipient; it is often sent anonymously, which can have further implications on the validation of abuse received offline, too. Anonymous bullying can greatly undermine the confidence and sense of safety for those receiving it because it is difficult to prove without the intervention of authorities where the abuse originated. It can create paranoia and often be more powerful than abuse from someone the person knows.

In more extreme cases of cyberbullying, recipients have had their physical security and privacy compromised through the unauthorized sharing of their personal information, such as their address, phone number and intimate family details. ‘Revenge porn’ is a term used to describe the act of sharing pornographic content involving a person without their consent in an effort to defame and embarrass them both publicly and intimately with their friends and family. Steps have been taken to introduce harsher legal sanctions against revenge porn as the act can have devastating impacts on the victims of such abuse. At a societal level, the subjects of revenge porn are often blamed for their own abuse and told that they should have never sent a naked image or video of themselves. This is challenging because it only adds to the problem and essentially validates the behaviour of the aggressor. It attaches shame to the exploration of sexuality, which should be a healthy element of modern relationships.

The Internet erodes historical socioeconomic barriers to communication, making it possible to reach anyone online—from friends and family to celebrities and world leaders. Open communication channels are generally good for the advancement of humanity, as they encourage greater collaboration and shared learning. Now, however, anyone with a social media presence can be susceptible to cyberbullying and abuse online. The transparent and viral nature of the Internet has the power to alter a person’s temperament and even their long-term fate within a matter of seconds, regardless of who they are or their life experiences. For societal role models, it is not so much a process of learning how to prevent bullying online as about learning how to deal with it in productive and empowering ways, without allowing actual or pre-emptive abuse to suppress their own thoughts or behaviours.

Everyone has the right to civil liberties and to live a life that is dignified in equality with others. It is important to reframe the issue to understand that a person is never abused because of their race, sexuality, religion or disability, for example. A person is bullied because of the negative attitude or circumstances of the aggressor. The key difference is that attitudes and circumstances can change with the appropriate levels of support and education. Identity is not something that can be changed or influenced by abusive behaviour, and no one should ever attempt to do so.

Young people must be encouraged to freely express themselves and exercise their rights in all environments, digital or non-digital. They must be empowered to contribute towards a democratic, global community by sharing their own ideations and opinions without attacking others who hold contrasting views.

A world that is truly fair and equal requires a culture of respect and mutual understanding. An interconnected world requires communication standards to which all adhere. With that goal in mind, we still have a long journey ahead of us.

1 Ditch the Label, “The annual cyberbullying survey 2013” (Brighton, 2013). Available from http://www.ditchthelabel.org/research-papers/the-cyberbullying-survey-2013/ .

2 Ditch the Label, “The annual bullying survey 2016” (Brighton 2016). Available from http://www.ditchthelabel.org/research-papers/the-annual-bullying-survey-... .

3 Ditch the Label and Brandwatch, “Cyberbullying and hate speech: What can social data tell us about hate speech online?” (Brighton, 2016). Available from http://www.ditchthelabel.org/research-papers/cyberbullying-and-hate-speech/ .

4 Ditch the Label, “The annual bullying survey 2015” (Brighton, 2015). Available from http://www.ditchthelabel.org/research-papers/the-annual-bullying-survey-... .

The UN Chronicle  is not an official record. It is privileged to host senior United Nations officials as well as distinguished contributors from outside the United Nations system whose views are not necessarily those of the United Nations. Similarly, the boundaries and names shown, and the designations used, in maps or articles do not necessarily imply endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.

Geospatial information refers to data that identifies the geographic location and characteristics of natural and constructed features and boundaries on Earth.

A Chronicle Conversation with Paloma Merodio Gómez

Leading up to the Seventh High-level Forum on United Nations Global Geospatial Information Management (UN-GGIM) in October, the UN Chronicle asked Paloma Merodio Gómez, former UN-GGIM Co-Chair and Vice President of the Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía of Mexico, about geospatial information as fundamental to sustainable development.

A primary care centre in Toledo, Spain. WHO / Andreas Beck

Improving Diagnosis for Patient Safety: A Global Imperative for Health Systems

States are increasingly recognizing the importance of ensuring access to safe diagnostic tools and services, towards avoiding preventable harm and achieving positive patient outcomes.

United Nations police (UNPOL) serving with the United Nations Mission in South Sudan meet with community leaders and members of the Community Watch Group in Juba, South Sudan, 19 December 2014. UN Photo/JC McIlwaine

How International Cooperation in Policing Promotes Peace and Security

The role of international policing is closely aligned with the principles of justice, peace, democracy and human rights, and is integral to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Documents and publications

Yearbook of the United Nations
Basic Facts About the United Nations
Journal of the United Nations
Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
United Nations Official Document System (ODS)
Africa Renewal

Libraries and Archives

Dag Hammarskjöld Library
UN Audiovisual Library
UN Archives and Records Management
Audiovisual Library of International Law
UN iLibrary

News and media

UN News Centre
UN Chronicle on Twitter
UN Chronicle on Facebook

The UN at Work

17 Goals to Transform Our World
Official observances
United Nations Academic Impact (UNAI)
Protecting Human Rights
Maintaining International Peace and Security
The Office of the Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth
United Nations Careers

Essays About Discrimination: Top 5 Examples and 8 Prompts

You must know how to connect with your readers to write essays about discrimination effectively; read on for our top essay examples, including prompts that will help you write.

Discrimination comes in many forms and still happens to many individuals or groups today. It occurs when there’s a distinction or bias against someone because of their age, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability.

Discrimination can happen to anyone wherever and whenever they are. Unfortunately, it’s a problem that society is yet to solve entirely. Here are five in-depth examples of this theme’s subcategories to guide you in creating your essays about discrimination.

IMAGE	PRODUCT
	Grammarly
	ProWritingAid

1. Essay On Discrimination For Students In Easy Words by Prateek

2. personal discrimination experience by naomi nakatani, 3. prejudice and discrimination by william anderson, 4. socioeconomic class discrimination in luca by krystal ibarra, 5. the new way of discrimination by writer bill, 1. my discrimination experience, 2. what can i do to stop discrimination, 3. discrimination in my community, 4. the cost of discrimination, 5. examples of discrimination, 6. discrimination in sports: segregating men and women, 7. how to stop my discrimination against others, 8. what should groups do to fight discrimination.

“In the current education system, the condition of education and its promotion of equality is very important. The education system should be a good place for each and every student. It must be on the basis of equal opportunities for each student in every country. It must be free of discrimination.”

Prateek starts his essay by telling the story of a student having difficulty getting admitted to a college because of high fees. He then poses the question of how the student will be able to get an education when he can’t have the opportunity to do so in the first place. He goes on to discuss UNESCO’s objectives against discrimination.

Further in the essay, the author defines discrimination and cites instances when it happens. Prateek also compares past and present discrimination, ending the piece by saying it should stop and everyone deserves to be treated fairly.

“I thought that there is no discrimination before I actually had discrimination… I think we must treat everyone equally even though people speak different languages or have different colors of skin.”

In her short essay, Nakatani shares the experiences that made her feel discriminated against when she visited the US. She includes a fellow guest saying she and her mother can’t use the shared pool in a hotel they stay in because they are Japanese and getting cheated of her money when she bought from a small shop because she can’t speak English very well.

“Whether intentional or not, prejudice and discrimination ensure the continuance of inequality in the United States. Even subconsciously, we are furthering inequality through our actions and reactions to others… Because these forces are universally present in our daily lives, the way we use them or reject them will determine how they affect us.”

Anderson explains the direct relationship between prejudice and discrimination. He also gives examples of these occurrences in the past (blacks and whites segregation) and modern times (sexism, racism, etc.)

He delves into society’s fault for playing the “blame game” and choosing to ignore each other’s perspectives, leading to stereotypes. He also talks about affirmative action committees that serve to protect minorities.

“Something important to point out is that there is prejudice when it comes to people of lower class or economic standing, there are stereotypes that label them as untrustworthy, lazy, and even dangerous. This thought is fed by the just-world phenomenon, that of low economic status are uneducated, lazy, and are more likely to be substance abusers, and thus get what they deserve.”

Ibarra recounts how she discovered Pixar’s Luca and shares what she thought of the animation, focusing on how the film encapsulates socioeconomic discrimination in its settings. She then discusses the characters and their relationships with the protagonist. Finally, Ibarra notes how the movie alluded to flawed characters, such as having a smaller boat, mismatched or recycled kitchen furniture, and no shoes.

The other cast even taunts Luca, saying he smells and gets his clothes from a dead person. These are typical things marginalized communities experience in real life. At the end of her essay, Ibarra points out how society is dogmatic against the lower class, thinking they are abusers. In Luca, the wealthy antagonist is shown to be violent and lazy.

“Even though the problem of discrimination has calmed down, it still happens… From these past experiences, we can realize that solutions to tough problems come in tough ways.”

The author introduces people who called out discrimination, such as Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and Barbara Henry – the only teacher who decided to teach Ruby Bridges, despite her skin color.

He then moves on to mention the variations of present-day discrimination. He uses Donald Trump and the border he wants to build to keep the Hispanics out as an example. Finally, Bill ends the essay by telling the readers those who discriminate against others are bullies who want to get a reaction out of their victims.

Do you get intimidated when you need to write an essay? Don’t be! If writing an essay makes you nervous, do it step by step. To start, write a simple 5 paragraph essay .

Prompts on Essays About Discrimination

Below are writing prompts that can inspire you on what to focus on when writing your discrimination essay:

Essays About Discrimination: My discrimination experience

Have you had to go through an aggressor who disliked you because you’re you? Write an essay about this incident, how it happened, what you felt during the episode, and what you did afterward. You can also include how it affected the way you interact with people. For example, did you try to tone down a part of yourself or change how you speak to avoid conflict?

List ways on how you can participate in lessening incidents of discrimination. Your list can include calling out biases, reporting to proper authorities, or spreading awareness of what discrimination is.

Is there an ongoing prejudice you observe in your school, subdivision, etc.? If other people in your community go through this unjust treatment, you can interview them and incorporate their thoughts on the matter.

Tackle what victims of discrimination have to go through daily. You can also talk about how it affected their life in the long run, such as having low self-esteem that limited their potential and opportunities and being frightened of getting involved with other individuals who may be bigots.

For this prompt, you can choose a subtopic to zero in on, like Workplace Discrimination, Disability Discrimination, and others. Then, add sample situations to demonstrate the unfairness better.

What are your thoughts on the different game rules for men and women? Do you believe these rules are just? Cite news incidents to make your essay more credible. For example, you can mention the incident where the Norwegian women’s beach handball team got fined for wearing tops and shorts instead of bikinis.

Since we learn to discriminate because of the society we grew up in, it’s only normal to be biased unintentionally. When you catch yourself having these partialities, what do you do? How do you train yourself not to discriminate against others?

Focus on an area of discrimination and suggest methods to lessen its instances. To give you an idea, you can concentrate on Workplace Discrimination, starting from its hiring process. You can propose that applicants are chosen based on their skills, so the company can implement a hiring procedure where applicants should go through written tests first before personal interviews.

If you instead want to focus on topics that include people from all walks of life, talk about diversity. Here’s an excellent guide on how to write an essay about diversity .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
HHS Author Manuscripts

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Bullying: Review and Implications for Intervention

Hunter College, City University of New York

Natalia Macrynikola

The Graduate Center and Hunter College, City University of New York

Muhammad Waseem

Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center

Regina Miranda

Hunter College and The Graduate Center, City University of New York

Despite increased research on bullying over the past few decades, researchers still have little understanding of how bullying differentially affects racial and ethnic minority and immigrant youth. To facilitate efforts to better evaluate the impact of bullying among racial and ethnic minority youth and improve interventions, we integrated research from multiple disciplines and conducted a systematic search to review relevant cross-cultural research on the prevalence of bullying, risk and protective factors, and differences in behaviors and outcomes associated with bullying in these populations. Studies measuring differences in bullying prevalence by racial and ethnic groups are inconclusive, and discrepancies in findings may be explained by differences in how bullying is measured and the impact of school and social environments. Racial and ethnic minorities and immigrants are disproportionately affected by contextual-level risk factors associated with bullying (e.g., adverse community, home, and school environments), which may moderate the effects of individual-level predictors of bullying victimization or perpetration (e.g., depressive symptoms, empathy, hostility, etc.) on involvement and outcomes. Minority youth may be more likely to perpetrate bullying, and are at much higher risk for poor health and behavioral outcomes as a result of bias-based bullying. At the same time, racial and ethnic minorities and immigrants may be protected against bullying involvement and its negative consequences as a result of strong ethnic identity, positive cultural and family values, and other resilience factors. Considering these findings, we evaluate existing bullying interventions and prevention programs and propose directions for future research.

Bullying involvement in youth is associated with increased risk for negative mental health and behavioral outcomes throughout the lifespan, including anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation and attempts, substance use, criminality, and involvement in other forms of interpersonal violence, such as child abuse and intimate partner violence ( Klomek, Marrocco, Kleinman, Schonfeld, & Gould, 2007 ; Mills, Guerin, Lynch, Daly, & Fitzpatrick, 2004 ; Forero, McLellan, Rissel, & Bauman, 1999 ; Olweus, 2011 ; Renda, Vassallo, & Edwards, 2011 ; Corvo, 2011; Ttofi, Farrington, Lösel, & Loeber, 2011 ; Falb et al., 2011 ). Bullying is of particular concern for racial and ethnic minority youth, who may face greater harm as a consequence of bias-based victimization, in which youth are targeted due to a socially stigmatized identity or appearance, such as gender or sexual identity, race, ethnicity, or immigrant status ( Russell, Sinclair, Poteat, & Koenig, 2012 ). Yet while many aspects of bullying are well-studied among racial and ethnic majority populations, they are under-studied among minority populations.

Existing review papers present important findings on specific racial or ethnic groups (e.g. Albdour & Krouse, 2014 ; Hong et al., 2014 ; Patton et al., 2013 ), prevalence of bullying (e.g. Vitoroulis & Vaillancourt, 2015 ; Vitoroulis & Vaillancourt, 2018 ), and bias-based bullying (e.g. Earnshaw et al., 2018 ). However, to our knowledge, no published review comprehensively integrates current knowledge on how race, ethnicity, and immigration background across cultural contexts more broadly affects bullying involvement and its consequences. As a result, inconsistencies in the literature proliferate and lead to barriers to progress. To address this gap and call attention to the need for more bullying research focused on minority youth, specifically, the present review seeks to integrate recent empirical knowledge and theories into a cohesive understanding of the social, cultural, and psychological forces that affect bullying victimization and perpetration among racial and ethnic minority youth. To do so, we first summarize findings on prevalence rates of bullying involvement among racial and ethnic minorities, discussing the many inconsistencies in findings. Second, we review risk and protective factors uniquely affecting minorities, organizing these factors within a social-ecological framework. Third, we discuss how minorities are differentially affected by bullying victimization and how they perpetrate bullying differently than majority students. We conclude the review by discussing the efficacy of interventions for diverse populations and offering insights and suggestions for future research directions in bullying research.

Bullying Definitions and Scope of Current Review

Bullying occurs when a person “...is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other persons” ( Olweus, 1993 , p. 9). Bullying also involves an intent to harm and a power imbalance between the perpetrator (the bully or a group of bullies) and the victim (the target of bullying). This definition of bullying behavior is widely but not universally accepted, and many negative behaviors overlap with bullying. Some studies cited measure aggression or harassment but not bullying specifically; these studies were included because aggression and harassment are related to bullying and are incorporated into some definitions of bullying ( Volk, Dane, & Marini, 2014 ). However, aggression or harassment does not always imply repeated negative behavior towards a targeted individual.

In this review, we use the term “bullying involvement” to indicate bullying victimization or perpetration, or both. Youth involved in bullying may be identified as pure bullies, pure victims, or bully-victims, a third category of youth who are simultaneously perpetrators and victims of bullying ( Menesini & Salmivalli, 2017 ). Bullying can be direct or indirect, and can take many forms, including physical (e.g. hitting, shoving, spitting, damaging or stealing property), verbal (e.g. name-calling, threats, teasing, sexual comments), and relational (e.g. social exclusion, spreading rumors) bullying ( Monks & Smith, 2006 ). With advances in technology, cyberbullying has become another serious concern ( Smith et al., 2008 ; Patchin & Hinduja, 2006 ).

In the present review, we also draw distinctions between race and ethnicity. The construct of race divides people into groups by physical characteristics, while ethnicity is more concerned with shared cultural or national identity (see Betancourt & López, 1993 and Barr, 2008 ). Race and ethnicity often interact in multifaceted ways, and can be further complicated by factors such as immigration status, class, gender, gender identity, and sexuality. The present review strives to examine racial and ethnic differences in bullying from an intersectional perspective, but findings may be limited by the relative dearth of research on the cumulative effects of multiple stigmatized identities. Immigration background was another major topic in this review. Children who are themselves immigrants (first generation) and children of immigrants (second generation) may experience stressors that native-born minority children may not. Furthermore, different parts of the world may be characterized by political and economic factors that affect immigrants and racial and ethnic minorities (e.g., attitudes toward immigration, differential socioeconomic status among immigrant populations within the same country or region). The current review does not provide extensive context for these differing political and economic ecosystems, and we caution against making direct comparisons between populations. At the same time, we conduct this study with the understanding that migration, race, ethnicity, and class are intricately tied together, and many of the difficulties and strengths associated with belonging to the racial and ethnic minority are shared cross-culturally, regardless of geographic region or local politics.

The current paper is an integrative, critical review of empirical research concerning the differential effects of race, ethnicity, and immigrant background on bullying involvement and its consequences. Although we conducted a systematic search to guide our process, the broad scope of the review combined with the gaps in the literature made a formal meta-analysis or systematic review both unhelpful and unfeasible. The primary purpose of the systematic search was not to locate and review every relevant paper, but to reduce bias and to uniformly and accurately represent the major findings of the field.

We conducted searches on PubMed and PsycInfo in July of 2019 using search terms relevant to four general areas: bullying (bully* OR OR perpetrat* OR victimiz* OR aggress* OR harass*), diverse populations (racial OR ethnic* OR divers* OR minority OR immigra* OR race), and child or adolescent population (youth OR adolesc* OR child* OR teen* OR student*). These search terms returned 1864 studies, 468 of which were duplicates. The remaining 1,396 studies went through two rounds of screening.

The first round of screening eliminated papers that were not about school-age children or adolescents and that took place outside of an academic or school setting (i.e. workplace harassment, violence among college students or young adults, aggression in inpatient or hospital settings and residential facilities, etc.). We also excluded papers about violence or aggression that did not meet the definition of bullying (i.e. dating violence, parental maltreatment, sexual violence outside of the context of bullying, physical fights and use of weapons, delinquency or criminality, etc.). Papers that were not specifically about bullying, but involved harassment or aggression among peers in a school setting moved on to the second screening. Studies that operationalized aggression as a generalized trait, as opposed to behaviors relating to peer relationships, were not included. A number of other papers were medical papers about physical ailments or treatments (e.g., aggressive periodontitis), or about non-human animals. In total, 802 papers were eliminated in the first screening.

The second screening excluded studies that did not present hypotheses or major findings about racial, ethnic, or cultural group differences. Studies were also excluded if abstracts did not mention major findings relating to immigrant or minority youth, or if the study utilized a diverse sample but did not include a hypothesis contrasting minority youth with majority youth. In total, 459 papers were excluded in the second screening. Three hundred and thirty-seven studies were excluded because they did not present major findings about race, ethnicity, immigrant status, or any kind of minority group, though of these, 116 studies utilized a diverse sample; 105 studies were excluded because they were about gender and sexual minorities but did not include findings about racial or ethnic minorities; and eight studies were about another minority group (e.g., subcultures like goths, disability, weight or body shape, etc.). Six studies were excluded because they were not empirical studies (e.g., summary articles or opinion pieces), and we were unable to locate three papers. The remaining 135 papers are included in the current review.

Articles may also have been identified from citations in papers or reference books returned from search results, or through prior knowledge and recommendation from colleagues. Research from any country was included, though the numerical majority of papers were from the United States, and we made a particular effort to examine race and ethnicity in many differing social contexts. We also reviewed sources that provide context for bullying among racial and ethnic minorities (e.g., theoretical papers and sociological texts).

Prevalence of Bullying Involvement Among Racial and Ethnic Minorities

Studies measuring the prevalence of bullying by race, ethnicity, and immigrant status have yielded mixed results. For this part of the current review, we included papers whose primary purpose was to investigate differences in rates of bullying involvement among racial or ethnic groups and immigrants, as well as papers that indicate major findings about this topic in their abstracts. For this reason, studies reporting no significant differences between groups may be underrepresented due to publication bias and our methodology of screening by abstract.

We found cross-cultural evidence for both higher and lower rates of bullying victimization among racial and ethnic minority and immigrant youth compared to majority groups, as well as no significant differences in victimization rates among racial and ethnic groups (see Table 1 ). Interestingly, racial or ethnic minorities may face greater risk for bullying victimization from both out-group and in-group peers: in Hungary, both Roma and non-Roma students bullied peers they perceived as Roma more often than peers not identified as Roma ( Kisfalusi, Pál, & Boda, 2018 ). Though some findings suggest less bullying perpetration among racial and ethnic minority groups and immigrants, and a 2018 meta-analysis found small effect sizes between groups ( Vitoroulis & Vaillancourt, 2018 ), researchers more frequently found that minorities perpetrated bullying at higher rates than majority group youth (see Table 1 ). Importantly, some ethnic minority groups may experience more bullying involvement than majority groups, while others experience less. Despite the lack of consensus on prevalence of general bullying involvement among racial and ethnic minorities, the field has produced more consistent evidence that racial and ethnic minority youth and immigrants are more likely than majority and native-born youth to experience bias-based bullying. Refer to Table 1 for relevant major findings of included papers.

Summary of Studies on Prevalence of Bullying Involvement Among Racial/Ethnic Groups

Sample	Bullying measures	Major relevant findings


N = 418,483 middle and high school students in California, U.S.	Behavior-based self-report questionnaires of verbal, physical, and sexual victimization	African Americans (OR = 1.27) were more likely to be classified into the “frequent verbal, physical, and sexual victimization” class compared to White and Latino (OR = 0.82) students, out of four defined latent classes (occasional verbal and physical, verbal and sexual, and no victimization)
N = 7,107 7- to 13-year-old children in Nordic countries	Parent-report single-item survey asking “has your child been bullied?” that was coded dichotomously	Immigrant children had higher odds of being bullied than native children in Norway, Sweden, and all Nordic countries surveyed. In Sweden, 8.6% of native children and 27.8% of immigrant children were bullied.
N = 79,492 6 -12 grade students in large metropolitan area in the U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	27.5% of Native Americans were victims of bullying, which were higher rates than that endorsed by White, African American, Hispanic, or Asian students (ranging from 16.5%−19.6%)
N = 10,254 middle school youth in the U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	Compared to White and Hispanic youth, African American Black youth were more likely to be in the victim (probability of 46%) or bully-victim (45%) classes than in the low-involvement class (7%).
N = 8,523 children in Rotterdam, the Netherlands	Behavior-based teacher reports of bullying vict. & perp.	Children with a non-Dutch background were more likely to be victims (AOR = 1.41) or bully-victims (AOR = 1.41) than children of Dutch origin.
N = 109,104 adolescents from the National Adolescent School-based Health Survey in Brazil	Behavior-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	Black (OR = 1.15) and Indigenous (OR = 1.16) adolescents had greater likelihood of experiencing bullying victimization than White, mulatto, and Asian students.
N = 12,098 school-aged children in the U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of bullying victimization that provides definition of bullying and refers to behavior as bullying	Non-Hispanic White immigrant youth (OR = 1.96) and Non-Hispanic Black immigrant youth (OR = 2.39) were more likely to be bullied than native-born youth.
N = 1,368 6 graders in southern California, U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	Asian youth (AOR = 1.57) were more likely to be victimized compared to Hispanic (AOR = 1.41) youth.
Systematic review including 18 studies from the U.S., the Netherlands, Israel, and France		Across cultures, first-generation immigrants experience peer victimization at higher rates than third-generation and native-born youth.
N = 4,957 9- to 12-year-old children in Finland	Behavior-based self-report of victimization prefaced by a definition of bullying & behavior-based peernomination	First- ( = 0.36) and second-generation ( = 0.36) immigrant youth scored higher on a 0- to 1-point bullying victimization scale than native youth ( = 0.25) by both self- and peer-report. Physical, racist, and sexual victimization were more common in both immigrant groups than in the native group.
N = 2,929 youth who endorsed victimization two times a month or more in the U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of peer victimization	More immigrant youth (33%) reported experiencing physical aggression than non-immigrant youth (22%), and they were also more likely to be victimized because of their race, religion, or family income.
N = 1,090 kindergarten-age children in German-speaking Switzerland	Definition-based teacher report of bullying victimization, preceded by a workshop about bullying	Having an immigrant mother predicted more frequent bullying victimization than native Swiss parents ( = 0.62).
N = 347 students in Hungary across 4 schools	Nominations of which peers participants bullied based on questions about behavior	Both Roma = 0.42) and non-Roma students = 0.53) reported bullying peers they perceived as Roma more often than peers not perceived as Roma.

N = 2,870 adolescents with disabilities in the U.S.	Single-item definition-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	White students were more likely to be bully-victims than Black (OR = 0.14), Hispanic (OR = 0.06) or other race (OR = 0.12) students, and also more likely to be victims than Black students (OR = 0.13).
N = 18,515 bisexual youth in the U.S.	Definition-based self-report of bullying victimization	White youth reported bullying at higher rates (40.7% reported in-person bullying; 31.4% reported electronic bullying) than African American (21.8%; 18%) and Hispanic (25.2%; 21.7%) bisexual youth.
N = 4,581 middle school U.S. White and African American students	Behavior-based self-report of bullying victimization	White students were bullied at significantly higher rates than African American students = .28)
N = 232 4 grade White and Asian American students in the U.S.	Behavior-based peer nomination of bullying perpetration of peer physical and verbal aggression	Association between ethnicity and nominations for experiencing peer victimization was stronger for Asian American students = 0.21) than White students = 0.35) such that Asian American students were less often identified as victims.
N = 4,593 sixth grade students in the U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of overt and relational victimization	White students = −0.08) reported lower frequency of overt victimization than African American students (reference group), but not for relational victimization. Hispanic students reported victimization at similar rates as African American students.
N = 568 native and immigrant children in Austria	Definition-based peer nomination of bullying vict. & perp.	9.0% of native Austrian children, 5.1% of the Turkish/Kurdish children, and 1.6% of the former Yugoslavian children were nominated as bullying victims.
N = 4,668 10- to 15-year-old youth in the U.K.	Self-report of bullying vict. & perp. that identifies certain behaviors as “bullying”	Indian (OR = 0.53), Bangladeshi (OR = 0.40), and African youth (OR = 0.27) were more likely to be bullied than White youth while there were no significant differences for Pakistani, other Asian, and Caribbean youth (though all groups still reported less bullying victimization than White youth).
N = 7,182 6 through 10 grade U.S. adolescents	Definition-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	African American adolescents were less likely to be victims of verbal (OR = 0.77) and relational bullying (OR = 0.70), but not physical or cyber bullying, than White adolescents.

N = 3,965 middle school students in northeastern U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	No substantial differences in bullying victimization rates were reported between White (71%), African American (75%), Latino (70%), and Asian (66%) students.
N = 1, 956 elementary-age children in the U.S. followed up after 2 years	Peer nomination based on two questions: who gets picked on and who gets pushed and hit	Hispanic students ( = 0.20) were less likely to be victimized than White = 0.24) and African American ( = 0.24) students.
N = 2,174 adolescents from 78 schools across northern New Zealand	Definition-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	Bullying victimization rates were relatively similar across ethnic groups, but Maōri adolescents were more likely to experience victimization via text message (but not in-school, outside of school, or internet victimization) than New Zealand European and other ethnicity groups.
N = 2,139 adolescents in secondary schools in the south of Spain	Behavior-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	No significant differences in bullying victimization rates between racial minority and majority groups.
N = 75,344 U.S. adolescents, of whom 5,541 self-reported as lesbian, gay, or bisexual	Single-item definition-based self-report of bullying victimization	While White and Hispanic sexual minority youth were bullied more frequently than White heterosexual youth, Black sexual minority youth were bullied at the same rates as White heterosexual youth. Furthermore, Black and Hispanic heterosexual youth were bullied less than White heterosexual youth.
N = 2,799 adolescents in California, U.S.	Single-item behavior-based bullying victimization (operationalized as threatening to hurt)	African American youth reported the highest rates of bullying victimization (24%) and Asian American youth the lowest (6.5%) compared to White (17.5%) and Latino (15.2%) adolescents.
N = 454 7 and 8 grade students in the U.S.	Definition-based self-report of bullying with examples of bullying scenarios	No significant difference in involvement based on ethnicity.
Meta-analysis of 105 international studies from 1990 to 2011		Analyses revealed small effect sizes for the impact of ethnic group membership on rates of bullying victimization (range = ±0.02 to ±0.08)
N = 7,475 6 through 10 grade U.S. adolescents	Definition-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	No significant differences in latent class membership (all types victims, verbal/relationship victims, or not victims) based on race/ethnicity.


N = 79,492 6 -12 grade students in large metropolitan area in the U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	27.7% of African Americans and 30.9% of Native Americans endorsed repeated bullying perpetration behaviors, which were higher rates than that endorsed by White (15.5%), Hispanic (17.4%), and Asian (11.6%) students.
N = 3,965 middle school students in northeastern U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	Prevalence of bullying perpetration among African Americans (56%) was highest compared to White (44%), Latino (47%), and Asian (41%) students.
N = 310 6 and 7 grade students in midwestern U.S.	Behavior-based self-report of peer victimization perpetration	Non-White students were more likely to perpetrate non-physical bullying ( = 0.31) compared to White students.
N = 156 native and immigrant secondary school students in an urban schools in Oslo, Norway	Definition-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	Immigrant boys were more often in the bullying group than in the non-bullying, and nearly all immigrant boys were bullies. Immigrant girls were underrepresented in the bullying group and overrepresented in the non-bullying group.
N = 3,127 native and immigrant 8 , 9 , and 10 grade students in Norway	Definition-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	Compared to native children in Norway = 0.36), immigrant children ( = 0.46) were significantly more likely to be bullying perpetrators.
N = 8,523 children in Rotterdam, the Netherlands	Definition-based teacher-report of bullying vict. & perp. with concrete examples.	Children with a non-Dutch background were more likely to be bullies (AOR = 1.38) or bully-victims (AOR = 1.38) than children of Dutch origin.
N = 347 students in Hungary across 4 schools	Behavior-based self-report and peer nominations of bullying perpetration	Roma students self-reported being bullies ( = 1.99) and were nominated for being bullies by peers ( = 1.37) at higher rates than non-Roma students ( = 1.60 self-report; = 0.97 peer nomination).
N = 2,174 adolescents from 78 schools across northern New Zealand	Definition-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	Bullying perpetration rates were significantly different across ethnic groups, with Mari adōlescents more likely to perpetrate bullying in person at school and via text message (but not outside of school or internet bullying) than New Zealand European and other ethnicity groups.
N = 2,139 adolescents in 22 secondary schools in the south of Spain	Behavior-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	Ethno-cultural minority students ( = 2.83) were more involved in bullying perpetration than majority students ( = 2.26), but not cyber bullying.
Weighted N = 16,837, 733 U.S. adolescents	Single-item parent report	Hispanic and African American students are more likely than White peers to be bullies.
N = 4,668 10- to 15-year-old youth in the U.K.	Self-report of bullying vict. & perp. that identifies certain behaviors as “bullying”	Pakistani (OR = 3.32) and Caribbean youth (OR = 2.74) were more likely to be bullies than White youth while there were no significant differences for Indian, Bangladeshi, other Asian, and African youth (though all groups except other Asian still reported greater bullying perpetration than White youth).
N = 7,182 6 to 10 grade U.S. adolescents	Definition-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	African American adolescents were more likely to perpetrate physical (OR = 1.60), verbal (OR = 1.52), and cyber bullying (OR = 1.74), than White adolescents. Hispanic adolescents were more likely to perpetrate physical bullying (OR = 1.39) and be cyber bully-victims (OR = 1.56).

N = 1,348 high school students in Boston, U.S.	One- to two-item behavior-based self-reports of physical, relational, and verbal/emotional aggression/violence toward peers	Recent immigrant youth (19%) had a significantly lower prevalence of peer violence perpetration than third-generation (43%), second-generation (39%), or immigrant youth who had lived in the U.S. for over four years (42%). No significant differences in relational or verbal/emotional peer aggression.
N = 232 4 grade White and Asian American students in the U.S.	Behavior-based peer nomination of bullying perpetration of peer physical and verbal aggression	Association between ethnicity and nominations for perpetrating peer victimization was stronger for Asian American students = 0.29) than White students = 0.06) such that Asian American students were less often identified as aggressors.
N = 568 native and immigrant children in Austria	Definition-based peer nomination of bullying vict. & perp.	11.8% of native Austrian children, 7.2% of the former Yugoslavian children, and 3.8% of the Turkish/Kurdish children were nominated as bullies.
Meta-analysis of 53 studies		Meta-analysis found small, non-significant differences in bullying perpetration rates between immigrant and non-immigrant youth, and between visible minority and majority students.

N = 156 children in the U.K.	Peer nomination based on definition of bullying. Smaller sample asked to specify type of bullying and race of bully.	While ethnic majority and minority students experienced roughly equal rates of bullying victimization, Asian students reported being teased about their race or color more often than White students.
N = 5,000 12- to 18-year old U.S. adolescents, approximately, every other year from 2001 to 2011	Self-report on bullying and race- or ethnic-based victimization, definition-based and behavior-based	Asian Americans were less likely to report experiencing bullying, but more likely to report race-based victimization (9%) compared to White students (4%).
N = 925 8- to 12-year-olds in Britain	Behavior-based self-report of experiencing peer aggression and discriminatory aggression	Overall, minority children (16%) experienced greater discriminatory aggression than majority children (7%). However, while minority children experienced greater discriminatory aggression when ethnic minorities were less than half the school population, but when the school concentration of minorities exceeded 81%, majority students experienced greater discriminatory aggression.
N = 4,581 middle school U.S. White and African American students	One-item self-report about teasing due to race/ethnicity or skin color	White students reported greater rates of race-based bullying victimization than African American students = 1.25) when controlling for gender and school ethnic composition. White students reported greater rates of race-based bullying when they were numerical than when African American students did when they were the minority, while African American students reported rates of race-based bullying when they were the numerical than White students did when they were the majority ( = −0.02).
N = 66 White and Asian children in the U.K.	Definition-based self-report of bullying vict. & perp.	While Asian (36.4%) and White children (39.4%) reported similar rates of bullying victimization in general, 50% of Asian children reported race-based bullying (racist name-calling), while no White children reported racist bullying.
N = 2,851 primary school students in the Netherlands	Behavior-based self-report of experiencing racist victimization	33–42% of Turkish, Moroccan, and Surinamese elementary age students reported racist name-calling and 26–30% of them reported ethnic exclusion. These rates were significantly higher than 21% of Dutch students who reported racist name-calling and 19% who reported ethnic exclusion.

All statistics reported are significant at the p < 0.05 level or lower where relevant. OR comparison groups are White, racial or ethnic majority, or native-born youth unless specified.

Behavior-based surveys of bullying involvement include a list of behaviors (i.e. “I was pushed or shoved; ” “I was teased or called names”) that participants endorse or do not endorse individually, usually by indicating the frequency. They do not name the behaviors as “bullying,” unless otherwise noted. Definition-based surveys present a definition of bullying and participants endorse bullying victimization and/or perpetration based on this description. They may be single-item surveys or may include a list of behaviors or contexts.

Factors contributing to mixed reports of bullying.

Inconsistencies in study reports of bullying prevalence among racial and ethnic minority groups suggest that race and ethnicity alone may not be adequate predictors of bullying involvement, and other factors such as socioeconomic status might have more predictive power. These inconsistencies may also be explained by a number of considerations, including measures of bullying behavior, differing cultural values affecting reporting, density of ethnoracial minority populations in schools, and differing political and economic contexts across countries and regions. We discuss the first two in this section and the latter three in the section of the current review dedicated to risk and protective factors in the school environment.

Measuring bullying behaviors poses a unique challenge, especially when working with diverse populations. Immigrants and racial and ethnic minorities may report bullying at differential rates compared to the bullying behaviors they actually experienced. A 2018 study found that minority and male students report bullying victimization at lower rates than White and female students on a definition-based measurement of bullying, despite reporting experiencing bullying at similar rates as White and female students on a behavioral measurement that does not use the word “bullying” ( Lai & Kao, 2018 ). In a study of 24,345 students from 107 Maryland public schools, the prevalence of bullying differed based on how it was assessed. African-American boys and girls and Asian-American boys were more likely than White youth to underreport victimization when they were answering a one-question, definition-based survey as opposed to questions about specific behaviors associated with bullying ( Sawyer, Bradshaw, & O’Brannon, 2008 ). In another study, African American adolescents reported similar levels of victimization to a school counseling center as Hispanic and Asian American/Pacific Islander students, but were less likely to report experiencing bullying ( Lewis et al., 2015 ). Though the study did not explicitly investigate students’ understanding of the word “bullying,” some racial and ethnic minorities may be less willing to identify with the label.

For minority students, cultural differences and social norms may inform how they perceive and identify with the label “bullying,” resulting in rates of reporting that are not commensurate to the amount of bullying they actually experience. Triandis (1976) theorized that different ethnic groups may interpret cultural values and norms in differing ways. Minority groups may feel pressure to appear invulnerable or experience stronger stigma against bullying and may be less willing to link their own experiences and behaviors to the word ( Phelps, Meara, Davis, & Patton, 1991 ; Sawyer et al., 2008 ). As such, it is imperative that researchers consider these cultural differences and select or construct measurement methods that are sensitive to norms and beliefs among ethnic minority cultures. A few measures of bullying perpetration and victimization have been designed and validated for cross-cultural use. The Self-Report of Victimization and Exclusion (SVEX), validated with Latino and White youth, is a measure of overt and relational bullying that includes an expanded set of exclusion behaviors that may be relevant for developmental and cross-cultural use ( Buhs, McGinley, & Toland, 2010 ). The European Bullying Intervention Project Questionnaire–Ethnic-Cultural Discrimination Version (EBIPQ–ECD) is a measure of discriminatory bullying victimization and aggression, validated in a sample of 27,367 Spanish adolescents ( Rodríguez-Hidalgo, Calmaestra, Casas, & Ortega-Ruiz, 2019 ). Bullying researchers should consider using such validated and psychometrically sound measures, adapt and validate existing measures for cross-cultural use, or design new ones to gather more accurate data across different racial, ethnic, and cultural groups.

Risk and Protective Factors for Bullying Involvement in Racial and Ethnic Minorities

In this section, we organize knowledge about factors that increase risk for, or protect against, bullying involvement in minority youth within a social-ecological framework, a systems approach to development that emphasizes the interaction of distal and proximal factors that influence youth behavior and development ( Bronfenbrenner, 1979 ). Adapted to theoretical explanations of bullying involvement by previous research (e.g. Earnshaw et al., 2018 ; Hong & Espelage, 2012 ), this model suggests that children are nested within multiple systems that interact to influence their development.

The two most distal layers that we focus on are the macrosystem and exosystem layers, which encompass broad societal and cultural influences (macrosystem) and the settings (exosystem) minority youth grow up in – settings that are themselves influenced by such macrosystem factors as cultural ideologies and institutionalized racism. The more proximal layers are the microsystem, which includes factors related to the daily interpersonal interactions of minority youth, and the individual layer, describing certain within-person factors that research suggests play a role in bullying involvement. In the process of examining these distal and proximal minority-specific risk and protective factors, we integrate empirical research findings with critical theories to confer a deeper understanding of the social and psychological forces that influence bullying behavior in minority youth. See Figure 2 for an overview of risk and protective factors organized into an ecological framework.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1548349-f0002.jpg

Summary of risk and protective factors organized within an ecological framework

Macrosystem and Exosystem Influences: Oppression, Neighborhoods, and Violence

Critical race theory recognizes that racism is pervasive in the dominant culture and institutionalized racism perpetuates the marginalization of people of color. That is, racial and ethnic minorities must often contend with macrosystem influences such as historical legacies and current structures of oppression that have legal and economic ramifications. The effects of these macrosystem forces are contextual factors such as poverty and socioeconomic status, and they trickle down to the exosystem level, creating adverse environments for minorities, including violence in neighborhoods, family conflict, intergenerational transmission of trauma, etc. ( Haynie, Silver, & Teasdale, 2006 ; Lareau, 2011 ; Lauritsen & White, 2001 ; Widom, 1989 ). In turn, negative behaviors and outcomes associated with poverty and trauma reinforce discrimination and social stigma ( Delgado & Stefancic, 2012 ). Given that racial and ethnic minorities disproportionately live in high-risk neighborhoods, they also face greater health and behavior risks associated with these adverse environments, including bullying involvement ( Cook et al., 2010 ).

Community environments.

A 2013 study found that being African American (vs. White) significantly predicted gang involvement and carrying guns to school. Bullies and bully-victims (vs. non-bullies) also had higher odds of being involved with gangs and carrying guns to school, indicating overlaps in risk factors between African American and bully groups ( Bradshaw, Waasdorp, Goldweber, & Johnson, 2013 ). Living in environments where violence is common and encouraged or accepted may put immigrant and minority youth at risk for behaving aggressively. Chronic exposure to violence and perceived neighborhood threats are associated with the belief that aggressive behavior is a viable way to resolve conflict, with endorsing such behavior, and with acting aggressively ( Coie & Dodge, 1996 ; Colder, Mott, Levy, & Flay, 2000 ). For example, in the United States, African American youth were more likely than White youth to endorse beliefs that support fighting ( Farrell et al., 2012 ), and they were more likely to be perceived as aggressive compared to their White peers ( Graham, Bellmore, & Mize, 2006 ). Perception of certain groups as more aggressive may lead to the completion of a self-fulfilling prophecy: others may behave in ways that elicit aggressive behaviors from those they stereotype as aggressive (e.g., Rist, 1970 ; Zimmerman, Khoury, Vega, Gil, & Warheit, 1995 ).

Importantly, research suggests that poverty in neighborhoods, rather than concentration of minorities or immigrants in those neighborhoods, is the primary cause of greater behavioral risks like poor adjustment and friendship with deviant peers ( Chung & Steinberg, 2006 ; Haynie et al., 2006 ; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2000 ; Nishina and Bellmore, 2018 ). Disadvantages associated with poor neighborhood quality and poverty may cause poor psychosocial adjustment in addition to self-fulfilling negative stereotypes and beliefs that aggression is acceptable. A 2017 study in the U.S. found that non-White youth lived in more disadvantaged neighborhoods than their White peers, non-White youth were more likely to be bullies than their White peers, and that bullies on average experienced a greater number of disadvantages (e.g. neighborhood quality and disorder, lack of social cohesion, parental incarceration, witnessing IPV, and other adverse childhood experiences) than non-bullies ( Sykes, Piquero, & Giovanio, 2017 ). These findings illustrate the cumulative and cascading effects of community environment on bullying involvement.

School context.

Adverse community environments also impact school environments. For example, African American students attending large, urban schools serving students of a lower socioeconomic status—i.e., those living in low-income areas—were more likely to be exposed to high aggression in classrooms ( Thomas, Bierman, & CPPRG, 2006 ). Community and school contexts may interact to put racial and ethnic minorities at higher risk for bullying involvement.

Concentration of immigrants and racial and ethnic minority students can affect bullying involvement. A high (versus low) density of minority students and immigrants may be protective against bullying victimization for racial and ethnic minorities and immigrants. In a study of 1,449 5th-through-8 th -grade students in Canada, immigrants and children of immigrants were victimized significantly less often in schools with high (versus low) concentrations of immigrants ( Vitoroulis & Georgiades, 2017 ). Additionally, White students at predominantly non-White schools were at significantly higher risk for victimization than White students at majority-White schools in the U.S. ( Fisher et al., 2015 ; Hanish & Guerra, 2000 ). Similarly, a study in the U.K. found that ethnic minority students experienced greater levels of discriminatory aggression until the school’s minority concentration exceeded 81%, after which White students experienced more discriminatory aggression ( Durkin et al., 2012 ). Such findings suggest that racial and ethnic representation in schools affects who may experience bullying victimization ( Schumann, Craig, & Rosu, 2013 ).

At the same time, increased heterogeneity in school environments may also increase violence and conflict overall, depending on school-wide attitudes about diversity. Conflict may increase as student populations become more diverse if schools do not foster a culture of respect for differences; bullying is more common in more heterogeneous schools for all students. In ethnically heterogenous classrooms, bullying victimization was more common, and ethnic minorities were also more likely to bully than they were in homogenous classrooms ( Vervoort, Schulte, & Overbeek, 2010 ). Similarly, peer victimization was less frequent in Greek schools with high or low minority density compared to schools with moderate minority density, defined as having 26–75% ethnic minority students ( Serdari, Gkouliama, Tripsianis, Proios, & Samakouri, 2018 ). Ethnic harassment was also more likely to occur in classrooms with greater ethnic diversity among students in Sweden ( Bayram Özdemir, Sun, Korol, Özdemir, & Stattin, 2018 ). This evidence suggests that heterogeneity of schools causes more inter-group conflict, leading to increased bullying involvement.

However, concentration of immigrants and racial and ethnic minorities in schools explain only some of the variance in bullying involvement prevalence. The social environment in classrooms and schools can be equally or more important. Walsh et al. (2016) found that higher concentration of immigrant students in schools was linked to greater rates of bullying perpetration (among both immigrants and non-immigrants) but lower rates of victimization in immigrant youth. However, they also found classroom support strengthened or weakened those relationships, such that it was a greater influence on school violence than immigrant concentration. To this end, respect for diversity and for differences between students is associated with decreased reports of bullying ( Gage, Prykanowski, & Larson, 2014 ). Maintaining a balance of diverse representation in a student population, while promoting a culture of respect, can be protective against bullying. Congruently, negative perceptions and expectations about minority or immigrant students may have harmful effects on bullying and school culture.

Home environment.

Studies have linked family violence and witnessing intimate partner violence (IPV) with concurrent bullying perpetration in children ( Grant, Merrin, King, & Espelage, 2018 ; Baldry, 2003 ; Voisin & Hong, 2012 ). A study of 1,050 children in South Africa found that witnessing IPV was a primary risk factor for aggressive behavior and bullying peers, even after controlling for factors such as food insecurity and orphanhood status ( Cluver, Bowes, & Gardner, 2010 ). Another study following a large cohort of youth in the U.K. over two years confirmed the predictive strength of witnessing IPV on bullying behavior, even above socioeconomic status ( Bowes et al., 2009 ). In particular, witnessing IPV may be most predictive of physical forms of bullying perpetration ( Bauer et al., 2006 ).

One theoretical explanation for the link between witnessing violence at home and bullying perpetration in children is social learning theory, which posits that children model behavior from others, particularly authority figures like adults and parents ( Bandura & Walters, 1977 ; Low & Espelage, 2013 ). Parental and authority figures are important models for healthy development in youth. Those growing up in economically disadvantaged communities where family conflict, violence, and other risk factors are common—which are disproportionately racial and ethnic minorities—may be socialized to accept and even model these behaviors in their relationships outside of the home, as well.

Bias and prejudice.

Various racial and ethnic groups may experience bullying victimization at similar rates, but minority groups tend to experience more racist or bias-based bullying ( Wang, Wang, Zheng, & Atwal, 2016 ; Boulton, 1995 ; Mooney, Creeser, & Blatchford, 1991 ). Youth may use identifiers such as race, language, and cultural norms to divide themselves into social groups that then experience inter-group conflict ( Tajfel, 1978 ; Tajfel & Turner, 1979 ; Vitoroullis & Valliancourt, 2015). Qualitative studies on ethnic-based harassment and bullying among ethnic minority youth in Northern Island ( Connolly & Keenan, 2002 ) and Arab Americans ( Albdour, Lewin, Kavanaugh, Hong, & Wilson, 2017 ) may provide further context for what bias-based bullying might look like. First- and second-generation Asian students in the United States cite language barriers, different appearance, and immigrant status as common reasons for being bullied ( Qin, Ray, & Rana, 2008 ). Sikh students also reported that they experienced peer victimization because they were perceived to be foreigners and because they wore head coverings (Atwal & Wang, 2019). That is, being seen as a foreigner or outsider, regardless of nativity, can be associated with higher risks of bullying victimization.

Minority students who do not conform to their group’s stereotypes are at higher risk of victimization. For example, African American youth who are not athletic or Asian Americans who do not excel academically may be bullied more than those who do conform to these stereotypes ( Peguero & Williams, 2013 ; Wang et al., 2016 ). Asian American students, who are stereotyped to be less aggressive than their peers, were more likely than their White peers to be victimized by peers if they were aggressive ( Menzer, Oh, McDonald, Rubin, & Dashiell-Aje, 2010 ). From an opportunity theory perspective, Peguero, Popp, and Koo (2015) suggest that racial and ethnic minority students are at greater risk for victimization at school than majority students when they conform to the standards of the majority through academic or athletic success (i.e., “acting White”). Indeed, African American, Latino American, and Asian American students were more likely to be victimized at school if they were more involved in academic extracurricular activities, while there was no effect for White students. Furthermore, Asian American and Latino American students were more likely to be victimized if they were involved in athletic extracurricular activities, while African American and White students were less likely to be victimized ( Peguero, Popp, & Koo, 2015 ). Peguero and Jiang (2016) replicated these findings, reporting African American and Latino American students were more likely to be victimized if they were more academically successful or involved, and if they were friends with White students.

Bullying does not occur only between individuals belonging to different social groups, or between minority and majority groups. Intra-cultural pressure and conflict can be particularly painful for racial and ethnic minorities. For example, Black girls accusing other Black girls of “acting White” can be seen as a form of bullying victimization that is associated with significant social anxiety ( Davis, Stadulis, & Neal-Barnett, 2018 ). Additionally, a qualitative study found that Mexican American students consistently bullied Mexican immigrants, and that the bullying was associated with perceived superiority and language barriers ( Mendez, Bauman, & Guillory, 2012 ). In the U.K., children of ethnic minority groups were more likely to be bullied by members of other ethnic minority groups than by White peers: Hindus were most frequently bullied by Pakistanis, while Indian Muslims and Pakistanis were most frequently bullied by Hindus. Furthermore, the content of the bullying behaviors were tied to religious beliefs and cultural practices, e.g., which God was worshipped, clothing, etc. ( Eslea & Mukhtar, 2000 ).

The unique socioeconomic backgrounds of immigrants and children of immigrants may contribute to differential rates of bullying involvement. For example, findings from a 2009 study suggest that third-generation Latino students tend to be bullied more than first- or second-generation Latino students. Meanwhile, first- and second-generation Asian children are more likely to be victimized than third-generation Asian Americans. First-generation immigrants (both Asian and Latino) are more likely to be afraid at school than are native-born White Americans ( Peguero, 2009 ). This complex pattern of victimization and fear among immigrant groups might be explained by segmented assimilation theory, which posits that differing social, economic, and political contexts lead to three differing levels of social and economic success among immigrants and their descendants. One group is defined by acculturation and integration into the White middle class, another remains in a cycle of poverty and downward assimilation, while a third quickly advances economically while deliberately retaining culture of origin values and community ( Zhou, 1997 ). Membership to one of these three general classes, as well as generational level of assimilation, may predict how immigrant children and children of immigrants are perceived and treated, leading to differing levels of bullying involvement. Latino American children of immigrants may experience greater levels of adjustment difficulties and stigmatization associated with downward assimilation, while Asian Americans benefit from the “model minority” stereotype (though this stereotype is also harmful in its other ways), leading to differential rates of bullying involvement.

Microsystem & Individual Levels: Social and Cognitive Predictors of Bullying Involvement

Peer interactions..

As discussed earlier in this review, the challenges faced in the adverse environments created by macrosystem-level influences may shape beliefs in minority youth that aggression is a viable or permissible way to deal with conflict ( Coie & Dodge, 1996 ; Graham & Echols, 2018 ), and this belief may extend to peer contexts. Indeed, aggressive behaviors were associated with increased perceived popularity and leadership in urban, high-risk environments ( Waasdorp, Baker, Paskewich, & Leff, 2013 ). Aggression is also positively correlated with popularity in Black-majority classrooms in the United States ( Rodkin, Farmer, Pearl & van Acker, 2000 ). Although popularity has been linked with both prosocial behavior and aggression ( Luthar & McMahon, 1996 ; Kornbluh & Neal, 2016 ), popular White boys were more likely to be prosocial while popular African-American boys were more likely to be “tough,” or aggressive, as perceived and rated by peers ( Rodkin et al., 2000 ). Popularity associated with aggression can act as a reward for such behavior, exacerbating bullying in classrooms, and concordantly, aggression can be used by bullies as a tool to achieve social goals such as social acceptance and popularity ( Salmivalli, 2010 ).

In addition, research on friendships among children and adolescents provide evidence for in-group bias theory. Race and ethnicity are common identifiers used to determine social groups and form friendships ( Aboud, Mendelson, & Purdy, 2003 ), and youth are more likely to become friends with or accept other youth who belong to the same racial or ethnic group and reject those who belong to a different one ( Bellmore, Nishina, Witkow, & Juvonen, 2007 ). Furthermore, immigrant adolescents might be more likely to associate with peers within their own ethnic community due to acculturation-related factors ( Titzmann, 2014 ). Classroom-level acceptance or rejection of individual students has also been found to be affected by racial demographics of the classroom, with Black peers more accepted in classrooms with a higher concentration of Black students ( Jackson, Barth, Powell, & Lochman, 2006 ). Social identity theory provides a framework through which to view racist or bias-based bullying among children, who may link perceived threat to their in-group with their self-esteem, and have negative associations or behavior toward out-group members ( Tajfel, 1978 ; Tajfel & Turner, 1979 ; Vitoroullis & Valliancourt, 2015 ). As threats or perceived threats arise (e.g., racial dynamics in classrooms, political opinions expressed by parents and media, etc.), youth may identify themselves more strongly to the status of their in-group, and they may seek a boost to their self-esteem by acting negatively toward out-group members. For example, a study of British children found that discriminatory aggression increased as concentrations of minority students in schools increased ( Durkin et al., 2012 ). Furthermore, individual aggression among children and adolescents are affected by socio-political events and exposure to violence in the media. To illustrate, a study found that among Israeli and Palestinian youth, exposure to ethno-political violence predicts greater aggression two years later. The relationship was mediated by changes in normative beliefs about aggression, aggressive social scripts, and emotional distress due to exposure ( Huesmann et al., 2017 ). Race, ethnicity, and immigration status may be strong dividing factors in school and classroom environments, causing segmentation in the student body that deepens as perceived threats rise and social relationships form as a result of bullying behaviors.

Being part of the majority group may have certain disadvantages as well. Belonging to the numerical majority in Californian schools with a Latino or Asian majority population made students vulnerable to greater victimization if their friends were victimized more over the course of an academic year ( Echols & Graham, 2016 ). The authors of the study suggest this may be because belonging to the majority group increases status and visibility, so when majority students associate with low-status individuals, they are more likely to be victimized because they stand out more. Alternatively, majority youth may suffer greater consequences because they cannot attribute victimization to prejudice and believe that they were at fault for their own victimization ( Echols & Graham, 2016 ; Graham, Bellmore, Nishina, & Juvonen, 2009 ).

At the same time, cross-ethnic friendships and respect for diversity are strong protective factors against bullying involvement. Friendships between members of different racial or ethnic groups uniquely predicted decreases in relational victimization. Furthermore, in classrooms that were more ethnically diverse, cross-racial/ethnic friendships were associated with decreased physical victimization and increased social support ( Kawabata & Crick, 2011 ).

Perceptions of social support.

Research has indicated that compared to White students, Black and Hispanic students in the United States reported poorer relationships with adults, lower connectedness with their schools, fewer participation opportunities, and greater fear of in-school victimization ( Voight, Hanson, O’Malley, & & Adekanye, 2015 ; Baker & Mednick, 1990 ). Arab American students facing bias-based bullying reported feeling supported by family and friends, but found little support among school administrators or teachers ( Albdour, Lewin, Kavanaugh, Hong, & Wilson, 2017 ). These negative perceptions may have profound effects on student academic and health outcomes.

A positive school environment, defined as greater disciplinary structure, teacher support, and academic expectations, had positive effects in decreasing bullying perpetration and victimization across racial groups ( Konold, Cornell, Shukla, & Huang, 2017 ). Schools that were supportive and had greater teacher diversity saw decreases in race-based bullying ( Larochette, Murphy, & Craig, 2010 ; Wright & Wachs, 2019 ). Furthermore, respect for differences between students as well as greater exposure to racial and ethnic diversity is associated with decreased reports of bullying ( Gage, Prykanowski, & Larson, 2014 ; Lanza, Eschols, & Graham, 2018 ).

Interactions with parents.

Although the connection between home environment and bullying involvement is widely studied, in comparison, few studies have also explored how these factors differentially affect racial and ethnic minorities.

Certain family interactions are universally harmful for bullying involvement across racial and ethnic groups. Studies comparing different effects of poor parent communication, high family violence, low parental monitoring, low parental support, and low family satisfaction found little variance across racial and ethnic groups ( Hong, Ryou, & Piquero, 2017 ; Low & Espelage, 2013 ; Spriggs, Iannotti, Nansel, & Haynie, 2007 ). Despite the strength of these universal parent-related risk and protective factors, the aforementioned studies and others report subtle differences between groups. For example, mother’s parental monitoring was protective against bullying perpetration and victimization across racial groups, but father’s parental monitoring was protective for White Americans only and not African Americans ( Hong, Ryou, & Piquero, 2017 ). Similarly, negative maternal parenting styles ( Brown, Arnold, Dobbs, & Doctoroff, 2007 ) and living with only one parent ( Spriggs, Iannotti, Nansel, & Haynie, 2007 ) were associated with increased bullying perpetration and relational aggression, respectively, but only for White youth and not for Black and Hispanic youth. At the same time, parental criticism was associated with experiencing indirect peer victimization for Hispanic children, but not for White children ( Boel-Studt & Renner, 2014 ). In another study, the relationship between parental monitoring and physical aggression was significant for African American, but not Hispanic adolescents; however, family cohesion was more strongly negatively linked to physical aggression for Hispanic than for African American youth ( Henneberger, Varga, Moudy, & Tolan, 2016 ). These findings suggest that how children are raised and their relationships with parents might be universal protective or risk factors for bullying involvement across racial and ethnic divides, but certain aspects of family life are moderated by unique sociocultural contexts specific to minority groups.

For immigrants and children of immigrants, the stress of acculturation can contribute to family conflict associated with greater levels of child aggression. A 2006 study investigated familial and cultural correlates of youth aggression among Latino families in the United States. The study found that perceived discrimination and parent-adolescent conflict predicted aggression in Latino adolescents, whereas familism (or positive and cohesive family relationships) and engagement with culture of origin protected against it. Acculturation conflicts were also related to parent-adolescent conflicts ( Smokowski & Bacallao, 2006 ; Smokowski, Rose, & Bacallao, 2009 ). While negative family and parent relationships are significant risk factors for bullying involvement across racial, ethnic, and cultural groups, cultural discord can make those relationships more challenging.

Child maltreatment.

Physical or sexual abuse may be linked to higher risk for both bullying victimization and perpetration in children and adolescents (Shields & Cicchetti, 2010; Duncan, 1999 ). Co-occurrence of multiple forms of maltreatment, including physical or sexual abuse and peer victimization, can cause more severe trauma to youth ( Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, 2007 ). Research findings show higher rates of child maltreatment among racial and ethnic minorities ( Scher, Forde, McQuaid, & Stein, 2004 ; Hussey, Chang, & Kotch, 2006 ), but correlations weaken substantively after controlling for socioeconomic status ( Hussey et al., 2006 ).

Individual-level cognition and mental health.

Low and Espelage (2013) found that compared to their White peers, African American boys scored higher on symptom scales measuring hostility and depression and lower on an empathy scale. Hostility was a stronger predictor of nonphysical bullying in White boys than White girls, African American boys, and African American girls, while depressive symptoms predicted nonphysical bullying in African American boys only ( Low & Espelage, 2013 ). They argue that these cognitive differences may have developed due to maladaptive family environments and contribute to racial and ethnic minorities’ greater perpetration of nonphysical bullying and cyberbullying. The interplay between cognitive mediators of minority status in relation to bullying involvement is not well documented. However, research on intimate partner violence suggests that compared to racial or ethnic majority youth, minority youth exposed to IPV may develop more internalizing behavior ( Graham-Bermann & Hughes, 2003 ; Hazen, Connelley, Kelleher, Barth, & Landsverk 2006 ) or externalizing behavior ( Ehrensaft, Cohen, Brown, Smailes, Chen, & Johnson, 2003 ; Morrel, Dubowitz, Kerr, & Black, 2003 ; Voisin & Hong, 2012 ). In turn, internalizing behavior is related to bullying victimization and externalizing behavior to bullying perpetration; bully-victims tend to display both internalizing and externalizing problems ( Cook, Williams, Guerra, Kim, & Sade, 2010 ). These studies imply that adversity, through its impact on, cognition may affect bullying in minority youth.

Acculturation stress and coping.

Youth struggling with acculturation, culture difference (i.e. difficulty with language, different values, etc.), stigma and prejudice, or social exclusion due to racial or ethnic group membership may be at higher risk of bullying involvement. Problems associated with racial or ethnic minority group membership and immigrant status may be in themselves the core reason for conflict with peers. For example, in the United States, Hispanic children who experienced greater acculturation stress were more likely to be bullied, and bullying victimization was a significant mediator between acculturation stress and depression ( Forster et al., 2013 ). For German and Russian immigrant youth in Israel, the greater risk for being a bullying victim was particularly pronounced within the first 3–5 years of residence in Israel, with risk evening out to be similar to that of native-born youth after this critical time period ( Jugert & Titzmann, 2017 ). A 2010 study compared universal vs. migration-specific factors predicting physical aggression and emotional problems in children of immigrants from Hong Kong, mainland China, and the Philippines in Canada. Universal factors such as parental depression and family dysfunction were related to both physical aggression and emotional problems, but migration-specific factors such as acculturation stress and perceived prejudice were also predictive of physical aggression ( Beiser et al., 2010 ).

In addition to increasing risk for bullying victimization, stressors uniquely relating to minority or immigrant status are related to bullying perpetration. Messinger, Nieri, Tanya, Villar, and Luengo (2012) found that acculturation stress increases odds of being a bully-victim (but not a pure bully or pure victim) among immigrant children in Spain. Similarly, a 2019 study found that the more immigrant youth in Sweden experienced harassment due to their ethnic identity, the greater their engagement in violent behaviors over time. This association was significantly moderated by ethnic identity, such that ethnic harassment predicted engagement in violent behaviors only when youth had high levels of separated identity, or high acculturation ( Bayram Özdemir, Özdemir, & Stattin 2019 ). Aggression and externalizing behavior may be maladaptive responses to acculturative stress, and are common responses to experiencing victimization ( Reijntjes et al., 2011 ). Experiencing victimization because of something one cannot change may be a particularly painful experience that begets greater psychological dysfunction and externalizing behavior.

Furthermore, bullying and aggression are often proactive means to achieve social goals, including status, acceptance, and belonging, which could be more difficult for racial and ethnic minorities and immigrant youth. Indeed, extensive research has shown that bullying is a social process tied to a need to belong and can be a social bonding agent ( Salmivalli, Lagerspetz, Björkqvist, Österman, & Kaukiainen, 1996 ; Underwood & Ehrenreich, 2014 ; Hoover & Milner, 1998 ). Bullying is largely a peer-group behavior, especially for pure bullies, as bullies require an audience to give them what motivates them to bully others in the first place: status, acceptance, and belonging ( Salmivalli, 2010 ). Students who reported more bullying perpetration behaviors also reported feeling less left out ( Barboza et al., 2009 ). In a sample of majority Latino and Asian students in California, having friends who participate in aggressive behavior predicted bullying perpetration among both pure bullies and bully-victims. Friendship with aggressive peers was negatively associated with being a victim ( Mouttapa, Valente, Gallaher, Rohrbach, & Unger, 2004 ). Among immigrant students (but not among non-immigrants) in Norway and Austria, the need for peer acceptance and affiliation significantly predicted bullying perpetration and aggression ( Strohmeier, Fandrem, & Spiel, 2012 ), and this effect was stronger for first generation immigrants than for second generation and native-born students ( Strohmeier, Fandrem, Stefanek, & Spiel, 2012 ). Though this has not been explicitly examined in any study to our knowledge, youth who may feel like an outsider or excluded due to their race, ethnicity, or immigration background might bully others to create social bonds with peers. Further, bullying and aggressive behavior may be initiated to deal with stigma, prejudice, and bullying that minority youth might face due to their social identities. For example, the African American lesbian gang, Dykes Take Over, has responded to homophobic bullying by sexually harassing same-sex heterosexual peers and re-establishing a power-dynamic using lesbian/bisexual threat (Johnson, 2008). Similarly, immigrants from the former Soviet Union in Israel formed organized, hierarchical gangs in which they bullied others, possibly due to an absence of reliable parental figures or to regain control in an unfamiliar environment ( Tartakovsky & Mirsky, 2001 ). Youth may turn to perpetrating bullying in a maladaptive way of coping with pressures and stressors unique to their marginalized identities and social contexts. Future research should examine nuanced relationships between known bullying involvement risk and protective factors and race and ethnicity as moderators.

Ethnic identity.

Ethnic identity may protect against bullying involvement. Interestingly, self-esteem may be personal in nature as well as associated specifically with ethnic identity. In a sample of Turkish children living in the Netherlands, personal self-esteem predicted peer victimization based on personal traits but not ethnic victimization, whereas ethnic self-esteem predicted ethnic victimization but not personal victimization ( Verkuyten & Thijs, 2001 ). Research has found that strong ethnic identity is negatively correlated with loneliness and depression ( Roberts et al., 1999 ), as well as aggression ( Arbona, Jackson, McCoy, & Blakely, 1999 ; Jagers & Mock, 1993 ; Smokowski et al., 2017 ). A study of African-American youth found that ethnic identity and global self-worth, in combination, predicted better coping strategies, fewer endorsements of aggression, and less aggressive behavior ( McMahon & Watts, 2002 ). Among Naskapi youths from Kawawachikamach, Québec, greater identity with Native culture predicted less perceived aggression from peers ( Flanagan, 2011 ). Immigrants and children of immigrants from the former Soviet Union in Israel were less likely to be aggressive against peers if they had high ethnic identity, and ethnic identity also predicted less future aggression ( Benish-Weisman, 2016 ). Thus, racial and ethnic minority status may be associated with protective factors, as well, providing a sense of belonging and prosocial bonds with family and peers, which reduce risk for bullying involvement ( Ttofi, Bowes, Farrington, & Lösel, 2014 ).

Differing Bullying Behaviors and Consequences of Bullying Involvement

Differential bullying behaviors among minority and immigrant youth..

Bullying may take different forms (e.g. physical, verbal, relational, cyber, etc.) among different racial and ethnic groups. Racial and ethnic minority students in the United States report being perpetrators of different forms of bullying than majority students, though results vary across studies. For example, Wang, Iannotti, and Luk (2012) found that African American, Hispanic, and “other race” youth are more likely than their White peers to engage in “all types” bullying perpetration. However, while African American youth were also more likely to engage in social and/or verbal-only bullying than their White peers, Hispanic and “other race” youth were less likely to do so. However, an earlier study found somewhat contrary evidence: in a 2009 study, African American students perpetrated physical, verbal, and cyberbullying—but not relational bullying—more often than White Americans. Compared to White students, Hispanic students were more likely to be physical bullies ( Wang, Iannotti, & Nansel, 2009 ). A third study indicated minority youth reported more physical bullying and less cyberbullying than majority youth ( Barlett & Wright, 2018 ). In a longitudinal study in Germany, teens with a migrant background reported higher consumption of violent media at baseline, and more physical but less relational aggression than German peers two years later ( Möller, Krahé, & Busching, 2013 ). In a sample of U.S. high school students in Hawaii, White, Filipino American, and Samoan students (who make up a numerical minority of the student population and who were more recent immigrants compared to native Hawaiians and Japanese Americans) perpetrated social exclusion at higher rates than the former two groups, but there were no significant differences between groups in levels of physical violence perpetration or teasing ( Hishinuma et al., 2015 ). Based on these findings, it is hard to draw concrete conclusions about different forms of bullying behaviors among minority and immigrant youth. Theory should guide future research focused on replicating these studies and clarifying discrepancies.

Differing rates of physical, verbal, and relational bullying may stem from unique sociocultural backgrounds. Minorities who grow up in adverse environments may be more likely to endorse aggressive behavior and engage in more overt rather than relational bullying, due to forming positive beliefs about aggressive behavior in the more adverse environment ( Coie & Dodge, 1996 ; Colder et al., 2000 ). In addition, value orientation may moderate types of bullying behavior. In individualistic societies, youth tend to enact direct or physical aggression, while in collectivist societies, bullying may be more indirect and less physical ( Forbes, Collinsworth, Zhao, Kohlman, & LeClaire, 2011 ). Furthermore, Western societies may be more willing to endorse and support aggression ( Bowker, Rubin, Buskirk-Cohen, Rose-Krasnor, & Booth-LaForce, 2010 ; Prinstein & Cillessen, 2003 ; Rodkin et al., 2000 ), while in collectivist cultures aggression is less accepted ( Li, Xie, & Shi, 2012 ). Some countries or regions may be influenced by both collectivism and individualism, leading to differences in behavior between racial, ethnic, or cultural groups. For example, in Trinidad, Afro-Trinidadians reported perpetrating higher levels of physical, indirect, and verbal aggression compared to Mixed and Indo-Trinidadians, which may be because Trinidadians of African descent had to adjust to Western individualist culture when they were transported to Trinidad and enslaved by White colonists, while Indo-Trinidadians retained a more collectivist culture ( Descartes & Maharaj, 2016 ). These cultural contexts can change how bullying behaviors manifest in different countries, and immigrants may retain values from their countries of origin, even as they acclimate to a new environment.

Differential consequences of bullying involvement.

Some research suggests that racial and ethnic minority and immigrant youth involved in bullying may incur greater health and educational consequences in some respects than majority youth. In a nationally representative sample of Canadian adolescents, harassment at school was associated with greater mental health problems, especially for immigrant (versus non-immigrant) students ( Abada, Hou, & Ram, 2008 ). Similarly, African American and Latino (versus White) students were more likely to drop out of school as a consequence of peer victimization ( Peguero, 2011 ). Latino students who felt little connection to either Latin or U.S. culture were more likely than Latinos who did have cultural connections to perceive high levels of discrimination and have fewer positive experiences. Latino adolescents who reported high discrimination and bullying victimization, as well as fewer positive experiences, experienced greater risk of depressive symptoms and cigarette use ( Lorenzo-Blanco, Unger, Oshri, Baezconde-Garbanati, & Soto, 2016 ).

Other research examining different bullying outcomes related to well-being found no significant differences in consequences of bullying victimization based on racial/ethnic group membership. Race/ethnicity did not moderate the effect of peer victimization on physical activity in overweight youth ( Pulido et al., 2019 ) or on substance use or suicidal ideation in a large sample of ethnically diverse transgender youth in the United States ( Hatchel & Marx, 2018 ; Hatchel, Valido, Pedro, Huang, & Espelage, 2018 ). Migration background had no influence on various physical and mental health outcomes among German students ( Menrath et al., 2015 ). There were likewise no major differences in psychosocial adjustment as a consequence of perpetrating peer aggression between minority and majority student groups, despite a greater likelihood for minority students to be chronically rejected by peers and to have greater conflict with teachers ( Ladd & Burgess, 2001 ).

One protective factor against negative consequences of bullying on mental health is ethnic identity. In a sample of Hispanic and non-Hispanic sexual minority youth, the association between bullying victimization and suicide attempts was strongest in non-Hispanic youth, suggesting that ethnic identity or Hispanic culture might be protective ( LeVasseur, Kelvin, & Grosskopf, 2013 ). Indeed, strong ethnic and religious identity provides a buffer against the effect of peer victimization on depressive symptoms ( Hunter, Durkin, Heim, Howe, & Bergin, 2010 ). Unfortunately however, while cross-ethnic friendships are protective against becoming involved in bullying, having an ethnically diverse network of friends does not protect against the psychological distress that results from being bullied ( Bhui, Silva, Harding, & Stansfeld, 2017 ).

It is possible that negative health and educational outcomes may be partly explained by attributions victims make about and how they cope with bullying. Youth who attributed being bullied to their race were more likely to decrease support-seeking from peers and were more likely to be nonchalant (i.e., acted as if nothing happened). However, youth who thought they were being bullied because they were not “cool” were less nonchalant and showed increased support seeking from both teachers and friends ( Visconti, Sechler, & Kochenderfer-Ladd, 2013 ). At the same time, youth belonging to a racial or an ethnic majority may be more likely to blame themselves for the bullying victimization they experience, perhaps because minority students can attribute victimization experiences to prejudice ( Graham et al., 2009 ). Believing one’s own characteristics or flaws caused victimization experiences might contribute to vulnerability to mental health problems. A recent study found that while anxiety and depression were significant mediators between peer victimization and alcohol use in White high school students, these indirect effects were not significant for African American students ( Rowe, Zapolski, Hensel, Fisher, & Barnes-Najor, 2019 ). Further research is necessary to develop accurate and useful models of risk associated with peer victimization among racial and ethnic minority youth.

Greater negative consequences due to bias-based bullying.

Bias-based bullying may lead to significantly more negative health outcomes than non-bias-based bullying. One of the most frequent forms of bias-based peer victimization is race-based harassment and bullying ( Bucchianeri, Eisenberg, & Neumark-Sztainer, 2013 ; de Oliveira et al., 2015 ). Ethnic-, race-, or bias-based bullying is associated with greater negative mental health consequences, harmful behaviors, and adjustment problems compared to general bullying. These high measurements of negative health and academic outcomes, discussed in greater detail below, might be explained by Carter’s theory of race-based traumatic stress, which posits that racial discrimination can manifest in targets of such discrimination as emotional, psychological, and even physical trauma ( Carter, 2007 ; Polanco-Roman, Danies, & Anglin, 2016 ; Williams, Yan, Jackson, & Anderson, 1997 ). The additional stressor of race-based trauma may exacerbate already-damaging health effects associated with bullying victimization. Compared to non-bias-based harassment, incidences involving bias-based harassment were more likely to engage multiple perpetrators, and have longer timeframes and multiple harassment episodes ( Jones, Mitchell, Turner, & Ybarra, 2018 ).

In addition to the fact that bias-based bullying targets aspects of the victim that are unchangeable, repeated and prolonged victimization from multiple perpetrators may make bias-based bullying a more psychologically harmful experience than non-bias-based bullying. However, even after controlling for the timeframe and the number of perpetrators and episodes, students who experienced bias-based harassment were more likely to feel sad, skip school, avoid school activities, and lose friends compared to students who experienced non-bias-based harassment ( Jones et al., 2018 ). Experiencing bias-based bullying was associated with depression, suicidal ideation, and injury due to victimization in urban Chinese and ethnic minority adolescents ( Pan & Spittal, 2013 ) and with poor self-esteem, depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, self-harm, and alcohol and illicit drug use in Black and Latino students in U.S. schools ( Bucchianeri, Eisenberg, Wall, Piran, & Neumark-Sztainer, 2014 ; Cardoso, Szlyk, Goldbach, Swank, & Zvolensky, 2018 ; Rosenthal et al., 2015 ).

A large-scale U.S. study found that youth who experienced bias-based bullying had increased odds of being victimized in a romantic relationship, endorsing depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation, and making a suicide attempt that were roughly twice as high as those who had only experienced general bullying ( Russell et al., 2012 ). Experiencing bias-based cyberbullying is associated with over three times higher odds of thinking about and attempting suicide than non-bias-based, non-cyber bullying, and with greatly increased odds of many other mental health and substance use problems ( Sinclair, Bauman, Poteat, Koenig, & Russell, 2012 ). Being a perpetrator of race-based bullying was also associated with higher likelihood of substance use ( Stone & Carlisle, 2017 ). Bullying that targets race, ethnicity, and cultural differences can lead to physical and mental health consequences that are even more severe and life threatening than bullying targeting personal characteristics.

Bias-based bullying may also have differential effects between ethnic groups and for individuals with intersecting identities. For example, ethnic victimization was more strongly associated with depression and anxiety in Aboriginal Canadian students than in Asian or White Canadian students ( Hoglund & Hosan, 2013 ). Youth belonging to intersecting marginalized groups were at highest risk of harassment ( Bucchianeri, Gower, McMoris, & Eisenberg, 2016 ). Students who experienced both weight- and race-based discrimination engaged in more self-harm behaviors and had higher odds of suicidal ideation compared to students who experienced only race-based discrimination ( Garnett et al., 2014 ).

In addition to health outcomes, bias-based bullying can also affect academic performance and school-related problems, while school environment and teacher-student relationships can be protective factors. Ethnic minority students in Belgium were less likely to feel school belonging when they experienced ethnic (versus other types of) harassment ( D’Hondt, Houtte, & Stevens, 2015 ). Experiencing ethnic harassment was associated with a decrease in self-esteem and lower expectations for academic success over time in immigrant students in Sweden. Furthermore, these relationships were moderated by teacher-student relationships and perceptions of school democracy, suggesting that school and classroom dynamics can be protective against the health risks associated with bias-based harassment, or they can significantly contribute to students’ negative self-perception ( Bayram Özdemir & Stattin, 2014 ). Similarly, teacher involvement moderated the relationship between race-based bullying and smoking initiation such that among Black and Latino students in the United States reporting high teacher involvement, race-based bullying was not associated with smoking initiation ( Earnshaw et al., 2014 ). However, teacher-student relationships may only be protective against poorer mental health in cases of moderate or less severe bias-based bullying ( Price, Hill, Liang, & Perella, 2019 ), leaving students experiencing high levels of bias-based victimization vulnerable. Bias-based bullying can also have substantial public economic costs. In the state of California, school absences associated with bullying based on student race or ethnicity resulted in a projected $78 million loss in unallocated funds, as school districts receive funding based on student attendance ( Baams, Talmage, & Russell, 2017 ).

Anti-Bullying Programs and Interventions

Given the prevalence of bullying behavior, many anti-bullying programs and interventions have been designed and evaluated in the past several decades. Most have been implemented in schools, as the educational setting may be ideal for fostering prosocial peer relations ( Farrell, Sullivan, Sutherland, Corona & Masho, 2018 ). Methodologically, these interventions have taken two forms: universal and focused.

Universal interventions take a systemic approach and are designed to involve the entire school population, rather than targeting specific categories of bullies or victims ( Cantone et al., 2015 ). The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP) is an example of a universal anti-bullying intervention ( Olweus & Limber, 2010 ). Developed and first implemented in Norway in the 1980s, the goal of the program is to foster a positive, prosocial school environment by implementing anti-bullying strategies at the school level (e.g., implementing a Bullying Prevention Coordinating Committee and training all staff), class level (e.g., class rules against bullying), and peer level (e.g., talks with bullies and victims). It also includes individual components focused on managing emotions and provides training for adults to intervene when they witness bullying behavior in the moment ( Limber, 2011 ). KiVa is another example of a largely universal intervention: It includes group discussions with victims and bullies, as well as teacher identification of bullying victims’ classmates who are asked to find ways to support the victim to prevent future bullying ( Salmivalli & Poskiparta, 2012 ).

Focused interventions are narrower in scope, focusing on the individuals involved in bullying behavior (i.e., bullies, victims, bystanders; Cantone et al., 2015 ). Examples of these interventions include social skills training and cognitive-behavioral interventions ( De Rosier, 2004 ), or mindfulness programs for emotion regulation skills ( Toomey & Anhalt, 2016 ).

Anti-bullying programs have generally been found to be effective. A recent meta-analysis of 100 school-based anti-bullying intervention studies concluded that, overall, these programs effectively reduced involvement in bullying behavior – both perpetration and victimization ( Gaffney, Ttofi, & Farrington, 2019 ). Meta-analyzed studies used four kinds of research methodology: randomized controlled trials, before-after/experimental control designs, age cohort designs, and other experimental-control designs. Studies using age cohort designs had the largest effects in reducing bullying perpetration and victimization, while randomized controlled trials were more effective in reducing bullying perpetration than before-after/experimental-control designs and similar to before-after experimental-control designs in reducing bullying victimization ( Gaffney et al., 2019 ). Although examining effectiveness of length of programs or types of components included in interventions was beyond the scope of this review, an earlier review of 15 randomized controlled trials found that the universal kind of interventions were particularly effective in the short term, although focused interventions also showed a moderate effect on reducing bullying ( Cantone et al., 2015 ).

Despite these promising results, there is a dearth of intervention research focused on decreasing rates of bullying behavior among racial and ethnic minority youth. Most interventions are not specifically designed for diverse populations; the extent of the research on racial and ethnic minorities largely consists of the implementation of the OBPP in schools with diverse populations. The OBPP has shown promising results internationally, with a recent study of OBPP implementation in 70 schools showing a sustained reduction of bullying during a four-year follow-up period ( Olweus, Solberg & Breivik, 2018 ). However, only a few studies have evaluated the implementation of the OBPP in schools with diverse populations ( Farrell et al., 2018 ; Bauer, Lozano & Rivara, 2007 ; Black & Jackson, 2007 ). Results have varied across schools ( Black & Jackson, 2007 ), often with no effects on student reports of bullying ( Farrell et al., 2018 ; Black & Jackson, 2007 ). Additionally, few OBPP evaluations have examined effects by race. Bauer et al. (2007) found reductions in relational and physical bullying victimization for White students but not for youth of other races and ethnicities. Limber et al. (2018) found significant reductions in the rate of bullying perpetration and victimization for White students but weaker program effects for African-American and Hispanic students. Although this finding may have been due to the considerably smaller numbers of ethnic minority (compared to White) students, it also points to a need for more research examining how minority students may differentially experience and engage in bullying behavior ( Limber et al., 2018 ).

These results reflect the need to tailor interventions to the needs and characteristics of minority populations. As others have noted, the OBPP was developed for a homogeneous Norwegian population, and the intervention components may be less relevant to bullying behaviors and dynamics of diverse populations ( Bauer et al., 2007 ; Farrell et al., 2018 ). Indeed, it is unclear whether the content of the aforementioned OBPP interventions used with diverse US populations was adapted for these populations.

Given that race/ethnicity, combined with contextual factors, differentially impacts the forms and outcomes of bullying perpetration and victimization, special emphasis on racial and ethnic minority students is needed when developing effective interventions. The following are literature-based considerations for designing interventions for racial and ethnic minorities.

Measures of bullying focused on behaviors.

Research suggests that minority students may be less likely to identify themselves as being bullied but more likely to endorse specific bullying behaviors ( Lai & Kao, 2018 ). This underreporting may reflect cultural norms that add pressure on certain minority groups to appear resilient, and thus they should be considered in measuring bullying. Most studies evaluating the OBPP in US schools have employed the Olweus Bullying Questionnaire to assess bullying outcomes, yet this measure does not differentiate among forms of bullying or victimization, and uses the term “bullying,” which may alienate racial and ethnic minority youth. It may thus lead to underestimates of bullying among minority students.

A specific focus on bias-based bullying and multiculturalism.

Comprehensive universal interventions such as the OBPP have typically focused on distal and proximal levels of influence, targeting structural, interpersonal, and individual factors that perpetuate bullying. Yet some researchers point out that an even more distal layer has been ignored: bias and social stigma ( Earnshaw et al., 2018 ). Social stigma pertains to societal attitudes of devaluation of marginalized social identities. Bias-based bullying is associated with worse mental health outcomes, including suicidal ideation and attempts, than non-bias-based bullying ( Earnshaw et al., 2018 ; Russell et al., 2012 ). While the OBPP and similar universal interventions impart important behavioral skills, such interventions need to address bias-based factors. Given that bias-based bullying is often a result of prejudicial attitudes about minorities that have been internalized from perpetrators’ social environment ( Nesdale, 2002 ), this type of bullying may be reduced by increasing multicultural content in the curriculum from a whole-school approach. Indeed, findings from a national education study of more than 5,000 teachers and education support professionals found that both groups desired more training related to bias-based bullying ( Bradshaw, Waasdorp, O’Brennan, & Gulemetova, 2013 ). Increasing awareness and affirmation of ethnic minority groups’ cultural values and traditions may foster a more accepting and prosocial school environment ( Scherr & Larson, 2010 ). Toward this goal, a multiculturally-focused component could be added to the various strategies of bullying interventions. One innovative example is a mobile application that is grounded in principles of gamification and designed to detect potential bias-based exclusion and bullying in the classroom (Alvarez-Bermejo, Belmonte-Urena, Martos-Martinez, Barragan-Martin, & del Mar Simon-Marquez, 2016). The application guides students through imaginary scenarios in which they are asked to choose preferred peers with whom to interact. The app then creates a sociogram of interaction distributions in classrooms, accessible to teachers, helping them to detect potential bias-based social exclusion. Such innovative designs can aid prevention efforts by implementing a dynamic classroom-based early detection system that allows identification of potentially bullied students. (Alvarez-Bermejo et al., 2016).

Inclusivity and intersectionality.

Research has focused on more visible or larger minority groups, and little information is known about bullying in other high-risk racial and ethnic groups that are not as high profile and that tend to be labeled as “other,” if identified at all (e.g., African Americans are more widely studied than Native Americans). Considering the unique social, economic, and cultural contexts that challenge or strengthen different racial and ethnic minority groups and explicitly including them in research studies may lead to better interventions for those groups. Furthermore, race and ethnicity and other factors, such as sexual orientation, poverty, gender, and more, have been shown to interact and moderate health and behavioral outcomes (e.g., Llorent et al., 2016 ; Low & Espelage, 2013 ; Lai & Kao, 2018 ; Rennison & Planty, 2003 ). Recognizing the complex relationships between compounding marginalized social identities within groups and individuals is important for effective bullying interventions.

Increasing understanding of bullying perpetration.

Bullying interventions should not only address coping with victimization, but should stress prevention—and prevention should start with the bullies, themselves. Moreover, research on bullying in minority populations tends to focus on victimization. Bullying perpetration, not just victimization, can be predicted by adverse environments and psychosocial malfunctioning, and often the most maltreated and disadvantaged children are the ones who bully others ( Cook et al., 2010 ): “hurt people hurt people.” Given the plethora of health and behavioral risks that disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minorities, understanding why and how they bully others, and adapting interventions to reflect these findings and increase relevance to minority populations, should be a top priority. One example of this is the Friend to Friend program, a culturally-adapted anti-bullying program designed specifically for urban African-American girls perpetrating relational aggression ( Leff et al., 2009 ). The program was designed through participatory action research, which involved integrating empirical research findings with input from community stakeholders (i.e., girls, teachers, etc.), as well as various cultural adaptations in the content. The program was acceptable by the minority it was intended for and showed promise in decreasing bullying behavior in this population ( Leff et al., 2009 ).

Interventions guided by theory.

Research suggests that public health interventions guided by behavioral science and social theories are more effective than non-theory-based programs ( Glanz & Bishop, 2010 ). Bullying interventions designed for diverse populations are likely to be more effective if grounded in theory that explains what leads to change in contexts relevant to ethnic/racial minorities. Interventions should consider that ethnic minorities are overrepresented in low socioeconomic groups. Theories on factors that lead to resilience in this challenging context can potentially guide interventions that offset adverse outcomes and tailor strategies to the needs of these students. For example, the shift-and-persist model (Chen & Miller, 2012) suggests that for youth who face adversities related to low socioeconomic status, exposure to role models who teach them to regulate their emotions and to adopt a future-oriented focus helps them learn to shift themselves (e.g., accept and reappraise their circumstances) and persist with optimism. One intervention in Spain found that inviting adult males of minority (e.g., Arab-Muslim and Roma) backgrounds to schools to address racial and ethnic bullying through role modeling led to reductions in prejudice and bullying ( Gomez et al., 2014 ). Interventions grounded in theory specific to racial and ethnic minorities may facilitate progress.

Conclusions

Research on race and ethnicity, in relation to bullying, has increased in the last few decades, as media coverage of suicide deaths related to bullying has proliferated and issues of stigma, inequality, and social justice have risen to the forefront of public discourse. Yet crucial gaps in knowledge still need to be filled if we are to reach a more complete understanding of bullying involvement in diverse populations. A central theme of the findings presented in the current paper is that context matters: from geopolitics and mass migration to regionally variant stereotypes to school-level factors like minority density and attitudes around cultural diversity, these factors likely account for the range in contrary findings across the literature. Future research and interventions should be theory-driven and informed by an intersectional approach to race relations.

We suggest future studies standardize measures of bullying involvement with behavior-based questions, which have shown to yield more valid responses from minority youth ( Lai & Kao, 2018 ), and using measures that are culturally sensitive. Furthermore, studies involving a diverse sample should consider how race dynamics within a school with a majority of racial and ethnic minority students might differ from schools where minority students are indeed the numerical minority. Special attention should be given to bias-based bullying prevention and treatment, due to the much greater associated risks. Lastly, rather than merely examining race and ethnicity as moderators, researchers should tailor interventions and research questions toward serving under-studied and disadvantaged groups. The effects of bullying involvement in childhood reverberate throughout the lives of individuals and of their peers, families, and communities. Bullying researchers are uniquely positioned to help vulnerable youth struggling with these painful and harmful experiences, and should continue to do so within an intersectional and multicultural framework.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1548349-f0001.jpg

PRISMA flow diagram

Bullying-related social-ecological factors disproportionately affect minorities
Ethnic identity and cultural factors are protective for minorities
Bias-based bullying poses greater health risks than non-bias-based bullying
Cultural insensitivity in methodology may explain inconsistencies in findings
Current interventions are less effective for minorities; future directions proposed

Acknowledgments

This research was funded, in part, by NIH Grant MH091873.

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Contributor Information

Mariah Xu, Hunter College, City University of New York.

Natalia Macrynikola, The Graduate Center and Hunter College, City University of New York.

Muhammad Waseem, Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center.

Regina Miranda, Hunter College and The Graduate Center, City University of New York.

Abada T, Hou F, & Ram B. (2008). The effects of harassment and victimization on self-rated health and mental health among Canadian adolescents . Social Science & Medicine , 67 ( 4 ), 557–567. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Aboud F, Mendelson M, & Purdy K. (2003). Cross-race peer relations and friendship quality . International Journal of Behavioral Development , 27 ( 2 ), 165–173. [ Google Scholar ]
Albdour M, & Krouse HJ (2014). Bullying and victimization among African American adolescents: A literature review . Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing , 27 ( 2 ), 68–82. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Albdour M, Lewin L, Kavanaugh K, Hong JS, & Wilson F. (2017). Arab American adolescents’ perceived stress and bullying experiences: A qualitative study . Western Journal of Nursing Research , 39 ( 12 ), 1567–1588. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Almeida J, Johnson RM, McNamara M, & Gupta J. (2011). Peer violence perpetration among urban adolescents: Dispelling the myth of the violent immigrant . Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 26 ( 13 ), 2658–2680. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Álvarez-Bermejo JA, Belmonte-Ureña LJ, Martos-Martínez A, Barragán-Martín AB, & del Mar Simón-Marquez M. (2016). System to detect racial-based bullying through gamification . Frontiers in Psychology , 7 , 1791. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Arbona C, Jackson RH, McCoy A, & Blakely C. (1999). Ethnic identity as a predictor of attitudes of adolescents toward fighting . Journal of Early Adolescence , 19 , 323–340. [ Google Scholar ]
Atwal K, & Wang C. (2018). Religious head covering, being perceived as foreigners, victimization, and adjustment among Sikh American adolescents . School Psychology Quarterly . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Baams L, Talmage CA, & Russell ST. (2017). Economic costs of bias-based bullying . School Psychology Quarterly , 32 ( 3 ), 422. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Baker RL, & Mednick BR (1990). Protecting the high school environment as an island of safety: Correlates of student fear of in-school victimization . Children’s Environments Quarterly , 37–49. [ Google Scholar ]
Baldry AC (2003). Bullying in schools and exposure to domestic violence . Child Abuse & Neglect , 27 , 713–732. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bandura A, & Walters RH (1977). Social learning theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
Barboza GE, Schiamberg LB, Oehmke J, Korzeniewski SJ, Post LA, & Heraux CG (2009). Individual characteristics and the multiple contexts of adolescent bullying: An ecological perspective . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 35 ( 1 ), 101–121. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Barlett CP, & Wright MF (2018). Longitudinal relations among cyber, physical, and relational bullying and victimization: Comparing majority and minority ethnic youth . Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma , 11 ( 1 ), 49–59. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Barr DA (2008). Race, ethnicity, and health In Health Disparities in the United States: Social Class, Race, Ethnicity, and Health . Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Bauer NS, Herrenkohl TI, Lozano P, Rivara FP, Hill KG, & Hawkins JD (2006). Childhood bullying involvement and exposure to intimate partner violence . Pediatrics , 118 , e235–e242. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bauer NS, Lozano P, & Rivara FP (2007). The effectiveness of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program in public middle schools: A controlled trial . Journal of Adolescent Health , 40 ( 3 ), 266–274 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bayram Özdemir S, & Stattin H. (2014). Why and when is ethnic harassment a risk for immigrant adolescents’ school adjustment? Understanding the processes and conditions . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 43 ( 8 ), 1252–1265. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bayram Özdemir S, Özdemir M, & Stattin H. (2019). Ethnic harassment and immigrant youth’s engagement in violent behaviors: Understanding the risk factors . Child Development , 90 ( 3 ), 808–824. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bayram Özdemir S, Sun S, Korol L, Özdemir M, & Stattin H. (2018). Adolescents’ Engagement in Ethnic Harassment: Prejudiced Beliefs in Social Networks and Classroom Ethnic Diversity . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 47 ( 6 ), 1151–1163. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Beiser M, Hamilton H, Rummens JA, Oxman-Martinez J, Ogilvie L, Humphrey C, & Armstrong R. (2010). Predictors of emotional problems and physical aggression among children of Hong Kong Chinese, Mainland Chinese and Filipino immigrants to Canada . Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology , 45 ( 10 ), 1011–1021. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bellmore A, Nishina A, Witkow MR, Graham S, & Juvonen S. (2007). The influence of classroom ethnic composition on same- and other-ethnicity peer nominations in middle school . Social Development , 16 , 720–724. [ Google Scholar ]
Benish-Weisman M. (2016). Brief report: Ethnic identity and aggression in adolescence: A longitudinal perspective . Journal of Adolescence , 47 , 131–134. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Berkowitz R, De Pedro KT, & Gilreath TD (2015). A latent class analysis of victimization among middle and high school students in California . Journal of School Violence , 14 ( 3 ), 316–333. [ Google Scholar ]
Betancourt H, & López SR (1993). The study of culture, ethnicity, and race in American psychology . American Psychologist , 48 ( 6 ), 629. [ Google Scholar ]
Bhui K, Silva MJ, Harding S, & Stansfeld S. (2017). Bullying, social support, and psychological distress: Findings from RELACHS cohorts of East London’s White British and Bangladeshi adolescents . Journal of Adolescent Health , 61 ( 3 ), 317–328. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bjereld Y, Daneback K, & Petzold M. (2015). Differences in prevalence of bullying victimization between native and immigrant children in the Nordic countries: A parent-reported serial cross- sectional study . Child: Care, Health and Development , 41 ( 4 ), 593–599. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Black SA, & Jackson E. (2007). Using bullying incident density to evaluate the Olweus Bullying Prevention Programme . School Psychology International , 28 ( 5 ), 623–638. [ Google Scholar ]
Blake JJ, Zhou Q, Kwok OM, & Benz MR (2016). Predictors of bullying behavior, victimization, and bully-victim risk among high school students with disabilities . Remedial and Special Education , 37 ( 5 ), 285–295. [ Google Scholar ]
Boel-Studt S, & Renner LM (2014). Child and family-level correlates of direct and indirect peer victimization among children ages 6–9 . Child Abuse & Neglect , 38 ( 6 ), 1051–1060. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Boulton MJ (1995). Patterns of bully/victim problems in mixed race groups of children . Social Development , 4 ( 3 ), 277–293. [ Google Scholar ]
Bowes L, Arseneault L, Maughan B, Taylor A, Caspi A, & Moffitt TE (2009). School, neighborhood, and family factors are associated with children’s bullying involvement: A nationally representative longitudinal study . Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry , 48 , 545–553. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bowker JC, Rubin KH, Buskirk-Cohen A, Rose-Krasnor L, & Booth-LaForce CL (2010). Behavioral changes predicting temporal changes in perceived poplar status . Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology , 31 , 126–133. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bradshaw CP, Waasdorp TE, O’Brennan LM, & Gulemetova M. (2013). Teachers’ and education support professionals’ perspectives on bullying and prevention: Findings from a national education association study . School Psychology Review , 42 ( 3 ), 280. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bradshaw CP, Waasdorp TE, Goldweber A, & Johnson SL (2013). Bullies, gangs, drugs, and school: Understanding the overlap and the role of ethnicity and urbanicity . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 42 ( 2 ), 220–234. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bronfenbrenner U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Brown SA, Arnold DH, Dobbs J, & Doctoroff GL (2007). Parenting predictors of relational aggression among Puerto Rican and European American school-age children . Early Childhood Research Quarterly , 22 ( 1 ), 147–159. [ Google Scholar ]
Bucchianeri MM, Eisenberg ME, & Neumark-Sztainer D. (2013). Weightism, racism, classism, and sexism: Shared forms of harassment in adolescents . Journal of Adolescent Health , 53 ( 1 ), 47–53. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bucchianeri MM, Eisenberg ME, Wall MM, Piran N, & Neumark-Sztainer D. (2014). Multiple types of harassment: Associations with emotional well-being and unhealthy behaviors in adolescents . Journal of Adolescent Health , 54 ( 6 ), 724–729. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bucchianeri MM, Gower AL, McMorris BJ, & Eisenberg ME (2016). Youth experiences with multiple types of prejudice-based harassment . Journal of Adolescence , 51 , 68–75. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Buhs ES, McGinley M, & Toland MD (2010). Overt and relational victimization in Latinos and European Americans: Measurement equivalence across ethnicity, gender, and grade level in early adolescent groups . The Journal of Early Adolescence , 30 ( 1 ), 171–197. [ Google Scholar ]
Cantone E, Piras AP, Vellante M, Preti A, Daníelsdóttir S, D’Aloja E, Lesinskiene S, Angermeyer MC, Carta MG, & Bhugra D. (2015). Interventions on bullying and cyberbullying in schools: a systematic review . Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health , 11 , 58. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cardoso JB, Szlyk HS, Goldbach J, Swank P, & Zvolensky MJ (2018). General and ethnic-biased bullying among Latino students: exploring risks of depression, suicidal ideation, and substance use . Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health , 20 ( 4 ), 816–822. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Carlyle KE, & Steinman KJ (2007). Demographic differences in the prevalence, co-occurrence, and correlates of adolescent bullying at school . Journal of School Health , 77 ( 9 ), 623–629. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Carter RT (2007). Racism and psychological and emotional injury: Recognizing and assessing race-based traumatic stress . The Counseling Psychologist , 35 ( 1 ), 13–105. [ Google Scholar ]
Chen X, Lee J, & Chen L. (2018). Culture and peer relationships In Bukowski WM, Lursen B, Rubin KH (Eds.), Handbook of Peer Interactions, Relationships, and Groups (2nd ed., pp. 552–570). New York, NY: The Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Chung HL, & Steinberg L. (2006). Relations between neighborhood factors, parenting behaviors, peer deviance, and delinquency among serious juvenile offenders . Developmental Psychology , 42 , 319–331. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cluver L, Bowes L, & Gardner F. (2010). Risk and protective factors for bullying victimization among AIDS-affected and vulnerable children in South Africa . Child Abuse & Neglect , 34 , 793–803. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Coie JD, & Dodge KA (1996). Aggression and antisocial behavior In Eisenberg N. (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology (Vol. 3). Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 779–862). New York, NY: Wiley. [ Google Scholar ]
Colder CR, Mott J, Levy S, & Flay B. (2000). The relation of perceived neighborhood danger to childhood aggression: A test of mediating mechanisms . American Journal of Community Psychology , 28 , 83–103. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Connell NM, El Sayed S, Reingle Gonzalez JM, & Schell-Busey NM (2015). The intersection of perceptions and experiences of bullying by race and ethnicity among middle school students in the United States . Deviant Behavior , 36 ( 10 ), 807–822. [ Google Scholar ]
Connolly P, & Keenan M. (2002). Racist Harassment in the White Hinterlands: Minority ethnic children and parents’ experiences of schooling in Northern Ireland . British Journal of Sociology of Education , 23 ( 3 ), 341–355. [ Google Scholar ]
Cooc N, & Gee KA (2014). National trends in school victimization among Asian American adolescents . Journal of Adolescence , 37 ( 6 ), 839–849. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cook CR, Williams KR, Guerra NG, Kim TE, & Sadek S. (2010). Predictors of bullying and victimization in childhood and adolescence: a meta-analytic investigation . School Psychology Quarterly , 25 ( 2 ), 65. [ Google Scholar ]
Corvo K. (2010). Towards an integrated theory of relational violence: Is bullying a risk factor for domestic violence? Aggression and Violent Behavior , 15 ( 3 ), 181–190. [ Google Scholar ]
D’hondt F, Van Houtte M, & Stevens PA (2015). How does ethnic and non-ethnic victimization by peers and by teachers relate to the school belongingness of ethnic minority students in Flanders, Belgium? An explorative study . Social Psychology of Education , 18 ( 4 ), 685–701. [ Google Scholar ]
Davis M, Stadulis R, & Neal-Barnett A. (2018). Assessing the effects of the acting White accusation among Black girls: Social anxiety and bullying victimization . Journal of the National Medical Association , 110 ( 1 ), 23–28. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
de Oliveira WAD, Silva MAI, Mello FCMD, Porto DL, Yoshinaga ACM, & Malta DC (2015). The causes of bullying: Results from the National Survey of School Health (PeNSE) . Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem , 23 ( 2 ), 275–282. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Delgado R, Stefancic J. (2012). Critical Race Theory: An Introduction (2nd ed.). New York: New York University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
DeRosier ME (2004). Building relationships and combating bullying: Effectiveness of a school-based social skills group intervention . Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology , 33 ( 1 ), 196–201. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Descartes CH, & Maharaj PE (2016). Does the type of aggression matter? The role of culture in understanding direct and indirect aggression among children and adolescents in Trinidad . Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma , 9 ( 3 ), 217–229. [ Google Scholar ]
Duncan RD (1999). Maltreatment by parents and peers: The relationship between child abuse, bully victimization, and psychological distress . Child Maltreatment , 4 ( 1 ), 45–55. [ Google Scholar ]
Durkin K, Hunter S, Levin KA, Bergin D, Heim D, & Howe C. (2012). Discriminatory peer aggression among children as a function of minority status and group proportion in school context . European Journal of Social Psychology , 42 ( 2 ), 243–251. [ Google Scholar ]
Earnshaw VA, Reisner SL, Menino DD, Poteat VP, Bogart LM, Barnes TN, & Schuster MA (2018). Stigma-based bullying interventions: A systematic review . Developmental Review 3 48 , 178–200. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Earnshaw VA, Rosenthal L, Carroll-Scott A, Peters SM, McCaslin C, & Ickovics JR (2014). Teacher involvement as a protective factor from the association between race-based bullying and smoking initiation . Social Psychology of Education , 17 ( 2 ), 197–209. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Echols L, & Graham S. (2016). For better or worse: Friendship choices and peer victimization among ethnically diverse youth in the first year of middle school . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 45 ( 9 ), 1862–1876. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ehrensaft MK, Cohen P, Brown J, Smailes E, Chen H, & Johnson JG (2003). Intergenerational transmission of partner violence: A 20-year prospective study . Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 71 , 741–753. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Eslea M, & Mukhtar K. (2000). Bullying and racism among Asian schoolchildren in Britain . Educational Research , 42 ( 2 ), 207–217. [ Google Scholar ]
Espelage DL, Hong JS, Kim DH, & Nan L. (2018). Empathy, attitude towards bullying, theory-of-mind, and non-physical forms of bully perpetration and victimization among US middle school students . Child & Youth Care Forum , 47 ( 1 ), 45–60. [ Google Scholar ]
Falb KL, McCauley HL, Decker MR, Gupta J, Raj A, & Silverman JG (2011). School bullying perpetration and other childhood risk factors as predictors of adult intimate partner violence perpetration . Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine , 165 ( 10 ), 890–894. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Fandrem H, Ertesvåg SK, Strohmeier D, & Roland E. (2010). Bullying and affiliation: A study of peer groups in native and immigrant adolescents in Norway . European Journal of Developmental Psychology , 7 ( 4 ), 401–418. [ Google Scholar ]
Fandrem H, Strohmeier D, & Roland E. (2009). Bullying and victimization among native and immigrant adolescents in Norway: The role of proactive and reactive aggressiveness . The Journal of Early Adolescence , 29 ( 6 ), 898–923. [ Google Scholar ]
Farrell AD, Bettencourt A, Mays S, Kramer A, Sullivan T, & Kliewer W. (2012). Patterns of adolescents’ beliefs about fighting and their relation to behavior and risk factors for aggression . Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology , 40 ( 5 ), 787–802. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Farrell AD, Sullivan TN, Sutherland KS, Corona R, & Masho S. (2018). Evaluation of the Olweus Bully Prevention Program in an urban school system in the USA . Prevention Science , 1–15. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Feinstein BA, Turner BC, Beach LB, Korpak AK, & Phillips G. (2019). Racial/ethnic differences in mental health, substance use, and bullying victimization among self-identified bisexual high school-aged youth . LGBT Health , 6 ( 4 ), 174–183. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Finkelhor D, Ormrod RK, & Turner HA (2007). Poly-victimization: A neglected component in child victimization . Child Abuse & Neglect , 31 ( 1 ), 7–26. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Fisher S, Middleton K, Ricks E, Malone C, Briggs C, & Barnes J. (2015). Not just black and white: Peer victimization and the intersectionality of school diversity and race . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 44 ( 6 ), 1241–1250. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Flanagan T, Iarocci G, D’Arrisso A, Mandour T, Tootoosis C, Robinson S, & Burack JA (2011). Reduced ratings of physical and relational aggression for youths with a strong cultural identity: Evidence from the Naskapi people . Journal of Adolescent Health , 49 ( 2 ), 155–159. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Forbes GB, Collinsworth LL, Zhao P, Kohlman S, & LeClaire J. (2011). Relationships among individualism–collectivism, gender, and ingroup/outgroup status, and responses to conflict: A study in China and the United States . Aggressive Behavior , 37 ( 4 ), 302–314. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Forero R, McLellan L, Rissel C, & Bauman A. (1999). Bullying behaviour and psychosocial health among school students in New South Wales, Australia: Cross sectional survey . The BMJ , 319 ( 7206 ), 344–348. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Forster M, Dyal SR, Baezconde-Garbanati L, Chou CP, Soto DW, & Unger JB (2013). Bullying victimization as a mediator of associations between cultural/familial variables, substance use, and depressive symptoms among Hispanic youth . Ethnicity & Health , 15 ( 4 ), 415–432. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Gaffney H, Ttofi MM, & Farrington DP (2019). Evaluating the effectiveness of school-bullying prevention programs: An updated meta-analytical review . Aggression and Violent Behavior , 45 , 111–133. [ Google Scholar ]
Gage NA, Prykanowski DA, & Larson A. (2014). School climate and bullying victimization: A latent class growth model analysis . School Psychology Quarterly , 29 ( 3 ), 256–271. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Garnett BR, Masyn KE, Austin SB, Miller M, Williams DR, & Viswanath K. (2014). The intersectionality of discrimination attributes and bullying among youth: An applied latent class analysis . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 43 ( 8 ), 1225–1239. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Glanz K, & Bishop DB (2010). The role of behavioral science theory in development and implementation of public health interventions . Annual Review of Public Health , 31 , 399–418. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Goldweber A, Waasdorp TE, & Bradshaw CP (2013). Examining associations between race, urbanicity, and patterns of bullying involvement . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 42 ( 2 ), 206–219. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Gomez A, Munte A, & Sorde T. (2014). Transforming schools through minority males’ participation: Overcoming cultural stereotypes and preventing violence . Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 29 ( 11 ), 2002–2020. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Graham S. & Echols L. (2018). Race and Ethnicity in Peer Relations Research In Bukowski WM, Lursen B. & Rubin KH (Eds.), Handbook of Peer Interactions, Relationships, and Groups (2nd ed., pp. 590–614). New York: The Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Graham S, Bellmore AD, & Mize J. (2006). Peer victimization, aggression, and their cooccurrence in middle school: Pathways to adjustment problems . Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology , 34 ( 3 ), 349–364. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Graham S, Bellmore A, Nishina A, & Juvonen J. (2009). “It must be me”: Ethnic diversity and attributions for peer victimization in middle school . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 38 ( 4 ), 487–499. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Graham-Bermann SA, & Hughes HM (2003). Intervention for children exposed to interparental violence (IPV): Assessment of needs and research priorities . Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review , 6 , 189–204. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Grant N, Merrin GJ, King MT, & Espelage DL (2018). Examining within-person and between-person associations of family violence and peer deviance on bullying perpetration among middle school students . Psychology of Violence , 8 ( 4 ). [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hanish LD, & Guerra NG (2000). The roles of ethnicity and school context in predicting children’s victimization by peers . American Journal of Community Psychology , 28 , 201–223. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hatchel T, & Marx R. (2018). Understanding intersectionality and resiliency among transgender adolescents: Exploring pathways among peer victimization, school belonging, and drug use . International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 75 ( 6 ), 1289. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hatchel T, Valido A, De Pedro KT, Huang Y, & Espelage DL (2018). Minority stress among transgender adolescents: The role of peer victimization, school belonging, and ethnicity . Journal of Child and Family Studies , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ]
Haynie DL, Silver E, & Teasdale B. (2006). Neighborhood characteristics, peer networks, and adolescent violence . Journal of Quantitative Criminology , 22 , 147–169. [ Google Scholar ]
Hazen AL, Connelly CD, Kelleher KJ, Barth RP, & Landsverk JA (2006). Female caregivers’ experiences with intimate partner violence and behavior problems in children investigated as victims of maltreatment . Pediatrics , 117 , 99–109. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Henneberger AK, Varga SM, Moudy A, & Tolan PH (2016). Family functioning and high risk adolescents’ aggressive behavior: Examining effects by ethnicity . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 45 ( 1 ), 145–155. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hishinuma ES, Chang JY, Goebert DA, Helm S, Else IR, & Sugimoto-Matsuda JJ (2015). Interpersonal youth violence perpetration and victimization in a diverse Asian American and Pacific Islander adolescent sample . Violence and Victims , 30 ( 2 ), 225–249. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hoglund WL, & Hosan NE (2013). The context of ethnicity: Peer victimization and adjustment problems in early adolescence . The Journal of Early Adolescence , 33 ( 5 ), 585–609. [ Google Scholar ]
Hong JS, & Espelage DL (2012). A review of research on bullying and peer victimization in school: An ecological system analysis . Aggression and Violent Behavior , 17 ( 4 ), 311–322. [ Google Scholar ]
Hong JS, Peguero AA, Choi S, Lanesskog D, Espelage DL, & Lee NY (2014). Social ecology of bullying and peer victimization of Latino and Asian youth in the United States: A review of the literature . Journal of School Violence , 13 ( 3 ), 315–338. [ Google Scholar ]
Hong JS, Ryou B, & Piquero AR (2017). Do family-level factors associated with bullying perpetration and peer victimization differ by race? Comparing European American and African American youth . Journal of interpersonal violence , 0886260517714441. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hoover J, & Milner C. (1998). Are hazing and bullying related to love and belongingness? Reclaiming Children and Youth , 7 ( 3 ), 138–141. [ Google Scholar ]
Huesmann LR, Dubow EF, Boxer P, Landau SF, Gvirsman SD, & Shikaki K. (2017). Children’s exposure to violent political conflict stimulates aggression at peers by increasing emotional distress, aggressive script rehearsal, and normative beliefs favoring aggression . Development and Psychopathology , 29 ( 1 ), 39–50. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hunter SC, Durkin K, Heim D, Howe C, & Bergin D. (2010). Psychosocial mediators and moderators of the effect of peer-victimization upon depressive symptomatology . Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 51 ( 10 ), 1141–1149. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hussey JM, Chang JJ, & Kotch JB (2006). Child maltreatment in the United States: Prevalence, risk factors, and adolescent health consequences . Pediatrics , 118 ( 3 ), 933–942. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jackson MF, Barth JM, Powell N, & Lochman JE (2006). Classroom contextual effects of race on children’s peer nominations . Child Development , 77 , 1325–1337. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jagers RJ, & Mock LO (1993). Culture and social outcomes among inner-city African American children: An afrographic exploration . Journal of Black Psychology , 19 , 391–405. [ Google Scholar ]
Jansen PW, Mieloo CL, Dommisse-van Berkel A, Verlinden M, van der Ende J, Stevens G, Verhulst FC, Jansen W, & Tiemeier H. (2016). Bullying and victimization among young elementary school children: The role of child ethnicity and ethnic school composition . Race and Social Problems , 8 ( 4 ), 271–280. [ Google Scholar ]
Johnson D. (2007). Taking over the school: Student gangs as a strategy for dealing with homophobic bullying in an urban public school district . Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services , 19 ( 3–4 ), 87–104. [ Google Scholar ]
Jones LM, Mitchell KJ, Turner HA, & Ybarra ML (2018). Characteristics of bias-based harassment incidents reported by a national sample of US adolescents . Journal of adolescence , 65 , 50–60. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jugert P, & Titzmann PF (2017). Trajectories of victimization in ethnic diaspora immigrant and native adolescents: Separating acculturation from development . Developmental Psychology , 53 ( 3 ), 552. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kawabata Y, & Crick NR (2011). The significance of cross-racial/ethnic friendships: Associations with peer victimization, peer support, sociometric status, and classroom diversity . Developmental Psychology , 47 ( 6 ), 1763. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kawabata Y, & Crick NR (2013). Relational and physical aggression, peer victimization, and adjustment problems in Asian American and European American children . Asian American Journal of Psychology , 4 ( 3 ), 211. [ Google Scholar ]
Kisfalusi D, Pál J, & Boda Z. (2018). Bullying and victimization among majority and minority students: The role of peers’ ethnic perceptions . Social Networks . [ Google Scholar ]
Kljakovic M, Hunt C, & Jose P. (2015). Incidence of bullying and victimisation among adolescents in New Zealand . New Zealand Journal of Psychology , 44 ( 2 ). [ Google Scholar ]
Klomek AB, Marrocco F, Kleinman M, Schonfeld IS, & Gould MS (2007). Bullying, depression, and suicidality in adolescents . Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry , 46 ( 1 ), 40–49. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Konold T, Cornell D, Shukla K, & Huang F. (2017). Racial/ethnic differences in perceptions of school climate and its association with student engagement and peer aggression . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 46 ( 6 ), 1289–1303. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kornbluh M, & Neal JW (2016). Examining the many dimensions of children’s popularity: Interactions between aggression, prosocial behaviors, and gender . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 33 ( 1 ), 62–80. [ Google Scholar ]
Ladd GW, & Burgess KB (2001). Do relational risks and protective factors moderate the linkages between childhood aggression and early psychological and school adjustment? Child Development , 72 ( 5 ), 1579–1601. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lai T, & Kao G. (2018). Hit, robbed, and put down (but not bullied): Underreporting of bullying by minority and male students . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 47 ( 3 ), 619–635. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lanza HI, Echols L, & Graham S. (2018). A silver lining: The role of ethnic diversity on co-occurring trajectories of weight status and peer victimization across early adolescence . Journal of Adolescent Health , 63 ( 5 ), 554–560. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lareau A. (2011). Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: University of California Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Larochette AC, Murphy AN, & Craig WM (2010). Racial bullying and victimization in Canadian school-aged children: Individual and school level effects . School Psychology International , 31 ( 4 ), 389–408. [ Google Scholar ]
Lauritsen JL, & White NA (2001). Putting violence in its place: The influence of race, ethnicity, gender, and place on the risk for violence . Criminology & Public Policy , 1 ( 1 ), 37–60. [ Google Scholar ]
Leff SS, Gullan RL, Paskewich BS, Abdul-Kabir S, Jawad AF, Grossman M, Munro MA, & Power TJ. (2009). An initial evaluation of a culturally adapted social problem-solving and relational aggression prevention program for urban African-American relationally aggressive girls . Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community , 37 ( 4 ), 260–274. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
LeVasseur MT, Kelvin EA, & Grosskopf NA (2013). Intersecting identities and the association between bullying and suicide attempt among New York City youths: Results from the 2009 New York City youth risk behavior survey . American Journal of Public Health , 103 ( 6 ), 1082–1089. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Leventhal T, & Brooks-Gunn J. (2000). The neighborhoods they live in: The effects of neighborhood residence on child and adolescent outcomes . Psychological Bulletin , 126 , 309–337. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lewis C, Deardorff J, Lahiff M, Soleimanpour S, Sakashita K, & Brindis CD (2015). High school students’ experiences of bullying and victimization and the association with school health center use . Journal of School Health , 85 ( 5 ), 318–326. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Li Y, Xie H, & Shi J. (2012). Chinese and American children’s perceptions of popularity determinants: Cultural differences and behavioral correlates . International Journal of Behavioral Development , 36 , 420–429. [ Google Scholar ]
Limber SP (2011). Development, evaluation, and future directions of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program . Journal of School Violence , 10 ( 1 ), 71–87. [ Google Scholar ]
Limber SP, Olweus D, Wang W, Masiello M, & Breivik K. (2018). Evaluation of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: A large scale study of US students in grades 3–11 . Journal of School Psychology , 69 , 56–72. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Llorent VJ, Ortega-Ruiz R, & Zych I. (2016). Bullying and cyberbullying in minorities: are they more vulnerable than the majority group? Frontiers in Psychology , 7 , 1507. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lorenzo-Blanco EI, Unger JB, Oshri A, Baezconde-Garbanati L, & Soto D. (2016). Profiles of bullying victimization, discrimination, social support, and school safety: Links with Latino/a youth acculturation, gender, depressive symptoms, and cigarette use . American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 86 ( 1 ), 37. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Low S, & Espelage D. (2013). Differentiating cyber bullying perpetration from non-physical bullying: Commonalities across race, individual, and family predictors . Psychology of Violence , 3 ( 1 ), 39–52. [ Google Scholar ]
Luthar S, & McMahon T. (1996). Peer reputation among inner city adolescents: Structure and correlates . Journal of Research on Adolescence , 6 , 581–603. [ Google Scholar ]
Malta DC, Porto DL, Crespo CD, Silva MMA, Andrade SSCD, Mello FCMD, Monteiro R, & Silva MAI (2014). Bullying in Brazilian school children: Analysis of the National Adolescent School-Based Health Survey (PeNSE 2012) . Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia , 17 , 92–105. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Maynard BR, Vaughn MG, Salas-Wright CP, & Vaughn S. (2016). Bullying victimization among school-aged immigrant youth in the United States . Journal of Adolescent Health , 58 ( 3 ), 337–344. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
McMahon SD, & Watts RJ (2002). Ethnic identity in urban African American youth: Exploring links with self-worth, aggression, and other psychosocial variables . Journal of Community Psychology , 30 ( 4 ), 411–431. [ Google Scholar ]
Mehari KR, & Farrell AD (2015). The relation between peer victimization and adolescents’ well- being: The moderating role of ethnicity within context . Journal of Research on Adolescence , 25 ( 1 ), 118–134. [ Google Scholar ]
Mendez JJ, Bauman S, & Guillory RM (2012). Bullying of Mexican immigrant students by Mexican American students: An examination of intracultural bullying . Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences , 34 ( 2 ), 279–304. [ Google Scholar ]
Menesini E, & Salmivalli C. (2017). Bullying in schools: The state of knowledge and effective interventions . Psychology, Health & Medicine , 22 ( Supplement 1 ), 240–253. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Menrath I, Prüssmann M, Müller-Godeffroy E, Prüssmann C, Ravens-Sieberer U, Ottova-Jordan V, & Thyen U. (2015). Subjective health, school victimization, and protective factors in a high-risk school sample . Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics , 36 ( 5 ), 305–312. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Menzer MM, Oh W, McDonald KL, Rubin KH, & Dashiell-Aje E. (2010). Behavioral correlates of peer exclusion and victimization of East Asian American and European American young adolescents . Asian American Journal of Psychology , 1 ( 4 ), 290. [ Google Scholar ]
Messinger AM, Nieri TA, Villar P, & Luengo MA (2012). Acculturation stress and bullying among immigrant youths in Spain . Journal of School Violence , 11 ( 4 ), 306–322. [ Google Scholar ]
Mills C, Guerin S, Lynch F, Daly I, & Fitzpatrick C. (2004). The relationship between bullying, depression and suicidal thoughts/behaviour in Irish adolescents . Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine , 21 ( 4 ), 112–116. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Möller I, Krahé B, & Busching R. (2013). Mediengewaltkonsum und aggressives Verhalten . Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie , 45 ( 3 ), 121–130. [ Google Scholar ]
Monks CP, & Smith PK (2006). Definitions of bullying: Age differences in understanding of the term, and the role of experience . British Journal of Developmental Psychology , 24 ( 4 ), 801–821. [ Google Scholar ]
Mooney A, Creeser R, & Blatchford P. (1991). Children’s views on teasing and fighting in junior schools . Educational Research , 33 ( 2 ), 103–112. [ Google Scholar ]
Moran S, Smith PK, Thompson D, & Whitney I. (1993). Ethnic differences in experiences of bullying: Asian and white children . British Journal of Educational Psychology , 63 ( 3 ), 431–440. [ Google Scholar ]
Morrel TM, Dubowitz H, Kerr MA, & Black MM (2003). The effect of maternal victimization on children: A cross-informant study . Journal of Family Violence , 18 , 29–41. [ Google Scholar ]
Mouttapa M, Valente T, Gallaher P, Rohrbach LA, & Unger JB (2004). Social network predictors of bullying and victimization . Adolescence , 39 ( 154 ), 315. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Mueller AS, James W, Abrutyn S, & Levin ML (2015). Suicide ideation and bullying among U.S. adolescents: Examining the intersections of sexual orientation, gender, and race/ethnicity . American Journal of Public Health , 105 ( 5 ), 980–985. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Nesdale D. (2002). Acculturation attitudes and the ethnic and host-country identification of immigrants . Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 32 ( 7 ), 1488–1507. [ Google Scholar ]
Nishina A. & Bellmore A. (2018). Inequality and Neighborhood Effects on Peer Relationships In Bukowski WM, Lursen B. & Rubin KH (Eds.), Handbook of Peer Interactions, Relationships, and Groups (2nd ed., pp. 510–532). New York: The Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Olweus D. (1993). Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do . Malden, MA: Blackwell. [ Google Scholar ]
Olweus D. (2011). Bullying at school and later criminality: Findings from three Swedish community samples of males . Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health , 21 ( 2 ), 151–156. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Olweus D, & Limber SP (2010). Bullying in school: Evaluation and dissemination of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program . American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 80 ( 1 ), 124. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Olweus D, Solberg ME, & Breivik K. (2018). Long-term school-level effects of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP) . Scandinavian Journal of Psychology . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Pan SW, & Spittal PM (2013). Health effects of perceived racial and religious bullying among urban adolescents in China: A cross-sectional national study . Global Public Health , 8 ( 6 ), 685–697. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Patchin JW, & Hinduja S. (2006). Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary look at cyberbullying . Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice , 4 ( 2 ), 148–169. [ Google Scholar ]
Patton DU, Hong JS, Williams AB, & Allen-Meares P. (2013). A review of research on school bullying among African American youth: an ecological systems analysis . Educational Psychology Review , 25 ( 2 ), 245–260. [ Google Scholar ]
Peguero AA (2009). Victimizing the children of immigrants: Latino and Asian American student victimization . Youth & Society , 41 ( 2 ), 186–208. [ Google Scholar ]
Peguero AA (2011). Violence, schools, and dropping out: Racial and ethnic disparities in the educational consequence of student victimization . Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 26 ( 18 ), 3753–3772. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Peguero AA, & Jiang X. (2016). Backlash for breaking racial and ethnic breaking stereotypes: Adolescent school victimization across contexts . Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 31 ( 6 ), 1047–1073. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Peguero AA, & Williams LM (2013). Racial and ethnic stereotypes and bullying victimization . Youth & Society , 45 ( 4 ), 545–564. [ Google Scholar ]
Peguero AA, Popp AM, & Koo DJ (2015). Race, ethnicity, and school-based adolescent victimization . Crime & Delinquency , 61 ( 3 ), 323–349. [ Google Scholar ]
Phelps RE, Meara NM, Davis KL, & Patton MJ (1991). Blacks’ and Whites’ perceptions of verbal aggression . Journal of Counseling & Development , 69 ( 4 ), 345–350. [ Google Scholar ]
Polanco-Roman L, Danies A, & Anglin DM (2016). Racial discrimination as race-based trauma, coping strategies, and dissociative symptoms among emerging adults . Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy , 8 ( 5 ), 609–617. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Pottie K, Dahal G, Georgiades K, Premji K, & Hassan G. (2015). Do first generation immigrant adolescents face higher rates of bullying, violence and suicidal behaviours than do third generation and native born? Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health , 17 ( 5 ), 1557–1566. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Price M, Hill NE, Liang B, & Perella J. (2019). Teacher Relationships and Adolescents Experiencing Identity-Based Victimization: What Matters for Whom Among Stigmatized Adolescents . School Mental Health , 1–17. [ Google Scholar ]
Prinstein MJ, & Cillessen AH (2003). Forms and functions of adolescent peer aggression associated with high levels of peer status . Merrill-Palmer Quarterly , 49 , 310–342. [ Google Scholar ]
Pulido R, Banks C, Ragan K, Pang D, Blake JJ, & McKyer EL (2019). The impact of school bullying on physical activity in overweight youth: Exploring race and ethnic differences . Journal of School Health , 89 ( 4 ), 319–327. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Qin DB, Way N, & Rana M. (2008). The “model minority” and their discontent: Examining peer discrimination and harassment of Chinese American immigrant youth . New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development , 2008 ( 121 ), 27–42. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Reijntjes A, Kamphuis JH, Prinzie P, Boelen PA, Van der Schoot M, & Telch MJ (2011). Prospective linkages between peer victimization and externalizing problems in children: A meta-analysis . Aggressive Behavior , 37 ( 3 ), 215–222. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Renda J, Vassallo S, & Edwards B. (2011). Bullying in early adolescence and its association with anti- social behaviour, criminality and violence 6 and 10 years later . Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health , 21 ( 2 ), 117–127. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rennison C, & Planty M. (2003). Nonlethal intimate partner violence: Examining race, gender, and income patterns . Violence and Victims , 18 ( 4 ), 433–443. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rhee S, Lee SY, & Jung SH (2017). Ethnic differences in bullying victimization and psychological distress: A test of an ecological model . Journal of Adolescence , 60 , 155–160. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rist R. (1970). Student social class and teacher expectations: The self-fulfilling prophecy in ghetto education . Harvard Educational Review , 40 ( 3 ), 411–451. [ Google Scholar ]
Roberts RE, Phinney JS, Masse LC, Chen YR, Roberts CR, & Romero A. (1999). The structure of ethnic identity of young adolescents from diverse ethnocultural groups . The Journal of Early Adolescence , 19 ( 3 ), 301–322. [ Google Scholar ]
Rodkin P, Farmer T, Pearl R, & van Acker R. (2000). Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations . Developmental Psychology , 36 , 14–254. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rodríguez-Hidalgo AJ, Calmaestra J, Casas JA, & Ortega-Ruiz R. (2019). Ethnic-cultural bullying versus personal bullying: specificity and measurement of discriminatory aggression and victimization among adolescents . Frontiers in Psychology , 10 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rosenthal L, Earnshaw VA, Carroll-Scott A, Henderson KE, Peters SM, McCaslin C, & Ickovics JR (2015). Weight-and race-based bullying: Health associations among urban adolescents . Journal of Health Psychology , 20 ( 4 ), 401–412. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rowe AT, Zapolski TC, Hensel DJ, Fisher S, & Barnes-Najor J. (2019). Peer victimization, mood symptoms, and alcohol use: Examining effects among diverse high school youth . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 48 ( 5 ), 924–934. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Russell ST, Sinclair KO, Poteat VP, & Koenig BW. (2012). Adolescent health and harassment based on discriminatory bias . American Journal of Public Health , 102 ( 3 ), 493–495. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Salmivalli C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review . Aggression and Violent Behavior , 15 ( 2 ), 112–120. [ Google Scholar ]
Salmivalli C, & Poskiparta E. (2012). KiVa antibullying program: Overview of evaluation studies based on a randomized controlled trial and national rollout in Finland . International Journal of Conflict and Violence (IJCV) , 6 ( 2 ), 293–301. [ Google Scholar ]
Salmivalli C, Lagerspetz K, Björkqvist K, Österman K, & Kaukiainen A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group . Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression , 22 ( 1 ), 1–15. [ Google Scholar ]
Sawyer AL, Bradshaw CP, & O’Brennan LM (2008). Examining ethnic, gender, and developmental differences in the way children report being a victim of “bullying” on self-report measures . Journal of Adolescent Health , 43 ( 2 ), 106–114. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Scher CD, Forde DR, McQuaid JR, & Stein MB (2004). Prevalence and demographic correlates of childhood maltreatment in an adult community sample . Child Abuse & Neglect , 28 ( 2 ), 167–180. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Scherr TG & Larson J. (2010). Bullying Dynamics Associated with Race, Ethnicity, and Immigration Status In Jimerson SR, Swearer SM, & Espelage DL (Eds.), Handbook of Bullying in Schools: An International Perspective (pp. 223–234). New York: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
Schumann L, Craig W, & Rosu A. (2013). Minority in the majority: Community ethnicity as a context for racial bullying and victimization . Journal of Community Psychology , 41 ( 8 ), 959–972. [ Google Scholar ]
Seals D, & Young J. (2003). Bullying and victimization: Prevalence and relationship to gender, grade level, ethnicity, self-esteem, and depression . Adolescence , 38 , 735–747. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Serdari A, Gkouliama A, Tripsianis G, Proios H, & Samakouri M. (2018). Bullying and minorities in secondary school students in Thrace-Greece . American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 88 ( 4 ), 462. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Shields A, & Cicchetti D. (2001). Parental maltreatment and emotion dysregulation as risk factors for bullying and victimization in middle childhood . Journal of Clinical Child Psychology , 30 ( 3 ), 349–363. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Sinclair KO, Bauman S, Poteat VP, Koenig B, & Russell ST (2012). Cyber and bias-based harassment: Associations with academic, substance use, and mental health problems . Journal of Adolescent Health , 50 ( 5 ), 521–523. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Smith PK, Mahdavi J, Carvalho M, Fisher S, Russell S, & Tippett N. (2008). Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils . Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 49 ( 4 ), 376–385. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Smokowski PR, & Bacallao ML (2006). Acculturation and aggression in Latino adolescents: A structural model focusing on cultural risk factors and assets . Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology , 34 ( 5 ), 657–671. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Smokowski PR, Guo S, Evans CB, Wu Q, Rose RA, Bacallao M, & Cotter KL (2017). Risk and protective factors across multiple microsystems associated with internalizing symptoms and aggressive behavior in rural adolescents: Modeling longitudinal trajectories from the Rural Adaptation Project . American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 87 ( 1 ), 94. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Smokowski PR, Rose RA, & Bacallao M. (2009). Acculturation and aggression in Latino adolescents: Modeling longitudinal trajectories from the Latino acculturation and health project . Child Psychiatry and Human Development , 40 ( 4 ), 589–608. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Spriggs AL, Iannotti RJ, Nansel TR, & Haynie DL (2007). Adolescent bullying involvement and perceived family, peer and school relations: Commonalities and differences across race/ethnicity . Journal of Adolescent Health , 47 ( 3 ), 283–293. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Stone AL, & Carlisle SK (2017). Racial bullying and adolescent substance use: An examination of school-attending young adolescents in the United States . Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse , 76 ( 1 ), 23–42. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Strohmeier D, & Spiel C. (2003). Immigrant children in Austria: Aggressive behavior and friendship patterns in multicultural school classes . Journal of Applied School Psychology , 79 ( 2 ), 99–116. [ Google Scholar ]
Strohmeier D, & Spiel C. (2003). Immigrant children in Austria: Aggressive behavior and friendship patterns in multicultural school classes . Journal of Applied School Psychology , 19 ( 2 ), 99–116. [ Google Scholar ]
Strohmeier D, Fandrem H, & Spiel C. (2012). The need for peer acceptance and affiliation as underlying motive for aggressive behaviour and bullying others among immigrant youth living in Austria and Norway . Anales de Psicología , 28 ( 3 ), 695–704. [ Google Scholar ]
Strohmeier D, Kärnä A, & Salmivalli C. (2011). Intrapersonal and interpersonal risk factors for peer victimization in immigrant youth in Finland . Developmental Psychology , 47 ( 1 ), 248. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Sulkowski ML, Bauman S, Wright S, Nixon C, & Davis S. (2014). Peer victimization in youth from immigrant and non-immigrant US families . School Psychology International , 35 ( 6 ), 649–669. [ Google Scholar ]
Sykes BL, Piquero AR, & Gioviano JP (2017). Code of the classroom? Social disadvantage and bullying among American adolescents, US 2011–2012 . Crime & Delinquency , 63 ( 14 ), 1883–1922. [ Google Scholar ]
Tajfel H. (1978). Differentiation Between Social Groups . London: Academic Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Tajfel H, & Turner J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict In Austin WG & Worchel S, (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole. [ Google Scholar ]
Tartakovsky E, & Mirsky J. (2001). Bullying gangs among immigrant adolescents from the former Soviet Union in Israel: A psycho-culturally determined group defense . Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 16 ( 3 ), 247–265. [ Google Scholar ]
Thomas DE, Bierman KL, & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (2006). The impact of classroom aggression on the development of aggressive behavior problems in children . Development and Psychopathology , 18 ( 2 ), 471–487. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Tippett N, Wolke D, & Platt L. (2013). Ethnicity and bullying involvement in a national UK youth sample . Journal of Adolescence , 36 ( 4 ), 639–649. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Titzmann PF (2014). Immigrant adolescents’ adaptation to a new context: Ethnic friendship homophily and its predictors . Child Development Perspectives , 8 ( 2 ), 107–112. [ Google Scholar ]
Toomey RB, & Anhalt K. (2016). Mindfulness as a coping strategy for bias-based school victimization among Latina/o sexual minority youth . Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity , 3 ( 4 ), 432–441. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Triandis HS (1976). Variations in Black and White Perceptions of the Social Environment . Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Ttofi MM, Bowes L, Farrington DP, & Lösel F. (2014). Protective factors interrupting the continuity from school bullying to later internalizing and externalizing problems: a systematic review of prospective longitudinal studies . Journal of School Violence , 13 ( 1 ), 5–38. [ Google Scholar ]
Ttofi MM, Farrington DP, Lösel F, & Loeber R. (2011). The predictive efficiency of school bullying versus later offending: a systematic/meta- analytic review of longitudinal studies . Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health , 21 ( 2 ), 80–89. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Underwood MK, & Ehrenreich SE (2014). Bullying may be fueled by the desperate need to belong . Theory Into Practice , 53 ( 4 ), 265–270. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Verkuyten M. & Thijs J. (2002) Racist victimization among children in the Netherlands: The effect of ethnic group and school . Ethnic and Racial Studies , 25 ( 2 ), 310–331. [ Google Scholar ]
Verkuyten M, & Thijs J. (2001). Peer victimization and self- esteem of ethnic minority group children . Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology , 11 ( 3 ), 227–234. [ Google Scholar ]
Vervoort MH, Scholte RH, & Overbeek G. (2010). Bullying and victimization among adolescents: The role of ethnicity and ethnic composition of school class . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 39 ( 1 ), 1. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Visconti KJ, Sechler CM, & Kochenderfer-Ladd B. (2013). Coping with peer victimization: The role of children’s attributions . School Psychology Quarterly , 28 ( 2 ), 122. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Vitoroulis I, & Georgiades K. (2017). Bullying among immigrant and non-immigrant early adolescents: School- and student-level effects . Journal of Adolescence , 61 , 141–151. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Vitoroulis I, & Vaillancourt T. (2015). Meta-analytic results of ethnic group differences in peer victimization . Aggressive Behavior , 41 ( 2 ), 149–170. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Vitoroulis I, & Vaillancourt T. (2018). Ethnic group differences in bullying perpetration: A meta- analysis . Journal of Research on Adolescence , 28 ( 4 ), 752–771. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Voight A, Hanson T, O’Malley M, & Adekanye L. (2015). The racial school climate gap: Within-school disparities in students’ experiences of safety, support, and connectedness . American Journal of Community Psychology , 56 ( 3–4 ), 252–267. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Voisin DR, & Hong JS (2012). A meditational model linking witnessing intimate partner violence and bullying behaviors and victimization among youth . Educational Psychology Review , 24 ( 4 ), 479–498. [ Google Scholar ]
Volk AA, Dane AV, & Marini ZA (2014). What is bullying? A theoretical redefinition . Developmental Review , 34 ( 4 ), 327–343. [ Google Scholar ]
von Grünigen R, Perren S, Nägele C, & Alsaker FD. (2010). Immigrant children’s peer acceptance and victimization in kindergarten: The role of local language competence . British Journal of Developmental Psychology , 28 ( 3 ), 679–697. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Waasdorp TE, Baker CN, Paskewich BS, & Leff SS (2013). The association between forms of aggression, leadership, and social status among urban youth . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 42 ( 2 ), 263–274. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Walsh SD, De Clercq B, Molcho M, Harel-Fisch Y, Davison CM, Madsen KR, & Stevens GW (2016). The relationship between immigrant school composition, classmate support and involvement in physical fighting and bullying among adolescent immigrants and non-immigrants in 11 countries . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 45 ( 1 ), 1–16. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wang C, Wang W, Zheng L, & Atwal K. (2016). Bullying prevention as a social justice issue: Implications with Asian American elementary school students . School Psychology Forum , 10 ( 3 ), 251–264. [ Google Scholar ]
Wang J, Iannotti RJ, & Luk JW (2012). Patterns of adolescent bullying behaviors: Physical, verbal, exclusion, rumor, and cyber . Journal of School Psychology , 50 ( 4 ), 521–534 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wang J, Iannotti RJ, & Nansel TR (2009). School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber . Journal of Adolescent Health , 45 ( 4 ), 368–375. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wang J, Iannotti RJ, Luk JW, & Nansel TR (2010). Co-occurrence of victimization from five subtypes of bullying: Physical, verbal, social exclusion, spreading rumors, and cyber . Journal of Pediatric Psychology , 35 ( 10 ), 1103–1112. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Widom CS (1989). The cycle of violence . Science , 244 ( 4901 ), 160–166. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Williams DR, Yan Y, Jackson JS, & Anderson NB (1997). Racial Differences in Physical and Mental Health: Socio-economic Status, Stress and Discrimination . Journal of Health Psychology , 2 ( 3 ), 335–351. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wright MF, & Wachs S. (2019). Does social support moderate the relationship between racial discrimination and aggression among Latinx adolescents? A longitudinal study . Journal of Adolescence , 73 , 85–94. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Zhou M. (1997). Segmented assimilation: Issues, controversies, and recent research on the new second generation . International Migration Review , 31 ( 4 ), 975–1008. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Zimmerman RS, Khoury EL, Vega WA, Gil AG, & Warheit GJ (1995). Teacher and parent perceptions of behavior problems among a sample of African American, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic white students . American Journal of Community Psychology , 23 ( 2 ), 181–197. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Preventing Bullying: Consequences, Prevention, and Intervention

Suzanne Le Menestrel National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

Bullying is considered to be a significant public health problem with both short- and long-term physical and social-emotional consequences for youth. A large body of research indicates that youth who have been bullied are at increased risk of subsequent mental, emotional, health, and behavioral problems, especially internalizing problems, such as low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and loneliness. Given the growing awareness of bullying as a public health problem and the increasing evidence of short- and long-term physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral health and academic consequences of bullying behavior, there have been significant efforts at the practice, program, and policy levels to address bullying behavior. This article summarizes a recent consensus report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Preventing Bullying Through Science, Policy, and Practice , and what is known about the consequences of bullying behavior and interventions that attempt to prevent and respond to it.

Author Biography

Suzanne le menestrel, national academies of sciences, engineering, and medicine.

American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force. (2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools?: An evidentiary review and recommendations. American Psychologist, 63(9) 852-862. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.852

Beran, T. (2009). Correlates of peer victimization and achievement: An exploratory model. Psychology in the Schools, 46(4), 348-361. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20380

Beran, T. N., Hughes, G., & Lupart, J. (2008). A model of achievement and bullying: Analyses of the Canadian National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth data. Educational Research, 50(1), 25-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880801920379

Beran, T. N., & Lupart, J. (2009). The relationship between school achievement and peer harassment in Canadian adolescents: The importance of mediating factors. School Psychology International, 30(1), 75-91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034308101851

Boccanfuso, C., & Kuhfeld, M. (2011, March). Multiple responses, promising results: Evidence-based nonpunitive alternatives to zero tolerance (Research to Results Brief, Child Trends Publication No. 2011-09). http://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Child_Trends-2011_03_01_RB_AltToZeroTolerance.pdf

Bradshaw, C. P. (2015). Translating research to practice in bullying prevention. American Psychologist, 70(4), 322. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039114

de Bruyn, E., Cillessen, A., & Wissink, I. (2010). Associations of peer acceptance and perceived popularity with bullying and victimization in early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(4), 543-566. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431609340517

Dijkstra, J. K., Lindenberg, S., & Veenstra, R. (2008). Beyond the class norm: Bullying behavior of popular adolescents and its relation to peer acceptance and rejection. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36(8), 1289-1299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-008-9251-7

Faris, R., & Ennett, S. (2012). Adolescent aggression: The role of peer group status motives, peer aggression, and group characteristics. Social Networks, 34(4), 371-378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2010.06.003

Farmer, T. W., Estell, D. B., Bishop, J. L., O’Neal, K. K., & Cairns, B. D. (2003). Rejected bullies or popular leaders? The social relations of aggressive subtypes of rural African American early adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 39(6), 992-1004. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.39.6.992

Farrington, D. P., & Ttofi, M. (2009). School-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 5(6), 1-148. https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2009.6

Gini, G., & Pozzoli, T. (2009). Association between bullying and psychosomatic problems: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 123(3), 1059-1065. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2008-1215

Gladden, R. M., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Hamburger, M. E., & Lumpkin, C. D. (2014). Bullying surveillance among youths: Uniform definitions for public health and recommended data elements (Version 1.0). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and U.S. Department of Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED575477.pdf

Glew, G. M., Fan, M.-Y., Katon, W., Rivara, F. P., & Kernic, M. A. (2005). Bullying, psychosocial adjustment, and academic performance in elementary school. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 159(11), 1026-1031. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.159.11.1026

Hatzenbuehler, M. L., & Keyes, K. M. (2013). Inclusive anti-bullying policies and reduced risk of suicide attempts in lesbian and gay youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(1), S21-S26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.08.010

Institute of Medicine. (1994). Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for preventive intervention research. National Academy Press.

Jiménez-Barbero, J. A., Ruiz-Hernández, J. A., Llor-Zaragoza, L., Pérez-García, M., & Llor- Esteban, B. (2016). Effectiveness of anti-bullying school programs: A meta-analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 61, 165-175. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2015.12.015

Juvonen, J., Nishina, A., & Graham, S. (2000). Peer harassment, psychological adjustment, and school functioning in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 349-359. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.349

Klomek, A. B., Kleinman, M., Altschuler, E., Marrocco, F., Amakawa, L., & Gould, M. S. (2011). High school bullying as a risk for later depression and suicidality. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 41(5), 501-516. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1943-278X.2011.00046.x

Kochenderfer, B. J., & Ladd, G. W. (1996). Peer victimization: Cause or consequence of school maladjustment? Child Development, 67(4), 1305-1317. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1996.tb01797.x

Kowalski, R. M., and Limber, S. P. (2013). Psychological, physical, and academic correlates of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(1), S13-S20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.09.018

Lereya, S. T., Copeland, W. E., Costello, E. J., & Wolke, D. (2015). Adult mental health consequences of peer bullying and maltreatment in childhood: Two cohorts in two countries. The Lancet Psychiatry, 2(6), 524-531. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(15)00165-0

Limber, S. B. (2014). Bullying Among Children and Youth. Unpublished manuscript of a study commissioned by the Planning Committee on Increasing Capacity for Reducing Bullying and Its Impact on the Lifecourse of Youth Involved. Department of Psychology and Institute on Family and Neighborhood Life, Clemson University.

Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., Morin, A. J., Parada, R. H., Craven, R. G., & Hamilton, L. R. (2011). Construct validity of the multidimensional structure of bullying and victimization: An application of exploratory structural equation modeling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(3), 701-732. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024122

McDougall, P., & Vaillancourt, T. (2015). Long-term adult outcomes of peer victimization in childhood and adolescence: Pathways to adjustment and maladjustment. American Psychologist, 70(4), 300. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039174

Minton, S. J. (2014). Prejudice and effective anti-bullying intervention: Evidence from the bullying of “minorities.” Nordic Psychology, 66(2), 108-120. https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2014.928485

Musher-Eizenman, D. R., Boxer, P., Danner, S., Dubow, E. F., Goldstein, S. E., & Heretick, D. M. L. (2004). Social-cognitive mediators of the relation of environmental and emotion regulation factors to children’s aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 30(5), 389-408.

Nakamoto, J., & Schwartz, D. (2010). Is peer victimization associated with academic achievement? A meta-analytic review. Social Development, 19(2), 221-242.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Preventing bullying through science, policy, and practice. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23482

Neary, A., & Joseph, S. (1994). Peer victimization and its relationship to self-concept and depression among schoolgirls. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(1), 183-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)90122-8

Nixon, C. (2014). Current perspectives: The impact of cyberbullying on adolescent health. Adolescent Health, Medicine and Therapeutics, 143-158. https://doi.org/10.2147/AHMT.S36456

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

Olweus, D. (1993b). Victimization by peers: Antecedents and long-term outcomes. In K. H. Rubin & J. B. Asendorpf (Eds.), Social Withdrawal, Inhibition, and Shyness in Childhood (pp. 315-341). Psychology Press.

Olweus, D. (2001). Peer harassment: A critical analysis and some important issues. In J. Juvonen & S. Graham (Eds.), Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized (pp. 3-20). Guilford Press.

Peeters, M., Cillessen, A. H., & Scholte, R. H. (2010). Clueless or powerful? Identifying subtypes of bullies in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(9), 1041-1052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9478-9

Polanin, J. R., Espelage, D. L., & Pigott, T. D. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, 41(1), 47-65.

Pöyhönen, V., Juvonen, J., & Salmivalli, C. (2010). What does it take to stand up for the victim of bullying? The interplay between personal and social factors. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 56(2), 143-163.

Reijntjes, A., Kamphuis, J. H., Prinzie, P., & Telch, M. J. (2010). Peer victimization and internalizing problems in children: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34(4), 244-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.07.009

Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1993). Dimensions of interpersonal relation among Australian children and implications for psychological well-being. Journal of Social Psychology, 133(1), 33-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1993.9712116

Rigby, K., & Slee, P. (2008). Interventions to reduce bullying. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 20(2), 165-183. https://doi.org/10.1515/IJAMH.2008.20.2.165

Rivers, I., & Noret, N. (2013). Potential suicide ideation and its association with observing bullying at school. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(1), S32-S36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.10.279

Rivers, I., Poteat, V. P., Noret, N., & Ashurst, N. (2009). Observing bullying at school: The mental health implications of witness status. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(4), 211-223. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018164

Rodkin, P. C., Espelage, D. L., & Hanish, L. D. (2015). A relational framework for understanding bullying: Developmental antecedents and outcomes. American Psychologist, 70(4), 311-321. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038658

Salmivalli, C. (2001). Group view on victimization: Empirical findings and their implications. In J. Juvonen & S. Graham (Eds.), Peer harassment in school (pp. 398-419). Guilford Press.

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

Salmivalli, C. (2014). Participant roles in bullying: How can peer bystanders be utilized in interventions? Theory Into Practice, 53(4), 286-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.947222

Sijtsema, J. J., Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., & Salmivalli, C. (2009). Empirical test of bullies’ status goals: Assessing direct goals, aggression, and prestige. Aggressive Behavior, 35, 57-67. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20282

Thunfors, P., & Cornell, D. (2008). The popularity of middle school bullies. Journal of School Violence, 7(1), 65-82. https://doi.org/10.1300/J202v07n01_05

Trach, J., Hymel, S., Waterhouse, T., & Neale, K. (2010). Bystander responses to school bullying: A cross-sectional investigation of grade and sex differences. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 25(1), 114-130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573509357553

Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2009). What works in preventing bullying: Effective elements of anti-bullying programmes. Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, 1(1), 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/17596599200900003

Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2011). Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7(1), 27-56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-010-9109-1

Ttofi, M. M., Farrington, D. P., Lösel, F., & Loeber, R. (2011). Do the victims of school bullies tend to become depressed later in life? A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, 3(2), 63-73. https://doi.org/10.1108/17596591111132873/full/html

Vaillancourt, T., Hymel, S., & McDougall, P. (2003). Bullying is power: Implications for school-based intervention strategies. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 19(2), 157-176. https://doi.org/10.1300/J008v19n02_10

Vaillancourt, T., McDougall, P., Hymel, S., & Sunderani, S. (2010). The relationship between power and bullying behavior. In S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), Handbook of Bullying in Schools: An International Perspective (pp. 211-222). Routledge.

Vaillancourt, T., Brittain, H. L., McDougall, P., & Duku, E. (2013). Longitudinal links between childhood peer victimization, internalizing and externalizing problems, and academic functioning: Developmental cascades. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41(8), 1203-1215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-013-9781-5

Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2011). Online communication among adolescents: An integrated model of its attraction, opportunities, and risks. Journal of Adolescent Health, 48(2), 121-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.08.020

Vreeman, R. C., & Carroll, A. E. (2007). A systematic review of school-based interventions to prevent bullying. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 161(1), 78-88.

Wolke, D., & Lereya, S. T. (2015). Long-term effects of bullying. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 100(9), 879-85. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2014-306667

Wolke, D., Lereya, S. T., Fisher, H., Lewis, G., & Zammit, S. (2014). Bullying in elementary school and psychotic experiences at 18 years: A longitudinal, population-based cohort study. Psychological Medicine, 44(10, 2199-2211. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291713002912

Ybarra, M. L., & Mitchell, K. L. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors, and targets: A comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(7), 1308-1316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00328.x

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.

Developed By

Information.

For Readers
For Authors
For Librarians

Committee for Children Blog

When bullying is racially motivated: recognizing it for what it is and supporting kids to be anti-racist upstanders.

On bus, young girl consoles her sad friend.

By Deborah Rivas-Drake, University of Michigan

All forms of bullying harm kids, but biased-based harassment—when the underlying cause or motivation is prejudice—causes specific, increased harm. 1 , 2 Racially motivated harassment and bullying manifest in numerous ways, from verbal insults to physical injury. As we see with Kid Kinder ® in the 2020 Captain Compassion ® comics series, a simple clothing choice can elicit racist comments, so-called “jokes,” 3 and worse. It’s difficult to imagine a white 11-year-old being called a thug just because they’re wearing a hoodie.

For children of color, these experiences are far too common. And, given the amount of time youth spend in school, school is where they’ll often encounter racial bullying. It’s important to note that Black children, in particular, bear the disproportionate burden of racially motivated peer harassment in school. According to the most recently available US Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights data, in the 2015–2016 school year, Black children comprised about 15 percent of the US public school population but 35.5 percent of those who reported being harassed or bullied on the basis of race, color, or national origin; a similar disproportionality can also be observed among American Indian and Alaska Native youth, who are represented among those racially bullied or harassed at a rate twice that of their presence in the overall student population. 4

Psychologist Brendesha Tynes, a pioneer in kids’ experiences of online racism, 5 found that youth of color, especially Black youth, encounter many of the same verbal taunts and harassment in virtual spaces as they do in brick-and-mortar settings. Kid Kinder’s experiences in the video game—repeated insults and invalidation by Antagotron—are a type of racial harassment. One of the most common stereotypes Black youth encounter online and offline is one of criminality, as when Antagotron refers to Kid Kinder as a “thug.” Tynes and her colleagues have shown that youth are also exposed to explicit imagery and overt assaults, such as derogatory language. All of these racial harassment experiences cause trauma and affect youth long after they’re initially exposed. 6

Why It Matters: Effects on Youths’ Mental, Physical, and Academic Health

Bullying behaviors motivated by racial bias harm the physical, psychological, and academic health of their victims. Race-based harassment and bullying places youth of color at greater risk for depression, substance use, and truancy. 7 Kids who are the victims of peers’ bias-based language—such as being called names—are four times as likely as those who don’t have this experience to feel sad, and about three times as likely to lose friends and avoid school and activities. 8

Helping Our Kids Be Anti-Racist Upstanders

Parents and educators: Now is the time to help support the development of anti-racist upstanding skills in our youth.

In supporting our kids, the first step is for them and for us to recognize racism for what it is. We must believe kids when they share their racist encounters—whether they happen online or in person. We must also attend to the complex emotions left in the wake of such encounters. 9

Some bystanders, like Zoey in the Captain Compassion comics, will recognize racial bullying right away as a manifestation of racism. But other bystanders won’t, as we see with Ari in the comics. So, a critical step toward anti-racist upstanding is teaching young people that racially motivated bullying is a way that racism is showing up in a particular space. 10 If they don’t have them already, we want to give our kids the language and tools to deal with racism. We need to impart the clear understanding that racial bullying is not just a joke or merely unkind, but rather that the ultimate goal of these behaviors is to subordinate Black, Indigenous, and other people of color, as the case may be.

Kids who are learning about this secondhand or who witness it indirectly, such as Zoey and Ari, may be sad or angry that their friends have been hurt in this way. Developmental psychologist Josefina Bañales and her colleagues have shown that youths’ feelings of anger about injustice can be an important step on the path to anti-racist behaviors such as challenging a peer who makes a racial joke or uses a racial slur. 11

A critical next step is to catalyze these emotions about injustice into action. Youth have the power to stand up to racism as it manifests among their peers. As adults, it’s our collective responsibility to model this upstanding behavior and guide young people as they stand up to racism. Here are some key actions you can help youth be prepared to take, depending on the circumstances:

Ask the victim if they’re okay and how you can help
Avoid becoming part of the bully’s audience in the moment by not laughing at racist “jokes” or teasing
Report the harassment to an adult, and let the victim know you’re someone they can tell about future bullying
Tell the bully or harasser to stop their behavior
Tell the bully that their racist comment or behavior is not acceptable
Disengage the bully by leaving the space—virtual or in-person—with the victim

There’s a long road ahead of us, but together, we have the power to stand against racially motivated bullying. Learn more about how you can get started at CaptainCompassion.org .

1 Russell, S. T., Sinclair, K. O., Poteat, V. P., & Koenig, B. W. (2012). Adolescent health and harassment based on discriminatory bias. American Journal of Public Health, 102 (3), 493–495. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2011.300430

2 Mulvey, K. L., Hoffman, A. J., Gönültaş, S., Hope, E. C., & Cooper, S. M. (2018). Understanding experiences with bullying and bias-based bullying: What matters and for whom? Psychology of Violence, 8 (6), 702–711. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000206

3 Douglass, S., Mirpuri, S., English, D., & Yip, T. (2016). “They were just making jokes”: Ethnic/racial teasing and discrimination among adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 22 (1), 69–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000041

4 U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. (2018). 2015–2016 civil rights data collection: School climate and safety. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/school-climateand-safety.pdf

5 Tynes, B. M., Lozada, F. T., Smith, N. A., & Stewart, A. M. (2018). From racial microaggressions to hate crimes: A model of online racism based on the lived experiences of adolescents of color. In G. C. Torino, D. P. Rivera, C. M. Capodilupo, K. L. Nadal, & D. W. Sue (Eds.), Microaggression theory: Influence and implications. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119466642.ch12

6 Tynes, B. M., Willis, H. A., Steward, A. M., & Hamilton, M. W. (2019). Race-related traumatic events online and mental health among adolescents of color. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65 (3), 371–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.03.006

7 Russell, S. T., Sinclair, K. O., Poteat, V. P., & Koenig, B. W. (2012). Adolescent health and harassment based on discriminatory bias. American Journal of Public Health , 102 (3), 493–495. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2011.300430

8 Jones, L. M., Mitchell, K. J., Turner, H. A., & Ybarra, M. L. (2018). Characteristics of bias-based harassment incidents reported by a national sample of U.S. adolescents. Journal of Adolescence , 65 , 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.02.013

9 Anderson, R. E., & Stevenson, H. C. (2019). RECASTing racial stress and trauma: Theorizing the healing potential of racial socialization in families. American Psychologist, 74 (1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000392

10 Aldana, A., Bañales, J., & Richards-Schuster, K. (2019). Youth anti-racist engagement: Conceptualization, development, and validation of an anti-racism action scale. Adolescent Research Review , 4 , 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-019-00113-1

11 Bañales, J., Aldana, A., Richards-Schuster, K., Flanagan, C. A., Diemer, M. A., & Rowley, S. J. (2019). Youth anti‐racism action: Contributions of youth perceptions of school racial messages and critical consciousness. Journal of Community Psychology . https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22266

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS

A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Research Resources

Consequences of Bullying

It is important for parents and people who work with children and adolescents to understand that bullying can have both short- and long-term effects on everyone involved. While most research on bullying has been about children and adolescents who have been bullied, those who bully others are also negatively impacted, as are those who are both bullied and bully others, and even those who are not directly involved but witness bullying.

Children Who Have Been Bullied

Research has found that children and adolescents who have been bullied can experience negative psychological, physical, and academic effects.

Psychological Effects

The psychological effects of bullying include depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, self-harming behavior (especially for girls), alcohol and drug use and dependence, aggression, and involvement in violence or crime (especially for boys). While bullying can lead to mental health problems for any child, those who already have mental health difficulties are even more likely to be bullied and to experience its negative effects.

Cyberbullying – bullying that happens with computers or mobile devices – has also been linked to mental health problems. Compared with peers who were not cyberbullied, children who were cyberbullied report higher levels of depression and thoughts of suicide, as well as greater emotional distress, hostility, and delinquency.

Physical Effects

Bullying and Suicide

Bullying is a risk factor for depression and thinking about suicide. Children who bully others, are bullied, or both bully and are bullied are more likely to think about or attempt suicide than those who are not involved in bullying at all.

The physical effects of bullying can be obvious and immediate, such as being injured from a physical attack. However, the ongoing stress and trauma of being bullied can also lead to physical problems over time. A child who is bullied could develop sleep disorders - such as difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep - stomachaches, headaches, heart palpitations, dizziness, bedwetting, and chronic pain and somatization (i.e., a syndrome of distressful, physical symptoms that cannot be explained by a medical cause).

Being bullied also increases cortisol levels – a stress hormone – in the body, which typically happens after a stressful event. Stress from bullying can impact the immune system and hormones. Imaging studies show that brain activity and functioning can be affected by bullying, which may help explain the behavior of children who have been bullied.

Academic Effects

Research has consistently shown that bullying can have a negative impact on how well children and adolescents do in school. It has a negative impact on both grades and standardized test scores starting as early as kindergarten and continuing through high school.

Children Who Bully and Those Who Witness Bullying

Very little research has been done to understand the effects of bullying on children who bully, and those who witness bullying (e.g., bystanders). More research is needed to understand the consequences of bullying on the individuals who bully others, particularly to understand the differences between those who are generally aggressive and those who bully others.

Studies of children who witness bullying usually focus on their role in the bullying situation (e.g., if they backed up the child who bullied, or defended the victim) and why they did or did not intervene. While studies rarely assess the effects of bullying exposure on the witness, some research has found that bullying witnesses experience anxiety and insecurity based on their own fears of retaliation.

Children Who Bully and Are Also Bullied

Children and adolescents who bully others and who are also bullied are at the greatest risk for negative mental and physical health consequences, compared to those who only bully or are only being bullied. These children and adolescents may experience a combination of psychological problems, a negative perception of themselves and others, poor social skills, conduct problems, and rejection by their peer group.

Compared with non-involved peers, those who have bullied others and have also been bullied have been found to be at increased risk for serious mental illness, be at high risk for thinking about and attempting suicide, and demonstrate heightened aggression.

Exposure to bullying in any manner – by being bullied, bullying others, or witnessing peers being bullied – has long-term, negative effects on children. The School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey found that in 2015, about 21 percent of students ages 12-18 reported being bullied at school during the school year. Given the prevalence of youth exposed to bullying across the nation, it is important to understand the consequences of bullying on children and adolescents, how it relates to other violent behaviors and mental health challenges, in order to effectively address them.

Download PDF

Source and Research Limitations

The information discussed in this fact sheet is based on the comprehensive review of bullying research presented in the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s report entitled Preventing Bullying Through Science, Policy, and Practice .

This report includes the most up to date research on bullying, but it is important to note that this research has several important limitations. Most of the research is cross-sectional, which means it took place at one point in time. This type of research shows us what things are related to each other at that time, but cannot tell us which thing came first or if one of those things caused the other to occur.

Conclusion: Implications and Addressing School Bullying and Inequality

First Online: 22 December 2020

Cite this chapter

Anthony A. Peguero ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4541-865X 4 &
Jun Sung Hong ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2816-9900 5

Part of the book series: Springer Series on Child and Family Studies ((SSCFS))

1494 Accesses

In the concluding Chap. 9 , we discuss why ameliorating violence and victimization should be a priority. Of course, addressing bullying victimization that occurs within schools for all youth is paramount toward sustaining a system that is supposed to facilitate educational progress and sustainability. There is a persistent history of disparities linked to socioeconomic and social status, family cohesion and interactions, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression, race, ethnicity, immigration, and religion, and disabilities and special health needs in the U.S. school system. The social problem of bullying within U.S. schools is both complex and diverse. It is clear that the sources and factors associated with the vulnerability and marginalization of youth to being victimized at school presented in this book also intersect. Although homes, schools, and neighborhoods may never be completely bully-free environments, there are several ways to assist students in breaking the bullying and peer victimization cycles. The information presented in this book is also one calling for advocacy, which will suggest that if policymakers, school administrators, and community stakeholders are seeking to address and ameliorate bullying within schools, it is vital to consider the significance of various forms of social inequality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime
Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info
Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Espelage, D. L. (2016). Sexual orientation and gender identity in schools: A call for more research in school psychology—No more excuses. Journal of School Psychology, 54 , 5–8.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Birkett, M., Espelage, D. L., & Koenig, B. (2009). LGB and questioning students in schools: The moderating effects of homophobic bullying and school climate on negative outcomes. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38 (7), 989–1000.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Kahle, L. (2017). Are sexual minorities more at risk? Bullying victimization among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and questioning youth. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 0886260517718830.

Google Scholar

Kahle, L. (2018). Feminist and queer criminology: A vital place for theorizing LGBTQ youth. Sociology Compass, 12 (3), e12564.

Article Google Scholar

Pascoe, C. J. (2011). Dude, you’re a fag: Masculinity and sexuality in high school . University of California Press.

Meyer, E. (2008). A feminist reframing of bullying and harassment: Transforming schools through critical pedagogy. McGill Journal of Education/Revue des sciences de l’éducation de McGill, 43 (1), 33–48.

Peguero, A. A., & Bondy, J. M. (2020). The importance of immigration with future research about school safety. Race and Justice, 10 (3), 247–268.

Schwartz, A. E., Stiefel, L., & Rothbart, M. W. (2016). Do top dogs rule in middle school? Evidence on bullying, safety, and belonging. American Educational Research Journal, 53 (5), 1450–1484.

Zembylas, M. (2010). Teachers’ emotional experiences of growing diversity and multiculturalism in schools and the prospects of an ethic of discomfort. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 16 (6), 703–716.

Zembylas, M. (2012). Transnationalism, migration and emotions: Implications for education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 10 (2), 163–179.

Espelage, D. L. (2014). Ecological theory: Preventing youth bullying, aggression, and victimization. Theory Into Practice, 53 (4), 257–264.

Gonzales, R. G. (2015). Lives in limbo: Undocumented and coming of age in America . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Book Google Scholar

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Vintage.

Simon, J. (2007). Governing through crime: How the war on crime transformed American democracy and created a culture of fear . Oxford University Press.

Crenshaw, K., Ocen, P., & Nanda, J. (2015). Black girls matter: Pushed out, overpoliced, and underprotected . New York, NY: Center for Intersectionality and Social Policy Studies, Columbia University.

Morris, M. (2016). Pushout: The criminalization of black girls in schools . New York: The New Press.

Portillos, E. L., González, J. C., & Peguero, A. A. (2012). Crime control strategies in school: Chicanas’/os’ perceptions and criminalization. The Urban Review, 44 (2), 171–188.

Rios, V. M. (2011). Punished: Policing the lives of black and Latino boys . NYU Press.

Rios, V. M. (2017). Human targets: Schools, police, and the criminalization of Latino youth . University of Chicago Press.

Noguera, P. A. (2009). The trouble with black boys:... And other reflections on race, equity, and the future of public education . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Peguero, A. A., & Shekarkhar, Z. (2011). Latino/a student misbehavior and school punishment. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 33 (1), 54–70.

Muschert, G. W., & Peguero, A. A. (2010). The Columbine effect and school anti-violence policy. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 17 , 117–148.

Kupchik, A. (2010). Homeroom security: School discipline in an age of fear . New York: NYU Press.

Addington, L. A. (2009). Cops and cameras: Public school security as a policy response to Columbine. American Behavioral Scientist, 52 (10), 1426–1446.

Muschert, G. W., Henry, S., Bracy, N. L., & Peguero, A. A. (2013). Responding to school violence: Confronting the Columbine effect . Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Bradshaw, C. P. (2013). Preventing bullying through positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS): A multitiered approach to prevention and integration. Theory Into Practice, 52 (4), 288–295.

Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Bevans, K. B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23 (4), 462.

Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Thornton, L. A., & Leaf, P. J. (2009). Altering school climate through school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports: Findings from a group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10 (2), 100.

Simonsen, B., Sugai, G., & Negron, M. (2008). Schoolwide positive behavior supports: Primary systems and practices. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40 (6), 32–40.

Sprague, J. R., & Golly, A. (2005). Best behavior: Building positive behavior support in schools . Longmont, CO: Sopris-West.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2010). School-wide positive behavior support: Establishing a continuum of evidence based practices. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 11 (1), 62–83.

Peguero, A. A., & Bondy, J. M. (2015). Schools, justice, and immigrant students: Segmented assimilation, race, ethnicity, gender, and perceptions of fairness and order. Teachers College Record, 117 (7), n7.

Peguero, A. A., Bondy, J. M., & Shekarkhar, Z. (2017). Punishing Latina/o youth: School justice, fairness, order, dropping out, and gender disparities. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 39 (1), 98–125.

Shedd, C. (2015). Unequal city: Race, schools, and perceptions of injustice . Russell Sage Foundation.

Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). Schools and delinquency . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gottfredson, D. C. (2017). Prevention research in schools: Past, present, and future. Criminology & Public Policy, 16 (1), 7–27.

Gottfredson, G. D., Gottfredson, D. C., Payne, A. A., & Gottfredson, N. C. (2005). School climate predictors of school disorder: Results from a national study of delinquency prevention in schools. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 42 (4), 412–444.

Payne, A. A. (2004). School community and disorder: Communal schools, student bonding, delinquency, and victimization . El Paso, TX: LFB Scholarly Publishing.

Payne, A. A. (2008). A multilevel analysis of the relationships among communal school organization, student bonding, and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 45 (4), 429–455.

Payne, A. A., Gottfredson, D. C., & Gottfredson, G. D. (2003). Schools as communities: The relationships among communal school organization, student bonding, and school disorder. Criminology, 41 (3), 749–778.

Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid schooling in America . Broadway Books.

Kozol, J. (2012). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools . Broadway Books.

Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life . Univ of California Press.

Lewis, A. E. (2003). Race in the schoolyard: Reproducing the color line in school 2003b New Brunswick . New Brunzwick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Lewis, A. E., & Diamond, J. B. (2017). Despite the best intentions: How racial inequality thrives in good schools . Oxford University Press.

Kao, G., Vaquera, E., & Goyette, K. (2013). Education and immigration . John Wiley & Sons.

Lee, S. J. (2009). Unraveling the" model minority" stereotype: Listening to Asian American youth . New York: Teachers College Press.

Lee, J., & Zhou, M. (2015). The Asian American achievement paradox . New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Peguero, A. A. (2008). Is immigrant status relevant in school violence research? An analysis with Latino students. Journal of School Health, 78 (7), 397–404.

Peguero, A. A. (2009). Victimizing the children of immigrants: Latino and Asian American student victimization. Youth & Society, 41 (2), 186–208.

Peguero, A. A. (2013). An adolescent victimization immigrant paradox? School-based routines, lifestyles, and victimization across immigration generations. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42 (11), 1759–1773.

Peguero, A. A. (2008). Bullying victimization and extracurricular activity. Journal of School Violence, 7 (3), 71–85.

Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S. M. (2010). Bullying in North American schools . Routledge.

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

Olweus, D., Limber, S., & Mihalic, S. (1999). Bullying prevention program: Blueprints for violence prevention, book nine . Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence.

Farrington, D. P., & Ttofi, M. M. (2009). School-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization. Campbell systematic reviews, 5 (1), i–148.

Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2011). Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7 (1), 27–56.

Mishna, F. (2008). An overview of the evidence on bullying prevention and intervention programs. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 8 (4), 327.

Hong, J. S. (2009). Feasibility of the Olweus bullying prevention program in low-income schools. Journal of School Violence, 8 (1), 81–97.

Peguero, A. A. (2012). Schools, bullying, and inequality: Intersecting factors and complexities with the stratification of youth victimization at school. Sociology Compass, 6 (5), 402–412.

Safran, E. R. (2007). Bullying behavior, bully prevention programs, and gender. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 7 (4), 43–67.

Vaillancourt, T., McDougall, P., Hymel, S., Krygsman, A., Miller, J., Stiver, K., & Davis, C. (2008). Bullying: Are researchers and children/youth talking about the same thing? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 32 (6), 486–495.

Gonzalez, T. (2012). Keeping kids in schools: Restorative justice, punitive discipline, and the school to prison pipeline. JL & Educ., 41 , 281.

Lockhart, A., Zammit, L., Charboneau, R., Owens, R., & Ross, R. (2005). Restorative justice: Transforming society . Inclusion Press.

Stinchcomb, J. B., Bazemore, G., & Riestenberg, N. (2006). Beyond zero tolerance: Restoring justice in secondary schools. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4 (2), 123–147.

Pavelka, S. (2013). Practices and policies for implementing restorative justice within schools. The Prevention Researcher, 20 (1), 15–18.

Morrison, B. E., & Vaandering, D. (2012). Restorative justice: Pedagogy, praxis, and discipline. Journal of School Violence, 11 (2), 138–155.

Payne, A. A., & Welch, K. (2013). Restorative justice in schools: The influence of race on restorative discipline. Youth & Society, 47 (4), 539–564.

Miller, H. V., Ripepi, M., Ernstes, A. M., & Peguero, A. A. (2020). Immigration policy and justice in the era of COVID-19. American Journal of Criminal Justice , 1–17.

Viner, R. M., Russell, S. J., Croker, H., Packer, J., Ward, J., Stansfield, C., Booy, R. et al. (2020). School closure and management practices during coronavirus outbreaks including COVID-19: A rapid systematic review. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health 4 .

Tessler, H., Choi, M., & Kao, G. (2020). The anxiety of being Asian American: Hate crimes and negative biases during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Journal of Criminal Justice , 1–11.

Taylor, K.-Y. (2016). From #BlackLivesMatter to black liberation . Haymarket Books.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

Anthony A. Peguero

School of Social Work, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA

Jun Sung Hong

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Peguero, A.A., Hong, J.S. (2020). Conclusion: Implications and Addressing School Bullying and Inequality. In: School Bullying. Springer Series on Child and Family Studies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64367-6_9

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64367-6_9

Published : 22 December 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-64366-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-64367-6

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Free Samples
Premium Essays
Editing Services Editing Proofreading Rewriting
Extra Tools Essay Topic Generator Thesis Generator Citation Generator GPA Calculator Study Guides Donate Paper
Essay Writing Help
About Us About Us Testimonials FAQ
Studentshare
Social science
Bullying and Discrimination in School

Bullying and Discrimination in School - Essay Example

Subject: Social science
Type: Essay
Level: Undergraduate
Pages: 8 (2000 words)
Downloads: 0

Extract of sample "Bullying and Discrimination in School"

Whether schools should create and enforces guidelines to protect individuals from bullying and discrimination

Bullying refers to the unwanted or aggressive and overpowering behavior, the use of threat, or force to dominate others or demand one's request, especially to those who are perceived as vulnerable. For a long time, there have been reported cases of bullying in schools through repeated verbal, physical, social, and psychological harm. Bullying can involve an individual, while in others, it could be a group. According to statistics, bullying off any form has the potential to have immediate short term, medium, or long term effects on those that are involved (Schott and Søndergaard,21). Discrimination, on the other hand, is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people commonly based on factors such as race, age, or gender, among other characteristics. Nevertheless, there have been numerous campaigns set up to eradicate all forms of discrimination and bullying, especially those that happen or occur in schools.

Bullying and discrimination have been ongoing for a long time in schools across all states. An average of 3.2 million students are bullied each year. With the numbers of reported cases of bullied students committing suicide, it seems like a grave matter which needs immediate attention and focuses on how it can be eradicated with the aim of reducing school violence Most of the instances have been proven to occur in certain designated areas such as the bathrooms, bus parks, and hallways. Such behaviors and experiences have adverse negative repercussions on individuals who go through these experiences. Bullying and discrimination in school can sometimes be well calculated and thought out, where students use the vulnerability of others to threaten, tease, or abuse them. As a result, occurrences of bullying and discrimination have become a serious issue which needs to be addressed promptly (Shore, 2).

Both discrimination and bullying behaviors have been evolving over time. There have been different forms of bullying that is direct and indirect methods. Direct methods include physical hitting, threatening, teasing among others while indirect methods include social isolation and spreading of rumors (Goodstein, 12). Some of the instances of bullying and discrimination include name-calling which is intended to humiliate and lower the self-esteem of the victims. Another form is physical manipulating which is inflicted on the victims including theft of the victim’s belongings and causing injuries. Either way, all these instances are still termed as exclusive bullying. Discrimination is majorly directed to students of different races and ethnicities and those students with disabilities. Most of the victims of bullying and discrimination tend to share some common characteristics such as anxiety, vulnerability, having insecurities, very cautious and tend to have very low self-esteem. Thus, it is important for the school administrations to set up measures that can be used to identify booth the bullies and victims of discrimination and bullying.

With the apparent global evolution of technology, cyberbullying has been on the rise and even harder to fight because of the animosity of the bullies. It has recently been termed as the most commonly used form of bullying in schools today. Cyber bullying uses the apparent changes in technology such as text messages, emails, posts on websites and other social media platforms such as instagram and twitter to either bully or discriminate the victims(Goodstein, 11). The continuous use of information and technology has created a technological world, one which has become threatening and unsafe and an environment of anxiety amongst all students in schools. However, it must be noted, this form of bullying is harder to control by the school because it frequent occurs off school property. In some instances, victims of cyber bullying have succumbed to depression while in some instances they have been driven to commit suicide. It is through the available technologies that the bullies have been able to hide away behind screens. Despite of all these issues, it is the responsibility of schools and parents to establish strategies and programs that will attempt to teach students not to cyber bully other students. However, for the learning to be effective, both teachers and schools should ensure that there is minimal or no needless and unpleasant confrontation or encounter.

For as long as the school system has been in existence, there have been multiple if not several instances of discrimination in schools occurring in one form or another. Many students have been discriminated because of the socio-economic status, race among other factors (Orfield and Ayscue, 20). Fact is that, it is not only student who discriminate against each other but also school officials such as teachers, administrators and faculty members who have been responsible for furling the discrimination in schools. The main question is, who should be held responsible or accountable of matters encompassing discrimination in schools? My response is that everyone should be held accountable for their actions or words which promote discrimination. There have been several reported cases of blocked opportunities for students of certain races or social and economic backgrounds("How Teachers Contribute to a Bullying Culture", 73). For example, African American and Hispanic students have been majorly affected by a form of discrimination referred to as tracking. Tracking involves separating students based on their intellectual abilities. This form of discrimination has proven to place majority of the students who are economically disadvantaged to be at the risk of not receiving quality education (Orfield and Ayscue, 22).

Bullying and discrimination have now been recognized as a widespread and neglected problem all around the globe. Both bullying and discrimination have implications and the apparent sever consequences for students who initiate the bullying and their victims. According to a recent study, an average of 60% of students that were bullies over grade 6-9 got to be convicted of crimes by the age of 24.Bullies have a tendency to demand power and have control over their victims and have no remorse whatsoever when inflicting pain and suffering to the victims(Goodstein, 14). For most bullies, they seem to exhibit very high self-esteem and minimal anxiety. These characteristics have been observed on students who come from homes which may practice physical punishment. Because the victims of bullying and discrimination are often perceived to be weak, in most instances, they are socially isolated while many struggle with grasping fundamental skills and have a hard time making and keeping friends. Some argue that bullying is part and parcel of life as it aids in the individual standing up for themselves, however, I do not agree because while others may be able to stand up for themselves there are those that just crumble down with insecurities and become reclusive individuals all their life, a matter which can be avoided or prevented through strong guidelines.

In order to provide students with a healthy education environment free of bullying, we need to establish and enforce guidelines which will protect students from bullying and discrimination. These students suffer from depression and anxiety, changes in sleeping and eating patterns. Moreover, some parents have reported cases of their children losing interest in things that they previously enjoyed doing and a decrease in academic achievement. Educators and the school administrators need to be hands on this matter because they have a big role to play in inhibiting the violent behavior of bullying and discrimination in the schools. It is their principle responsibility to make sure that the school environment creates a nonviolent haven free from discrimination and bullying activities. However, for them to manage this, they need to be conscious of the reality of the problem so as to cultivate measures to intervene. This should begin from the classroom because teachers have a more one on one interaction with the students who could be bullies or rather the victims. This can assist in the detection of bullying practices and thus encourage the victims and bystanders to report these cases to the school. Whatever interventions are established, they need to be inclusive all students without necessarily being an intimidation to either the victims or the bullies. Moreover, for a further increase in awareness of the problem to the parents, the school administrators should develop parent teacher days to make the parents aware of the problem’s existence and the importance of the parents to get involved in the whole process.

Preventing and putting an end to bullying and discrimination requires a lot of commitment. Not only is the school guidelines important but also the s students and parents intervention to curb matters of discrimination and bullying. It is also essential that schools have professionals with the capacity to promote a positive force that can be used to stop or reduce any occurrence of school violence amongst the students. In addition to this, schools should also set aside a part of the curriculum that is aimed at teaching students bullying and discrimination language amongst themselves and their peers. Teaching positive communication skills will also create a more positive environment that does not support these acts. The school administration needs also establish a system of reporting (if possible, unanimously) so that students affected or by standers can feel open to report these cases. A follow up of the students and their families is essential to come up with solutions of how best to handle these matters. Educators can also take maters in their own hands by having discussions the motivations and effects of bullying and discrimination as a way of sensitizing students on the importance of promoting self-awareness.

To further promote and strengthen guidelines that protect the individuals from bullying and discrimination, it is upon the school to set and make known to the students the strong repercussions for those found committing these acts. Bullying and discrimination should be treated as illegal offences, therefore, there should be zero tolerance for such kind of behaviors in the school environment. While the above long-term solutions may offer a bit of consolation, they may not entirely instill good behavior on students that commit these acts. This is why it is essential that school authorities demonstrate the importance of protecting the students against acts of bullying and discrimination. Both educators and coaches need to explicitly remind the students that behaviors regarding bullying and discrimination of other students will result to harsh consequences(Rose and Pierce, 67). Moreover, parents need to develop and set boundaries with technological devices. This will offer immense help in filtering the kind of information that students are exposed to or interact with an aim of reducing cyber bullying. Both teachers and parents need to model as positive examples and portray the importance of having positive relationships with their peers.

In conclusion, bullying and discrimination are part of the society’s inception and for this reason, they may not be easily eradicated. However, through the joint efforts of the school, parents and students it possible to create a much more positive and healthier environment for students to interact and learn. There exists no clear framework or strategies that will curb these problems directly or prevent them from ever taking place. However, having the ability to note, deal with or offer long-term solutions of acts of bullying and discrimination is the best shot of minimizing the chances of these problems reoccurring in education institutions. All parties including the students should be involved when creating these guidelines as this will give the students the mandate and role which will assist them in setting an environment which allows them to feel safe and own their personal climate of respect and responsibility for each other. However, it must be noted that these actions will all be in vain if they are not properly reinforced at home level by both parents and the guardians of the students. In addition to this, for schools to further enforce these guidelines aimed at protecting the students from discrimination and bullying, they need to ensure that the schools’ policies, rules and regulation remain consistent with those of the state laws and school districts policies. These laws will place more responsibility on schools and hand them the authority that they need to stop and deal with these instances. Remaining vigilant to curbing these acts of discrimination and bullying will definitely minimize any chances of them occurring within the school environments. Thus it is therefore very important that schools create and enforces guidelines to protect individuals from bullying and discrimination before they evolve to be uncontrollable.

Cited: 0 times
Copy Citation Citation is copied Copy Citation Citation is copied Copy Citation Citation is copied

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Bullying and Discrimination in School

Workplace discriminations, sociology - prejudice and descrimination, how to reduce bullying in schools, conceptual limitations of school violence, increasing bullying cases, equality and diversity in the primary school in wales, an evaluation of means of combatting bullying in the uk school, discrimination and anti-oppressive practice in youth work practice.

TERMS & CONDITIONS
PRIVACY POLICY
COOKIES POLICY

What you need to know about school violence and bullying

Bullying in schools deprives millions of children and young people of their fundamental right to education. A recent UNESCO report revealed that more than 30% of the world's students have been victims of bullying, with devastating consequences on academic achievement, school dropout, and physical and mental health.

The world is marking the first International Day against Violence and Bullying at School Including Cyberbullying , on 5 November. Here is what you need to know about school violence and bullying.

What is school violence?

School violence refers to all forms of violence that takes place in and around schools and is experienced by students and perpetrated by other students, teachers and other school staff. This includes bullying and cyberbullying. Bullying is one of the most pervasive forms of school violence, affecting 1 in 3 young people.

What forms may school violence take?

Based on existing international surveys that collect data on violence in schools, UNESCO recognizes the following forms of school violence:

Physical violence, which is any form of physical aggression with intention to hurt perpetrated by peers, teachers or school staff.
Psychological violence as verbal and emotional abuse, which includes any forms of isolating, rejecting, ignoring, insults, spreading rumors, making up lies, name-calling, ridicule, humiliation and threats, and psychological punishment.
Sexual violence, which includes intimidation of a sexual nature, sexual harassment, unwanted touching, sexual coercion and rape, and it is perpetrated by a teacher, school staff or a schoolmate or classmate.
Physical bullying, including hitting, kicking and the destruction of property;
Psychological bullying, such as teasing, insulting and threatening; or relational, through the spreading of rumours and exclusion from a group; and
Sexual bullying, such as making fun of a victim with sexual jokes, comments or gestures, which may be defined as sexual ‘harassment’ in some countries.
Cyberbullying is a form of psychological or sexual bullying that takes place online. Examples of cyberbullying include posting or sending messages, pictures or videos, aimed at harassing, threatening or targeting another person via a variety of media and social media platforms. Cyberbullying may also include spreading rumours, posting false information, hurtful messages, embarrassing comments or photos, or excluding someone from online networks or other communications.

Who perpetrates school violence?

School violence is perpetrated by students, teachers and other school staff. However, available evidence shows that violence perpetrated by peers is the most common.

What are the main reasons why children are bullied?

All children can be bullied, yet evidence shows that children who are perceived to be “different” in any way are more at risk. Key factors include physical appearance, ethnic, linguistic or cultural background, gender, including not conforming to gender norms and stereotypes; social status and disability.

What are the consequences of school violence?

Educational consequences: Being bullied undermines the sense of belonging at school and affects continued engagement in education. Children who are frequently bullied are more likely to feel like an outsider at school, and more likely to want to leave school after finishing secondary education. Children who are bullied have lower academic achievements than those who are not frequently bullied.

Health consequences: Children’s mental health and well-being can be adversely impacted by bullying. Bullying is associated with higher rates of feeling lonely and suicidal, higher rates of smoking, alcohol and cannabis use and lower rates of self-reported life satisfaction and health. School violence can also cause physical injuries and harm.

What are the linkages between school violence and bullying, school-related gender-based violence and violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression?

School violence may be perpetrated as a result of gender norms and stereotypes and enforced by unequal power dynamics and is therefore referred to as school-related gender-based violence. It includes, in particular, a specific type of gender-based violence that is linked to the actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity or expression of victims, including homophobic and transphobic bullying. School-related gender-based violence is a significant part of school violence that requires specific efforts to address.

Does school-related gender-based violence refer to sexual violence against girls only?

No. School-related gender-based violence refers to all forms of school violence that is based on or driven by gender norms and stereotypes, which also includes violence against and between boys.

Is school violence always gender-based?

There are many factors that drive school violence. Gender is one of the significant drivers of violence but not all school violence is based on gender. Moreover, international surveys do not systematically collect data on the gendered nature of school violence, nor on violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression.

Based on the analysis of global data, there are no major differences in the prevalence of bullying for boys and girls. However, there are some differences between boys and girls in terms of the types of bullying they experience. Boys are much more exposed to physical bullying, and to physical violence in general, than girls. Girls are slightly more exposed to psychological bullying, particularly through cyberbullying. According to the same data, sexual bullying the same proportion of boys and girls. Data coming from different countries, however, shows that girls are increasingly exposed to sexual bullying online.

How does UNESCO help prevent and address school violence and bullying?

The best available evidence shows that responses to school violence and bullying that are effective should be comprehensive and include a combination of policies and interventions. Often this comprehensive response to school violence and bullying is referred to as a whole-school approach. Based on an extensive review of existing conceptual frameworks that describe that whole-school approach, UNESCO has identified nine key components of a response that goes beyond schools and could be better described as a whole-education system or whole-education approach. These components are the following:

Strong political leadership and robust legal and policy framework to address school violence and bullying;
Training and support for teachers on school violence and bullying prevention and positive classroom management
Curriculum, learning & teaching to promote, a caring (i.e. anti- school violence and bullying) school climate and students’ social and emotional skills
A safe psychological and physical school and classroom environment
Reporting mechanisms for students affected by school violence and bullying, together with support and referral services
Involvement of all stakeholders in the school community including parents
Student empowerment and participation
Collaboration and partnerships between the education sector and a wide range of partners (other government sectors, NGOs, academia)
Evidence: monitoring of school violence and bullying and evaluation of responses

More on UNESCO’s work to prevent and address school violence and bullying

Read UNESCO's publication Behind the numbers: Ending school violence and bullying

Photo: Eakachai Leesin/Shutterstock.com

More on this subject

Language Technologies for All – LT4All 2025

How parents, teachers, and kids can take action to prevent bullying

Preventing and stopping bullying involves a commitment to creating a safe environment where children can thrive, socially and academically, without being afraid.

Schools and Classrooms

sad little girl being consoled by her father

Introduction

Bullying is aggressive behavior that is intentional and involves an imbalance of power or strength. It is a repeated behavior and can be physical, verbal, or relational. While boys may bully others using more physical means, girls often bully others by social exclusion. Bullying has been part of school, and even workplaces, for years. More recently, though, technology and social media have created a new venue for bullying that has expanded its reach. Cyberbullying is bullying that happens online and via cell phones. Websites like YouTube, Instagram, and Snapchat allow kids to send hurtful, ongoing messages to other children 24 hours a day. Some sites, such as Instagram, allow messages to be left anonymously.

Preventing and stopping bullying involves a commitment to creating a safe environment where children can thrive, socially and academically, without being afraid. APA recommends that teachers, parents, and students take the following actions to address bullying.

Teachers and school administrators

Be knowledgeable and observant, involve students and parents.

Students and parents need to be a part of the solution and involved in safety teams and antibullying task forces. Students can inform adults about what is really going on and also teach adults about new technologies that kids are using to bully. Parents, teachers, and school administrators can help students engage in positive behavior and teach them skills so that they know how to intervene when bullying occurs. Older students can serve as mentors and inform younger students about safe practices on the internet.

Set positive expectations about behavior for students and adults

Schools and classrooms must offer students a safe learning environment. Teachers and coaches need to explicitly remind students that bullying is not accepted in school and such behaviors will have consequences. Creating an antibullying document and having both the student and the parents/guardians sign and return it to the school office helps students understand the seriousness of bullying. Also, for students who have a hard time adjusting or finding friends, teachers and administrators can facilitate friendships or provide “jobs” for the student to do during lunch and recess so that children do not feel isolated or in danger of becoming targets for bullying.

Parents of kids being bullied

Observe your child for signs they might be being bullied, teach your child how to handle being bullied, set boundaries with technology.

Educate your children and yourself about cyberbullying and teach your children not to respond or forward threatening emails. “Friend” your child on Facebook and other social media platforms and set up proper filters on your child’s computer. Make the family computer the only computer for children, and have it in a public place in the home where it is visible and can be monitored. If you decide to give your child a cell phone think carefully before allowing them to have a camera option. Let them know you will be monitoring their text messages. As a parent, you can insist that phones are stored in a public area, such as the kitchen, by a certain time at night to eliminate nighttime bullying and inappropriate messaging. Parents should report bullying to the school, and follow up with a letter that is copied to the school superintendent if their initial inquiry receives no response.

Parents should report all threatening messages to the police and should document any text messages, emails, or posts on websites.

Parents of kids engaged in bullying

Stop bullying before it starts.

Educate your children about bullying. It is possible that your child is having trouble reading social signs and does not know what they are doing is hurtful. Remind your child that bullying others can have legal consequences.

Make your home “bully free”

Children learn behavior through their parents. Being exposed to aggressive behavior or an overly strict environment at home makes kids more prone to bully at school. Parents/caregivers should model positive examples for your child in your relationships with other people and with them.

Look for self esteem issues

Children with low self-esteem often bully to feel better about themselves. Even children who seem popular and well-liked can have mean tendencies. Mean behavior should be addressed by parents and disciplined.

Report bullying and cyberbullying

It is important for students to report any bullying to a parent or an adult they trust. Often kids don’t report cyberbullying because they fear their parents will take away their phone or computer. Parents will support their child’s reports of bullying and not take away their phones as a consequence. It is important for kids to remember that bullying is wrong and should be handled by an adult.

Don’t bully back

It may be difficult to not bully back, but as the saying goes, two wrongs don’t make a right. Try not to show anger or tears. Either calmly tell the bully to stop bullying or simply walk away.

Avoid being alone

Whenever possible, avoid situations where there are no other students or teachers. Try to go to the bathroom with a friend or eat lunch in a group. When riding the bus, sit near the front. If you know a student who likes to bully others is in an area where you normally walk to lunch or class, try to use alternative hallway routes.

Remember, report bullying of yourself or other students to your teacher, coach, principal, and/or parent.

Students who experience bullying may feel overwhelmed, depressed, or anxious. If your child or student is having trouble at school or with friends as a result of bullying, a mental health professional, such as a psychologist, can help your child develop resilience and confidence. This will enable your child to be more successful both socially and academically.

Additional resources

Net Cetera: Chatting with kids about being online
Stop Bullying Now Campaign
APA Q and A with Dr. Susan Swearer
Bullying Research Network

Special thanks to Rosalind Dorlen, PsyD, independent practice, New Jersey Elaine Ducharme, PhD, independent practice, Connecticut Susan M. Swearer, PhD, associate professor of school psychology and licensed psychologist; codirector, Nebraska Internship Consortium in Professional Psychology; and secretary, APA Division 16 (School Psychology)

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Government Equalities Office
Equality Hub
Department for Education

Evaluation of the government’s 2016 to 2019 anti-homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying programme in schools

Published 27 September 2024

Applies to England

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected] .

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/evaluation-of-the-governments-2016-to-2019-anti-homophobic-biphobic-and-transphobic-bullying-programme-in-schools/ef753220-9141-4f01-b167-00d35ab1ed3d

Disclaimer:

This research was commissioned under the 2016 to 2019 May Conservative Government and never published.

Owing to delays in publication, the content and language of the report does not reflect current government policy or the latest available evidence.

The views expressed in this report are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect those of the government. While the Equality Hub has made every effort to ensure the information in this document is accurate, they do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of that information.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all those who supported the evaluation, including all participants, the programme’s providers (Barnardo’s, the LGBT Consortium, METRO, the National Children’s Bureau, the Proud Trust, and Stonewall), staff from the Government Equalities Office, and colleagues at Sheffield Hallam University who supported the work.

Evaluation team

Project director: Eleanor Formby

Project managers: Claire Wolstenholme (qualitative lead), Martin Culliney (quantitative lead)

Lead statistician: Sean Demack

Fieldwork team: Claire Wolstenholme, Eleanor Formby, Bernadette Stiell

Administrators: Linda Bray, Louise Glossop, Judith Higginson

Executive summary

Introduction and evaluation methodology.

In 2016 the Government Equalities Office (GEO), which is now part of the Cabinet Office Equality Hub, funded a 3-year programme which aimed to:

help primary and secondary schools prevent and respond to homophobic, biphobic and transphobic (HBT) bullying
create inclusive school environments for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) pupils and their families

Six organisations were awarded funding to deliver staff training and other whole-school activities in some schools (Model 1), and staff training only in other schools (Model 2).

The 3 intended outcomes for the programme were for:

more schools to have policies and curricula embedded, which are targeted at preventing and tackling HBT bullying, and building inclusive LGBT environments
more teachers and non-teaching staff to report that they feel supported, confident and capable of preventing and tackling HBT bullying, and building more inclusive school environments
more pupils to report that they feel confident reporting HBT bullying, to feel more resilient towards bullying, and also feel their school is inclusive towards LGBT pupils and families

As part of the grant agreement, providers were asked to work with schools towards these outcomes and did not prescribe or endorse particular whole-school activities or policy changes as part of the programme.

The programme reached around 1,800 schools in 3 years, with each provider having a target to deliver to at least 200 schools.

The Centre for Development and Research in Education (CDARE) at Sheffield Hallam University (SHU) were commissioned to conduct an independent evaluation of the programme. The evaluation consisted of the following elements:

a scoping phase to gather plans from each provider for working with schools for both models.
baseline and follow-up surveys with staff (both models) and pupils (Model 1 only).
school case studies in 12 schools, involving interviews and focus groups with staff and pupils, in-site observation, and document review.
telephone interviews with 18 school programme leads (usually a member of the senior leadership team (SLT) or the Personal, Social, Health and Economic education (PSHE) lead in school).

More details about the methods used in the evaluation can be found in the Evaluation Methodology section.

This summary now presents findings from the evaluation. It begins by looking at the programme impacts for school policies and processes, school environments, support for LGBT pupils, learning about LGBT identities and HBT bullying in school, and staff confidence and capability. It finishes by presenting outcomes on HBT bullying occurrences, reporting and responses.

School policies and processes

The programme was associated with an increase in the proportion of school staff who were aware of an anti-bullying policy (from 61% to 82%) and a bullying recording system at their school that explicitly included HBT bullying (from 50% to 70%).

These findings were supported by qualitative evidence: the majority of interviewees had changed some of their school’s policies (or were planning to).

Supportive school policies were perceived to make staff feel more confident to address HBT bullying and include LGBT issues within the curriculum.

School environment

After the programme, more staff reported that their school actively tried to prevent HBT bullying (rising from 72% to 91%). Even greater change was observed on staff believing that their school actively tried to build an LGBT-inclusive environment (from 48% to 78%).

Primary school staff saw greater increases than secondary school staff regarding both HBT bullying prevention and LGBT inclusion.

Support for LGBT pupils

There was an increase in staff reporting that their school had a named member of staff responsible for LGBT matters or supporting LGBT pupils. The increase was larger for primary staff, though from a lower starting point.

Case study evidence highlighted that (secondary) school-based LGBT groups were appreciated by pupils where they were available, but there were issues about group set-up, privacy versus publicity, and whether staff should take a lead or supporting role.

Learning about LGBT identities and HBT bullying in school

At follow-up (3 to 6 months after delivery completion), more staff reported that LGB identities were included in most subject areas (from 4% to 13%). For trans identities, the rise was from 3% to 10%. The increase was greater at primary level than at secondary level.

There were also increases in schools including learning about HBT bullying in lessons. The proportion of staff reporting that homophobic or biphobic bullying was included went up from 6% to 12%. For transphobic bullying the increase was from 3% to 11%.

Evidence from case studies indicated that primary schools often taught about LGBT identities and relationships through the use of books, whereas secondary schools more often utilised assemblies, PSHE lessons and/or drop-down days. [footnote 1]

Teachers reported some concerns over teaching about LGBT identities and/or HBT bullying due to potential or actual parental opposition, though only a minority of schools experienced this. Those who reported concerns found the following useful in guiding their responses:

supportive school policies which increased staff confidence
training for governors
looking at policies from other schools
citing relevant legislation

Staff confidence and capability

At baseline, 78% of staff felt either ‘very’ or ‘quite’ able to respond to HBT bullying, compared to 91% at follow-up. Improvements were larger in primary schools than in secondaries.

Prior to the programme, 56% of staff felt ‘very’ or ‘quite’ able to include LGB identities and relationships in teaching, compared to 77% at follow-up. The proportion of staff who felt the same about including trans identities and relationships grew from 38% to 62% at follow-up.

Staff said that training had aided knowledge and confidence to include LGBT identities and relationships in teaching: staff viewed training and other support from providers overwhelmingly positively. Support that was tailored, ongoing, and focused on identities was particularly valued.

Occurrence of HBT bullying

Qualitative data from pupils illustrated examples of HBT bullying experienced and witnessed (mostly before, though also sometimes during, the programme), more often in secondary schools than in primary schools.

The school-level weighted percentage of staff who reported witnessing HBT bullying ‘less often than monthly’ or ‘never’ went up from 81% to 87%, but there was no evidence of change in the frequency of staff observing transphobic bullying.

It has not been possible to collect data from schools on the level of bullying before and after the programme. This is because not all schools had systems in place to record incidents of HBT bullying prior to the start of the programme. Furthermore, given the focus of the programme in improving the measurement and monitoring of HBT bullying, some schools only began measuring these incidents as part of the programme. As a result it is not possible to say whether the level of HBT bullying changed as a result of the programme. However, in absence of this data, the evaluation captured whether teachers agreed that HBT bullying had decreased since the programme.

Reporting and tackling HBT bullying

Staff reported little change in the frequency of them responding to, or witnessing other staff responding to, HBT bullying.

Within discussions with pupils, there were mixed experiences of how schools dealt with HBT bullying, with some feeling that not all staff challenged HBT bullying appropriately. Other pupils however were able to provide examples of more proactive responses.

Conclusions

This evaluation shows that, with support, schools can make significant steps towards HBT bullying prevention and LGBT inclusion. Evidence from the surveys, case studies, and telephone interviews demonstrates that staff confidence in responding to HBT bullying and including LGBT identities and relationships in teaching grew during the programme.

In general, improvements in programme outcomes were greater in primary than in secondary schools, though often from lower baselines. Given appropriate support, primary schools appeared to find it easier to implement change.

There were also more gains in Model 1 schools than in Model 2. This is not surprising given the greater level of support on offer to a greater number of people within Model 1 schools. The implication here is that greater levels of support, and/ or involving greater numbers of staff in that support, lead to greater levels of impact within schools.

From survey results, both primary and secondary school staff felt that their school now more proactively tried to prevent HBT bullying, and to a lesser extent, was a more LGBT-inclusive environment.

Despite the generally positive feedback from staff, pupils (more often at secondary level) were less certain about the effects of the programme, with calls for further work in the area from both LGBT and non-LGBT pupils, in order to make schools more LGBT-inclusive, and to tackle HBT bullying more successfully.

Once the programme had finished, confidence was higher among school staff in responding to HBT bullying than it was in including LGBT identities and relationships in teaching, suggesting that school staff feel more confident reacting to bullying than they do proactively trying to prevent bullying and/or increase LGBT inclusivity in lessons. Curriculum inclusion appeared to be the hardest element to implement in schools.

Overall, LGB identities and homophobic or biphobic bullying were more likely to be included in lessons than trans identities or transphobic/gender-identity based bullying.

Staff confidence appears key, both in terms of practical application and permission to do this work, for example knowing how to and that they can do this work. It was felt that appropriate support available to schools free of charge was important.

The programme was able to contribute to its intended outcomes of:

more schools having ‘policies and curricula embedded, which are targeted at preventing and tackling HBT bullying and building inclusive LGBT environments’
more teachers and non-teaching staff feeling ‘supported, confident and capable of preventing and tackling HBT bullying and building more inclusive school environments’

It is less clear, however, if the programme achieved its outcome of ‘pupils reporting that they feel:

more confident in reporting HBT bullying
more resilient towards bullying
that their school is inclusive towards LGBT pupils and families’

This is because it is harder to demonstrate a direct impact on pupil experiences, and ultimately impact on reducing HBT bullying, at least in the timeframe of this programme/evaluation.

Since the programme came to an end in March 2020, anti-HBT bullying policy has been passed to the Department for Education (DfE). The DfE will ensure any future anti-bullying interventions work for all pupils, including those vulnerable to bullying such as LGBT pupils, are a core feature to their 2021 to 2022 programmes. [footnote 2] The DfE continues to fund projects and programmes which tackle bullying, including HBT bullying.

1. Introduction

1.1 policy context.

In 2017, the National LGBT Survey asked respondents about their experiences in education. All respondents were asked whether sexual orientation and gender identity were discussed during their education, and how well they felt this prepared them for later life. If respondents were in education in the academic year preceding the survey, they were also asked about how open they were about their lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) status and any incidents they had experienced.

A number of respondents had experienced a negative incident during their time in education. The National LGBT Survey 2017 found many people had been ‘outed’ without their consent, or been victims of verbal harassment in education. In addition, very few respondents felt that their education had prepared them for life as an LGBT person. Some of the most important findings were:

In the academic year preceding the survey, 21% of respondents in education had experienced a negative reaction involving someone disclosing their LGBT identity without their permission, and 19% involving verbal harassment, insults or other hurtful comments.
21% of respondents recalled discussion of sexual orientation, gender identity, or both at school. Of those who did, only 9% felt this had prepared them well for later life as LGBT people.
83% of the most serious incidents experienced by respondents within educational institutions in the academic year preceding the survey were not reported, primarily because they considered them too minor, not serious enough or that they ‘happen all the time’.

The government in 2018 committed, in the LGBT Action Plan, to take a variety of actions so that the education system supports every young person. This included delivering the anti-homophobic, biphobic and transphobic (HBT) bullying programme to help LGBT young people feel their education is relevant to them, and to be able to participate fully in their education without fear of bullying or harassment.

1.2 The programme

In September 2016, the Government Equalities Office (GEO), which is now part of the Cabinet Office Equality Hub, launched the Anti-Homophobic, Biphobic and Transphobic (HBT) Bullying programme. The purpose of the programme, which built on a pilot phase that took place from 2015 to 2016, [footnote 3] was to reduce the incidence of HBT bullying in primary and secondary schools in England by transforming the culture of how schools prevent and respond to HBT bullying in a sustainable way. The fund had 3 main aims:

to prevent HBT bullying from happening in the first place
to effectively respond to HBT bullying when it does occur
to create an inclusive school environment for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) pupils and their families.

Providers were required to deliver 2 different models designed to achieve the programme aims, depending on the individual circumstances of schools:

A ‘whole-school approach’ to addressing HBT bullying, including:

supporting school senior leadership teams to make tailored changes to their policy and curricula
provision of training to staff
engaging pupils.

Targeted training for school staff, in order to build their confidence and capacity to prevent and respond to HBT bullying and build inclusive school environments. In some cases, this only involved one member of staff per school.

Three key intended outcomes for the anti-HBT bullying programme, were identified:

Outcome 1: More schools have policies and curricula embedded, which are targeted at preventing and tackling HBT bullying and building inclusive LGBT environments.
Outcome 2: More teachers and non-teaching staff report that they feel supported, confident and capable of preventing and tackling HBT bullying and building more inclusive school environments.
Outcome 3: More pupils report that they feel confident in reporting HBT bullying, feel more resilient towards bullying, and feel their school is inclusive towards LGBT pupils and families.

1.3 Providers

Six civil society organisations were awarded funding through open and competitive tender to deliver the programme:

Barnardo’s
the LGBT Consortium (comprising a network of partner organisations) [footnote 4]
the National Children’s Bureau
the Proud Trust

By the end of the programme in March 2019, providers had delivered to around 1,800 schools (with each provider having a target to deliver to at least 200 schools). Table 1 summarises the schools that were signed up within the period of eligibility for the evaluation.

Table 1: Number of schools per provider, delivery model and school phase, January 2018

Provider	Model 1	Model 2	Primary	Secondary	Total
Barnardo’s	44	145	118	71	189
LGBT	101	200	84	219	303
METRO	121	234	202	154	356
NCB	49	46	50	45	95
Proud	273	0	111	162	273
Stonewall	101	357	345	113	458
Total	689	982	910	764	1674

Source: Data supplied to SHU by GEO/providers. Model unknown for one school.

1.4 About this report

This report presents findings from the evaluation in a thematic structure. The evaluation examines programme outcomes within schools, not provider performance. Findings from the surveys, case studies and telephone interviews are integrated in each chapter. Readers with an interest in particular programme areas can read the relevant sections as standalone documents, though cross-referencing between the different sections is used where it is important to draw connections between related programme outcomes. The report mirrors the structure of the surveys: it begins with school policies and processes (Chapter 3), school environments (Chapter 4) and Support for LGBT pupils (Chapter 5). It then turns to learning about LGBT identities and HBT bullying in school (Chapter 6) and staff confidence and capability (Chapter 7). Finally, it addresses the occurrence of HBT bullying in Chapter 8, and the reporting and tackling of HBT bullying in Chapter 9.

2. Evaluation methodology

2.1 overview of evaluation.

The Centre for Development and Research in Education (CDARE) at Sheffield Hallam University (SHU) were commissioned to conduct an independent evaluation of the anti-HBT bullying programme in schools. Evaluation activities ran from December 2016 to March 2019. The evaluation objectives were to:

evaluate the extent to which the initiatives are associated with the programme outcomes
compare the effectiveness of each model alone and relative to each other.

The evaluation consisted of 4 phases:

Scoping phase: data was gathered about each provider’s specific plans for their recruitment of, and work with, schools. Following on from this, the survey tools were designed and piloted.
Baseline and follow-up surveys: baseline surveys were sent to all participating schools recruited by the end of September 2017. Surveys were designed for school staff (all staff in Model 1 schools, and staff expected to receive training in Model 2 schools) and pupils (for Model 1 schools only). Baseline data was collected prior to delivery beginning in schools. Follow-up surveys were conducted between 3 and 6 months after delivery had completed in school, up until the end of December 2018.
School case studies: 12 school visits were undertaken in Model 1 schools (in 6 primary and 6 secondary schools). Visits consisted of a combination of interviews and focus groups with staff and pupils. Where possible, observations of school activity and the collection of key documentation also took place.
Telephone interviews: 18 additional interviews were conducted in 2 rounds. Round 1 (in the autumn of 2017) focused on schools which faced particular challenges to participation in the programme, including participation in the baseline surveys (5 interviews, including some who dropped out and some who stayed involved in the programme). Round 2 took place between the spring of 2018 and the start of 2019 (running alongside the case studies) and focused on the process of delivery and the impact of the programme in schools (13 interviews).

2.2 Baseline surveys

Recruitment and delivery in schools was staggered across different school years, mainly due to provider capacity. It was therefore not possible to survey a random sample of schools on the programme. For this reason, and due to the risk of small sample sizes resulting from non-response, a census approach was adopted across both models, with all participating schools contacted instead of a sample, in order to maximise the amount of data that could be collected.

Questionnaire development

Different questions were used for secondary school staff, primary school staff, secondary school pupils and primary school pupils, as experiences and perceptions related to bullying are likely to differ between these respondent groups. For instance, staff members are responsible for disciplinary responses to bullying procedures whilst pupils are not. During survey piloting concerns also emerged as to the suitability of some language for primary school pupils. Different questions were therefore produced where necessary, although the same broad topics were covered in all surveys, and in many cases, the same questions were used.

Dissemination

All staff in Model 1 schools were eligible to complete the survey, along with pupils in the relevant year groups. However, for Model 2 schools only staff due to participate in training were asked to do the survey, as it was expected that this delivery approach might not directly reach all school staff, and it would therefore be less fruitful to survey those who had no contact with providers. Pupils in Model 2 schools were not asked to complete the survey as no whole-school activities were planned for these schools.

Baseline survey data was collected from schools prior to providers starting delivery. Surveys were distributed electronically. It was agreed that the baseline survey would run during 3 separate tranches to allow providers to begin their work with schools in a timely fashion. Table 2 (below) summarises the timeline. Tranche 1 took place during 2016 to 2017 and was split into 2 parts so as not to delay the start of delivery whilst recruitment was ongoing. Tranche 1A opened in March 2017 and was due to close after 6 weeks, but the deadline was extended to June 2017 as schools reported difficulties with IT, timetabling and other issues. Tranche 1B was open from early May to mid-June 2017. For Tranche 1, Model 1 schools were asked to administer the baseline survey to pupils in Years 4, 7 and 9. Tranche 2 was open from September to November 2017. As this was in the next academic year, Model 1 schools were asked to administer the baseline survey to pupils in Years 5, 8 and 10, in addition to all staff, to ensure the survey reached the same cohort of pupils as Tranche 1.

Table 2: Baseline survey respondents by model and tranche

	Tranche 1 (Mar-Jun 2017)	Tranche 2 (Sep-Nov 2017)	Tranche 1 (Mar-Jun 2017)	Tranche 2 (Sep-Nov 2017)
All staff	yes	yes
Staff receiving training only			yes	yes
Pupils in Y4, 7 and 9	yes
Pupils in Y5, 8 and 10		yes

2.3 Follow-up survey

Follow-up survey data was collected between 3 and 6 months following the completion of delivery in a school, with an average of 4.4 months. Variation in the interval between completion of the programme and administration of the survey was due to the need to fit the evaluation around scheduled provider delivery and the school calendar. Follow-up data collection took place in 6 waves, determined by the date each school finished their work with the provider. The last wave of follow-up data collection was completed in December 2018. Staff members were sent the follow-up survey directly to the email address they supplied in the baseline survey.

It is important to reiterate that as sampling techniques were eschewed in favour of a census approach, the survey is not representative. Instead, the priority was to maximise the number of responses. Recruitment to the programme was not undertaken with any intention to achieve representativeness, at local or national level, on the part of providers. However, the profile of schools responding to the survey is summarised in section 2.4. Figures for the evaluation surveys are compared with averages for both the population of schools participating in the programme and with England overall. In section 2.5 individual level survey data are discussed according to key respondent characteristics. Although there are measures on which the survey sample appears well aligned with national and/or overall programme level averages, this is serendipitous rather than by design. Other limitations associated with the survey are discussed in section 2.7.

2.4 Analysis sample

Staff survey sample for final report.

Analysis was restricted to schools that responded to both baseline and follow-up surveys. This left 374 schools for the staff survey. However, to ensure robust baseline/follow-up comparisons, staff responses were only used when email addresses provided in both surveys matched, to mitigate the risk of variation in school level responses being due to different individuals responding. This leaves an analysis sample of 318 schools for the staff surveys (see Table 3, below). Table 1 (above) shows that 1674 schools were signed up to the programme within the evaluation period. Using this figure as the denominator gives a school level response rate of 19%.

The breakdown of schools in the analysis sample by provider, delivery model and school phase can be found in Appendix 2 (Table 9). There are differences in the sample sizes used for the analysis of each variable due to item non-response. In the tables accompanying chapters 3 to 9 (found in the relevant appendices), these figures are reported alongside the descriptive statistics used to gauge the impact of the programme on the relevant outcomes.

Pupil survey sample for final report

For pupils it was not possible to take the same approach, as contact details were not collected in the surveys: the survey was distributed through programme leads in each school, who were then responsible for ensuring dissemination to the targeted cohorts. There was a low response rate to pupil surveys, particularly at follow-up. Only 28 of a possible 461 schools responded to the follow-up pupil surveys, a response rate of 6%, although this achieved sample includes responses from over 2,000 pupils. Summary figures are displayed in Appendix 2 (Table 10).

Presentation of results

As analysis of programme outcomes is conducted at the school level using aggregated individual responses, cases not identifying with a particular school could not be included in the analyses. The number of individual staff responses per school was low – 40% of schools had only one individual respondent, a further 20% had only 2. The results presented in this report are weighted school-level averages, generated through averaging the individual-level responses within each school to produce a school-level value for each variable. Some schools will have contributed multiple respondents, others only one. This approach prevents excessive emphasis on schools with larger numbers of respondents, as is appropriate for evaluating a programme with recruitment and delivery focussing on schools rather than individuals. To clarify, responses are not weighted according to the characteristics of schools or individual respondents. The weighting is simply a method of presenting data collected from individuals at school level.

Engaging schools in the survey

Continued efforts were made to engage schools in the follow-up surveys through targeted follow-up emails to individual staff members and phone calls to the programme. However, the evaluation design meant that reminders from the programme lead could not be targeted, as the programme lead was not aware who in the school had taken part in the baseline survey and therefore who had been sent the follow-up. This may be seen as a limitation but was necessary for ethical reasons. Low response rates were also likely due to staff turnover in some schools, given the length of time between baseline and follow-up.

Table 3: Responses in analysis sample (baseline and follow-up)

	Analysis total respondents	Analysis total schools
Secondary staff	626	172
Primary staff	326	146

Source: SHU survey

Sample profile

The number of schools per provider by delivery model and school phase can be found in Appendix 2 (Tables 9 and 10), along with other tables detailing the figures presented in this section. The profile of primary schools recruited to the programme before the cut-off point for inclusion in the evaluation is very similar to England overall in terms of institution type (see Table 11). For primary schools that returned staff surveys this is also generally true, although academies and maintained schools are slightly overrepresented, while independent and special schools are underrepresented. Among primary schools that returned pupil surveys, maintained schools are greatly overrepresented, while academies, independent and special schools are greatly underrepresented. However, readers should note that this is based on a small sample of only 13 primary schools from which pupil surveys were returned. In terms of secondary schools, those participating in the programme were more likely to be academies and maintained schools, and less likely to be independent and special schools, compared to England overall. The same was true for secondary schools that returned staff and pupil surveys.

In terms of attainment [footnote 5] primary schools participating in the programme were very similar to the England national average, as were those who returned staff surveys, although for schools who returned pupil surveys, attainment was slightly higher. For secondary schools, those participating in the programme had slightly higher levels of attainment than the national average, as did those schools that returned staff and pupil and staff surveys (see Appendix 2, Table 12).

On average, primary schools signed up to the anti-HBT bullying programme had relatively similar proportions of deprived [footnote 6] pupils (27%) compared to England overall (25%), which was also the case for those who returned staff and pupil surveys. Secondary schools who took part in the programme, and who returned staff surveys, also had similar levels of deprivation to England overall, but those who returned pupil surveys had lower levels of pupil deprivation (24%) compared to the national average (34%). These figures can be found in Appendix 2, Table 13.

For Ofsted ratings, both those primary and secondary schools who participated in the programme, and who returned staff surveys, were relatively similar to the national average. However, primary schools that returned pupil surveys were more likely to be rated as ‘good’, and less likely to be rated as ‘outstanding’, while secondary schools who returned pupil surveys were more likely to be rated as ‘good’ and less likely to be rated as ‘outstanding’ or ‘satisfactory’ (see Appendix 2, Table 14).

Primary and secondary schools participating in the programme were somewhat more likely to be based in urban areas compared to the national average. This was also true for schools that returned staff and pupil surveys, and particularly so for secondary schools that returned pupil surveys (74% of whom were in an urban area, compared to 57% in England overall). These figures can be found in Appendix 2, Table 15.

Turning lastly to faith status, schools (and particularly primary schools) participating in the programme were more likely to be faith schools than the national average. This was also true for schools that returned staff and pupil surveys. This may partly be because one of the providers, Stonewall, chose to deliver a programme specifically aimed at schools with a religious character (see Appendix 2, Table 16).

2.5 Profile of individual respondents

This section profiles individual survey respondents. Comparing these survey findings to national figures is not possible as equivalent data is not available. Detailed tables can be found in Appendix 2 (Tables 17 to 20).

School staff

Across all providers, more respondents identifying as female than male completed the staff survey, though this may partly reflect the composition of the workforce. More females than males responded from both secondary and primary schools. The difference was more apparent at primary level, where 84% of respondents identified as female and 15% as male. Less than 1% selected non-binary and 1% preferred not to say. Among secondary school staff, 72% of respondents identified as female and 25% as male, with the remainder identifying as non-binary, in another way, or preferring not to say.

In terms of sexual orientation, the majority of secondary staff respondents (87%) identified as heterosexual. 7% identified as gay or lesbian, 3% as bisexual, and 1% ‘in another way’, whilst 2% selected ‘prefer not to say’.

A similar pattern emerges among primary staff, of whom 90% identify as heterosexual. The proportion of gay and lesbian respondents is lower than among secondary staff (4%), and a slightly higher number prefer not to say (3%) than are bisexual (2%) or self-defined ‘in another way’ (1%).

In the analysis sample, 57% of secondary pupils identified as female, 36% as male, 2% ‘in another way’, 4% as trans and 2% as non-binary. Among primary pupils, 46% were female and 45% male, 3% self-defined ‘in another way’ and 5% said they ‘prefer not to say’ (see Appendix 2, Table 19).

Overall, 81% of secondary pupils identified as heterosexual. It is noteworthy that 7% of pupils self-report their sexual orientation ‘in another way’, and 5% ‘prefer not to say’, which is higher than for staff. This may indicate issues with the veracity of this data, though previous research has suggested similarly high numbers of young people identifying as not (solely) heterosexual (YouGov, 2015).

2.6 Qualitative data collection

Survey open comments.

Baseline and follow-up surveys had one open question at the end, which asked respondents if they would like to make any comments about HBT bullying or LGBT inclusion. Comments were analysed thematically and, where relevant, are discussed in each chapter.

Case studies and telephone interviews

Case study visits were conducted in 6 primary and 6 secondary schools, drawn from across the 6 different providers. Case studies sought in-depth understanding from staff and pupils in engaged schools about how the programme had been implemented, support received from providers, activities following delivery of the programme, and any perceived early impacts.

In addition to the case studies, 18 telephone interviews were also undertaken with school programme leads (usually a member of the senior leadership team (SLT) or the PSHE lead in school). These were split into 2 rounds: 5 initial interviews were conducted in autumn 2017, focusing specifically on the challenges faced by particular schools in taking part in the programme, and a final round of thirteen interviews was conducted to provide further qualitative data to complement the case studies. The focus was on schools that had been less actively engaged than case study schools, in order to obtain a wider range of views. A purposive sampling approach was used to recruit schools for fieldwork. Providers were asked to give contact details of a sample of schools who were either actively or less actively involved in the programme for recruitment to case studies or telephone interviews respectively.

Schools were contacted by email initially to request either a case study visit or a telephone interview. Follow-up calls were made to schools that did not respond. For the case studies in particular recruitment was difficult, with many schools not responding and others declining due to workload or feeling that not enough progress with the programme had been made.

Data collection

The case studies and second round of telephone interviews were completed between May 2018 and February 2019. For case study visits, we requested the following from schools:

an interview with a member of the senior leadership team.
a staff focus group (including where possible teaching and non-teaching staff), ideally including the school’s programme lead (a member of teaching staff, SLT, or inclusion leader responsible for the programme in school).
a pupil focus group with around 8 pupils from Years 5 and/or 6 for primary schools, and for secondary schools, drawn from Years 8 to 11.
where possible, an observation of any programme-related activities (for example, PSHE lessons, assemblies, diversity celebrations) and/or activities involving the community/parents.
the collection of any new/updated policies or curriculum documentation.

In addition, we welcomed the opportunity to interview any other groups such as governors, parents or other members of the community who were available on the day (though in the end it was not possible to include any parents or other community members during our fieldwork visits). Details of the achieved sample of case study schools and the data collection that took place within them are described in Table 4 below.

Interviews were transcribed verbatim and then uploaded into NVivo 10. A coding frame based on the programme objectives was created and the interviews were coded to this ‘high level’ coding frame. Once this first round of coding was complete, the project team held an analysis meeting to discuss the coding, including areas of potential overlap. Coding to sub-codes was then undertaken separately, and key quotes highlighted to use to illustrate key areas and themes discussed throughout the report.

Table 4: Case study school details

Case studies	School details	Provider	Case study details
Case study 1	Primary school	METRO	Interviews: Deputy head, 2 members of staff Focus group: Y6 pupils (mixed genders and ethnicities) Observation: PSHE lesson. Also given school ‘tour’ of relevant displays etc. Deputy head present throughout
Case study 2	Secondary grammar school	METRO	Interviews: 2 members of Senior Leadership Team (SLT), 2 members of staff Focus group: Y9 to 11 pupils (all female, mixed ethnicities) Observation: school-based equality group meeting. SLT member present throughout
Case study 3	Primary school	Proud Trust	Interview: Headteacher Focus groups: Y5 to 6 pupils (mixed genders and ethnicities), 2 members of staff (PSHE lead and higher level teaching assistant)
Case study 4	Primary Church of England school	Stonewall	Interviews: Headteacher, LGBT champion and anti-bullying lead Focus group: Year 5 to 6 pupils (mixed genders, all white) Observation: International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia (IDAHOBIT) whole-school assembly
Case study 5	Secondary Pupil Referral Unit - special school for pupils with emotional and mental health needs	Barnardo’s	Focus groups: a Y8 and Y10 pupil (both male), 2 staff members Observation: a PSHE lesson focused specifically on homophobic bullying
Case study 6	Secondary school	Barnardo’s	Focus groups: 2 teachers, pupils from across year groups
Case study 7	Secondary school	National Children’s Bureau	Interviews: SLT and inclusion lead Focus groups: staff and pupil focus group with Y8 to 11s Observation: Y9 PSHE lesson on LGBT issues/anti-HBT bullying
Case study 8	Primary Church of England school	METRO	Interview: Headteacher Focus groups: Y5 to 6 pupils, staff, governors Observation: Y6 PSHE lesson on anti-HBT bullying
Case study 9	Primary school	LGBT Consortium (East London Out Project)	Interview: Headteacher Focus groups: teaching staff, Y9 pupils
Case study 10	Secondary school	LGBT Consortium (East London Out Project)	Interviews: Teacher, SLT Focus group: pupils (mixed year groups)
Case study 11	Primary school	National Children’s Bureau	Interviews: PSHE lead, Y1 and Y2 teacher, Y5 teacher, headteacher Focus groups: lunchtime supervisors, Y5 and Y6 pupils
Case study 12	Catholic secondary school for girls	Stonewall	Interviews: Deputy head and head of Juniors Focus groups: pupils from mixed year groups, informal (not recorded) with governor and secretary of deputy head, informal (not recorded) with teaching staff Observation: PSHE lesson focused on LGBT-related content

2.7 Limitations of the evaluation

Survey-specific limitations.

Evaluation findings should be treated with caution for the following reasons. First, there was a low response rate to the follow-up surveys, despite repeated attempts through email and telephone chasing to boost survey completion. This was especially true for the pupil follow-up survey. Due to the low response rate, and as the profile of schools with responding pupils was somewhat different to the overall profile of schools in the evaluation, the pupil survey data was not deemed sufficiently robust for inclusion in the main report. However, in the interest of transparency, tables relating to pupil survey data can be found in the relevant appendices for each chapter.

Some of the measures used in the survey, for instance on LGBT-inclusive policies, were based on awareness rather than any ‘direct’ measure, and therefore it is difficult to know if staff were simply not aware of the existence of a policy, or perhaps thought one existed where it did not. The responses given by individuals to survey questions were also aggregated to the school level. As such, these variables provide a measure of the extent of awareness, for instance of anti-HBT bullying policies within each school.

As schools were not selected randomly to take part in the programme, it would be inappropriate to generalise findings from this evaluation to the wider population (for example, through inferential statistics such as p-values). Findings are therefore descriptive – in other words, conclusions drawn from the analysis presented in this report are not necessarily applicable to schools in England that did not take part in this programme.

Other limitations

There were no control groups used in the evaluation, and therefore we cannot be sure that any changes observed over the course of the programme were directly as a result of the programme. However, the qualitative data does support the findings in most cases, which adds validity and rigour to the quantitative findings.

There is also the possibility of response bias given that participation in both the evaluation and the programme overall was voluntary. As the support for schools offered through the programme was not conditional upon compliance with the evaluation, this is unavoidable. The effect on the results is difficult to gauge. On the one hand, respondents may have wished to portray their schools favourably at baseline, which would dilute positive effects associated with the programme. On the other hand, individuals involved in the programme may seek to exaggerate its benefits. Free text responses to the survey show that respondents did not always speak highly of their school or the programme, however, so it is our hope that these factors are evenly balanced, yet the reader should bear in mind the risk of bias inherent in a study relying on voluntary participation.

Although there was a gap between programme implementation and follow-up data collection, the effects of the programme may not yet have become embedded in some schools. This may particularly be the case where substantial changes need to be made in the school in order for impacts to happen.

3. School policies and processes

Evaluation survey findings suggest that the anti-HBT bullying programme was associated with an increase (from 61% to 82%) in the proportion of staff who were aware of an anti-bullying policy at their school that explicitly included HBT bullying.

Most interviewees had changed some of their school’s policies (or were planning to do so), with support from their provider. These changes included clarifying procedures around HBT bullying, and equality policies being more explicit and inclusive in relation to LGBT identities.

Supportive school policies were thought to empower staff, making them feel more confident to address HBT bullying and include LGBT people within the curriculum. This was the case for a small number of schools who felt some resistance from parents, governors, or the wider community.

The case studies suggested that strengthening school policies was a central component in measures to address HBT bullying and LGBT inclusion in schools.

The programme was also associated with an increase (from 50% to 70%) in the proportion of school staff aware of a bullying recording system in their school that explicitly includes HBT bullying.

Case study evidence indicates that some schools were recording instances of HBT bullying prior to their involvement in the programme, but that other schools began to record (and address) instances of HBT bullying as a direct result of the programme.

However, case study findings also pointed to some concerns about differing definitions and/or understandings of bullying between individual school staff members, with some staff keen to distinguish between repeated and one-off incidents.

3.1 Anti-HBT bullying policies

Quantitative findings.

Staff awareness of anti-HBT bullying policies increased. At baseline, a school-level weighted average of 61% of staff said ‘yes’ in response to the question ‘Are you aware of an anti-bullying policy in your school that explicitly includes HBT bullying?’. This figure increased to 82% at follow-up. Among secondary school staff, the school-level weighted average increased from 61% at baseline to 78% at follow-up. For primary school staff, the gains were greater, with the figure rising from 61% to 86% (see Appendix, Table 20).

Overall, Model 1 schools saw slightly greater improvements in awareness of school anti-HBT bullying policies compared to Model 2 schools. At baseline, the school-level weighted percentage of staff aware of an anti-bullying policy in their school that explicitly includes HBT bullying was slightly lower in Model 1 (60%) than in Model 2 schools (62%). At follow-up, the values were 81% and 82% respectively. The main finding is that substantial gains were observed at the overall programme level, with minimal differences between the 2 delivery models on this variable.

Qualitative findings

Although this evaluation only measured awareness of, and not presence of, policies, evidence from the qualitative data suggests that the increasing awareness seen above may be driven by the development of policies. The majority of interviewees reported that, with support from their provider, they had changed some of their school’s policies, or were planning to do so following advice. However, a small number of interviewees already felt they had up-to-date and inclusive policies and therefore decided not to change them. Policies that were most often mentioned were anti-bullying or equality policies. Changes were mostly reported to include increased clarity around procedures with regard to bullying and HBT bullying in particular, and being more explicit and inclusive in relation to LGBT identities in the equality policy.

For some school staff, the rationale for making the changes to policies was related to empowering them and their colleagues to feel confident in addressing HBT bullying and including LGBT people within the curriculum, and having this ‘backed up’ officially:

I think it’s also empowering for staff to have the views that they already hold given more weight because they’re in the policies (Case study, secondary staff member).

This was particularly the case for a small number of schools who had reportedly felt some resistance from parents, governors or the wider community. One telephone interviewee, for example, said their school had previously experienced difficulties with making policy changes due to it being a faith school. They commented that school governors had halted progress in relation to sex and relationships education (SRE) and related policies. They further reported that provider training for governors, and looking at ‘model’ policies that fit with the Church of England ethos, had been particularly helpful. This school and others found that using language in updated policies such as ‘This meets the requirements of the Equality Act’ was helpful in making clear to parents that the emphasis was coming from government and associated legal obligations, rather than just from the school:

On every single one of our policies, that’s spelt out… We’re looking at the protected characteristics, which of course includes homosexuality… Any policies that I’ve reviewed since then I’ve inserted that as the opening paragraph now (Telephone interview, primary headteacher)

[A parent] came in to tell us how absolutely disgusting it was that we were teaching about homosexual relationships, and we said, ‘This is the school policy, this is what the government demands of us’ (Case study, primary headteacher).

A small number of evaluation participants wanted there to be stronger or more explicit guidance on LGBT inclusion coming from national policy, so that they felt they had a solid justification for the change(s) they were making:

Everything is ‘well, in the Equalities Act…’ Yes, but it doesn’t state specifics, so it would be good if the government would state some specifics and say ‘schools have to do this’ so that when you do get that, you can say, ‘but this is what we have to follow, this isn’t our decision, this is a national [policy]’ (Case study, secondary senior leader)

Sometimes I think that parents get to the point where they don’t listen to schools and maybe it does need to come directly from government. Actually, this is something that the Church of England, the DfE, Ofsted, all these partner agencies and organisations are proactively helping schools get better at dealing with (Telephone interview, secondary headteacher).

Overall, the case studies suggested that strengthening school policies was a central component in measures to address HBT bullying and LGBT inclusion. For some, this transformed the school, whilst for others it at least ensured staff conformed to new ways of working:

[That] had the biggest difference because it really made us sit down and think about ‘well, for the next 3 years what do we want to achieve with the school’… We pretty much drew them [policies] up from blank and made sure they really covered everything… because we hadn’t really had anything in there about LGBT… Looking at the policies and the action plan was really useful for us because… it’s something that’s planned in now… It’s part of our school ethos… She [provider staff member] really made us think about the bigger picture, rather than just coming in and doing this one-off little bit of work which wouldn’t have had the ongoing impact (Case study, primary headteacher).

3.2 HBT bullying recording systems

The programme was associated with an increase in the proportion of school staff that were aware of a bullying recording system that explicitly included HBT bullying within their school. Overall, the school-level weighted percentage of staff aware of such a system in their school increased from 50% to 70% over the evaluation period. At baseline, 49% of secondary staff were aware of such a system in their school. This figure increased to 64% at follow-up. For primary school staff, the picture is similar, rising from 51% at baseline to 76% at follow-up. Model 1 schools observed greater gains on this measure across the study period compared to Model 2, in both primary and secondary schools (see Appendix, Table 21).

Evidence from the case studies appears to support the finding that whilst some schools were already recording instances of HBT bullying prior to their involvement in the programme, other schools began to record instances of HBT bullying as a direct result of the programme:

[We have] updated our behaviour incident report forms. Before it never used to have homophobic bullying on it, and… transphobic… and biphobic. Now these have all been added onto our behaviour list (Case study, primary lunchtime staff member)

Since the training, we have made it explicit whether it’s homophobic bullying or not. It might just have been recorded as inappropriate language in previous years, but it’s more explicit now (Case study, primary headteacher).

Since beginning to record instances of HBT bullying more clearly in their school, some staff felt that HBT bullying was also now responded to more robustly:

We have a system where for kids it’s internal exclusion, so for homophobic incidents they get, it depends on the incident, but it can be 2 or 3 days in internal exclusion (Telephone interview, secondary PSHE lead)

Teachers now know that it’s dealt with in the same way as racism, that there are forms to fill in… and actually escalating matters a little bit quicker… It led to a few conversations I think at the end of last year with students that would say kind of homophobic language and we stamped on it really quickly… It’s had an effect on students not actually saying silly things (Case study, secondary SLT staff member).

However, evaluation participants sometimes raised concerns about bullying with regard to definitions and understandings, which speaks to debates elsewhere about whether HBT language can automatically be considered bullying if there is no intent to offend or upset (Formby, 2013, 2015, McCormack, 2012, Warwick and Aggleton, 2013). Some staff were therefore keen to distinguish between repeated and one-off incidents:

Sometimes bullying is confused with a single act, where in my definition bullying is about an act that happens more than once to the same person by the same person or by a group of people. So sometimes the B word [bullying] is used when in actual fact it is not bullying in its arguable sense of the word. It’s an event that’s happened – a single event (Telephone interview, secondary SLT member)

We’ve been educating parents and children as to what bullying actually is. It is not a fall-out with your friends one day and then playing the next day and going round to each other’s house for tea. That is not bullying. So we’ve given the definition of what bullying is, because it’s very, very serious (Case study, primary teacher).

Similarly, others also distinguished between ‘incidents’ and bullying. Within these discussions, the need for clarity within a school about what is considered bullying and/or problematic language (as opposed to ‘banter’) was clear:

I was hoping… that there would be some more clarity in the [school] behaviour policy about using the word ‘gay’ in lessons. But that didn’t really happen… I think there’s still mixed views around when it becomes homophobic and when it’s just banter. My line is that we don’t do it at all, but that isn’t necessarily the view of everybody (Telephone interview, secondary PSHE lead).

It should be noted that whilst a number of the schools said that they clearly record any instances of HBT bullying, there were differing opinions amongst staff about how effectively (or not) different members of staff responded when they witnessed such behaviour. This issue is explored in more detail in Chapter 9.

4. School environment

Over the study period, more staff believed that their school actively tried to prevent HBT bullying, rising from 72% to 91%.

Greater improvements were seen in terms of staff feeling that their school actively tried to build an LGBT-inclusive environment (48% at baseline, 78% at follow-up).

Primary school staff saw greater increases than secondary school staff regarding both HBT bullying prevention and LGBT inclusion, but from a lower baseline.

Within the case studies, prevention was seen by staff to be achieved through education and the creation of an inclusive and caring school environment.

4.1 Active prevention of HBT bullying

As part of the baseline and follow-up surveys, school staff were asked ‘Do you think that your school actively tries to prevent HBT bullying?’. The results from this question are displayed in Figure 1 (see also Appendix, Table 24). Across all respondent groups, there is evidence that the programme had a positive impact, with the school-level weighted average rising from 72% at baseline to 91% at follow-up. For secondary schools, the school-level weighted percentage of staff reporting that their school actively tried to prevent HBT bullying increased from 76% to 91% between baseline and follow-up. The increase was greater among primary school staff, from 68% to 91%.

It should also be noted that, in absolute terms, slightly greater improvements were observed among Model 1 schools on the question ‘Do you think that your school actively tries to prevent HBT bullying?’ (baseline = 71%, follow-up = 91%) than for Model 2 (baseline = 73%, follow-up = 91%). The main finding here is that substantial improvements were made across both delivery models.

Figure 1: Do you think that your school actively tries to prevent HBT bullying?

From the analysis of open comments from the baseline survey, secondary pupils tended to state that they felt staff could do more to actively prevent HBT bullying by raising awareness and teaching more about this area. This was echoed in the case studies and later telephone interviews, where there was a common belief amongst staff that a key cause of HBT bullying was a lack of understanding amongst pupils about LGBT identities. Prevention was therefore viewed as being about ensuring that pupils are aware as early as possible of key terms, including what is and is not appropriate language to use, thus creating an early expectation that HBT language will not be tolerated. Staff commented on how younger pupils especially may have heard homophobic language from home or the media and be repeating it without an awareness of its meaning, and that educating pupils about meanings was therefore key before they started to use certain words:

They might have some lovely turns of phrase because that’s what they’ve heard at home. If we say ‘oh you don’t use that word’ they haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about, so we say ‘we don’t use this word’ and we teach them the words that they’re not to use… You have to be direct, you can’t be subtle… I think because we are using those words a lot more in assemblies and added onto all other types of bullying in a more overt way, then they’re learning and they understand, so it’s preventing (Case Study, primary SLT member)

I think it’s the education. From early on, they’re used to hearing about it and hearing those words. Because it starts early, they’re used to whether it’s a right thing or a wrong thing to say, so they already know that it’s the sort of language they shouldn’t be using in a derogatory way (Case study, primary staff member).

One school held assemblies where they tried to enforce the message ‘bullying not banter’ to highlight how using words that may be seen as a joke or funny to some pupils may be more serious and hurtful to others.

Primary pupils in one school felt that rules around HBT bullying should be strict and tightly defined and be based around values so that pupils are aware that there will be consequences if they break these rules. Pupils across schools also discussed the importance of teaching about HBT bullying through lessons and visual displays so that other pupils are aware of the potential pain that may be caused through bullying of this type:

I think they just need to learn how much it hurts when they say stuff like that, because they don’t know how much it hurts (Case study, primary pupil)

We were doing, I think it was bullying, and then we got a piece of paper and it had like a person on, and we wrote rude things to that person and we crumpled it up and then we unfolded it out and then those creases would be there for the rest of their life (Case study, primary pupil).

Pupils from a secondary school discussed how teachers perhaps needed to be more aware of the signs of LGBT bullying and how this might affect pupils, to ensure they could spot where this might be happening. It was felt that opening up the conversation could be helpful, particularly when linking this to negative mental health consequences often associated with HBT bullying:

I feel like it’s not talked about enough… they don’t go into detail about why it happens, what are the effects of it. Because LGBT is – unfortunately – it’s linked very much with mental health and how mental health affects how you feel (Case study, secondary pupil).

In some schools, staff felt there was such a small amount of HBT bullying that there was not a need for much emphasis on prevention as they felt they could tackle a problem if and when it emerged.

Other conversations were around ensuring visibility of LGBT families and normalising LGBT identities in order to prevent bullying through building up a sense of empathy and understanding in pupils:

[In] even just our afternoon assemblies, we have our [value of the month] for example, maybe compassion or resilience or tolerance, and those sorts of things celebrating people’s understanding of each other, or acting in kind and considerate ways, so promoting that, accepting differences, and all that sort of stuff… A lot went into it (Case study, primary staff member).

Instilling a sense of understanding and compassion in pupils was done in schools through both informal classroom conversations, such as asking pupils how they might feel in a particular situation, and more formally, in assemblies and through key texts to promote the message that everyone should be accepted regardless of difference:

I think having the conversation about having 2 dads or 2 mums has enabled the children to think actually yes it is just a different family. My family is different to yours because I’ve got whatever. It’s just a different family… it’s like asking the children if they know what the word means. We don’t fudge it… It doesn’t matter whether it’s LGBT inappropriate or just not nice, rude, whatever, language. It’s dealt with in the same way (Case study, primary SLT member)

It just makes the environment obviously a place where we’re not going to tolerate HBT bullying, as opposed to making sure we really clamp down when it happens, which is one side of it. I think the main prevention comes from just the environment being a place which is really welcoming and inclusive. So I suppose there’s that difference. I think the more work you put into supporting the students and empowering those students, then the rest of it just comes afterwards really (Case study, secondary inclusion lead).

Some primary schools used the transition to secondary school as a way to discuss issues of acceptance and difference, making pupils aware that they were likely to meet others who may look or act differently to themselves and teaching them about the importance of understanding and accepting them:

We talk about like if when you go to secondary school, there’s going to be… boys that are wearing makeup or girls that look like boys, but you shouldn’t be rude to them, because then you don’t know what they’re going through or if their family doesn’t like it or something like that. So if you see them being bullied or feeling sad, then you go to them and help them (Case study, primary pupil).

4.2 LGBT-inclusive school environment

At the overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff participants stating that their school actively tried to build an LGBT-inclusive environment grew from 48% to 78% over the programme period. Results are shown in Figure 2 (see also Appendix, Table 26). The rise was greater among primary school staff despite a lower baseline value, from 40% to 75%, compared to an increase from 54% to 80% among secondary staff. It is worth noting that a far lower proportion of staff overall are likely to agree that the school actively tries to build an LGBT-inclusive environment than agree that the school actively tries to prevent HBT bullying.

Figure 2: Do you feel that your school actively tries to build an LGBT-inclusive environment?

Comparing the 2 delivery models, slightly larger improvements were witnessed in Model 1 schools, where a school-level weighted average of 48% of staff at baseline believed that their school actively tried to build an LGBT-inclusive environment, rising to 82% after the programme was finished. For Model 2 schools an increase from 47% to 74% was observed on this measure.

From the baseline survey open text responses, the majority of pupils who discussed ‘coming out’ reported that their school was not a place where they or other pupils would feel comfortable and confident in coming out as LGBT. Reasons given for this were that other pupils were often perceived to act differently around those who had come out, from making ‘jokes’ and comments, to actively bullying (see further discussion in Chapter 8). Pupils also reported that school staff might be unsupportive or oblivious to the needs of LGBT pupils:

I can name at least 20 different pupils within my school who identify as a member of the LGBTQ+ community, myself included. Most teachers are completely unaware that these students are at all of a different sexuality or gender identity… I want to see all of my friends being able to evidently express themselves without feeling ashamed about who they are or what others will say. It is not an open topic of discussion within school, it is not recognised well enough within Pride month, and it is certainly not well taught throughout the school. A few half torn down posters is all I see (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

I would not call it inclusion. Inclusion involves recognition, support and help that is clearly identified. While LGBTQ bullying does not happen at our school (as far as I know), there is not much effort to recognise this community either (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

In the baseline survey, staff similarly highlighted a difference between tackling HBT bullying and fostering LGBT equality:

LGBT inclusion at my school is entirely passive. Although the school would absolutely back an LGBT pupil to the hilt, and HBT bullying would - and is - absolutely clamped down on, the school does not really take any proactive measures, as far as I can see, to foster LGBT openness and equality (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

This might partly be explained by desire on the part of some staff to keep issues of inclusion more generic:

Children should be taught not to treat anyone in an unkind way - no matter who they are - I don’t feel there needs to be a specific focus on HBT bullying or LGBT inclusion (Primary staff baseline survey respondent).

Others similarly indicated somewhat of a contradiction between education around inclusivity and a concurrent invisibility of LGBT identities:

As a school we promote inclusion of everybody, which includes gender, race, religion, so LGBT comes in the same remit - however there are no specific activities solely for LGBT purposes (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

One primary teacher, for example, mirroring a few secondary staff respondents, thought it was counter-productive to give “additional prominence” to LGBT issues, as it was preferable to discuss them “alongside different faiths, appearances and all manner of lifestyle issues”. Other staff also demonstrated a belief that LGBT inclusion is only relevant to LGBT pupils, in doing so showing a lack of awareness of LGBT parents and wider families:

As we are a primary school, LGBT inclusion is not really a problem as ALL children are included and we have no LGBT pupils (Primary staff baseline survey respondent).

Motivations and future plans for work on LGBT inclusion

For some, knowledge of LGBT parents was a specific motivation for work around LGBT inclusion:

Both HBT bullying and LGBT inclusion is a high priority of the school and is built into the guiding principles of the school, its ethos and the wider community, and is actively voiced and considered and responded to on a daily basis. The school has identified that within the community there are a number of same-sex parents and that the needs of children to be educated and given full understanding and appreciation of this, is of vital importance to promote a safe school for all (Primary staff baseline survey respondent)

We have a higher than average number of LGBT parents and students and we look for ways of celebrating and promoting equality at every opportunity (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

Similarly, the identities of pupils were also sometimes considered. A teacher in a secondary school, for instance, commented that pupils feeling like they could not be open about their identity could negatively impact their academic attainment, as well as emotional wellbeing, and therefore it was crucial to foster an atmosphere of inclusivity:

Over many years, I’ve seen students that are clearly struggling with some kind of identity crisis or sexuality issue, and that particularly in boys manifests itself as pure aggression… [but] I’m seeing less aggression in those that are comfortable to say that they’re gay. I’ve seen a difference in the way that they approach their work. I can think of one in particular who would be quite happy to sit here and say I’m gay, but since he has taken that step forward, he’s found his identity. I just find that everything has massively changed with regards to his work, and his confidence… That difference is quite significant between how it used to be… There is now an environment where students feel comfortable, and openly say, ‘this is who I am – I’m gay’ (Case study, secondary staff member).

There were differences in opinion amongst case study participants about how LGBT inclusive their schools felt after delivery of the programme. In one secondary school, for example, the consensus in the pupil focus group seemed to be that the school did not feel fully inclusive of LGBT people at the time, however there was an acknowledgement that the staff were trying, but were “still not there yet”:

[I’ve] only identified as LGBT for a very short amount of time, but I think that the only thing I know about it and I can say is that it’s still a huge problem. I don’t feel that the school is inclusive, especially for LGBT people (Case study, secondary pupil).

There was, however, a discussion of future plans that these pupils were aware of in the school, including one teacher planning to use a number of LGBT symbols throughout the school, such as rainbow shoelaces, noticeboards and Pride flags. Staff in this school acknowledged that they had not yet been able to make much progress in the area after the training, due to a significant amount of staff turnover, particularly pastoral staff, but did talk about future plans for events and activities as well as the possibility of gender-neutral uniforms and toilets. The staff in the secondary school leading on this area of work, felt that ideas that came from the pupils would be the ones that would work best and were therefore keen to include pupils in planning. By contrast, pupils elsewhere said that their school felt very inclusive, and always had done, and therefore they had not noticed any particular change following provider support.

In one secondary school, pupils felt that the school becoming aware of the diverse nature of the pupil population was a facilitator to their school being supportive and inclusive:

The more people have been open about it, the more the school puts in place (Case study, secondary pupil).

Pupils also mentioned that having school staff members who were LGBT themselves, who they could view as positive role models, was helpful to make the school feel more inclusive. Similarly, staff felt that having pupils who were out and happy to talk about their sexual orientation or gender identity was a facilitator in having these discussions with other pupils.

In some schools there had been much debate about whether and how to change toilets to become gender-neutral, whereas in other schools the signs on particular sets of toilets were simply changed to gender-neutral so that there were both gender-specific and gender-neutral toilets available. Once again, particular parents or pupils were sometimes a motivation for this work:

In a governors’ meeting we looked at our policy and we realised that actually we had 2 trans parents that were coming into school as visitors and our toilets were very much male and female… You wouldn’t think there could be so much, so many meetings and so much talk around toilets! (Telephone interview, middle school SLT member)

When asked about the LGBT-inclusivity of their schools, primary school staff members talked about the small ways they were changing to build more inclusivity, and challenge stereotypes. This was usually more related to gender than sexual orientation – for example, avoiding gender-based queues, using more gender-neutral language, and avoiding terms such as ‘big strong boys’ and ‘beautiful girls’. Some teachers were also attempting to challenge social norms around colours associated with particular genders:

When I did ask the question, ‘is pink a colour for girls only?’ they were like, ‘no, no’… whereas when I talked about this last year, it was like ‘yeah’. It was a different response, so you can already see the changes towards the attitude of the kids in school (Case study, primary staff member).

This type of work is useful, as research has identified how anti-HBT language can often be rooted in gender stereotypes (Donelson and Rogers, 2004). Schools can also unintentionally perpetuate gender stereotyping through their policies, practices, and in their curriculum (Formby, 2015, Priest and others, 2014, Ward, 2017).

Changing the uniform policy was also seen as an easy way to become more LGBT-inclusive by some teachers. Not having specified ‘girls’ and ‘boys’ uniforms, but instead just a single uniform with options that any gender was welcome to wear worked well. Staff members described particular examples of a boy wearing a dress in class, and how other pupils “did not bat an eyelid”, which they felt was indicative of their inclusive environment:

I know it’s perhaps not the be-all-and-end-all… [but] we’ve done the [uniform] policy so it’s gender-neutral, so if boys want to wear a dress they can wear a dress. Technically, we’re not going to say ‘boys can wear a dress’, but we’re going to say all children may choose from trousers, pinafore dress, skirt, and just people can make up their own minds like that, but we’ve agreed as a staff that if a boy comes in in a pinafore dress, we carry on, we don’t even make reference to it (Case study, primary programme lead).

Another school had changed sports day, deciding not to have separate boys’ and girls’ races but to combine them instead. This was described as “quite a risk” in terms of anticipated adverse parental reaction, though teachers felt that physically it would make no difference to pupils of primary age.

In secondary settings, teachers felt that pupils’ seeming more willing to talk openly, listen and respect each other was a sign that the school had built an inclusive environment where there was a feeling of safety and a confidence to talk honestly.

5. Support for LGBT pupils

There was an increase in staff reporting that their school had a named member of staff responsible for LGBT matters or supporting LGBT pupils (from 35% to 66%). The increase was larger for primary staff, though from a lower starting point.

Case study data highlighted that school-based LGBT groups were appreciated by pupils where they were happening, but there were issues about group set-up, privacy versus publicity, and whether staff should take a lead or supporting role.

5.1 Named member of staff responsible for LGBT matters or supporting LGBT pupils

At the overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff reporting that their school had a named member of staff responsible for LGBT matters or supporting LGBT pupils went up across the evaluation period, from 35% to 66%.

The figure increased from 39% at baseline to 63% at follow-up for secondary staff, and from 31% to 69% for primary staff, a larger increase but from a lower baseline.

Greater gains were made in Model 1 schools, where an increase from 35% to 70% was observed, compared to an increase of 36% to 62% in Model 2 schools, though this difference is largely accounted for by smaller gains among Model 2 secondary staff. The school-weighted gains for Model 1 secondary schools (from 39% to 68%) were far greater than for Model 2 secondary schools (from 40% to 57%). For primary schools, the gains were more similar for Model 1 (from 30% to 71%) and Model 2 schools (from 31% to 67%). These figures are displayed in Table 28 (see Appendix).

In the baseline survey a large number of comments from secondary pupils included references to there not being enough support in schools for LGBT pupils, be it safe spaces or simply members of staff pupils would feel comfortable talking to:

There’s hardly any visible and actively talked about forms of help for people who aren’t heterosexual or cisgender (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

We need someone who can help others like we do with general bullying. No one really helps out LGBT people in this school. We need a club after school or somewhere all LGBT people can feel safe and be who they are (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

There were also some similar views expressed by staff:

Our staff have had zero targeted training in supporting students questioning their sexual and gender identity in a school with several out transgender students… We have no lead member of staff co-ordinating training and providing resources (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

There was little qualitative data related to a named member of staff in the school responsible for LGBT matters or supporting LGBT pupils. Interviewees sometimes alluded to the idea that the responsibility to take this area of work forward was solely on them, however this seemed to be due to personal interest or a feeling that if they did not do it, nobody else would, rather than them having been given this role as a nominated person. There was a sense that perhaps in some schools, LGBT support was viewed as a minority or unimportant issue, and not a more shared responsibility for all staff:

A designated person for LGBTQ issues is a great idea… I don’t think older members of SLT see LGBTQ issues as important, and some have made comments that are, at best uneducated and at worst transphobic in relation to a child with gender identity issues (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

In one case study school, pupils talked about how one member of staff seemed to be taking forward the learning and support needs of LGBT pupils:

She’s the only teacher that I’ve had for PSHE that actually incorporates LGBT into it. So right now we’re doing sex and relationships, and she’s actually talked about like same-sex couples, different sexualities, she talked about [being] asexual (Case study, secondary pupil).

Having only one person willing or able to deliver this work can be problematic, however, as it can become overly burdensome and leaves the area vulnerable to being ‘dropped’ if that member of staff moves on from the school.

In another case study school, named members of staff were identifiable due to wearing rainbow lanyards to signify to pupils and parents that they are the people they can speak to about any LGBT-related issues.

A safeguarding lead in one school discussed the importance of arming all staff with important knowledge about how to support young people dealing with their gender or sexual identity without unnecessarily compromising confidentiality and potentially ‘outing’ them:

There’s still a lot of misconceptions for young people and I think that’s something I’m going to take forward next year. Being the safeguarding lead, this idea that if you tell somebody that you’re gay that that’s a safeguarding concern, we’re going to contact… I always say to my students, the only time I would contact home is if I was concerned and you were on Grindr searching for, you know, older males, females. However, even then the conversation would be – approaching older adults. But equally I would be concerned about staff’s perception of that as well, because I think some staff do immediately think ‘this is a safeguarding concern’. Well it’s not. So that’s something I think a bit wider is actually getting clear messages out to young people and staff about where we have concerns and where we don’t, actually, and how to have those conversations without actually outing a young person (Case study, secondary senior leader).

The quote above illustrates how same-sex relationships can, but should not, be treated differently to heterosexual relationships, and in fact staff can unintentionally create safeguarding issues by ‘outing’ a pupil.

In one school, instead of having a named member of staff, a group of engaged sixth form pupils were trained as listeners who could be approached and signpost other younger pupils to support available in the school.

5.2 Organised groups for LGBT pupils

From the qualitative data, a small number of schools had either pre-existing or newly-formed (as a result of provider support) LGBT groups. Often run during lunchtime in the week, and for all year groups, these were said to be a safe space where pupils could talk and be themselves. Groups could also be used as a place for pupils to talk if they were having problems:

You go in and you say your name and your pronouns and then you just kind of chat about if it’s just issues, or if it’s just like a safe space where you can just hang out (Case study, secondary pupil)

It was the first time in a while when you sat down and talked about like being gay and stuff, and that was nice. That was welcomed, like a little family (Case study, secondary pupil).

For those who did not have such a group, this was sometimes something they said they wanted (at both baseline and follow-up):

I think [my school] should have an LGBTQ+ club and should talk more about this subject. I would love to also talk to people like staff about this subject and about myself… If my school started an LGBTQ+ club and actually bothered to deal with this I would really appreciate it… It would help so much. Please make an LGBTQ+ club and talk about this more and deal with all of the people that cause suicides, cutting, depression etc. (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

There is no LGBT society to support LGBT people even though the demand for one has been brought to the school’s attention MANY times. They consistently refuse to set one up, lumping all social issues into one [single] discussion group (Secondary pupil follow-up survey respondent).

Groups being pupil-led was considered to be appropriate by staff, to help make pupils in attendance feel accepted by their peers. However, previous research has suggested that pupils involved in such groups can sometimes feel that they lack sufficient staff support and/or that they are being tasked with LGBT inclusion as opposed to the school taking responsibility (Formby et al, 2016). There was some evidence of this here too:

It was more like the LGBT group of the sixth formers rather than the actual school, so I think if those sixth formers and that kind of group wasn’t there, I’m not sure we would do anything (Case study, secondary pupil).

In one of the case studies, there were also clear tensions between what school staff thought the group should focus on and how it should be run, versus what the pupils said they wanted.

In another case study school, the inclusion lead spoke about how having this LGBT group was written into the school improvement plan and therefore had to be implemented as it was “actually in writing”. In this school, the LGBT group was thought to be an important part of the school’s support in place for LGBT pupils, and one that had clear impacts:

I’ve heard them describing the group as being ‘everything’ to them. I think that a student coming into the school in Year 7 or 8, how long it might take until you find someone who’s sympathetic to you, having the confidence to go to the group and having some role models in older years, already must just be a huge help to them (Case study, secondary inclusion lead)

It’s amazing to see how some of the students having that group are so super-confident now and there’s quite a few who are quite openly gender-fluid or have different gender identity and are open in school about that. They’ve changed their name and they feel accepted I think, to quite a big degree (Case study, secondary SLT member).

One difficulty of running these groups discussed by pupils and staff was how to advertise the group safely. There was a concern by some that allowing the whole school to know the time and location of the group could potentially lead to ‘outing’ pupils who might not be ready to come out to the wider school. Another potential difficulty was ensuring that the group could meet the differing needs of pupils.

In one school, a group was set up for sixth form pupils only, who were very engaged in issues of inclusion. This was different to a specific LGBT group and was arranged for pupils to be available to provide advice and signposting for pupils who needed support.

Some school staff felt that the groups could be expanded to run events, such as a mini Pride, or be involved in activities for LGBT history month. Other ideas mentioned included:

Our plans for the LGBT group were to get speakers in, watch films, and also for the group to train staff (Case study, secondary staff member)

We’re going to do something for the Christmas fair and we do something for LGBT awareness [history] month… And then we do something for Pride month… We do some charity work… It’s not like we just go there and we just mess about. Part of it is that, and that’s what makes it so fun, and less like, ‘oh you’re like a group of people meeting twice a week’. It’s more like, you’re a group of people, you know? (Case study, secondary pupil).

The above quotes illustrate staff and pupil desire to utilise LGBT groups to effect change and work with others outside of school environments, but using pupils to train staff may present some challenges for all those involved.

5.3 Adverts or information about external support for LGBT pupils

The amount of signposting to outside agencies who specialise in support for LGBT individuals appeared to be low in the qualitative data collection, which mirrors findings in previous LGBT-related research (Formby et al, 2016). This was rarely mentioned by evaluation participants when asked about inclusion or support. Where this was mentioned, it was talked about by pupils as something that they felt the school should be doing but was not. In one secondary school focus group, for example, one pupil pointed out that there were LGBT groups in the area local to the school and that this was something the school could get involved in. Another pupil pointed out the benefits of making pupils aware of LGBT specific support available outside of school in order to make LGBT pupils feel less isolated:

I think if it’s made known the things that can happen outside of school and things, such as [the] LGBT group, because if there’s people around you that are the same as you, you don’t feel as different. But even if it’s that you know there’s an LGBT group, that makes things better, even if you don’t go to it - you know that it happens, like I’m not the only one (Case study, secondary pupil).

Another pupil at this school emphasised the need for the support systems to be better publicised:

It has to be treated in a very different way to any other issue… I don’t know how good the support system is at the moment but, like, when I was Year 8 and didn’t accept myself, I didn’t know anything about any support systems. I think it definitely needs to be more well-known (Case study, secondary pupil).

One member of staff talked about signposting to external support but not in relation to LGBT services specifically:

Sometimes I’d put things up like that, like mental health clinics or sexual health clinics, stuff like that where they’ve got phone numbers, because they don’t always want to talk to us (Telephone interview, secondary deputy head).

We do not know why there was a lack of advertising to external support groups but it could be due to a lack of staff awareness of outside agencies, or concern among staff about recommending pupils to external support that they had no involvement in.

6. Learning about LGBT identities and HBT bullying in school

At follow-up, there was an increase in staff reporting that LGB identities were included in lessons where possible across most subjects from 4% to 13%. For trans identities, the rise was from 3% to 10%.

There was a greater increase in including LGBT identities and relationships in lessons at primary level than at secondary level.

Modest increases in schools including learning about HBT bullying in lessons were also observed. At follow-up, 12% of staff reported that homophobic and biphobic bullying were discussed in lessons, compared to 6% at baseline. For transphobic bullying the increase was from 3% to 11%.

Qualitative data showed that primary schools were more likely to teach about LGBT identities and relationships through the use of books, whereas secondary schools were more likely to utilise assemblies, PSHE lessons, and/or drop-down days.

Teachers in a minority of schools reported some concerns in teaching this area due to perceived or actual parental opposition.

There was a fairly large reported increase in schools displaying posters or noticeboards about LGBT identities (from 25% to 55%).The largest increase was at secondary level. Primary schools had a very low baseline for displaying posters or noticeboards about HBT bullying, though saw larger increases here than secondary schools.

Marking LGBT-related events such as LGBT history month or Pride varied across schools, from small events and displays to larger celebrations, though staff felt that the inclusion of LGBT identities should not be restricted to only one month a year.

6.1 Learning about LGBT identities in lessons

6.1.1 learning about lgb identities in subject lessons – quantitative findings.

As part of the surveys, school staff were asked if their school covered LGB identities and relationships in subject lessons. This multiple-choice question offered 5 possible responses:

‘Yes, where possible across most subjects’
‘Yes, where possible in some subjects’
‘Yes, only as a specific session within a subject such as PSHE’
‘Don’t know’

At the programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff that said ‘Yes, where possible across most subjects’ increased from 4% at baseline to 13% at follow-up. In primary schools, the gains were greater, with an increase from 3% at baseline to 17% at follow-up. An increase was also observed among secondary staff, from 4% to 10%. Overall, Model 1 schools saw greater gains (baseline 4%, follow-up 14%) than those in Model 2 (baseline 4%, follow-up 12%).

Overall, the school-level weighted percentage of staff that said ‘Yes, where possible in some subjects’ increased from 20% at baseline to 33% at follow-up. Primary schools saw larger gains, from 15% at baseline to 33% at follow-up, yet an increase was also observed among secondary staff, from 25% to 34%. Model 1 schools saw slightly smaller gains (from 21% at baseline, to 34% at follow-up) compared to those in Model 2, which saw a rise from 19% at baseline to 33% at follow-up.

The school-level weighted percentage of staff that said ‘Yes, only as a specific session within a subject such as PSHE’ decreased from 42% at baseline to 37% at follow-up. In secondary schools, the decline was greater, from 43% at baseline to 36% at follow-up, compared to a drop from 41% to 38% among primary staff. Model 1 schools saw slightly less change, from a baseline figure of 37% to 35% at follow-up, compared with those in Model 2, for whom the baseline figure of 47% fell to 38% at follow-up. Overall, the school-level weighted percentage of staff that said LGB identities and relationships were not included in subject lessons decreased at the overall programme level, with this pattern replicated among both school phases and both delivery models. These figures are presented in Figure 3 (see also Appendix, Table 30) and show that LGB identities or relationships were included in lessons more frequently after the programme than beforehand.

Figure 3: At your school, are LGB identities or relationships included within any subject lessons?

6.1.2 Learning about trans identities in subject lessons – Quantitative findings

Staff members were also asked if their schools covered trans identities and relationships in lessons. This multiple-choice question offered the same 5 possible responses as listed above.

At the overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff that said ‘Yes, where possible across most subjects’ increased from 3% at baseline to 10% at follow-up. In primary schools it increased from 2% at baseline to 12% at follow-up. An increase was also observed among secondary staff, from 4% to 8%. Overall, Model 1 schools saw greater gains (from 3% at baseline to 11% at follow-up) compared with those in Model 2 (from 3% at baseline to 9% at follow-up).

The school-level weighted percentage of staff that said ‘Yes, where possible in some subjects’ grew from 11% at baseline to 25% at follow-up. In primary schools, the increase was greater, from 9% at baseline to 29% at follow-up, compared to a rise from 12% to 21% among secondary staff. Model 1 schools saw slightly more change, rising from a baseline figure of 12% to 29% at follow-up, compared to those in Model 2, rising from 10% at baseline to 21% at follow-up.

The school-level weighted percentage of staff that said trans identities and relationships were included ‘only as a specific session within a subject such as PSHE’ increased from 32% at baseline to 40% at follow-up. In primary schools, the gains were greater, reaching 42% from a 36% baseline. An increase was also observed among secondary staff, from 27% to 37%. Model 1 schools saw similar gains (a 9 percentage point increase from a baseline figure of 27%) to Model 2 schools (an 8 percentage point increase from 36% at baseline). Overall, the school-level weighted percentage of staff that said trans identities and relationships were not included in subject lessons decreased at the overall programme level, with this pattern replicated among both school phases and both delivery models. These figures are presented in Figure 4 (see also Appendix, Table 32) and show that trans identities or relationships were included in more subject lessons more often after the programme than before.

The survey data shows that, prior to the programme, teaching about trans identities and relationships was less commonplace in schools than teaching about LGB identities and relationships. For both areas of teaching, there was an increase associated with the programme. These gains were of similar magnitude. The overall weighted percentage of staff reporting that trans identities and relationships were included either ‘in most subjects’ or ‘in some subjects’ grew from 14% to 34.5% (+21.5%). For LGB identities and relationships, the figure rose from 23.8% to 46.5% (+22.7%). While these figures show a slightly stronger improvement for trans compared to LGB, the main findings are that trans teaching was far less widely reported at baseline, and that similar increases were witnessed in both areas of teaching over the evaluation period.

Figure 4: At your school, are trans identities or relationships included within any subject lessons?

6.1.3 Teaching methods – Qualitative findings

As part of the case studies, school staff and pupils were asked about the (post-programme) activities they had been doing in school related to LGBT identities. The majority of pupils were not aware of the programme having taken place in their school, likely due to programme support being focused predominantly on staff members in schools, and only a small number of providers having worked directly with groups of pupils. For this reason, pupils were asked about what types of learning about LGBT identities had happened in their school more recently, and whether they felt like this had changed from earlier experiences. The general pattern emerging from this was that, whilst both primary and secondary schools made use of assemblies to teach about LGBT identities, secondary schools mostly utilised PSHE and drop-down days, whereas in primary schools LGBT identities were most often taught through the use of particular books. Books had frequently been purchased by school staff that dealt with the theme of ‘difference’. Primary schools used these books across classes, from nursery up to Key Stage 2, to look at different family situations. The books were used in a variety of creative ways to plan lessons that looked at different families and identities:

So I actually got my Year 5s writing dating adverts for the king advertising that he didn’t want to marry a princess. He wanted to marry a prince. So we do look directly at same-sex relationships in that way (Telephone interview, primary assistant head).

One headteacher described how the school had used equality books focused on LGBT identities throughout the school to discuss the question ‘Is it ok to be different?’. This question was chosen as a direct result of the training they had received.

As outlined above, in secondary schools, learning about LGBT identities was most likely to be incorporated into PSHE, or through a drop-down day which focused on this area. Pupils in secondary schools commented that they found lessons to be helpful where they had to match up LGBT-related words with their meaning:

You learn about things you had no clue about 5 minutes before (Case study, secondary pupil).

Pupils also thought that films were a good way to teach about LGBT identities, as they were easy to understand, and they enjoyed small group discussions, as this enabled them to gain other people’s perspectives and to think more about the issues. Where LGBT identities were taught directly in PSHE, this was appreciated by pupils:

I hate PSHE… but the fact that she introduced that, I was like, you’re talking for me… I’m learning something… she’s teaching about same-sex couples, like sex, how it works, what you need to protect from. The only way I was actually learning about that before was a book I bought, and that’s really dodge… It was nice to actually have another human speaking about it, who I actually know, instead of like a celebrity or an author or something (Case study, secondary pupil).

In addition to teaching the area through PSHE, there was some discussion during conversations with both staff and pupils about how to embed LGBT identities across the curriculum. In one school, staff explained how they were planning to look at personal identities by focusing on the prominent artist Frida Kahlo and her change in image throughout her life. Staff from another school discussed how this was done using a variety of writers:

From Oscar Wilde to ‘How not to be a boy’, Robert Webb, I got all of these extracts. I had a read and directed them to… have discussions about how others feel and how writers have expressed their identity or their problems with identifying and in life. And that sort of opened up, that freedom gave them the opportunity to sort of talk about their own and plan their own responses. We haven’t had that before and I think to be honest, I think even 3 years ago I don’t think we would have been allowed that opportunity. So I think for Year 10 as well, to have that oracy and that articulacy throughout that term was really helpful for them (Case study, secondary staff member).

Staff across case studies talked about making an effort to include LGBT identities across subject areas, with one primary headteacher commenting that it needs to be “fundamental to the curriculum”. Another telephone interviewee discussed how teaching staff had created departmental action plans which outlined the different ways each member of staff can bring this area of teaching into their subject. It was felt that this way of working the subject into the curriculum helps to normalise LGBT identities for pupils and ensure that it is not seen as something different that is taught as a one-off:

I think because they do see it as part of just their normal learning, that’s really helped to make them think this is just as normal. This person we’re reading about who’s transgender is completely normal. Then when we had discussions with the children… I guess because it was the first year we were introducing it, I thought to myself this is going to be a big thing, this is going to cause a big stir in school and all the rest of it, but actually – nothing (Case study, primary headteacher)

It’s not that we do a theme week and then we never talk about it again. It’s the opposite of that… we were able to say OK how could you pick up this issue in history, how could you cover it in art, what other subjects does this link with? So we did try to plan and discuss all of those and my mind-set and my theory behind it is gradually embedding it into my colleagues’ heads and way of thinking (Telephone interview, primary headteacher).

Pupils in a secondary school concurred with the notion of integration into lessons, and were able to see clear ways to ensure the curriculum was more inclusive, including within subjects such as maths, as the below example of a potential maths problem illustrates:

This is John and his husband Jim and they’re buying a house… See, that would help. Try incorporating it somehow (Case study, secondary pupil).

Other schools at the early stages of making changes after their training had historically only touched on LGBT identities separately through drop-down days and/or by using outside agencies. These schools were therefore thinking about how to incorporate the area across the curriculum. One telephone interviewee acknowledged that they were unsure of how to embed it, commenting that it was a “tricky thing” to do.

Another interviewee had utilised provider support as an opportunity to have their lesson plan examined which resulted in them changing some of the language they had planned to use. This was described as a “learning curve” for staff on language that they had not previously known. In addition to knowledge, the training also helped teachers to feel that this was an area that they were both allowed, and furthermore obligated, to teach. There was a concern for many about how to teach about LGBT identities in a sensitive way without offending anyone:

I think for teachers there’s always the worry that you’re going to put your foot in your mouth and say something that maybe I shouldn’t have said it that way, or whatever. So it’s given us that validity, that validation to say yes you are legally required to do it this way actually, and it’s fine and the children do need to know and do want to know. That’s quite liberating (Case study, primary programme lead).

However, one teacher specifically mentioned that they had concerns that their Year 7 pupils may not be mature enough to deal with the content, and therefore felt they needed more training on how to deliver the area to younger age groups. This speaks to ongoing concerns about how to achieve age appropriateness, which schools may need continued support with.

In a separate interview, a staff member discussed how staff in general needed to learn more about identities, commenting on how different members of staff had different levels of knowledge and awareness, but that all staff have a responsibility to ensure they are well versed in this area in order to teach it competently. This was echoed by some secondary pupils who had experienced a teacher admitting they did not know about same-sex relationships, and so could not teach pupils about them.

Use of outside speakers

When discussing what could work well in schools in the future, pupils (predominantly from secondary schools) talked about the value of having speakers from outside of the school, particularly those with direct personal experience:

It’s like [with] someone else speaking, someone who has more experience than us, we can think about how other people feel or maybe how we’ll feel (Case study, secondary school pupil).

However, the use of outside speakers was not without some risks:

There are also people that they bring into the school that are really homophobic and who spread their views as if it’s a true fact… It’s good for people to understand that there are different views, but bringing in someone who is just going to say, ‘oh you’re going to hell’, and just spout homophobic things… If you are part of the LGBT community and in the same room as someone saying, ‘oh this is wrong, this is not good’, that makes you feel horrible (Case study, secondary pupil).

Drawing on the experiences of LGBT people was seen to be something that would help pupils to understand how it might feel to be LGBT, and bring insights that (non-LGBT) teachers may not have. Teachers also felt that guest speakers coming in to present may be more impactful for pupils to have someone who may be seen as more expert and not their regular school teacher speaking. However, for the headteacher and a class teacher in one primary school, there was a degree of unease that this may conversely be seen to potentially highlight the issue in an unintentionally negative way:

One of the things that we want to do is make sure we do have guest speakers … [but] in my mind it kind of clashes with what I think is right… like… here’s this person at a one-off assembly. It really should be coming from the wider staff. I think there’s more power in the units of work, discussing it with people they are comfortable with and know really well (Case study, primary headteacher)

I mean, obviously, there is the unfortunate side-effect of that is… well, [it] could verge on the, ‘you’re this, come and talk to us about it’, and that in a way is sort of counter… (Case study, primary staff member).

In a small number of schools, teachers said that they had learned a lot from pupils in the school who were LGBT, and in some cases these pupils had been asked to lead assemblies talking about their experiences. Pupils also thought it would be beneficial to hear from other young people who they could relate to more easily.

6.1.4 Lack of inclusion – Qualitative findings

The baseline survey prompted staff in one primary school to reflect on their lack of teaching in this area to date, and the assumptions that they had made about what the children did or did not know. Staff commented that they were surprised to learn that pupils did not know what the terms in the survey meant and how their pupils wanted to be better informed about LGBT identities:

One of the questions was about do you do assemblies and things on… and they just looked at me and… I said you’re not going to be in trouble! I know that we don’t do enough of that. In the end she [a pupil] said, ‘oh are we doing this so that we can know more and then we’ll be a better person when we leave school?’ (Case study, primary senior leader).

Where this was not the case, pupils vocalised their concerns that LGBT identities were not covered enough throughout the curriculum or within their PSHE lessons:

This lack of education is terrible for people because it makes them feel like their feelings are not real, not acknowledged and not accepted… I think we should have lessons about LGBT sex and relationships. These lessons could be incorporated into the standard lessons on sex and relationships as to feel more normal and again not alienated (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

The only lesson they’ve mentioned LBGT is RE… Instead of acknowledging that you’re learning about homosexuality, it’s about Catholics don’t like homosexuality (Case study, secondary pupil).

For some pupils, this was particularly pertinent as it meant they were denied access to important information about how to adopt safer sex practices:

For me, because I am not straight, it would greatly help me if I learnt about like 2 people who are of the same sex who wanted to have sex, because it’s a lot different from like a male and a female having sex… I don’t know how it works… so if there came a time when I wanted to have sex with someone who wasn’t a man, then it would be like, help! And so, yeah, it would be refreshing to learn about that, because I haven’t learned about that yet (Case study, secondary pupil).

Pupils from another school also mentioned that LGBT identities were a topic rarely touched upon in their sex education and that where it was mentioned it felt “tagged on rather than integrated”. Teachers in this school acknowledged that they were still at an early stage of implementing work in this area:

We’re trying to integrate it… but it’s really got a long way to develop. It’s in RE but largely from a focus of a religious rather than an LGBT-inclusive perspective, and it’s in sex ed but it’s not integrated through. It wasn’t in the drop-down day at all, actually, it was just completely missing (Case study, secondary staff member).

Instead, teachers in this school discussed their plans for the future, and how they intended to have a large focus on the area within the curriculum in the next month (to coincide with LGBT history month).

6.1.5 Impact of inclusive teaching – Qualitative findings

Within the case studies, it was noted that some (primary) pupils who were emotionally mature enough could interpret inclusive books as a message about acceptance and LGBT identities, whereas others may not have had this level of understanding but would enjoy the stories regardless. Often the teaching in primary schools seemed to then open up more informal class conversations that may not have come about otherwise, where pupils seemingly felt comfortable to ask a variety of questions and talk about their own family members who were LGBT. Pupils noted that learning through books had impacted on some of their peers more than others, as this focus group discussion shows:

It changed some people… Some people… they took it in… Some people’s first impressions were [to] laugh… I liked the book because most books… there’s books like you know fairy-tale books, the prince gets married to the princess. I think there should be fairy-tale books where like 2 princes get married, or 2 princesses get married… Yes, just to show it’s OK (Case study, primary pupils).

Pupils also took away messages about learning to be themselves in the face of potential adversity, and about the development of empathy, for example looking at puberty and how that process might feel for a trans person:

We read a book called I Am Jazz and it was about a little boy and he was wearing girls’ clothes. And his mum and brother thought he was being silly. When he grew up they took him to the doctor’s and he told them that he was transgender. He wanted to use the girls’ bathroom but the teachers wouldn’t let him (Case Study, primary pupil).

Primary pupils in focus groups across the case studies talked about the learning that had occurred for them as a result of this work. Pupils discussed how they had previously been confused when they had seen men or women who did not look or act like the gender they were perceived to be. The work in this area had helped them understand the notion of transgender and that people may not always look the way they might be expected to look. Similarly, some pupils had not been aware of what the word gay meant and therefore said they had felt confused if they saw a gay or lesbian couple either in real life or on television. Learning had included how being gay was illegal in some countries, and pupils commented:

[You] should be able to love who you want to love… [and be] really supportive to all the gay couples (Case study, primary pupil).

Pupils also talked about how they or their peers had previously found the topic funny if it was brought up in class or assemblies, but now they felt more aware and that they could be mature about it. Primary pupil familiarity and confidence with terminology was evident in some of the case studies, including in one where they sang a song about it being ‘OK’ to be LGB.

Some primary teachers emphasised the importance of starting to teach about this area at a young age, so that issues do not become ‘entrenched’ by the time pupils move to secondary school:

Yes, I think it was necessary, I really do. And I think because children see this stuff in the media, they’re seeing that they’re confused about things and who’s going to answer those confused questions if you’ve got parents who don’t know the answer or don’t want to discuss it with them. Some do, obviously, and that’s fine, but you’ve got a big group of children who otherwise… where would they go to? (Case study, primary programme lead).

Another teacher made the point that pupils will be aware of LGBT identities from adult conversations and the media, and that many would not be in a position to receive input from their parents, and therefore learning accurate information in primary schools was important. In contrast, there seemed to be general agreement from lunchtime supervisors within one primary school that some of the pupils in lower key stages may be too young to understand this area and possibly not be interested. These staff felt that children should be “kept innocent” and felt that there may be concerns from parents about what and how this area would be taught. Another concern from a primary lead was about “overdoing” the teaching in this area, which may “plant ideas in their head” about their gender identity, perhaps reflecting wider public ‘debate’ at the time of the research:

You don’t want to lead them into something that they wouldn’t normally choose, but you want them to understand that it’s OK (Case study, primary programme lead).

By contrast, others did not see curriculum inclusion as ‘teaching’ or ‘implanting ideas’, but felt it was merely “informing them about equality. It’s not a lesson they have to learn, it’s just something that is there” (Case study, primary SLT member). However, in one secondary school, a teacher had been told by a more senior colleague that it was ‘inappropriate’ to discuss a painting of a gay couple. Similarly, some secondary pupils experienced their questions within PSHE being deemed ‘inappropriate’:

When we are in lessons such as PSHE, people ask relevant questions about LGBT but teachers class it as inappropriate and choose not to answer which everyone thinks is out of order. It is like we aren’t allowed to talk appropriately and openly about gay people (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

In other cases, pupils felt that the teaching they were subject to was inappropriate:

Especially in like RS and stuff, whenever we do bring up LGBT issues, it’s treated as more of a debate than a discussion… Because you can’t change who you are, I don’t think that should be treated as something, as like a debate… You can’t really disagree with someone that’s been born that way. It’s like disagreeing with someone because they have ginger hair or something… It’s treated as more like a novelty than like an actual thing (Case study, secondary pupil).

6.2 Posters or noticeboards about LGBT identities

At the overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff reporting that posters or noticeboards about LGBT identities were displayed in their school increased from 25% at baseline to 55% at follow-up. In primary schools it increased from 15% at baseline, to 43% at follow-up. A substantial increase was also observed among secondary staff, from 33% to 65%.

Model 1 schools saw similar gains, from 23% at baseline, to 55% at follow-up, to Model 2 (baseline 26%, follow-up 54%). Although both sets of schools saw large increases in the display of relevant posters and notices (see Appendix, Table 34).

The qualitative data highlighted how many primary schools adopted the ‘different families, same love’ campaign, originally conceived by Stonewall, for their posters and noticeboards (even those who did not receive support from Stonewall directly). This was seen to be a positive way to get messages across to young people about different identities, particularly for younger children in these schools. In some primary schools, pupils also created posters with messages such as ‘It is OK to be different’, or focussing on inclusion and diversity:

We used some of the resources, age-appropriate, and we found things online and we made diversity inclusion noticeboards, and they include references to a huge variety of differences and why we need to be inclusive… With the older ones there’s more for them to read and think about, it’s quite reflective. It’s to promote deeper thinking maybe about their behaviour and their assumptions and stereotypes. With the younger ones, they’re sort of pictures from picture books and the message is it’s OK to be different, and it’s very visual obviously, just recognising that we are all different and that’s good. So we’ve put those up ready for September. So we had the training in the summer term and we felt that was a good place to start (Telephone interview, primary headteacher).

Posters were often based around the books that classes had been reading and basing their work around (discussed in 6.1.3 above). Often a display would be erected in the library to go alongside and highlight the addition of equality or diversity-themed books. Staff in primary schools felt that pupils making posters as an activity was helpful to clarify their learning, ensure their understanding, and to be able to reflect on and promote their own ideas and feelings about identities. For one interviewee, posters and visual displays were seen to help contribute to the general ethos of the school:

So, displays… we’re very much a school that talks about just being who you want to be. If you’re different, so what? We celebrate individuality. And parents certainly when they come round the school and say that you certainly get that feeling it’s about that uniqueness and that as long as you’re not offensive to people and you’re not chucking it down people’s throats, that you can just be who you want to be (Telephone interview, middle school deputy head).

In secondary schools, posters and visual displays had been made depicting notable LGBT thinkers or personalities:

In terms of visual displays, we’ve got these huge murals of various independent thinkers around the school. The LGBT network did a campaign and survey [in order to] put an LGBT thinker up, so we’ve got Alan Turing in a very prominent position in the [social area] of the school (Telephone interview, further education deputy head)

I put one up last year using the [provider] stuff, of successful people from the LGBT community. It was in the corridor. The older kids have seen that all the time and the parents walk past it. I think having that presence is really important (Telephone interview, primary assistant head).

A number of secondary school staff members said they had put posters up as part of a Pride wall or Pride display. Overall, secondary pupils and staff welcomed the display of posters, for example reflecting on the messages that they hoped having these types of posters would portray to visitors and pupils in the school:

I think for other people, say if they’re bringing their kids here for an open day, they see that, they’re sort of like, ‘oh hey I have a feeling my kid might be like this’…(Case study, secondary pupil)

I think the presence of that wall in itself is hugely validating for somebody who is going through a confusion around their identity and just wants to explore it, or is clear on their identity, because it’s saying that, it’s giving it that respect and that weight of importance. So I think just its presence is quite comforting and says a lot about the culture in this school in terms of respect (Case study, secondary staff member).

Secondary pupils felt that the posters should be clearly visible - as one pupil commented, “over the top huge” - and placed in conspicuous locations often frequented by staff, pupils and visitors to the school, such as a main stairway. However, secondary pupils in one school discussed the potentially sensitive nature of the topic for some pupils, and that visual displays would have to be very carefully designed in order to ensure that no offence or upset be caused to a pupil who is struggling with their own feelings or identity:

Going back to the posters and assemblies and raising awareness, I would personally be quite afraid, depending on who would be presenting the assemblies or designing the posters or putting them up, because… everyone has different opinions. It’s very easy for someone to say the wrong thing or just miss… something, especially for someone who is maybe not accepting of themselves, who they are, at all, is worried that people won’t accept and are quite fragile. It’s very hard, if then someone says the wrong thing, it can completely turn someone’s life around (Case study, secondary pupil).

Similarly, staff in a primary school had concerns about how increasing LGBT visibility could be experienced in the context of their school:

[We] talked about whether we did a display in the school where we had LGBT figures, and I actually went away from that, because we’ve got a family - and in a [rural area] everyone knows they’re a same-sex family - but I didn’t want to highlight it as an issue, because I felt for their children it made it an issue… So what we did was we did displays but it wasn’t just on an LGBT basis, it was on a gender basis, on a race basis (Telephone interview, primary headteacher).

More generally, some pupils and staff also had some scepticism about whether posters or noticeboards were successful, perceiving them as “not a big enough gesture to have an effect”. There was some caution that posters and noticeboards could become a passive or tokenistic practice, rather than something actively promoting inclusion.

In a small number of schools there was discussion from staff about difficulties with creating noticeboards or posters pertaining to LGBT identities, for example because of a lack of a central space to display posters in one school. Also, needing more posters provided to schools as a resource as it was commented that buying these types of posters was “almost impossible”, despite them being viewed as useful for information and to plan activities:

Also posters of famous people, like scientists and things like that, would be really helpful (Telephone interview, secondary programme lead).

When talking about visual displays relating to LGBT identities, a telephone interviewee reflected on the change in their school over time and the help of the training that had enabled them to promote LGBT identities through displays, without fear of reprisal from colleagues or the senior leadership team:

We’ve had experiences in the past with staff that have been quite, ‘why do we need to know all this? This is all very complicated, you’re either straight or you’re gay or you’re not’. I’ve been here 20 years and getting past that barrier from - most days when I used to come back from Stonewall conferences and things and we put these posters up, and SLT would be like, ‘no, or, you can, but can you hide them?’ - to kind of suddenly be in the position where actually not only can I actually just do that, but I can only do that with the support of everybody else (Telephone interview, middle school programme lead).

6.3 Learning about HBT bullying in lessons

As part of the surveys, school staff were asked if homophobic or biphobic bullying were included in lessons. This multiple-choice question offered 5 possible responses: ‘Yes, where possible across most subjects’, ‘Yes, where possible in some subjects’, ‘Yes, only as a specific session within a subject such as PSHE’, ‘No’ and ‘Don’t know’. The results are summarised below in Figure 5 and presented in full in the appendix (Table 36).

At the programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff that said ‘Yes, where possible across most subjects’ increased from 6% at baseline to 12% at follow-up. In primary schools, the gains were greater, increasing from 4% at baseline to 16% at follow-up. An increase was also observed among secondary staff, from 7% to 9%. Overall, Model 1 schools saw greater gains (from 4% at baseline to 12% at follow-up) than Model 2 (baseline 7%, follow-up 12%).

Overall, the school-level weighted percentage of staff that said homophobic or biphobic bullying were included ‘where possible in some subjects’ increased from 19% at baseline to 30% at follow-up. In primary schools, the gains were greater, increasing from 17% at baseline to 30% at follow-up. An increase was also recorded among secondary staff, from 21% to 29%. Model 1 schools saw similar gains (from 18% at baseline, to 29% at follow-up) to Model 2 schools (baseline 20%, follow-up 30%).

The school-level weighted percentage of staff reporting that homophobic or biphobic bullying were included ‘only as a specific session within a subject such as PSHE’ changed from 40% at baseline to 41% at follow-up. In secondary schools, there was a slight decline, from 41% at baseline to 39% at follow-up, compared to a rise from 40% to 42% among primary staff. Model 1 schools saw a small decrease (baseline 41%, follow-up 39%), while Model 2 schools witnessed a small increase (baseline 40%, follow-up 42%). These figures, along with those presented earlier in this section, show that homophobic or biphobic bullying were included in more lessons more frequently after the programme than before.

School staff members were asked about whether their school covered transphobic or gender-identity based bullying in lessons. This multiple-choice question offered the same 5 possible responses as listed above.

At the overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff that responded ‘Yes, where possible across most subjects’ increased from 3% at baseline to 11% at follow-up. In primary schools it increased from 2% at baseline to 14% at follow-up. An increase was also observed among secondary staff, from 5% to 8%. Overall, Model 1 schools saw greater gains on this variable, from 3% at baseline to 12% at follow-up, than Model 2 (baseline 3%, follow-up 10%).

Figure 5: At your school, is homophobic or biphobic bullying included within any subject lessons?

The school-level weighted percentage of staff that said their school covered transphobic or gender-identity based bullying in lessons ‘where possible in some subjects’ grew from 13% at baseline to 23% at follow-up. In primary schools, the increase was greater, from 13% at baseline to 24% at follow-up, compared to a rise from 14% to 22% among secondary staff. Model 1 schools saw similar levels of change, from 14% at baseline, to 25% at follow-up, to Model 2 schools (baseline 13%, follow-up 22%).

The school-level weighted percentage of staff saying that transphobic or gender-identity based bullying were included ‘only as a specific session within a subject such as PSHE’ increased from 33% at baseline to 43% at follow-up. In primary schools, the gains were greater, increasing from 35% at baseline to 42% at follow-up. An increase was also observed among secondary staff, from 35% to 42%. Model 1 schools saw slightly smaller gains (baseline 32%, follow-up 40%) compared to those in Model 2 (baseline 34%, follow-up 46%). These figures show that transphobic or gender-identity based bullying were included in more lessons more frequently after the programme than before. These figures are summarised below in Figure 6 and presented in full in the appendix (Table 38).

Figure 6: At your school, is transphobic bullying included within any subject lessons?

The case studies suggested that, on occasion, the provider delivered input directly to pupils. In one school, a member of the senior leadership team described how the provider led a school assembly to the children about HBT language and how it was harmful. Generally, however, it was school staff who delivered input to pupils around HBT bullying. This was often in the form of an assembly rather than a subject lesson:

We had another [assembly] about HBT bullying which the head delivered about talking about words that we should and shouldn’t be using (Case study, primary staff member)

We did have some assemblies on the back of it… to talk about HBT bullying and the use pejoratively of the words gay and lesbian (Telephone interview, further education deputy head).

Often the aim was to challenge the casual use of homophobic language through education:

Children might say their work was gay, obviously they didn’t have a clue what it meant, so we would like to address it from an education point of view, not ‘oh you shouldn’t say that’, but explaining why and what it meant. I really wanted it to be progressive all the way through school… so the children built on it year on year, not just an assembly or a book. We wanted it to be built in and embedded (Case study, primary SLT member)

For some children, for some of our boys, it’s been part and parcel of their language for a long period of time, calling each other gay. But what we are seeing with some of our Year 6 boys after those reflective conversations, they’re really, really coming across like they’ve got a good understanding of it and talking about their own family members and brothers and sisters who are LGBT. It’s been really powerful to hear some of the language around it, so they can then talk… so it opens it up basically (Telephone interview, primary safeguarding lead).

In one case study school, the researcher was able to observe an assembly dedicated to International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia (IDAHOBIT). The teacher described what the individual words meant and included pupils through questioning them about gender and sexual identity stereotypes. However, pupils participating in the case studies were not always positive about the success of such assemblies:

I think most people just took it as a sign to, like, make fun of it, so it’s the whole thing about you can’t say all this sort of homophobic, biphobic or transphobic language, but then as soon as the assembly was over, everyone would go out and they would just mock [the teacher] who did the assembly by saying those things. So it wasn’t particularly helpful (Case study, secondary pupil)

I think once we learnt about it, it didn’t change too much. It might have changed for a few weeks, but I think maybe to make it more like, so bullying stops about how people look, maybe we should do it in lessons more often, because I’ve realised that when we did do lessons about being transgender, lesbian and gay, a lot of people stopped bullying and stuff in the school, and a few weeks later, it started again (Case study, primary pupil).

When asked what they would like to see in relation to teaching, pupils were often keen to receive more input on HBT bullying as well as wider LGBT-related content. Pupils wanted HBT bullying to be a regular topic of discussion within schools, and felt it would be useful to have discussions between year groups, for example assemblies aimed at Years 5 and 6 together:

Put homophobic language at like the top priority for words, and more education, more integration of it into education, like into sex ed, especially trans people (Case study, secondary pupils)

They worked with me, the students, about what they wanted to include and what they wanted other students to know, especially around things like bullying. So we created a month’s worth of work for tutors to do with what the students wanted the other students to know and how to stop homophobic bullying. Tutors delivered that and it kind of culminated into… we did a pledge, we got all tutor groups to make a pledge, in terms of how to treat people equally regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, all of those things, and then we made a display of it (Case study, secondary SLT member).

In this school, staff mentioned that it was written into the curriculum to eliminate bullying, including HBT. Elsewhere, some secondary pupils felt that teachers needed to be educated further in order to teach about, or respond to, HBT bullying, as well as to support LGBT pupils more effectively.

6.4 Posters or noticeboards about HBT bullying

At the overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff reporting that posters for notice boards about HBT bullying were displayed in their school increased from 24% at baseline to 46% at follow-up. In primary schools it increased from 10% at baseline to 35% at follow-up. A substantial increase was also observed among secondary staff, from 37% to 56%. Model 1 schools saw similar gains (baseline 25%, follow-up 47%) to those in Model 2 (baseline 24%, follow-up 45%), though both sets of schools saw large increases in the display of posters and notices (see Appendix, Table 42).

The qualitative data suggested that HBT bullying specifically was less likely to be the subject of visual displays than broader LGBT or gender-related content, for example during focus groups with pupils in primary schools, some pupils talked about having posters up with quotes about being one’s self, and addressing stereotypes about how boys and girls should look and behave. Posters were sometimes said to promote equality on a more general level, though some anti-bullying posters also mentioned sexual orientation as a potential target of bullying:

We had last year a boy from Year 6, he drew a ‘gay is OK’… poster for anti-bullying [week]. He said that because he thinks that everyone is equal and they all have the same rights as us (Case study, primary pupil).

One school had a poster contest related to anti-bullying. Another school described how a pupil had created a poster for the school newsletter which highlighted thoughts and feelings associated with bullying:

They’d drawn themselves in a situation with a bully, and then they’d put round it in different colours the emotions that person might have been feeling and also the emotions, potentially, of the bully. Then in anti-bullying [week] the children just did an A3 sheet that was with their thoughts about equality, basically. And we have posters up around the school that are produced by our safeguarding board, about stopping bullying, and respect (Telephone interview, primary headteacher).

In 2 schools where a cautious approach had been taken to address the subject area, anti-HBT bullying posters were put up alongside posters about other types of bullying, in order to draw attention without being too conspicuous:

Slowly, slowly, we did a sort of drip approach to the project, where we stuck up some posters originally. We didn’t say anything about them, we just put them up. Mixed with anti-racism and anti-hate crime things, across the whole school (Telephone interview, secondary deputy head).

This approach was said to have been extremely impactful for certain pupils within the school:

I’d had children come up to me and say, ‘Miss, since you’ve put up those posters on the wall, I’ve decided to come out to my parents’, and then I said when are you going to do that and how do you feel about it? …It was quite a big deal for him. But I asked him at the end of the year how he felt, and he said he felt relieved, he felt much happier (Telephone interview, secondary deputy head).

6.5 Marking LGBT-related events

As an example of a visible marker of LGBT inclusion in schools, the survey showed an increase in staff saying that their school marked LGBT history month within lessons, assemblies or displays (see Appendix, Table 44). At the overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of schools that reportedly did so increased from 16% to 35% over the evaluation period. The gains observed in secondary schools (from 26% to 46%) were slightly greater than those seen in primaries (from 4% to 23%). However, whilst the programme was associated with gains of a similar magnitude, primary schools were starting from a far lower baseline than secondary schools. Greater gains were made in Model 1 schools (from 18% to 39%) compared to Model 2 (from 14% to 31%), though this difference is mainly accounted for by primary schools. At baseline, only 1% of Model 2 primaries reported activities to mark LGBT history month, rising to 17% at follow-up. It appears that the programme is associated with positive impact across all types of participating schools on this measure.

Staff were also asked if their school marked anti-bullying week within lessons, assemblies or displays. The results are tabulated in the appendix (Table 45). Overall, the school-level weighted percentage of schools that did so increased from 85% to 90% over the evaluation period. This indicates that anti-bullying week was marked by far more schools than LGBT history month both before and after the programme. The programme was associated with greater increases in school activity around LGBT history month, yet there was more scope for improvement on this. Another comparison worth highlighting is that anti-bullying week is covered more by primary schools (97% at follow-up) than secondary schools (84% at follow-up). Model 1 schools started with a slightly higher baseline figure (87%) than Model 2 (83%) with both 90% overall at follow-up.

In addition to LGBT history month and anti-bullying week, staff were asked if their schools used lessons, assemblies or displays to mark other LGBT-related events such as local Pride or IDAHOBIT events. Results can be found in the appendix (Table 46). At the overall programme level, the baseline value (11%) was lower than for LGBT history month (16%), but similar gains were observed across the evaluation period (from 11% to 30%). These other events were marked much more commonly in secondary (19%) than primary schools (5%) at baseline. The gains were also greater in secondary (from 19% to 40%) than primary schools (from 3% to 18%), yet this is evidence of positive change across the evaluation period. The overall change in Model 1 and Model 2 schools was identical (11% at baseline, 30% at follow-up).

Just under half of the case study schools linked some work to a specific event or period of time, such as IDAHOBIT (see above), LGBT history month, Pride or anti-bullying week. In one school LGBT history month was marked after support from the provider, where materials were created and delivered to classes, and there was a non-uniform day. In the focus group, pupils in this school remembered undertaking activities for LGBT history month, including looking at famous gay people and LGBT rights. From a staff perspective, “February… gives a nice opportunity to talk about LGBT… just to raise a bit of awareness really”. Some schools were also planning work for the next LGBT history month, such as letting pupils wear rainbow shoelaces, and more ambitious plans such as the below:

There’s LGBT history month that we’re obviously going to work on and do a big piece of work, like we’ve just done Black history month, getting everyone in the school involved in different elements of that, so it’s going to be the same for that (Case study, secondary senior leader).

For another school who celebrated LGBT history month, the feeling from the programme lead was that although this is very important, it was more important to ensure that LGBT-related teaching was happening year-round throughout the school:

During LGBT month, in February, [the headteacher] gets all the rainbow bunting out and everything, he goes completely over the top, [but] it’s just dropping it in I think more through the year… You roll the Black people out in October and you roll the gay people out in February, and the rest of the year we go back to being quite white and heterosexual (Telephone interview, primary assistant head).

Other staff also had similar misgivings:

It would be nice to maybe have something a bit more visual in school, not just have February as the month where we celebrate it, because it should be… consistent and should be celebrated all the time, I think. It shouldn’t necessarily just be given a slot. And the children are happy to see it throughout the year, otherwise if it’s only spoken about at a certain time, it doesn’t really have the right impact (Case study, secondary staff member).

A headteacher from a primary school had made parents aware of the school’s plans to celebrate LGBT history month and had received some negativity about their child’s involvement.

Schools more often talked about celebrating their local Pride events or holding mini Pride events within their school, for example one school had a stand where they gave out Pride flags, stickers and cupcakes. A staff member and pupil who had been involved reflected on what they felt was the impact of the event:

I was a bit apprehensive about how it was going to go down, but it was amazing, it was absolutely incredible, everyone got on board, you could see all the kids with the little flags going along the school. And I wasn’t sure what the impact was going to be, but talking to the [school’s LGBT] group at the beginning of this year, because that happened in June… [and] they were all openly saying that there’s been less homophobic comments, there’s been less jokes, they’ve noticed that teachers pull students up on things a lot more. They feel it’s been a very positive move that’s happened, and there’s a lot more awareness around LGBT rights and presence (Case study, secondary SLT member)

I was like on the stand, giving out things… I went up to my lesson after that, and it was fun to see everyone who had stickers or who were still eating cake or who had the little flags that we gave out… It was kind of like, you recognised how many people there were who weren’t homophobic, transphobic or biphobic, and it was kind of refreshing to see that… After that sort of event, everyone was like, ‘oh there’s a load of people who support this’, and then so it was kind of like, ‘I’m not going to be as mean to people because there’s a lot of them now!’ (Case study, secondary pupil).

Other schools did Pride pledges, Pride wall displays, stalls and held t-shirt design competitions. Case study participants also talked about celebrating diversity at other occasions, including anti-bullying week and IDAHOBIT:

We do an anti-bullying week every year… and it all comes down to everybody has got the right to be respected despite their colour, despite their sex, despite their religion… Whatever their interests are… The older you go throughout the school the more groups we actually mention (Case study, primary PSHE lead)

We also have mental health awareness week which we celebrate every year, and this year again we did a diversity day and we flew the rainbow flag and we did a special event with a beautiful rainbow and people came and wrote messages on it. We try to do these events every so often, but we wanted to make sure there was a formal diversity day and that was part of our deal, as it were, with [the provider] as well (Case study, secondary SLT member)

We sort of tied it into how we do our worships across the Church year… so we celebrate differences, different faiths, different cultures and also different families… Obviously today with it being [IDAHOBIT]… it’s very specific today what we’re going to be doing… It’s [anti-] HBT worship specifically (Case study, primary programme lead).

7. Staff confidence and capability

Survey data showed that 78% of staff felt either ‘very able’ or ‘quite able’ to respond to HBT bullying prior to the programme, rising to 91% at follow-up.

Improvements were greater in primary than in secondary schools.

At baseline, 56% of staff felt either ‘very able’ or ‘quite able’ to include LGB identities and relationships in teaching, rising to 77% at follow-up. The proportion of staff that felt either ‘very able’ or ‘quite able’ to include trans identities and relationships in teaching also went up, from 38% at baseline to 62% at follow-up.

Staff said that training had aided knowledge and confidence to include LGBT identities and relationships in teaching.

In general, staff viewed the training and other support from providers as overwhelmingly positive, with impacts on schools’ ability to work towards an LGBT-inclusive environment. Support that was tailored, ongoing, and focused on identities was particularly valued.

7.1 Staff confidence in responding to HBT bullying

On average, survey data indicates that staff already felt able to respond to HBT bullying at baseline, though this improved further during the programme. At baseline, staff confidence in their ability to respond to homophobic or biphobic bullying was a school-level weighted average of 78% feeling either ‘very able’ or ‘quite able’. This rose to 94% at follow-up (see Figure 7, and Appendix, Table 47). For these survey items, responses were given on a scale of 1: very able, to 5: very unable.

Improvements were larger among staff in primary schools, with the school-level weighted average increasing from 74% to 96%, compared to figures from staff in secondary schools, which increased from 82% to 91%. Model 1 and Model 2 schools witnessed similar improvements, both beginning with a baseline value of 78% and rising by 15% and 17% respectively.

Figure 7: To what extent do you feel able to respond to homophobic or biphobic bullying, should it occur?

With regard to responding to transphobic or gender identity-based bullying, a school-level weighted average of 68% of staff at baseline responded either ‘very able’ or ‘able’, rising to 90% at follow-up. This indicates that, on average, staff already felt relatively able to respond to HBT bullying at baseline, although this improved further during the programme.

This pattern was more pronounced among staff in primary schools, with the school-level weighted average increasing from 62% to 92%, compared to figures from staff in secondary schools, which increased from 73% to 88%. Model 1 and Model 2 schools again saw gains of almost the same size, with gains of 22% from baseline values of 67% for Model 1 and 69% for Model 2 (see Appendix, Table 48).

Respondents reporting that they felt ‘very able’ or ‘quite able’ to respond to HBT bullying were asked to state the reasons why. More than one reason could be selected. At baseline, the most frequently chosen reason was ‘my personal views support this’. This was the case for homophobic and biphobic bullying, as well as transphobic bullying (presented as separate questions in the surveys). However, at follow-up, the most popular response was ‘I feel the school ethos supports this’. There were also substantial increases in the number of respondents selecting ‘I feel confident about this’, ‘I feel I understand the subject enough to do this’, ‘There are specific school policies in place that support this’ and ‘I feel the SLT supports this’ (see Appendix, Table 51).

Respondents who said they felt ‘very unable’, ‘quite unable’ or ‘neither able nor unable’ to respond to HBT bullying were also asked to state the reasons why. At baseline, the most frequently recorded response was ‘I have not had any training about this’, but fewer than half of respondents cited this as a reason at follow-up. At follow-up, the most common response was ‘I do not feel confident about this’ (see Appendix, Table 52).

Prior to programme support, open text responses to the baseline survey suggested that at least some staff lacked confidence in this area. In particular, some primary staff said they felt uncertain because of a perceived lack of incidents in their school, meaning they lacked experience in how to respond. Another factor that appeared to influence responses was around potential opposition, which may contribute to the invisibility of LGBT identities in some schools:

While I believe that the school is an inclusive environment, I feel this is one area which is avoided slightly. I feel this is due to the cultural background of the majority of the students and their beliefs, but I believe that this makes it even more important. Students casually use homophobic language, and in many cases this goes unchecked. I think the open discussion of HBT bullying and LGBT inclusion should be a priority among the school community (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

It is worth noting that fears about parental opposition in some primary and secondary schools were not always realised once programme delivery began. However, in a minority of cases, some parents did object to their child being involved in particular lessons and some children were subsequently removed from lessons as a result.

Following programme support, people were able to point to improvements in staff confidence to respond to HBT bullying:

I think there’s been a marked improvement in people’s attitudes and the way people talk about it… There’s a couple of more senior teachers that work within the Year 5 and 6 cohort and they speak a lot about Section 28 and how there was a time when you literally couldn’t do anything about it, and they felt they didn’t know what to say… There are definite, definite shifts. I know there is within staff attitudes and the language they use to deal with HBT language, because they are dealing with it, and we’re getting reports, and we can evidence that as well, which is a good thing (Telephone interview, primary safeguarding lead)

I think the language used has changed as well. There’s still the odd student that says ‘God that’s so gay’, and now you can just say, ‘stop a minute please, that’s not appropriate’… As long as we maintain that, keep that level of consistency, you know, eventually that’s going to take root a little bit more than it has before (Case study, secondary staff member).

There was some evidence in latter stages of data collection that wide-scale media coverage of protests at Parkfield primary school in Birmingham in 2019 (although it was not involved in this programme) were a cause for concern for some schools. As a result, in a minority of cases staff said that this had delayed or minimised the work they were willing to do during or following the programme.

7.2 Staff confidence in including LGBT identities and relationships in teaching

Overall, staff appeared to feel less able to include LGB identities and relationships in their teaching (compared to their ability to respond to HBT bullying), though this did increase from baseline to follow-up. Again, a scale of 1 (very able) to 5 (very unable) was used, and full results for this survey item are shown in the appendix (Table 49). At the programme level, a school-level weighted average of 56% of staff at baseline responded either ‘very able’ or ‘able’, rising to 77% at follow-up.

Greater improvements were observed among staff in primary schools, with the school-level weighted average increasing from 48% to 82%, compared to figures from staff in secondary schools, which increased from 61% to 74%. Model 2 schools saw an improvement of 24% from a baseline of 55%, a larger gain than Model 1 schools (baseline 56%, follow-up 76%).

With regard to including trans identities and relationships in teaching, a school-level weighted average of 38% of staff responded either ‘very able’ or ‘able’ at baseline, rising to 62% at follow-up, representing substantial improvements during the programme.

In primary schools, the school-level weighted average increased from 29% to 64%, a greater increase compared to staff in secondary schools, among whom the school-level weighted average grew from 45% to 61%. Model 1 and Model 2 schools again saw similar increases (see Appendix, Table 50).

Respondents reporting that they felt ‘very able’ or ‘quite able’ to include LGBT identities or relationships in teaching were asked to state the reasons why. Again this question was presented on a multiple response basis. At baseline, the most frequently chosen reason was ‘my personal views support this’ (for both homophobic and biphobic bullying and transphobic bullying). At follow-up, the most popular responses were ‘I feel I understand the subject enough to do this’ (for trans identities) and ‘my role in the school enables this’ (LGB identities). There were also substantial increases in the number of respondents selecting ‘There are specific school policies in place that support this’, ‘I feel I understand the subject enough to do this’ and ‘I feel the SLT supports this’ (see Appendix, Table 53).

Respondents who said they felt ‘very unable’, ‘quite unable’ or ‘neither able nor unable’ to include LGBT identities or relationships in teaching were also asked to state the reasons why. At baseline, the most frequently recorded response was ‘I have not had any training about this’, but fewer than half the amount of respondents cited this as a reason at follow-up. At follow-up, the most common response was ‘There is no space/time in the curriculum to allow this’ (LGB identities) and ‘my personal views do not support this’ (trans identities) (see Appendix, Table 54).

Both case study data and open text responses to the baseline survey suggested that at least some staff lacked confidence in this area, prior to programme support. In particular, there were some doubts about what was ‘allowed’, especially in primary settings:

I remember someone on the course we went on, she was a reception teacher, and I said you should be using the words gay and lesbian in the classroom, and she was like, ‘oooh really? Am I allowed to say lesbian and gay?’ Well, yeah, why not!? (Case study, primary staff member)

Whenever children ask me about LGBT identities or say things like girls can only marry boys, I’m never sure how to respond, as I don’t want to give information that their parents might disagree with. I would like some clear rules on how I should respond when it comes to this issue (Primary staff baseline survey respondent)

I think primarily, it sounds so silly but I think there was a misconception between some that they couldn’t talk about it, they couldn’t use those words, they couldn’t address it (Telephone interview, primary headteacher).

Within secondary settings, there was more variation in people’s perceptions and experiences:

Student attitudes would make me anxious about presenting LGBT+ topics in class as students do not respond maturely as they are not exposed to this subject in a serious manner frequently (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent)

Teaching RE and Sociology I discuss this issue of homosexuality frequently and all pupils respond to the issue with maturity and I have never experienced negative comments (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

Sometimes a resistance to include LGBT identities and relationships in teaching was not related to a lack of confidence but a belief that increasing visibility by drawing ‘attention’ to LGBT people was not the right approach:

I believe that including LGBT matters in PSHE could potentially show the younger children that LGBT people are different from the norm. Instead I believe it is better to treat this as though it is perfectly normal and not anything to bring attention to (Primary staff baseline survey respondent)

Having a separate LGBT or HBT policy or activities actively marks this out as a separate issue which gives the message that this is a different issue, and almost invites people to look on it as such… The emphasis should ALWAYS be on wide-reaching inclusivity and acceptance, covering all ‘difference’, with the message that bullying is intolerable and will be dealt with, full stop (Primary staff baseline survey respondent).

However, in general, the training and support received had given teachers what they perceived to be much needed knowledge about LGBT identities, including key terminology which enabled them to feel they were giving the correct information. Some school staff commented that this was an area they would have never broached if it were not for this programme, due to a lack of knowledge and experience in the area:

We don’t know of any of our children who are in those situations, but that doesn’t mean to say that you shouldn’t start the conversation, but I don’t think we probably would have if we hadn’t had the training (Case study, primary headteacher)

[It has] given the confidence to do this. [I] didn’t have the knowledge of the key terms before then. Training has helped: I’m quite sheltered really, so it gave me that wonderful confidence (Case study, primary teacher)

I think that’s half the battle, it’s having the confidence, because people are so frightened of, ‘I might say the wrong thing, so I’m not going to say anything’… It’s having that confidence and being comfortable with the terminology (Case study, secondary staff member).

7.3 Staff contribution to an LGBT-inclusive school environment that actively tackles HBT bullying

School staff were asked 4 survey questions concerning their own personal contribution to creating an LGBT-inclusive school environment that actively tackles HBT bullying.

First, staff were asked if they ‘actively try to prevent HBT bullying’. The possible responses were ‘yes’ and ‘no’. At overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff answering in the affirmative rose from 74% at baseline to 87% at follow-up. The gains observed among primary school staff were far greater, rising from 67% at baseline to 90% at follow-up, compared to secondary staff (baseline 79%, follow-up 86%). Model 1 schools saw a rise of 17%, compared to 10% in Model 2 schools, which had a higher baseline (78% compared to 69% for Model 1). These results are shown in Table 5.

Table 5: At the moment, do YOU personally actively try to prevent HBT bullying at your school?

	Yes: Baseline %	Yes: Follow-up %	No: Baseline %	No: Follow-up %	Don’t know: Baseline %	Don’t know: Follow-up %	Total
Secondary staff
Model 1	75.2	85.9	20.1	11.6	4.7	2.5	86
Model 2	82.1	84.9	11.6	11.2	6.4	3.8	84
Total	78.6	85.5	15.9	11.4	5.5	3.1	170
Primary staff
Model 1	59.8	87.7	31.0	8.6	9.2	3.7	58
Model 2	73.7	91.4	16.3	6.3	10.0	2.2	67
Total	67.2	89.7	23.1	7.4	9.7	2.9	125
Overall
Model 1	69.0	86.6	24.5	10.4	6.5	3.0	144
Model 2	78.4	87.8	13.6	9.1	8.0	3.1	151
Total	73.8	87.2	18.9	9.7	7.3	3.1	295

Staff were then asked if they ‘Actively try to include awareness of HBT bullying in the curriculum’. Overall, the school-level weighted percentage of staff reporting that they did grew from 43% at baseline to 67% at follow-up. The gains observed among primary school staff were far greater, rising from 38% at baseline to 75% at follow-up, compared to secondary staff (baseline 47%, follow-up 62%), partly owing to a higher baseline for secondary staff. Model 1 schools saw a rise from 38% to 64%, compared to an increase from 48% to 70% for Model 2 (see Table 6).

Table 6: At the moment, do YOU personally actively try to include awareness of HBT bullying in the curriculum at your school?

	Yes: Baseline %	Yes: Follow-up %	No: Baseline %	No: Follow-up %	Don’t know: Baseline %	Don’t know: Follow-up %	Total
Secondary staff
Model 1	39.5	57.9	53.3	38.2	7.2	3.9	79
Model 2	54.4	65.1	34.3	29.3	11.2	5.6	80
Total	47.0	61.5	43.7	33.7	9.2	4.8	159
Primary staff
Model 1	35.7	73.6	51.8	17.2	12.5	9.2	56
Model 2	39.3	76.3	48.8	17.8	11.9	5.9	62
Total	37.6	75.0	50.2	17.5	12.2	7.4	118
Overall
Model 1	37.9	64.4	52.7	29.5	9.4	6.1	135
Model 2	47.8	70.0	40.6	24.3	11.5	5.7	142
Total	43.0	67.3	46.5	26.8	10.5	5.9	277

The next survey item asked staff if they ‘Actively try to build an LGBT-inclusive environment’. The results are displayed in Appendix 7, Table 55. At the programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff saying yes to this question rose from 52% at baseline to 79% at follow-up. The figure for primary school staff grew more (from 42% at baseline to 78% at follow-up) compared to secondary staff (baseline 60%, follow-up 81%). Model 1 schools saw a rise of 22%, compared to 23% in Model 2 schools, although the latter had a higher baseline (47% compared to 57% for Model 1).

Finally for this section, staff were asked if they ‘Actively try to include LGBT identities or relationships in the curriculum’. Results for this item can be found in the appendix (Table 56). At the overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff saying yes to this question rose from 42% at baseline to 64% at follow-up. The increase among primary school staff was from 35% at baseline to 70% at follow-up, far greater than for secondary staff (baseline 48%, follow-up 60%). For Model 1 schools, the figure went up from 42% to 63% over the evaluation period, a slightly smaller increase than for Model 2 schools (baseline 42%, follow-up 66%).

Across evaluation data, there was more certainty about responding to HBT bullying than there was about preventing HBT bullying, and even more so, creating an LGBT-inclusive school environment. Though we recognise this may relate to some uncertainty about what prevention and inclusivity look like in practice, it also suggests a tendency to be reactive rather than proactive:

The school, students and staff, are all extremely accepting of LGBTQI members of our community and bullying of this is extremely rare… However, we have several students who are questioning their gender and I feel we could have support to help support these students through the process and transition. I am confident responding to bullying etc. when it happens and dealing with incidents but feel less confident about building an active community within the school, for example including it in lessons etc. which would be useful (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent)

Although our school does not tolerate homophobic/transphobic/biphobic bullying (along with any other kind), they do nothing to prevent this from happening, and spread little to no awareness of the LGBT community (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

For some staff, a lack of contribution to an LGBT-inclusive environment was driven by fears related to their own identity and how this might be responded to in school:

I find it a difficult area for several reasons. It is a Christian school with many families from Pentecostal backgrounds who seem particularly antagonistic towards LGBT people and issues. As a gay man, I am not open about my sexuality in school and feel vulnerable to accusations. I always challenge homophobia and other forms of discrimination but feel very nervous about actively promoting LGBT inclusion, even though I know it is the right thing to do (Primary staff baseline survey respondent)

Sometimes (by certain senior staff members) LGBT issues are dismissed, not seen as equal to heterosexual relationships, and homophobia is treated as less serious than other types of discrimination. As an LGBT staff member, I do not always feel comfortable or included and feel some staff are narrow minded and make inappropriate comments about gender and sexuality to students (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

7.4 Views on programme support

7.4.1 training.

In both staff surveys, respondents were asked to rate the support received during the programme. These questions were only asked in the follow-up surveys, so baseline/follow-up comparisons are not possible. Responses were given on a scale of 1 (very good) to 5 (very poor). Training was largely perceived as positive by respondents, with a school-level weighted percentage of 84% of staff rating the training as either ‘very good’ or ‘good’. The response was more positive among primary staff (90%) than secondary staff (78%). Among Model 1 schools, the response was slightly more positive (85%) than among Model 2 schools (82%). These figures are presented in Figure 5 below, and in Table 57 (see Appendix).

Within the case studies, the training was often thought to have been particularly well-delivered:

The engagement was incredible, I was actually blown away, because it was quite detailed and people were just asking questions. They weren’t afraid, they asked things that might be obvious to others, but actually other people were grateful, and it just explained a lot of things… We had so much talk afterwards and realised actually how many people in school have got members of their family who it might be relevant to… It was really popular (Case study, primary staff member)

I learned an absolute load… I thought I knew quite a bit… I thought ‘ooh I’m quite up on this, I know this’. No I didn’t at all… and I think it sort of empowers you when you learn (Case study, primary staff member)

It has worked well… It’s opened up a subject that potentially could have been tricky to handle but because we’d had that training we were all confident in tackling that subject in a positive way and we had the confidence to know how to deal with any incidents that may arise… I’d say confidence was a biggie (Case study, primary headteacher).

Training on gender identities was especially valued as this was often where people lacked the most awareness or confidence:

There were a lot of teachers saying ‘oh I didn’t realise this’, and ‘I didn’t know that’, and ‘I didn’t know there were so many identities’, so I think teachers had a huge education themselves, especially around the gender identities and stuff. There was a lot of missing understanding, but I think there was a lot of trepidation as well (Case study, secondary SLT member)

[The] training has made a monumental difference to the way staff support our trans students (Primary staff follow-up survey respondent).

Elsewhere, however, the training had not been so well received. One trainer beginning a CPD session with how they perceived the school to not be LGBT-friendly had reportedly made staff feel uneasy. This was felt to be a very negative experience which did not lead to a helpful dialogue about changes that could be made. The interviewee reported that staff were very enthusiastic prior to training, and were very aware that their school had room for improvement, but said that it was the trainer’s manner that was off-putting rather than the criticism itself. In a second school, people also felt that the trainer could have been more experienced in shutting down unhelpful conversation:

The project didn’t start as well as I’d hoped it would… The lady wasn’t very strong, wasn’t a facilitator, and didn’t shut down some tricky conversations, so some far more vocal staff were allowed to take the floor, and a couple of them were really religious, which was a real shame… I think quite a few staff thought ‘uh, what’s the point of this?’ …So that group session just wasn’t managed well at all to start with… [but] for me it did highlight what the issues are! What the issues were in the staff team, and then our head did do a presentation about HBT bullying being illegal, and that personal views should not influence you at work at all in any way, so he was quite strong about it afterwards, which was good (Telephone interview, secondary PSHE lead).

In another school, people felt that the training should have been more practically tailored to help teachers implement change more easily, as this focus group exchange shows:

There was too much of ‘this is who this person is, this is who that person is’… I don’t think we had mention of like, in terms of schools’ literature and books that are available, none of that was mentioned. So we found that out just through our own research… The staff team at the end of it felt exhausted and bombarded… I think people felt that they were just overloaded with stuff in the morning… and not given the tools to put it into practice as much… It seemed quite laboured (Case study, secondary staff members).

7.4.2 Resources

Respondents were also asked to rate the resources received during the programme. Responses were again given on a scale of 1 (very good) to 5 (very poor). Resources were rated positively by respondents, with a school-level weighted percentage of 77% of staff rating the resources as either ‘very good’ or ‘good’. The response was more positive among primary staff (83%) than secondary staff (72%). Among Model 1 schools, the response was slightly more positive (80%) than among Model 2 schools (76%). While these figures are encouraging, they are slightly lower than those reported for the quality of the training. These figures are presented in Figure 5 below, and in Table 58 (see Appendix).

7.4.3 Advice and guidance

Similarly to the programme training and resources, the policy advice and guidance supplied through the programme was rated positively by respondents, with a school-level weighted percentage of 80% of staff rating advice and guidance as either ‘very good’ or ‘good’. The response was more favourable among primary staff (86%) than secondary staff (74%). For Model 1 schools, the response was slightly more positive (81%) than among Model 2 schools (78%). These figures are presented in Figure 5 below, and in Table 59 (see Appendix).

Figure 8: Staff views of programme support

Where it was received, ongoing support and advice was welcomed, and led to strong sentiments of gratitude amongst evaluation participants:

We’ve got a lot of value from having a relationship with an organisation like this because we need that guidance and support really… I’m so grateful for the funding… because without [the support] this year we might have not been doing as much as we’ve done. I think that’s essential that that carries on (Case study, secondary SLT member)

I found [provider staff member] coming in and delivering the session after school for us as teaching staff, and outlining everything and going through the language with us and the new changes and things like that, was really useful. And then for me to meet with him and go through what we had… asking questions on a one-to-one with him… was brilliant. That was a really big resource for me (Case study, secondary staff member)

I think that’s so powerful in the school, to just have that support and someone to ask the stupid questions without feeling stupid… my thanks for being able to be involved in it. We certainly got loads out of it (Telephone Interview, primary headteacher).

Where programme support had been tailored to the specific school’s needs this was felt to be especially valuable:

The trainer had also looked at the Church of England documentation and so was aware of that, which I thought was really important. In fact, he started with our school motto and with our church ethos, and again I thought that was really important for my staff. He got the fact that we were a church school, but within that we’re OK to talk about it… [He] was absolutely brilliant (Telephone interview, primary headteacher).

7.4.4 Programme impact

Case study data drawn from staff perspectives was almost unanimously positive about the programme support they had received, for example relating it to increased staff confidence:

It developed my confidence to talk to staff members about it and gave me a really good plan of what to do… I think the programme itself has been very thorough, and really good at starting, I think what it really did for me is looking at the way of organising the work, and a structure to it… and to ensure that everything is covered when work starts, and you’ve developed an understanding with the staff and a language in order to challenge, if you come across it, with the children or the parents (Telephone interview, primary safeguarding lead)

From our point of view, it was over and above. I couldn’t recommend it enough… We’ve found it just excellent, really, from start to finish… [before] we were like, ‘oh where shall we start?’… It is a big issue if you’re not an expert in it (Case study, primary SLT member)

It was so worthwhile doing it, and I think everybody got so much out of it… Really good project to be involved in, and I’m proud to be involved in it actually (Case study, primary staff member).

Whilst some people were already thinking about this area, for others the programme had been more significant in putting the issue on their radar:

For me it is so important that we’re doing it… You find that children these days are very open-minded and open to difference and change and we need to capture that and we need to go with that. I was so delighted to get an email to say we’re going to help you in doing it, because otherwise it would have been me trying to get the message across and I think that would have been isolating for me (Telephone interview, primary headteacher)

I think it’s just the realisation that it is something that’s important for us to tackle. Something that you’d put to one side, but I think it’s brought it to the forefront of our attention (Case study, secondary SLT member)

It was just nice to have someone very positive and encouraging and someone that you could reflect backwards and forwards with… I wouldn’t have been able to do it otherwise because I wouldn’t have known I was doing the right thing, which is a worry, because I think you could make a mess of this (Telephone interview, secondary PSHE lead).

Impacts within school

Some thought that the programme had a particular impact on gendered language use, particularly in primary schools:

I think it has made everybody more aware because we’ve had the conversations about, you mustn’t say ‘big strong boy’ and all that sort of thing, so it has made us very aware of our language around the children… I don’t think there was anybody who was in any way homophobic, biphobic or transphobic, I think maybe the biggest impact has been the gender thing (Case study, primary programme lead)

Something that struck me that’s really come out of it is… using gender-neutral language. So something that we’re trying, I wouldn’t say that we were always successful, but we’re really trying as a staff that we’re not saying, you know, ‘gorgeous girls’ and ‘mate’ to the boys and that sort of thing, that actually we’re just being very neutral with everybody (Case study, primary SLT member)

[We’ve] changed a lot of language… As a school we’ve removed ‘she’ from all letters, it’s all ‘their’, and we’ve tried to make everything gender-neural (Case study, secondary SLT member).

Most people felt that the programme support (often the training in particular) had had a clear impact at the school, even if sometimes this was ‘incremental’ rather than ‘massive’ in nature, particularly given the context of Section 28 (also mentioned above):

Although there’s not been massive significant changes, it’s the little incremental gains… and I think the ethos for the college is shifting and changing. We talk a lot, and we did in the training, about the fact that a significant amount of our staff will have been trained when you were not allowed to promote different types of relationships… That’s difficult for them to acclimatise to. There are still complexities around things like changing rooms and facilities and things like that, but again it’s been made quite clear to staff that the students’ rights prevail. They have the choice… So that kind of message is going out (Case study, secondary SLT member)

The course impacted greatly on the resources and staff awareness of these issues. We are now actively trying to promote a more inclusive curriculum and I know that already this has been positive for a pupil (Secondary staff follow-up survey respondent).

Often the support was said to have led to increases in staff confidence and awareness, in particular feeling able to talk to young people and use correct terminology, although inevitably staff members had different starting points for this:

I think for me personally it was a lot of talking at you, and all the different terminology and how we as staff need to be aware of the terminology that we’re using in class. It was quite intense… It was interesting in that sense to know all the different ways that people do identify, and that was good to know. I will be honest and say I did leave a little bit confused because some of them… it was different words but the same idea, and we didn’t really go into much detail… it was just on a sheet of paper, and then all these different key terms, and I was just like, ‘what?’ (Case study, primary staff)

There was lots of stuff that I already knew as part of this training. There were some things that I didn’t know that were explained to me and that I did get straight away… If you already sort of knew what transphobic bullying was, there was a lot of stuff in there which you would have heard of, and some things that you could work out based on the things you already knew (Case study, primary staff)

Last week in the staff room at lunch time, the staff were talking about asexuals and… that’s language we never would have heard before. When we started this, there was a real thing around language and what it’s alright to tell children, and to have that change to it being just a normal conversation in the staff room and people trying to be accurate about the language they’re using, I just thought that was brilliant (Telephone interview, primary headteacher).

Within most of the case studies, staff felt that involvement in the programme had improved staff responses to HBT behaviour, often due to a rise in confidence:

I think that staff are more confident in tackling, in knowing that actually if someone says ‘that’s gay’ they’re going to be in isolation… [and] if it’s in attack of someone, then it’s going to be much more serious… I have seen a big difference (Case study, secondary staff member)

I think some teachers didn’t feel comfortable and didn’t know what to do. It feels as if now we’ve said that if this happens, you deal with it like this, and you deal with it the same way as you deal with racism, I think it’s given more strength for them to actually know what to do, as opposed to just trying to ignore it and hope, you know, I didn’t hear that, I don’t have to deal with it (Case study, secondary SLT member)

It [bullying] has come down… It’s been a downward trend. The more work you put in, the more we’re on top of it, the lower it comes down (Case study, primary programme lead).

In one school, teachers said that they were apprehensive before but found the support “empowering” and they had “learnt a lot”. Training was also thought to have led to practical changes such as gender-neutral toilets and school bullying policies and recording practices (see Chapter 3). One school said that their involvement in the programme had directly contributed to their recent (positive) Ofsted inspection. The programme was also seen to be giving ‘permission’ to schools to do this work:

Staff initially were concerned, what if the children have questions? What if the children want to go deeper? How much am I allowed to say? What am I allowed to say? Where does my remit end with this? And I think a lot of those questions were answered by [the provider staff member] being very open and very honest and just stating a fact – this is the way it is. And I think that made our staff feel a lot more relieved that potentially they’re not going to get parents coming back and saying you’ve spoken to my child about this, and those sorts of things. I think that was the biggest challenge – staff feeling comfortable enough that they had free rein to talk about what the children needed to know, and if the children had questions, it was either OK to say yes this is how it is, or well let’s speak to your parents about that (Case study, primary SLT member)

I think it’s given us confidence to talk about it and to go, ‘yes that’s fine, we can’. I think for teachers there’s always the worry that you’re going to put your foot in your mouth and say something that maybe I shouldn’t have said… so it’s given us that validity, that validation to say yes you are legally required to do it this way actually, and it’s fine and the children do need to know and do want to know. That’s quite liberating… [If it wasn’t for the training] I don’t think we’d have probably addressed it at all, if I’m honest (Case study, primary programme lead).

Personal impacts

For some, impact had also been more personal in nature:

One thing it’s done for me, with the language as well, because I had been working at the school for a long time and I got married to my partner, and I felt like I had no language in order to talk about that. But I did start talking about it in school, and that in itself was quite powerful for the kids to hear… The initial training for me was quite powerful to a) talk about my own experiences, but b) have the staff hear. And also we had some of the staff, who really felt like they couldn’t talk about any of this stuff at work, come forward later on and approach me and have a bit more of a language (Telephone interview, primary safeguarding lead).

Within the follow-up staff survey and one telephone interview, however, some respondents said that there had been limited impact because the programme was too short, or the input was too limited:

I wish we’d had 2 years on it… I think we could have seen it through to really embed it… Doing it for a year is a bit of a flash in the pan and this year’s project… As much as I think it’s changed us, if we weren’t such a small school I think it could take longer to really embed it (Telephone interview, primary headteacher).

Impacts on pupils

Whilst most reports of programme impact focused on staff, in some case studies people were able to point to what they felt were actual or potential impacts on pupils:

Now, I wouldn’t think anything about having an assembly using any of those terms, answering the children’s questions, and they don’t have any issues… They’ll openly say it to you. A year ago, they wouldn’t have had those words, and wouldn’t have known what it meant… They’re just words to explain things, but unless you tell the children that, they don’t know, particularly if some words are being used in a derogatory way (Case study, primary SLT member)

The feedback I’ve had from tutors is that students are really respectful, and actually they had questions to ask that weren’t just mocking, that were just like, ‘OK so what about this?’… The feedback I had was really positive. As a result of that, there has been less homophobic incidents and comments, and actually I’ve heard students say stuff like, ‘oh so-and-so is gay’, and like, ‘OK that’s cool’, and it feels as if there’s been a bit of a shift (Case study, secondary SLT member)

I feel like some of the students will get a different experience here than they would maybe in another school that didn’t have this work done, and I think some of that work is life-saving, to be honest. Thinking about friends growing up, and some of the experiences they’ve had in schools… I just think some of it is life-changing, life-saving, really (Case study, secondary inclusion lead).

Pupil perspectives

Despite the generally positive feedback from staff, pupil views post-programme were less complimentary about its impact:

This school handles LGBT things badly and it needs a lot of work because the reason there is so much bullying is because they have no information to tell people what being transgender is (Secondary pupil follow-up survey respondent)

I have been bullied since coming out and whenever I attempt to tell a teacher of this, the teacher is either unsupportive and turns me or others away, or the bullying increases. I have never been in a lesson where we have done anything on LGBT and there has only been one assembly in the 3 years I have been at this school (Secondary pupil follow-up survey respondent).

In general, the secondary pupil follow-up survey open text data was very similar to baseline feedback, with suggestions that schools should do more, and accounts of negative experiences and/or observations. This was in clear contrast to staff comments above, suggesting that it may take time for programme impacts to ‘trickle down’ to pupils.

However, in a small number of case studies pupils were able to identify what they thought were programme impacts on school staff and other pupils:

Maybe a couple of years ago there was 2 girls who were like hugging each other… and the teachers were like, some of the teachers outside were saying to them, ‘stop doing that’, because it’s like weird or something… I think that now they like have changed a bit about it (Case study, primary pupil)

I feel awareness has spread… People who don’t want to be homophobic or biphobic or transphobic, they’ve become a lot more cautious about what’s being said, and people have been less afraid of asking questions as well… I’m one of the few people in my year who is openly pansexual and gender-fluid, and so people have come up to me and will be like, ‘I want to know more and I’m going to ask a question’… so I feel like it’s become a lot less scary to talk about (Case study, secondary pupil).

8. Occurrence of HBT bullying

Qualitative data illustrated examples of pupils experiencing and witnessing HBT bullying, predominantly in secondary schools.

There was evidence that the frequency of staff observing homophobic or biphobic bullying declined slightly over the evaluation period. The school-level weighted percentage of staff that reported witnessing homophobic or biphobic bullying ‘less often than monthly’ or ‘never’ went up from 81% to 87%.

There was no evidence of change in the frequency of staff observing transphobic bullying over the evaluation period.

8.1 Pupil experiences of HBT bullying

Within the baseline survey open text data, people shared experiences of HBT, and in particular gender-based, bullying, serving to highlight how gendered expectations are shared amongst peers:

From the day I came out, the day I cut my hair and decided I’d rather act myself, I received torments and comments, mainly at the start, but even ‘til this day. It was only a couple of weeks ago where my whole form came up to chant ‘2 genders’, just to spite me. On social media it was even worse, and it was where I realised that this school isn’t as safe as I thought it ought to be. Boys would message me and my friends, making fun of our sexualities and telling us to cut ourselves (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

People say me and my friend (I’d prefer not to say names) look like girls and need haircuts. People also tell me to “man up” and stop “acting like a girl” (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

Being friends with someone who identified as LGBT could also lead to experiences of bullying:

Even though there are not many… LGBT people at school, they are severely bullied, and people who are not any of the above are called gay because they have certain friends (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

Whilst experiences of HBT bullying were often experienced from peers, there were also instances where staff members were deemed to be perpetrating or inciting bullying:

Once my teacher made fun of me because I came out as gay, so he began mocking me and encouraging other pupils to bully me (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

I experience homophobia nearly daily – even my teachers have made comments about my appearance in particular (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

Within the case studies, there were also examples of (more often secondary) pupils describing HBT bullying that they had experienced (mostly before, though also sometimes during, the programme), regardless of whether or not they themselves identified as LGBT:

When [I first came out], oh my god, I used to get like pushed around in the corridors and people would start yelling at me, and some kids started screaming at me in the middle of lessons, telling me I was going to go to hell, and I started crying, and it was crazy (Case study, secondary pupil)

People just walk up to me and call me a tranny. They might not even know what it means… [and] the word gay or faggot has been used… on a daily basis (Case study, secondary pupil)

I remember when in Year 4, I’d hang out with like a lot of girlfriends – friend girls – and my friend boys, but then I think a lot of people called me bisexual, and I was like, ‘well I’m not bisexual. Like, a lot of girls in the school hang out with girls, but also boys, and it doesn’t mean that I’m like in love with the boys, and it doesn’t mean that I’m in love with the girls. I just like them as friends’ (Case study, primary pupil).

8.2 Pupil observations of HBT bullying

Additional feedback within the baseline survey documented many instances of pupils witnessing HBT behaviour or more broadly gender-based bullying:

I don’t have many friends who are part of the LGBT community, although I do know of some people who are. I have never really witnessed any bullying verbally or physically but I feel as though there is a slight sense of isolation… I don’t know many people who are LGBT but I know OF them - there tends to be a group of them who stick to themselves, and I feel as though this is because there is a feeling of ‘disgust’ towards them… as though us students distance ourselves (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

I’ve seen some people bullying people because they act like a boy or want to play with boys and it’s the same with boys because they want to play with girls and it’s unfair (Primary pupil baseline survey respondent).

There were also comments about language that might not be deemed bullying but which respondents felt was disrespectful. Often they shared information about things that happened to their friends but which they found personally upsetting:

At my school, people think it is all ‘cool’ and edgy to be like that’s ‘gay’ when something can’t just be gay, it is not an adjective! Also it is really disrespectful to say things like that! People also are like ‘ewww, transgender’ or ‘ha ha you are transgender’ which is really disrespectful and horrible… My gay friend gets called horrible things like a faggot, etc., which is really really really horrible (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

I can’t stand witnessing my friends be bullied because they are a part of LGBT and I don’t understand why our school won’t accept the fact that the LGBT is a real community that exists within our school! (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

8.3 Staff observations of HBT bullying

In both primary and secondary schools, staff were asked how often they observe homophobic or biphobic bullying. Although this chapter might have benefited from pupil data on the reporting of bullying, as stated in the limitations section (2.7), the markedly lower response rate in the pupil survey means that data here is drawn from relevant questions in the staff survey only. Responses were given on a scale of 1 (every day) to 5 (never). Bullying on a daily basis was uncommon among participating schools at baseline, and has fallen to zero at the follow-up stage for homophobic and biphobic bullying, and to 0.1% for transphobic bullying. As such, daily and weekly responses are combined into one ‘weekly’ category in Figure 7 (below).

The school-level weighted percentage of staff that reported witnessing homophobic or biphobic bullying ‘less often than monthly’ or ‘never’ grew from 81% to 87% (see Figure 7 below). This is partly due to a decline in staff reporting that such bullying is observed weekly or monthly (from 13% to 10%), and partly due to a decline in staff reporting that they ‘don’t know’, from 6% to 3%. From this, one could infer that the programme is associated with a slight reduction in homophobic and biphobic bullying, but also a slight increase in awareness of what constitutes such bullying.

The overall increase in staff reporting that homophobic or biphobic bullying occurs less frequently is accounted for predominantly by secondary staff, for whom the figure rose from 72% to 81%, whereas for primary staff it grew from 92% to 94%. In Model 1 schools, the increase was from 82% to 89%, whereas for Model 2 schools it grew from 81% to 85%.

Staff were also asked how frequently they had witnessed transphobic or gender identity-based bullying (see Figure 7 below). Again, responses were given on a scale of 1 (every day) to 5 (never), but due to low response levels the ‘daily’ and ‘weekly’ categories are combined here. The overall school-level weighted percentage of staff that reported witnessing bullying related to pupil sexual orientation ‘less often than monthly’ or ‘never’ was almost static, rising only from 88% to 89%. However, at follow-up the number of staff reporting that they observed transphobic or gender identity-based bullying every week or every month increased from 6% to 9%. Given that the proportion of ‘don’t know’ responses fell from 6% to 2%, it is possible that the increase in respondents that observe bullying more frequently could be attributed to greater awareness.

In terms of variation by school phase, secondary staff witnessing transphobic or gender identity-based bullying dropped only slightly from 85% to 84%, whereas for primary staff it increased slightly from 93% to 95%. In Model 1 schools, there was no change from 90%, whereas for Model 2 schools it increased slightly from 87% to 88%. These figures are summarised below in Figure 7 and full data tables can be found in the appendix (Tables 64 and 65).

Figure 9: How often in the last 12 months have you witnessed bullying related to pupils’ sexual orientation or gender identity?

School staff were also asked in the follow-up survey if they felt that involvement in the programme had reduced HBT bullying in their school, on a scale of 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Full results from this survey question are shown in the appendix (Table 66). Overall, at the weighted school level, 45% of respondents said ‘neither agree nor disagree’, which is equal to the weighted percentage of respondents answering ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ combined (45%). Secondary school staff gave slightly more positive answers (47% agree/strongly agree) than primary (44%). Model 1 (50% agree/strongly agree) schools were slightly more positive than Model 2 (42%). This suggests that whilst staff reported a limited decrease in witnessing HBT bullying during the evaluation period (see above), they nevertheless perceived that the programme was associated with lower levels of HBT bullying at their school.

Within the baseline survey, some staff used the opportunity to identify what they felt was HBT behaviour from pupils towards themselves, which had gone unchallenged by other staff members:

It has recently come to light that a student has been making homophobic remarks/gestures behind my back while I am teaching/helping other students in the class. Some members of staff (heads of year and a member of SLT) were made aware of this some time ago and have not acted on it… Even now, the member of SLT appears reluctant to take any action (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent)

I feel that staff do not challenge HBT bullying. I have had inappropriate comments directed at me because of my sexual orientation. These have apparently been ‘jokes’ (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

Such experiences concur with a body of literature that examines the experiences of LGBT staff in schools. By contrast, other staff members made assumptions that there was no HBT bullying in their school, because they believed they had no LGBT pupils:

We have no students who are presenting as LGBT and therefore have had no incidents of bullying in this particular area (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

Echoing findings in Chapter 3, within the case studies, participants discussed some of the nuances around what might be understood as HBT bullying. In a primary setting, for example, this was felt to be inappropriate language rather than bullying:

It’s not bullying, it’s ignorance of the use of the word [gay], and I think there’s a distinction. I wouldn’t say any of our children have been bullied. It’s the words, whether it was gay or whatever, that have been used inappropriately (Case study, primary headteacher).

Similarly, in a secondary setting, it was felt to be a lack of understanding or common ground rather than bullying behaviour:

There’s a student in Year 7… [and] over the summer holidays he decided he’s gay… then he’s come into school and he’s talking to our Year 7 boys - all they want to do, the majority of them, is play football and play PlayStation - and he’s trying to have grown-up conversations with them about his sexuality, and they’re just looking at him like, what are you talking about? – I don’t even get you… He finds that difficult, he says, ‘Miss I’m being bullied’, and I’m like, you’re not really being bullied, if you think about it. They’re not coming up to you and finding you and calling you gay. Sometimes the comments that you’re making and the things that you’re saying about yourself, they just don’t understand and they’re just not mentally mature enough to appreciate what you’re saying (Case study, secondary staff member).

However, some staff demonstrated a belief that the programme had impacted on staff responses to HBT behaviour (see 7.4.4 above), and therefore the number of instances witnessed in their school:

I’ve heard the word gay being used less around the playground. It used to be just a common word that everybody used all the time. I’m hearing that less now (Case study, primary staff member)

There used to be a lot of careless language… and I think even that has changed a lot, certainly in the last year, the amount of work that’s been put in, it’s just disappeared (Case study, primary staff member).

9. Reporting and tackling HBT bullying

The percentage of staff that reported witnessing staff responding to homophobic or biphobic bullying ‘less often than monthly’ or ‘never’ changed very little, falling from 81% to 79%. For witnessing staff responding to transphobic bullying, the drop was from 88% to 85%.

There was little or no change in the frequency of school staff witnessing other staff responding to HBT bullying.

Qualitative findings showed mixed experiences of schools dealing with HBT bullying, with many examples of HBT bullying being unchallenged by staff, but with a few examples of better practice emerging.

9.1 Pupil confidence in reporting and tackling HBT bullying

Within the case studies, in general, there was low confidence amongst secondary pupils in relation to the reporting and tackling of HBT bullying in their school. Sometimes this was explicitly related to a fear of reprisal, but more often seemed to be due to a lack of faith in school staff:

[My teacher] was there and tried to support me and stuff, but then he told me to write down the names and I was scared they were going to come for me, so I didn’t do anything about it (Case study, secondary pupil)

Most of the times… people have like said homophobic things and it was ignored. Like I’ve never seen a teacher actually acknowledge that that’s bad - tell them, ‘hey, don’t use that word!’ (Case study, secondary pupil).

Although primary pupils in general were more likely to say that they would feel confident to confront or report HBT bullying, some were concerned about reporting their experiences due to potential repercussions from teachers or their peers:

I remember me and [another pupil] in Year 4 and Year 3, we were best friends. Sometimes we’d even like hold hands, link arms, hug in the playground, and I remember like the other Year 6s they’d be like, ‘oh my gosh, you’re so lesbian, what’s wrong with you?’ And I’m like, ‘yeah but if we were lesbian, what’s wrong with that?’ …[but] I kind of felt uncomfortable like telling a teacher… because I’m worried they’ll judge me, like why are you linking arms with this person or something (Case study, primary pupil)

If someone was bullying you about being lesbian or gay, I’d feel less comfortable to tell the teacher, because then I’d feel like they’re bullying me again for being called a snitch (Case study, primary pupil).

There was a belief among some staff that pupils were more inclined to report incidents after, and as a result of, the programme:

I think they’re more inclined [to report] because we make more of a thing about telling us whatever happens… if you see somebody is being bullied or you hear somebody being bullied, don’t keep it to yourself, you’ve got to share it with somebody. It’s not a secret, and if you’re standing by watching, you’re just as bad. We make it as plain as that… [and] you’ve got peer mediators which are children that go out in jackets and if they see somebody sitting on their own or see a problem they try and go and sort it out, and if they can’t they can refer it to the dinner staff or, at worst, they bring them in… I think it all helps. It’s peer pressure as well, isn’t it, because a lot of the bullying comes from peer pressure, so if we can change the peer pressure to be like the caring side… (Case study, primary PSHE lead).

9.2 Staff responses to HBT bullying

9.2.1 staff responses to homophobic or biphobic bullying.

There were very little changes reported across the board on how often respondents said they witnessed staff responding to homophobic or biphobic bullying. Once more, responses here and for the rest of section 9, were given on a scale of 1 (every day) to 5 (never). The school-level weighted percentage of staff that reported witnessing this ‘less often than monthly’ or ‘never’ changed very little, falling from 81% to 79%. For secondary staff, the figure fell from 71% to 70%, and for primary staff it dropped from 92% to 89%. In Model 1 schools, there was a slight increase from 79% to 80%, whereas for Model 2 schools it changed from 82% to 78% (see Figure 8 below, and Appendix Table 70).

School staff were also asked how often they had personally responded to homophobic or biphobic bullying. Responses were given on the same scale. There was again very little change at the overall programme level, with a slight increase in the school-level weighted percentage of ‘less often than monthly’ or ‘never’ responses, from 83% at baseline to 85% at follow-up. For secondary staff, the figure went up from 74% to 78%, whereas for primary staff it remained at 94%. In Model 1 schools, the increase was from 84% to 88%, whereas for Model 2 schools it was 82% at baseline and did not change over the evaluation period (see Figure 8 below, and Appendix Table 71).

Figure 10: Frequency of staff responding to homophobic and biphobic bullying

9.2.2 Staff responses to transphobic bullying

Survey questions asked how often primary and secondary school staff witnessed staff responding to transphobic or gender identity-based bullying. Changes here were very slight. At the overall programme level, the school-level weighted percentage of staff that reported witnessing this ‘less often than monthly’ or ‘never’ fell from 88% to 85%.

For secondary staff, the figure fell slightly from 83% at baseline to 79% at follow-up, and for primary staff it dropped from 95% to 93%. In Model 1 schools, there was a small decline from 87% to 86%, whereas for Model 2 schools it dropped from 89% to 85% (see Figure 9 below and Appendix 9, Table 72).

Questions on how often primary and secondary school staff had personally responded to transphobic or gender identity-based bullying were also asked in the survey. At the overall programme level, there was no change from the baseline school-level weighted percentage of 89%. The figure for primary staff grew from 94 to 95% but there was no change from the baseline value of 85% among secondary staff. A slight increase from 89% to 91% for Model 1 schools was offset by a fall from 89% to 87% among Model 2 schools (see Figure 9 below and Appendix 9, Table 73).

Figure 11: Frequency of staff responding to transphobic bullying

9.2.3 School responses to HBT bullying

School staff were also asked if they thought that being involved in the programme had improved the way that their school responds to HBT bullying. Results are displayed below in Table 7. Respondent views were more positive at the weighted school level when compared to perceptions of how well schools try to prevent bullying (reported in 9.2.4), with 74% overall saying ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’. Primary staff gave more positive responses (78% agree/strongly agree) than secondary (70%). Model 1 (76% agree/strongly agree) schools were slightly more positive than Model 2 (72%).

Table 7: Staff agreement with statement ‘I think that being involved in the programme has changed the way the school responds to bullying in the school’

	Strongly agree %	Agree %	Neither %	Disagree %	Strongly disagree %	Total
Secondary staff
Model 1	24.3	47.9	24.6	1.2	2.1	82
Model 2	29.1	38.6	29.0	3.4	-	84
Total	26.7	43.2	26.8	2.3	1.0	166
Primary staff
Model 1	41.7	39.2	17.1	2.0	-	68
Model 2	39.6	36.1	20.3	3.6	0.3	77
Total	40.6	37.6	18.8	2.8	0.2	145
Overall
Model 1	32.2	44.0	21.2	1.5	1.1	150
Model 2	34.1	37.4	24.8	3.5	0.2	161
Total	33.2	40.6	23.1	2.5	0.6	311

Whether it involved HBT language or more clear cases of HBT bullying, schools were thought (by staff) to have more rigorous responses, with these often compared to racist incidents (echoing findings in Chapter 3):

I’ve noticed a difference in the classroom as well, because I’m based in classrooms with the teaching staff, actually challenging homophobic remarks. In the past, maybe before this training, some of the staff may not have realised the seriousness of some of those remarks, ‘it’s so gay’ or ‘that’s gay’ or ‘stop being gay’. Now they actually challenge fully, the same as they would racism or anything like that (Case study, secondary staff member)

I think they feel a little bit more empowered to deal with the incidents themselves because they know that just like in the olden days when a racist comment was instantly… escalated, it was reportable, you don’t do it, it’s a red card… We now make homophobic language the same (Telephone interview, middle school deputy head).

It was also felt that there was increasing support from pupils to address HBT behaviour, which could helpfully coincide with staff responding to it more:

We do get some of the language that’s objectionable… Homophobic language predominantly… and when we do get episodes of that, that’s tackled now… I actually think there are lots of students now who have relatives, people, family that they know who are now open about their gender, sexuality, whatever it is… So I think students are now more reluctant because they’re kind of going, ‘well, that’s uncle so-and-so, I’m not going to say that’ (Case study, secondary SLT member).

One strategy that some schools were adopting involved the use of a ‘script’, so that all incidences of HBT behaviour were dealt with in the same manner:

If there was any inappropriate language, they’d just use the script. And that script – it doesn’t matter what the language is, it doesn’t even have to be LGBT inappropriate language – any inappropriate language that would be used in school is dealt with in the same way (Case study, primary headteacher)

One thing that we’re going to be implementing is… a standard script that everybody says… If we look back previously, any HBT issues around this would have been about children using the word gay to mean a derogatory term… At our age [group] that’s kind of the biggest thing, so we should have a script that we agree on as a staff that we would say… [for example] how would you feel if people started to say brown hair meant rubbish? And have that very open conversation with them. So that’s something that we’re going to start working on as a staff, having that set script for tackling those issues (Case study, primary SLT member).

However, secondary pupils did not often have a positive view of how their school’s staff responded to HBT behaviour, with some clear emotion present in baseline survey responses:

There was a boy in our school (quite a close friend of mine) and school let him get bullied. He used to report every verbal comment which was shouted at him, and in our opinion teachers ignored it and nothing was done to stop it, leading the behaviour to carry on. He became so isolated, even though he had friends, and due to this he left school. I remember when he used to hide cuts and scars on his wrists and ankles. He was bullied so much that he self-harmed. It was so sad but we had no power to change it… He needed a trusted professional to help him and no-one was there when he needed it the most (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

I know that one person in my year bullies a bisexual girl in my year, and we went to see the teacher and they’ve done nothing about it. This bullying is affecting this girl quite a lot and it’s so heart-breaking to see. Why is nothing being done? If this was a different case of bullying the school would stop it right away, so why is [this] not being stopped at our school? (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent)

In my school they don’t do anything towards LGBT and HBT and I am very hurt all the time because I have a best friend who is gay and he is frequently bullied by boys in our lessons that he sometimes becomes very upset, and teachers don’t do anything when he tells them about the bullying (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

In some cases, a lack of response within schools was said to directly impact upon pupil’s ability or willingness to be ‘out’:

Last year when a girl came out as bisexual, and was isolated and sneered at by her peers behind her back, but she was unaware. People now just do not or would not feel comfortable revealing their sexuality and she has now told everyone that she is not bi (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

In this context of potential alienation and invisibility, for some, even the evaluation survey held particular significance:

As a closeted bisexual, I don’t feel comfortable coming out to more than a few close peers as I regularly hear ‘that’s so gay’ or ‘faggot’, sometimes even on a daily basis… The few assemblies we’ve had raising awareness about it have focused on the negative sides of LGBT, and as important as it is to educate against bullying, I have never had any situation where we’ve been shown that there is a positive side to being LGBT too… I feel ashamed of who I am at school because there is nothing telling us that we are valid and ‘normal’. So thank you for getting in contact, it means a lot (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

Elsewhere, though, there was a positive report of school support:

I myself am transgender (female to male)… and I have come out to the school, and they are so supportive, and accepting, teachers and students alike. They make sure I am OK and give me as much support as possible (Secondary pupil baseline survey respondent).

Some staff baseline survey respondents also used the opportunity to provide further feedback on what they felt were inappropriate responses to HBT behaviour at their school:

As a boys’ school, I feel that casual discrimination is encouraged. Not amongst all staff, but in certain departments. I have also heard members of staff making indirectly discriminatory remarks in social situations. I think that situations where LGBT inclusion or HBT bullying is involved is not often dealt with appropriately. A student was asked to stop discussing his mother’s personal life with his friends. I believe that this was only asked as she is gay. Rather than dealing with the separate bullying incident alone, he was asked to hide parts of his life. This felt to me like indirect discrimination (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent)

As an out teacher, I wish that schools were more visible in their support of every member of the school community. I see teachers do nothing when minor homophobic incidents happen and students pass it off as ‘banter’. Because we do not address the most minor of insults or comments, our LGBTQI students do not feel supported or included (Secondary staff baseline survey respondent).

Echoing baseline survey responses, during case study activities with pupils they frequently criticised their schools for not responding to HBT behaviour more strongly, if at all:

I know some teachers do try to like stop it, but I feel like other teachers don’t take it as seriously… I feel they don’t deal with it as severely as they would with normal bullying… because the other day, somebody had shouted across ‘you’re gay’ and Miss said ‘oh stop saying that’, but then if somebody had sworn, ‘ah can you stop’, and go into a bit more detail why you should stop swearing (Case study, secondary pupil)

In a lot of my lessons, there is like a lot of the homophobic, biphobic, all that, going on. You have some of the teachers who’ll be like, ‘don’t say that, that’s rude’. And then you have the ones who hear it, you can see that they’re hearing it, because they’re making a face like ‘that’s not right’, but they ignore it… They feel that I can’t just punish them for that… but you can… you can send them straight to isolation, as you would for bullying in any other sense. Just because it is homophobic or any other type, it’s just like actually I’ll just ignore it (Case study, secondary pupil)

It’s always an automated response if someone says something homophobic or biphobic or transphobic, it’s sort of ‘don’t say that, it’s offensive’. Whereas if it’s like a swear word or if you’d done something wrong against school rules, it’s sort of like you get an explanation of why you shouldn’t say these things, or why you shouldn’t do these things, but you don’t get an explanation as to why you shouldn’t be saying ‘oh you’re gay’… I feel that would be beneficial for kids that think it’s alright or don’t fully understand why it is offensive (Case study, secondary pupil).

For some, there was also a belief that staff needed educating further, in order to not rely on pupils to address HBT bullying, as this focus group exchange illustrates:

Teachers don’t say much, because if someone is making a homophobic or biphobic comment, I feel like teachers don’t step in to say anything because it’s just like ‘what kids say’… and then if every other kid sees that, unless they’re like part of LGBTQ… they don’t think it’s as serious as it is… They kind of rely on the kids to do it… I feel like they need to be educated on, like, little comments, like calling someone gay… how it can be a serious thing for someone that is gay, but teachers don’t understand that. They need to be educated in the little things (Case study, secondary pupils).

However, in one school, some pupils provided positive feedback on the impact of the programme in their school:

They kind of understand now that the school doesn’t accept it. I think some teachers before then were sort of like, ‘I don’t like this kid saying that, I would like to challenge it, but I’m not sure it’s in my jurisdiction to do so’… now that it’s not OK, they’re sort of like, ‘OK, now I can say something’ Because I identify as gender-fluid I’ve had a couple of teachers who go ‘ladies and gentlemen’ and now that they’ve become more aware they’ve tried to stop doing that. Since I was in Year 7, we’ve been talking about it [HBT bullying] more than what we did a couple of years ago. I think teachers have sort of been more like strict on those sort of things, rather than just saying, ‘oh you can’t say it’… it’s been like, ‘wait outside or go to isolation’, things like that (Case study, secondary pupils).

9.2.4 Preventing HBT bullying

In the staff follow-up surveys, respondents were asked if they thought that being involved in the programme had improved the way that the school tries to prevent HBT bullying. Responses were given on a scale of 1(strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree), and results are presented in Table 8. These items were not included in the baseline surveys, and therefore baseline/follow-up comparisons are not possible. Overall, 77% of staff responded with either ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’. The figure was higher for primary schools (83%) than for secondary schools (72%). In Model 1 schools the figure was higher (79%) than in Model 2 schools (75%).

Table 8: Staff agreement with statement ‘I think that being involved with the programme has improved the way the school tries to prevent HBT bullying in the school’

	Strongly agree %	Agree %	Neither %	Disagree %	Strongly disagree %	Total
Secondary staff
Model 1	26.0	47.1	24.2	2.3	0.4	82
Model 2	29.7	40.5	26.5	3.3	-	84
Total	27.9	43.8	25.3	2.8	0.2	166
Primary staff
Model 1	43.2	42.1	12.8	2.0	-	68
Model 2	42.9	37.9	16.6	1.6	1.0	77
Total	43.0	39.9	14.8	1.8	0.5	145
Overall
Model 1	33.8	44.8	19.0	2.2	0.2	150
Model 2	36.0	39.3	21.8	2.5	0.5	161
Total	34.9	41.9	20.4	2.3	0.3	311

10. Conclusions

This evaluation suggests that incidences of HBT bullying are still common in English schools, supporting previous research (Bradlow and others, 2017, GEO, 2018, Henderson, 2016, METRO, 2014). This was apparent at baseline, and although there was some evidence of improvement over the evaluation period, findings show that it remained an issue at programme follow-up. Within the case studies, for example, secondary pupils described some of their negative experiences relating to their own identities or that of their friends. These experiences often related to HBT language use, which was not always defined as bullying. However, the evaluation also makes clear that, with support, schools can make significant steps towards HBT bullying prevention and LGBT inclusion in schools.

Differences by school phase

In general, improvements were greater in primary than in secondary schools, for instance regarding the display of anti-HBT bullying posters, the inclusion of LGBT identities and relationships in lessons, confidence to respond to HBT bullying, and staff actively trying to prevent HBT bullying. However, primary schools often started at a lower level than secondary schools, which could be linked to reported anxieties and uncertainties about what elements of LGBT inclusion were permitted in those settings (see also Formby and Clague, 2016). Given appropriate support, primary schools appeared to find it easier to implement change, which may be linked to the context in which secondary schools operate in, where they often face greater pressures to improve attainment. There is supporting evidence, for instance, that such contexts can make it difficult for secondary schools to find the time or space in the curriculum to prioritise work that is not deemed ‘core’ to the school (Formby and Clague, 2016, Formby and Wolstenholme, 2012). Within the case studies, it seemed that primary schools were more likely to focus on the gender aspects of the programme rather than sexual orientation. It is interesting to note that whilst gender identity was the subject staff felt less sure about prior to programme delivery, following programme input, for at least some primary schools, it was felt to be ‘easier’ than the subject of sexual orientation.

Evidence from the evaluation surveys, case studies and telephone interviews, demonstrates that staff confidence in responding to HBT bullying and including LGBT identities and relationships in teaching, grew over the course of the programme. These changes were observed in both Model 1 and Model 2 schools. Improvements were larger in primary schools, although from less favourable baselines. Overall, at programme end, staff in both primary and secondary schools reported greater confidence in responding to HBT bullying, compared to including LGBT identities and relationships in teaching.

Analysis of survey data shows that school staff were more likely to actively prevent or respond to HBT bullying than to include bullying in the curriculum, build an inclusive environment, or include LGBT relationships or identities in curriculum. This was the case before the programme, and remains the case after the programme. This suggests that curriculum inclusion may generally be harder to implement, even though gains were observed on this. For a small number of staff involved in case studies or telephone interviews, a lack of contribution to an LGBT-inclusive environment was driven by fears related to their own identity, and how this might be received in school. For others, it is possible that action related to HBT bullying is simply easier to observe than LGBT inclusion, which could be understood as more difficult to define or assess. However, survey data shows increases in all of these measures across the evaluation period. Overall, almost two-thirds of staff reported that they now include bullying in the curriculum, with a similar number reporting that they include LGBT relationships or identities in the curriculum. More than three-quarters say that they personally try to build an LGBT-inclusive environment in school. Increases were observed across all phases and delivery models on these items.

The qualitative data revealed that, in general, LGBT inclusion and HBT bullying prevention work was taking place within assemblies. Secondary schools were also delivering through drop-down days and/or PSHE delivery, and at primary level, this was also done through the use of specific books. Often these books were newly bought as a result of provider recommendations. Where LGBT identities were included within secondary PSHE provision, this was particularly valued by LGBT pupils as their identities felt ‘seen’, and more likely to be understood, within school. Where they felt LGBT identities were not included, this was often a cause for concern for pupils, whether or not they identified as LGBT themselves. This suggests that amongst pupils, there is recognition of the need to learn about LGBT identities. Whilst both staff and secondary pupils talked about the value of having outside speakers with ‘real’ experience, some people (more often staff) felt this could lead to tokenistic input. Some schools also used their own LGBT pupils within delivery, which some staff and pupils felt was appropriate and valuable (as it was thought that pupils could relate to the input of other young people more easily). However, this approach does require that those pupils feel able and willing to do this, and it can put them under undue pressure (Formby et al, 2016). Case studies also suggest that it can lead to some pupils feeling that the school has passed responsibility for LGBT inclusion onto the pupil body, rather than the staff.

After the programme, regardless of the model implemented, reports that schools were displaying posters or noticeboards about LGBT identities and/or HBT bullying increased, more so within secondary schools. Within primary school case studies, displays were often related to books they had been reading about the subject of ‘difference’. Secondary case study schools, by contrast, often talked about using imagery of well-known LGBT figures, such as Alan Turing or Tom Daley, or more general Pride-themed displays. On the whole, secondary pupils and staff seemed to welcome these displays, though a minority felt that they could be ineffective and/or tokenistic. Both quantitative and qualitative data suggested that HBT bullying was less likely to be the subject of visual displays than broader LGBT or gender-related content.

Within the case studies, there were discussions about the potential difficulty of running (secondary) school-based LGBT groups, in relation to concerns about how to advertise them whilst also ensuring group participants’ safety. Case study schools rarely provided adverts or information about external support for LGBT pupils (a finding echoed in Formby et al, 2016).

It was evident from the qualitative data that some primary and secondary schools were linking their work to particular events or periods of time, such as IDAHOBIT (International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia), LGBT history month, Pride, or anti-bullying week. Some staff raised concerns that this could result in the compartmentalisation of particular minority identities into only certain weeks or months of the year, with invisibility being the norm for the rest of the time.

Fear of parental opposition was an issue for some primary and secondary schools, mirroring previous evidence (Formby and Clague, 2016, Formby and others, 2016). In many instances, these fears were unrealised, which gave staff greater confidence to continue the work, but in a minority of cases, some parents did object to their child being involved in particular lessons (and some were subsequently removed). In later stages of data collection, there was some evidence that wide media coverage of protests at Parkfield primary school in Birmingham in 2019 (although it was not involved in this programme) exacerbated staff fears about undertaking LGBT inclusion work in their school. In comparison, others felt that this work had become easier over the last 10 to 20 years, as a result of wider social changes in the UK.

Differences by programme model

Across the evaluation, improvements were greater in Model 1 schools than in Model 2, though differences were small on some measures. This is perhaps not surprising given the greater level of support on offer within Model 1, and the fact that it involved far greater numbers of staff within each school (by contrast Model 2 may have involved only one member of staff in each school). The implication here is that greater levels of support, and/or involving greater numbers of staff in that support, lead to greater levels of impact within schools.

Differences between staff and pupil perspectives

Whilst most reports of the effects of the programme focused on staff, in some case studies individual staff reported actual or potential impacts on pupils. These included expanded vocabulary and understanding related to LGBT identities, and reduced numbers of homophobic incidents and comments. Despite the generally positive feedback from staff, pupils (more often at secondary level) were less certain about the effects of the programme, with calls for further work in the area from both LGBT and non-LGBT pupils, in order to make schools more LGBT-inclusive, and to tackle HBT bullying more successfully.

Within the case studies, in general, there was low confidence amongst secondary pupils in relation to them reporting, and the school tackling, HBT bullying. Although some pupils said they feared reprisal from bullies if they reported bullying, others lacked faith in how robustly their school would respond if they did report, believing that staff would just “ignore it”, as some pupils had experienced. Although primary pupils in general were more likely to say that they would confront or report HBT bullying, some were concerned about reporting their experiences due to teachers or peers potentially treating them differently as a result. Staff, however, reported small increases in observing other staff responding to HBT bullying (at both primary and secondary level). Within the case studies, staff were more clear that they felt involvement in the programme had improved staff responses to HBT behaviour, often due to a rise in confidence.

Looking at the data, across both models and all school phases, most staff felt that their school now tried to proactively prevent HBT bullying more, and was a more LGBT-inclusive environment (albeit to a lesser extent). This feeling was not shared by pupils, however, which could suggest that it will take time for programme impacts to ‘trickle down’ to pupils, or that pupils and staff tend to have different perspectives on the subject, with pupils still wanting more LGBT visibility in schools. It also suggests that school staff may still feel more confident reacting to bullying than proactively trying to prevent bullying.

In the baseline survey, many pupils stated that their school was not a place where they or other pupils would feel comfortable or confident in coming out as LGBT. As the case studies indicate, some staff may have contributed to this feeling by suggesting that LGBT inclusion was only relevant to LGBT pupils, believing they did not have any at their school. This shows a clear assumption that LGBT people would be visible to them somehow, as well as a lack of thought about the ‘relevance’ of pupils’ wider families and friendship circles. However, in other schools, knowledge of LGBT parents was a specific motivator to undertake this work.

Gender identity and sexual orientation differences

Across the evaluation, regardless of model or school phase, there was an increase in the number of respondents who felt that their school included information about LGBT identities or relationships, as well as homophobic or biphobic bullying, and transphobic or gender-identity based bullying in lessons. However, at the end of the programme, LGB identities and homophobic or biphobic bullying were more likely to be included in lessons, than trans identities and transphobic or gender-identity based bullying. Survey results show a slightly stronger increase in the teaching of LGB identities and relationships compared to trans identities and relationships, yet trans-related teaching was far less widely reported at baseline. Similar increases were witnessed in both areas of teaching over the evaluation period.

Overall programme satisfaction and outcomes

In discussions with participating staff, individuals involved were often very satisfied with the support they had received as part of the programme, which corroborates survey data on programme satisfaction. The programme was reported to have led to increased awareness throughout the school, and increased numbers of staff challenging HBT behaviour, as well as practical measures, such as the introduction of gender-neutral toilets and uniform policies. Confidence was often mentioned specifically, which was related to a greater understanding of up-to-date terminology, with training on gender identity particularly valued, as this was often an area people felt less sure about. Training was most well-received when it was practical and easily applicable, and did not appear adversarial. Where it was received, ongoing support and advice, particularly where tailored to the specific school, was also valued. For some staff, HBT bullying prevention and LGBT inclusion was an area they would never have broached if it were not for the programme support available. Staff in one school said that their involvement in the programme had directly contributed to their recent positive Ofsted inspection.

Both quantitative and qualitative evaluation findings from staff indicate that across models and school phases, the programme was associated with an increase in the number of schools that have an anti-bullying policy that explicitly includes HBT bullying. In the case studies (predominantly Model 1 schools), supportive school policies were thought to make staff feel more confident in addressing HBT bullying and including LGBT people within the curriculum. Within both models, at primary and secondary level, the programme was also associated with an increase in the proportion of school staff aware of a bullying recording system that explicitly includes HBT bullying within their school. The case studies provided evidence that some schools began to record (and address) instances of HBT bullying as a direct result of the programme.

Following the programme, more staff (at both primary and secondary schools) felt that their school actively tried to prevent HBT bullying than it did before. In general, staff thought that HBT bullying was a result of a lack of understanding about LGBT identities. There were comments by staff that pupils may hear homophobic language at home or in the media and repeat it without an awareness of its meaning, so educating pupils about its meaning was key before they started to use this language themselves. Increasing knowledge about LGBT identities, and about HBT language use, was therefore understood as a form of bullying prevention work.

After being involved in the programme, the percentage of staff reporting that their (primary or secondary) school had a named member of staff responsible for LGBT matters or supporting LGBT pupils increased. However, case study data suggested that if a particular (more often than not LGBT) individual is responsible for this area of work, it can indicate that support for LGBT pupils is a ‘minority’ or unimportant issue, rather than a shared responsibility within school. In addition, as some staff identified, if this member of staff leaves the school, their knowledge - and the momentum for this area of work - can be lost. It is therefore suggested that measures to address HBT bullying and/or LGBT inclusion have clear lines of leadership and collective responsibility within schools.

Overall, the evaluation findings indicate that staff confidence is key to schools developing work on HBT bullying prevention and LGBT inclusion, both in terms of practical application (for example, learning how to implement work on HBT bullying prevention and LGBT inclusion) and permission to do this work (for example, knowing that they are allowed to do this work in schools). Because there had been uncertainties about what was permitted in primary settings prior to the programme, the programme was seen to have given permission for this work to be undertaken (see also Formby and Clague, 2016). Staff felt that government-sponsored external support aided status and buy-in from staff and parents, and that free support enabled schools to participate when budgets may be tight. Equalities legislative frameworks were also viewed as a key enabler. Within schools, SLT support was also thought to be crucial.

In conclusion, it seems that the programme was able to contribute to its intended outcomes of:

There were incremental gains towards LGBT visibility in schools, and the programme successfully brought the topic to schools’ attention. There is less clear evidence, however, the extent to which the programme was able to achieve its outcome of pupils reporting that they feel ‘confident in reporting HBT bullying, feel more resilient towards bullying, and feel their school is inclusive towards LGBT pupils and families’. In other words, it may be harder to demonstrate a direct impact on pupil experiences, and ultimately impact on preventing and reducing HBT bullying, at least in the timeframe of this programme/evaluation.

Looking to the future, training and ongoing support is important to upskill school staff, and increase their confidence to address HBT bullying and LGBT inclusion in schools. It would appear that the more staff that are involved, the better, in terms of outcomes. Whilst practical support is pivotal, it is also important to understand that where support is allied to current legislation and/or government initiatives, this increases confidence and gives an important signal that schools are permitted – and indeed encouraged – to carry out this work (see also Formby and Clague, 2016). Organisations working with schools should be mindful of the elements that appear harder to implement, for at least some schools. These include curriculum-based developments, and those focussed on delivery in secondary schools, LGBT inclusion (as opposed to HBT bullying prevention more specifically), and gender identity particularly. Addressing the fact that many pupils appear to want further measures to increase LGBT inclusion and/or support in schools, schools could look to increase links and/or signposting to outside school provision aimed at supporting LGBT young people, as such youth work based provision is often highly regarded (Formby, 2013, 2015, Formby and Donovan, 2020, Juetten and O’Loan, 2007). This large-scale research adds to the evidence base on initiatives designed to decrease and prevent HBT bullying, as well as increase LGBT inclusion in schools. This allows us further understanding about both staff and pupil perspectives on these activities in schools. Specifically, it further suggests that support is impactful, and extends existing evidence that suggests longer-term, whole-school approaches are more effective than short-term, piecemeal activities (Mitchell et al, 2014a, 2014b, 2016).

The programme was originally targeted at schools with no, or ineffective, measures in place on HBT bullying, and those that had not received previous support or training in this area. However, some schools involved in the programme had already done work in this area, and therefore some providers were perhaps working with schools that did not meet the original criteria (for reasons we do not know). This may not be cause for concern, though, because some schools may require longer-term, or more intensive, support, to reach the same level of activity, since not all schools are operating in the same context. That is, schools begin their ‘journey’ - as some staff called it - towards LGBT inclusion and HBT bullying prevention at different starting points and with varying issues and resources at their disposal (such as differing school budgets, staff skills and knowledge levels, potential parental opposition, governor understanding and support). It is therefore not necessarily advisable to restrict support on offer to only certain ‘types’ of schools. Supporting this, there was evidence in the case studies that some schools had found varied input from different providers over a period of time helpful (for example, not only from their provider within this programme). This allowed them to take on board aspects from some programmes, and elements from another, as they saw fit for their school. Ultimately, what is clear is that support is obviously beneficial for schools to become more LGBT-inclusive spaces.

Bradlow, J., Bartram, F., Guasp, A. and Jadva, V. (2017) School report: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bi and trans young people in Britain’s schools in 2017. London: Stonewall.

DePalma, R. and Jennett, M. (2010) ‘Homophobia, transphobia and culture: Deconstructing heteronormativity in English primary schools’, Intercultural Education 21 (1): 15-26.

Donelson, R. and Rogers, T. (2004) ‘Negotiating a research protocol for studying school‐based gay and lesbian issues’, Theory into Practice 43 (2): 128-35.

Formby, E. (2013) ‘Understanding and responding to homophobia and bullying: Contrasting staff and young people’s views within community settings in England’, Sexuality Research and Social Policy 10 (4): 302-316.

Formby, E. (2015) ‘Limitations of focussing on homophobic, biphobic and transphobic ‘bullying’ to understand and address LGBT young people’s experiences within and beyond school’, Sex Education 15 (6): 626-640.

Formby, E. and Clague, L. (2016) SEF addressing HBT bullying through SRE grant evaluation: Final report. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.

Formby, E. and Donovan, C. (2020) ‘Sex and relationships education for LGBT+ young people: Lessons from UK youth work’, Sexualities.

Formby, E., Willis, B. and Stevens, A. (2016) Inspiring Equality In Education grant evaluation: Final report. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.

Formby, E. and Wolstenholme, C. (2012) ‘“If there’s going to be a subject that you don’t have to do…” Findings from a mapping study of PSHE education in English secondary schools’, Pastoral Care in Education 30 (1): 5-18.

Forrest, S. and Cole, M. (2006) ‘Straight talking: Challenges in teaching and learning about sexuality and homophobia in schools’. In Education, equality and human rights: Issues of gender, ‘race’, sexuality, disability and social class, 2nd edition, edited by Cole, M., 111-33. London: Routledge.

GEO (Government Equalities Office) (2018) National LGBT survey: Research report. Manchester: Government Equalities Office.

Henderson, M. (2016) ‘Bullying experiences among sexual minority youths in England: The nature, prevalence and association with life satisfaction’, Journal of Research in Gender Studies 6 (1): 220-240.

Juetten, N. and O’Loan, S. (2007) ‘Lifeline, not luxury: Improving outcomes for LGBT young people through specialist youth work’, Scottish Youth Issues Journal 10: 41-58.

McCormack, M. (2012) The declining significance of homophobia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

METRO (2014) Youth chances survey of 16 to 25 year olds: First reference report. London: METRO.

Mitchell, M., Gray, M., Green, K. and Beninger, K. (2014a) What works in tackling homophobic, biphobic and transphobic (HBT) bullying among school-age children and young people? London: NatCen.

Mitchell, M., Gray, M. and Beninger, K. (2014b) Tackling homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying among school-age children and young people. London: NatCen.

Mitchell, M., Kotecha, M., Davies, M., Porter, H., Kaxira, A. and Turley, C. (2016) Evaluation of an anti-homophobic, biphobic and transphobic (HB&T) bullying programme. London: NatCen.

Pascoe, C.J. (2013) ‘Notes on a sociology of bullying: Young men’s homophobia as gender socialization’, QED 1 (1): 87-104.

Payne, E. and Smith, M. (2012) ‘Rethinking safe schools approaches for LGBTQ students: Changing the questions we ask’, Multicultural Perspectives 14 (4): 187-193.

Payne, E. and Smith, M. (2013) ‘LGBTQ kids, school safety, and missing the big picture: How the dominant bullying discourse prevents school professionals from thinking about systemic marginalization or… Why we need to rethink LGBTQ bullying’, QED 1 (1): 1-36.

Priest, N., Ferdinand, A., Perry, A., Paradies, Y. and Kelaher, M. (2014) Mental health impacts of racism and attitudes to diversity in Victorian schools. Melbourne: VicHealth.

Rawlings, V. and Russell, K. (2012) ‘Gender control: (Re)framing bullying, harassment and gender regulation’, University of Sydney Papers in Human Movement, Health and Coach Education 1: 17-27.

Ward, R. (2017) ‘‘I just want to be myself’: How we can challenge homophobia, transphobia, and racism in Australian schools’, Journal of Intercultural Studies 38 (4): 469-479.

Warwick, I. and Aggleton, P. (2013) ‘Bullying, ‘cussing’ and ‘mucking about’: Complexities in tackling homophobia in three secondary schools in South London, UK’, Sex Education 14 (2): 159-173.

YouGov (2015) 1 in 2 young people say they are not 100% heterosexual. [Online] Available at: https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/16/half-young-not-heterosexual/ .

Drop-down days refer to the suspension of normal timetabling to allow schools to provide dedicated themed content to pupils that day, such as on PSHE (personal, social, health and economic) education. ↩

Department for Education (2021) More support schools to tackle bullying. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/more-support-for-schools-to-tackle-bullying ↩

Mitchell, M. et al (2016) Evaluation of an anti-homophobic, biphobic and transphobic (HBT) bullying programme. [online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/anti-homophobic-biphobic-and-transphobic-bullying-programme-evaluation . ↩

2BU Somerset, ELOP, Free 2B Alliance, Mermaids, MESMAC, Mosaic, NE Federation, Proud2Be, Space, and YAY Cornwall. ↩

As measured by percentage of those reaching the expected standard in writing, reading and maths for primary schools, and achieving 5 or more GCSEs at A*-C (including English and maths) for secondary schools. ↩

As measured by percentage eligible for free school meals (FSM) in the last 6 years. ↩

Is this page useful?

Yes this page is useful
No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .

IMAGES

On Stop Bullying Free Essay Example
Discrimination Essay
Bullying Essay
Bullying in Schools Essay
The Issue of Bullying and Discrimination Informative Essay on Samploon.com
😱 Bullying essay introduction. Bullying Essay for Students and Children

VIDEO

10 Lines on Bullying in Schools in English:A Short Essay on Bullying in Schools:Bullying in Schools
My Experience with Workplace Bullying: The Day I Spoke Up
Short Essay On Bullying a Student
Anti Bullying Standing Up for Everyone -Essay
How to Write an Argumentative Essay
Bullying in Schools: Anti-Bullying Programs

COMMENTS

Discrimination, Harassment, Abuse and Bullying in the Workplace: Contribution of Workplace Injustice to Occupational Health Disparities
Experiences of discrimination, harassment and bullying in the workplace can operate as stressors provoking a psychological and/or physiological stress response. There is strong empirical evidence that psychological stress can affect biological host resistance through the activation of neuroendocrinological and immunological responses [ Cohen ...
Bullying And Discrimination At Workplace
Bullying And Discrimination At Workplace. This essay sample was donated by a student to help the academic community. Papers provided by EduBirdie writers usually outdo students' samples. Human beings have the prospective to mistreat each other with verbal abuse and bad behaviour. It is aimed at an individual or a group of people to make them ...
150 Bullying Topics for Essays + Examples
Teenagers bully for various reasons, including a need for power or control, revenge, social status, etc. They may also bully to receive attention or seek validation or excitement by creating drama. Sometimes, bullying is a misguided attempt to fit in or avoid being bullied. See some topics on causes of bullying:
Bullying And Discrimination Essay
Bullying /discrimination can be caused by multiple reasons whether that be because of a person's hair color, skin color or sexual orientation. There are many effects that bullying/discrimination can cause. The effects of this bullying can be drastic. In this paper I will be discussing how bullying/discrimination is unacceptable because it can ...
The Impact of Workplace Bullying
The most notable outcomes of workplace bullying include impaired decision making, low self esteem, depression, reduced quality of life, stress, low productivity, as well as suicide in extreme cases. Reduced quality of life is exprienced when victims of bullying succumb to pressure and ultimately quit their jobs.
The Broad Impact of School Bullying, and What Must Be Done
1. Psychological: Being a victim of bullying was associated with increased depression, anxiety, and psychosis. Victims of bullying reported more suicidal thinking and engaged in greater self ...
618 Discrimination Essay Topics & Writing Examples
Gender Discrimination in the Workplace Essay. This essay will document gender bias and gender discrimination in the context of social and physical and the social confines of the work place that is experienced at work in the context of United States […] BMW Group's Pricing Strategy and Discrimination. Therefore, the company makes use of this ...
(PDF) Bullying and Discrimination in Schools: Exploring Variations
strategies for addressing such behaviors in school, but paves the way for more. effective, multidimensional prevention and intervention efforts. Bullying and discrimination are signiﬁ-. cant and ...
Tackling Bullying from the Inside Out: Shifting Paradigms in Bullying
The current geopolitical context is more challenging than ever before to promote inclusion and address discrimination as a form of bullying in schools and cyberspace. In 2017, bullying rates among middle school students in the USA were 18% higher in localities where voters had favoured Donald Trump than in those that had supported Hillary ...
Cyberbullying and Its Implications for Human Rights
Bullying taps into societal undertones of prejudice and discrimination and often impacts people with protected characteristics of race, religion, sexuality, gender identity and disability the most.
Essays About Discrimination: Top 5 Examples and 8 Prompts
These are typical things marginalized communities experience in real life. At the end of her essay, Ibarra points out how society is dogmatic against the lower class, thinking they are abusers. In Luca, the wealthy antagonist is shown to be violent and lazy. 5. The New Way of Discrimination by Writer Bill.
Bullying in schools: the state of knowledge and effective interventions
Abstract. During the school years, bullying is one of the most common expressions of violence in the peer context. Research on bullying started more than forty years ago, when the phenomenon was defined as 'aggressive, intentional acts carried out by a group or an individual repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend him- or herself'.
Racial and Ethnic Differences in Bullying: Review and Implications for
The European Bullying Intervention Project Questionnaire-Ethnic-Cultural Discrimination Version (EBIPQ-ECD) is a measure of discriminatory bullying victimization and aggression, validated in a sample of 27,367 Spanish adolescents (Rodríguez-Hidalgo, Calmaestra, Casas, & Ortega-Ruiz, 2019). Bullying researchers should consider using such ...
Preventing Bullying: Consequences, Prevention, and Intervention
Bullying is considered to be a significant public health problem with both short- and long-term physical and social-emotional consequences for youth. A large body of research indicates that youth who have been bullied are at increased risk of subsequent mental, emotional, health, and behavioral problems, especially internalizing problems, such as low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and ...
Defining school bullying and its implications on education ...
School violence, including bullying, is widespread: one in three learners is bullied at school every month globally. The growing use of digital devices has exacerbated cyberbullying. In 2019, at least 10% of learners aged 8-10 had experienced cyberbullying, rising to 20% of learners aged 12-14. School violence can leave long-lasting impacts on learners' safety, physical and mental health ...
When Bullying Is Racially Motivated: Recognizing It for What It Is and
By Deborah Rivas-Drake, University of Michigan. All forms of bullying harm kids, but biased-based harassment—when the underlying cause or motivation is prejudice—causes specific, increased harm. 1,2 Racially motivated harassment and bullying manifest in numerous ways, from verbal insults to physical injury. As we see with Kid Kinder ® in the 2020 Captain Compassion ® comics series, a ...
Consequences of Bullying
Psychological Effects. The psychological effects of bullying include depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, self-harming behavior (especially for girls), alcohol and drug use and dependence, aggression, and involvement in violence or crime (especially for boys). While bullying can lead to mental health problems for any child, those who already ...
Conclusion: Implications and Addressing School Bullying and ...
We then discuss the implications of inequality for commonly practiced school safety and anti-bullying policies such as zero-tolerance and social control, Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports programs (SWBIS), communal schools, Olweus bullying prevention, and restorative justice programs. We then highlight the importance of ...
Bullying and Discrimination in School
Some of the instances of bullying and discrimination include name-calling which is intended to humiliate and lower the self-esteem of the victims. Another form is physical manipulating which is inflicted on the victims including theft of the victim's belongings and causing injuries.
What you need to know about school violence and bullying
School violence refers to all forms of violence that takes place in and around schools and is experienced by students and perpetrated by other students, teachers and other school staff. This includes bullying and cyberbullying. Bullying is one of the most pervasive forms of school violence, affecting 1 in 3 young people.
How parents, teachers, and kids can take action to prevent bullying
Some sites, such as Instagram, allow messages to be left anonymously. Preventing and stopping bullying involves a commitment to creating a safe environment where children can thrive, socially and academically, without being afraid. APA recommends that teachers, parents, and students take the following actions to address bullying.
Bullying and Discrimination in Schools: Exploring Variations Across
Abstract. This commentary reviews the four articles included in a special issue of the School Psychology Review that address factors related to the bullying and discrimination among youth. The articles explore rather diverse topics within the broader literature on youth interpersonal violence, but each adds to our understanding of the very complex nature of bullying involvement.
Evaluation of the government's 2016 to 2019 anti-homophobic, biphobic
Evaluation survey findings suggest that the anti-HBT bullying programme was associated with an increase (from 61% to 82%) in the proportion of staff who were aware of an anti-bullying policy at ...

Bullying And Discrimination At Workplace

Cite this paper

Related articles

Most popular essays

Join our 150k of happy users

Bullying And Discrimination Essay

Related Documents

John Greenya Bullying Summary

Analysis Of Ender's Game, By Orson Scott Card

Bully Myth Essay

Annotated Bibliography

Bullying: Article Analysis

It's Time To Stop Bullying In The United States

Example Of NICHD Research

Bully Documentary Analysis

Bullying: The Really Big Problem In America

Bullying Should Be Banned In Australia

Kohlberg's Theory Of Bullying Essay

Bullying Injustice

Persuasive Speech Outline On Bullying

Bullying Informative Speech Outline

Related Topics

The Broad Impact of School Bullying, and What Must Be Done

Silence facilitates traumatization

The impact of bullying

What can be done?

618 Thought-provoking Discrimination Essay Ideas & Examples

Cyberbullying and Its Implications for Human Rights

A Chronicle Conversation with Paloma Merodio Gómez

Improving Diagnosis for Patient Safety: A Global Imperative for Health Systems

How International Cooperation in Policing Promotes Peace and Security

Documents and publications

Libraries and Archives

News and media

The UN at Work

Essays About Discrimination: Top 5 Examples and 8 Prompts

1. Essay On Discrimination For Students In Easy Words by Prateek

Prompts on Essays About Discrimination

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Bullying: Review and Implications for Intervention

Natalia Macrynikola

Muhammad Waseem

Regina Miranda

Bullying Definitions and Scope of Current Review

Prevalence of Bullying Involvement Among Racial and Ethnic Minorities

Factors contributing to mixed reports of bullying.

Risk and Protective Factors for Bullying Involvement in Racial and Ethnic Minorities

Macrosystem and Exosystem Influences: Oppression, Neighborhoods, and Violence

Community environments.

School context.

Home environment.

Bias and prejudice.

Microsystem & Individual Levels: Social and Cognitive Predictors of Bullying Involvement

Perceptions of social support.

Interactions with parents.

Child maltreatment.

Individual-level cognition and mental health.

Acculturation stress and coping.

Ethnic identity.

Differing Bullying Behaviors and Consequences of Bullying Involvement

Differential consequences of bullying involvement.

Greater negative consequences due to bias-based bullying.

Anti-Bullying Programs and Interventions

Measures of bullying focused on behaviors.

A specific focus on bias-based bullying and multiculturalism.

Inclusivity and intersectionality.

Increasing understanding of bullying perpetration.

Interventions guided by theory.

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

Contributor Information

Preventing Bullying: Consequences, Prevention, and Intervention

Author Biography

Developed By

Committee for Children Blog

Consequences of Bullying

Children Who Have Been Bullied

Psychological Effects

Physical Effects

Academic Effects

Children Who Bully and Those Who Witness Bullying