essays about bullying in schools

Essay on Bullying in Schools

School bullying can be defined as the situation in which one or more students (The Bullies) single out a child (victim) and intend in behavior intended to cause discomfort or harm the child. A bully will repeatedly target the same victim several times. Under all circumstances, bullies have an advantage over the victim as they possess more power. Compared to the victim, bullies usually have physically stronger with a large circle of friends or higher social standing. Bullying can inflict emotional distress, humiliation, and physical harm. More than 95% of learning institutions experience bullying globally. Bullying must be meet a specific rationale to be considered bullying. Such requirements include repetitiveness, recurrent imbalance of power, and provocation. Bullying can occur in schools, on campus, or the outskirts of school, but its setting must have been created within the school. Regardless of the position, all the stakeholders in a school context, such as parents, educators, children, and community members, are required to contribute to the prevention of bullying in schools. School bullying is increasingly becoming a social problem in modern society. Ideally, there are several types of school bullying attached to different causes. The effects of school bullying can be classified in psychological, economical, and academic dimensions.

Types of Bullying in Schools

The common types of bullying in a school setting include verbal, sexual, cyber, psychological, physical, and higher education bullying. Notably, victims in a learning context can experience bullying regardless of age. The aforementioned types of bullying are further classified as either direct or indirect bullying. Direct bullying is defined as an attack that is openly targeted to a victim. Direct bullying is either verbal or physical. Contrary, indirect bullying involves different forms of relational aggression that leads to social isolation through defaming one’s reputation and manipulating the conscience of others into falsehood. Indirect bullying is usually hard and subtle to detect in a school setting (Goodwin et al. 330). If undertaken by a group of bullies, direct and indirect bullying can be referred to as pack bullying. The different types of bullying can be defined either directly or indirectly relative to the implication to the victim.

Physical bullying occurs when there is unwanted physical contact between the victim and the bully. Physical contact can be hand to hand or tripping and throwing items at others that can cause physical harm. The second is emotional bullying. Emotional bullying can be defined as hurting others emotionally by negatively influencing their moods and psyche. The primary examples of emotional bullying include; belittling, spreading false information, and defamation. Verbal bullying can be defined as the usage of slanderous language or statements causing emotional distress to other people. Examples of verbal bullying include harassing, mocking, teasing, and threatening to cause harm. Finally, Cyberbullying is attached to the evolution of the internet and computers. The use of computers in bullying at schoolyards is on the surge. In most instances, schools experience difficulties in controlling cyberbullying as experiences are beyond the school fraternity.

The other common types of school bullying are sexual bullying and higher education bullying. Sexual bullying is either non-physical or physical, grounded on the gender or sexuality of the victim. In most instances, sexual bullying is undertaken by the male gender. The United States department of education reports an average of 60% of expulsions and suspensions from learning institutions attached to sexual bullying (Goodwin et al. 328). In most instances, the young ones are frames into tricks to share their nudes, after which there are forced to fulfill specific sexual demands at the expense of exposure. Higher education bullying occurs at the campus or college level. Around 95% of students have reported having been bullied at the college level. Higher education bullying results in depression and suicide in most cases.

Measures to Control Bullying

The main approaches in controlling bullying in school settings include the implementation of educative programs, creating a positive school climate, engaging parents, encouraging open communication and punishments. These techniques, however, vary depending on the learning level and the prevalence of bullying in the particular period. Education programs involve creating awareness to parents, students, and teachers regarding what constitutes bullying. Educative programs are instrumental in creating insight into the harmful nature of whichever kind of bullying. All the stakeholders within the school fraternity are enrolled in sessions of creating awareness on the signs of bullying and the most appropriate intervention criteria. The most common ways in educating on bullying include role-play, identification and reporting discussions, and other approaches to decline being involved in bullying. Nickerson(19) argued that educative programs are 62% effective in curbing the prevalence of bullying in learning institutions.

Secondly, schools can help in the prevention of bullying by promoting a positive school climate. Schools with a positive climate are presumed to have a healthy development, while the negative school climate results in a surge in bullying cases, unsafe feelings, victimization, and aggression. While the elements of positive school culture vary from norms relative to power, relationships, and feelings, it’s evident that a positive climate is a product of a conscious process that becomes self-reinforcing (Goodwin et al. 330). The main determinants of a positive climate include leadership and integrity in learning institutions. Therefore, the ability to have cognitive leaders is an advantage of coping with bullying in schools.

Third, schools should engage parents. Parents spend most of their time with children at the primary level. While there are many stakeholders involved in the lives of the children, parents play an essential role in understanding their behavior. Engaging parents in bullying scenarios means initiating communication on the progress of the children in terms of behavior and performance. Integration between parents and teachers is essential in providing consistent approaches that help yield a more productive and appropriate behavior (Nickerson 22). Parents can help their children recognize while being bullied by others. However, the approach is not viable in urban schools as parents experience difficulties establishing trust with schools.

Finally, schools should initiate open communication techniques. Open communication is essential in building rapport. Having open communication means that students can disclose their problems to teachers. Open communication helps the teachers gain more insight into existing bullies in the school (Nickerson 20). For instance, classroom meetings in grade 4 will enable teachers to obtain crucial information in enacting more controls to curb bullying in schools. Teachers are expected to listen carefully during the class meetings to avoid inflicting fear on the learners. Students should be assured of confidentiality and privacy of the information obtained as any disclosure might attract further bullying.

Effects of School Bullying 

The effect of school bullying can be categorized in psychological and academic dimensions. Bullying results in poor performance in school. More than 70% of learners subjected to bullying ends up recording a decline in academic performance. The results are more severe at a young age. Bullying would result in fading of interest and participation of learners in school activities as it results in unexplained injuries linked to affecting concentration (Menesini and Christina 246). The impact of bullying on educational performance is increasingly becoming imminent. Bullying installs fear in learners from attending school regularly, thus affecting their consistency and concentration in class. Based on this explanation, it’s evident that bullied students will experience difficulties in achieving their academic goals. Moreover, bullying is linked with an unsafe learning environment that creates a negative climate of fear and insecurities and the perception that teachers do not care about the welfare of learners, thus decline in quality of education.

Secondly, bullying is associated with psychological problems. While bullying to individuals helps them enhance their personality and perceptions as they grow, it’s presumed that bullying can risk an individual developing an antisocial personality disorder linked to committing crimes. Bullying leads to depression, anxiety, and psychosomatic symptoms, which often leads to alcohol and substance abuse by the victims at a later stage in their lives. It’s argued that victims of depression feel free and open to share their experience with others, unlike in bullying, where the victims would choose to shy talking about the feeling in fear of being bullied again. In the short run, bystanders of the bullying experience may develop the fear, guiltiness, and sadness, and if the experience persists, they might get psychologically drained (Sampson). Therefore, the victims of bullying experiences struggle with insomnia, suicidal thoughts, health problems, and depression. Bullying does affect not only the students but also their classmates and family. Feeling powerless, parents and immediate family members might fall victim to depression and emotional distress. Some parents would invest more time in protecting their children, thus affecting them psychologically and economically.

Causes of Bullying

There are numerous causes of school bullying attached to religion, socioeconomic status, race, and gender. Understanding the reasons why students chose to bully their classmates is significant to teachers in combating bullying. The National Center for Educational Statistics report established that 25% of Blacks, 22% of Caucasians, 17% of Hispanics, and 9% of Asian students were bullied in 2017 (Divecha). Some of the students that bully others have higher levels of courage and confidence and can respond aggressively if threatened by the behavior. Students at the college level get bullied on sexual matters. For instance, the subscribers to LGBTQA sexual orientation get bullied based on their decision as gay or lesbians. Moreover, bullying in schools is caused by other factors attached to families. Students from abuse and divorced families are likely to bully others due to jealousy, anger, and despair.

From the above discussion, it’s evident that school bullying in whichever capacity is detrimental to human dignity. School bullying is increasingly becoming a social problem in modern society. Ideally, there are several types of school bullying attached to different causes. The effects of school bullying can be classified in psychological, economical, and academic dimensions. The primary forms of school form such as verbal, sexual, cyber, psychological, physical, and higher education bullying are categorized into direct and indirect bullying. The intervention strategies to curb bullying should involve all the stakeholders, such as parents, teachers, and students. The main approaches in controlling bullying in school settings include implementing educative programs, creating a positive school climate, engaging parents, and encouraging open communication and punishments.

Works Cited

Divecha, Diana. “What Are the Best Ways to Prevent Bullying in Schools?”  Greater Good , https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/what_are_the_best_ways_to_prevent_bullyi ng_in_schools

Sampson, Rana. “Center for Problem-Oriented Policing.” Arizona State University,  https://popcenter.asu.edu/content/bullying-schools-0

Menesini, Ersilia, and Christina Salmivalli. “Bullying in schools: the state of knowledge and effective interventions.”  Psychology, health & medicine  22.sup1 (2017): 240-253.

Goodwin, John, et al. “Bullying in schools: an evaluation of the use of drama in bullying prevention.” Journal of Creativity in Mental Health 14.3 (2019): 329-342.

Nickerson, Amanda B. “Preventing and intervening with bullying in schools: A framework for evidence- based practice.”  School Mental Health  11.1 (2019): 15-28.

Cite this page

Similar essay samples.

• Essay on Strategies for Developing Trust Within Team Setting
• Essay on Security Risk Management
• Essay on What Were the Main Consequences for India After the 1857 Revo...
• Essay on Data Security in Cloud Computing
• Financial Analysis of Carpetright plc and Topps Tiles plc
• PULSED ELECTRIC FIELD PRETREATMENT OF ANAEROBIC DIGESTION FEEDSTOCK TO...

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

Essay on Bullying in Schools

Students are often asked to write an essay on Bullying in Schools in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Bullying in Schools

Understanding bullying.

Bullying in schools is a serious issue. It involves repeated, unwanted, aggressive behavior. It can be physical, verbal, or social.

Effects of Bullying

Bullying harms students both mentally and physically. It can lead to low self-esteem, depression, and even thoughts of suicide.

Preventing Bullying

Schools can prevent bullying by fostering a safe environment. Encourage students to report bullying and provide support for victims.

Role of Students

As students, you can help by standing up against bullying. Be a friend, not a bystander.

250 Words Essay on Bullying in Schools

Introduction.

Bullying in schools is a pervasive issue that affects students’ academic performance and emotional well-being. It is a detrimental act, characterized by the intention to cause harm, repetition, and power imbalance between the bully and the victim.

Prevalence and Impacts

The prevalence of bullying is alarmingly high, with approximately one in three students worldwide reporting being bullied. The impacts are far-reaching, causing significant psychological distress, leading to depression, anxiety, and, in severe cases, self-harm and suicide.

The Role of the Internet

The advent of the internet has given rise to cyberbullying, exacerbating the issue. Cyberbullying allows perpetrators to hide behind screens, making it easier to inflict harm and harder for victims to escape.

Prevention Strategies

Preventing bullying requires a comprehensive approach. Schools should foster a culture of respect and inclusion, implement anti-bullying policies, and ensure their enforcement. Teachers and parents need to be educated about recognizing and addressing bullying.

Bullying in schools is a critical issue that requires collective effort to combat. By fostering an environment of respect and empathy, we can mitigate the impacts of bullying and build safer, more inclusive educational environments.

500 Words Essay on Bullying in Schools

The nature of bullying.

Bullying can take many forms, from physical aggression to verbal taunts, social exclusion, spreading rumors, and cyberbullying. The common thread is the intention to harm and the presence of a power imbalance, with the bully often being physically, socially, or psychologically dominant. Bullying can have severe and long-lasting impacts on the victims, including mental health issues, academic problems, and even suicidal ideation.

The Underlying Causes

The reasons why bullying occurs are multifaceted. Some scholars suggest it’s an expression of an innate human tendency for dominance and aggression. Others point to environmental factors such as family dynamics, school climate, and societal norms that tolerate or even endorse aggression. Bullying can also be a learned behavior, with bullies often having been victims of bullying themselves or having witnessed it in their surroundings.

The Role of Schools

Prevention and intervention strategies.

Addressing bullying requires comprehensive, evidence-based strategies. Schools should adopt a whole-school approach that involves students, staff, parents, and the wider community. This approach includes implementing clear anti-bullying policies, providing regular training for staff and students, fostering a positive school climate, and offering support services for victims.

Bystander intervention is also a promising strategy. Encouraging students to stand up against bullying, rather than passively witnessing it, can significantly reduce the prevalence of bullying. Furthermore, restorative justice approaches, where bullies are made to understand the harm they’ve caused and take responsibility for their actions, can be highly effective.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Bullying Problem in School Words: 651
• The Problem of Bullying in School Words: 2206
• Prevention of Bullying in Schools Words: 4261
• Bullying in Schools: Essay Example Words: 904
• Reducing Bullying in Schools by Involving Stakeholders Words: 2607
• Bullying in School: The Negative Effects Words: 642
• Bullying in Schools and Intervention Methods Words: 827
• Bullying in Schools: Addressing and Preventing Words: 2267
• School Bullying and Problems in Adult Life Words: 1480
• Bullying and Laws in American Schools Words: 1116
• The Issue of High School Bullying Words: 1143
• The Consequences of High School Bullying Words: 470

School Bullying: Causes and Effects

Bullying has become one of the most urgent problems in modern society. It comes from different sources and affects victims’ psychological state and quality of life. In this essay, we analyze the causes of bullying in school, its effects on victims, and mitigation measures that should be taken.

Cause and Effect of Bullying: Essay Introduction

Cause of bullying in school, bullying causes and effects: mitigation measures, works cited.

Bullying is one of the main challenges children face at school. It is a global problem that is currently affecting many youth. The rate at which bullying cases are reported causes many worries to parents. The issue is severe to the extent that many children have learned to live with it, and some have created the notion that bullying is part of their life in the early years of their development. Several cases, especially in the United States and Japan, have been reported about children’s humiliation, mistreatment, physical attacks, and even rape cases of young female learners.

The effects of bullying on a child can be very traumatizing if not carefully addressed. These effects sometimes are long-lasting and can provoke the victim to take dangerous measures to forget the incidents. According to Rigby (64), bullying experiences can cost the lives of the victims if not prevented in time. In New York, it is reported that a young immigrant killed herself due to excessive bullying. This researcher argues that it is high time for the issue of bullying in schools to be addressed. The notion that bullying is a rite of passage should be eliminated. This research paper aims to explore the causes, effects, and possible solutions to bullying in schools.

According to Olweus (34), many reasons lead to bullying in schools. One of the main causes is the cultural factor. This includes race and ethnicity. A child may be a bully or a victim if he or she comes from a majority or minority race, respectively. Another cause of bullying in schools is the nature of life a child is exposed to. In many families in developed countries, children can comfortably watch TV even in their bedrooms. Instead of studying, such children spend their time playing computer games. Their games make them bullies because they see others practice the same.

According to Tattumand Lane (27), high expectations of parents of their children contribute to bullying. The reason is that a child will spend much time studying to perform well and meet the parents’ expectations. Failure to achieve the target may develop stress in a child, and they will express anger through shouting or bullying fellow learners. Another cause of bullying in schools emanates from the family’s social status. A child from a humble background will always have some pressurizing needs that are not met. This child will always want to express this frustration to fellow learners, especially those from stable families, by bullying them.

The effects of bullying, as mentioned above, can be very traumatizing. Victims of bullying may opt to drop out of school because of the trauma they experience. Others may develop irresponsible behavior that involves missing classes on most occasions. School irregularities among the learners result in poor performance. Bullying leads to stress among the victims. This, in turn, results in poor communication with these children. McGrath (44) argues that, in some cases, excessive bullying can lead to victims committing suicide to escape from painful experiences and memories.

Some of the effects are short-term, but if not well addressed, they can result in serious complications. The victims may have bed-wetting problems, unexplained worries, and digestive problems because of the fear instilled in them. Some victims with the intention of hitting back may develop very destructive behavior. Other victims may end up engaging in drug abuse to make them forget their painful experiences. Bullying affects the normal development of victims and makes them have low self-esteem (Dupper 62). 

Mitigating bullying in schools is not a one-person battle. Since it is a global issue, it calls for a collaborative and participatory approach to addressing the problem. Teachers, parents, and policymakers have a significant role in curbing this bad behavior in schools. Teachers spend much of their time with the learners and, therefore, can easily control their behavior while in school. They should be tough and keen to identify the bullies and expel or suspend them from school to avoid spreading such behaviors among other learners. School administrators should seriously punish the physically strong learners who take advantage of the weak ones by mistreating them. The administration should not tolerate any sign of bullying within the school (Tattum&Lane 53). 

Parents should also be strict with their children and avoid anything that may turn them into bullies. Watching TV and playing computer games must be regulated at home. The child should be seriously punished if he or she shows some bullying behavior while at home. The government also has an essential role in curbing this vice. Policymakers must enact policies that address bullying in schools. These policies should be implemented and strictly adhered to, and whoever violates them should face the law irrespective of age. All the stakeholders, including the humanitarian non-governmental organizations, must join hands to curb this vice in society. Through this collaborative approach, success will be achieved.

Dupper, David. School Bullying: New Perspectives on a Growing Problem . New York: Oxford University Press, 2013. Print.

McGrath, Mary. School Bullying: Tools for Avoiding Harm and Liability . Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press, 2007. Print.

Olweus, Dan. Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do . Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1993. Print.

Rigby, Ken. Bullying in Schools and What to Do About It . Melbourne, Vic: ACER, 2007. Print.

Tattum, Delwyn, and David Lane. Bullying in Schools . Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham, 1988. Print.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2020, November 7). School Bullying: Causes and Effects. https://studycorgi.com/school-bullying-causes-and-effects/

"School Bullying: Causes and Effects." StudyCorgi , 7 Nov. 2020, studycorgi.com/school-bullying-causes-and-effects/.

StudyCorgi . (2020) 'School Bullying: Causes and Effects'. 7 November.

1. StudyCorgi . "School Bullying: Causes and Effects." November 7, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/school-bullying-causes-and-effects/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "School Bullying: Causes and Effects." November 7, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/school-bullying-causes-and-effects/.

StudyCorgi . 2020. "School Bullying: Causes and Effects." November 7, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/school-bullying-causes-and-effects/.

This paper, “School Bullying: Causes and Effects”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: November 8, 2023 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Bullying in Schools

How it works

• 1 Introduction
• 3 Conclusion
• 4 Reference List

Introduction

Bullying has negative influences on children, consequently, need to be prevented in schools. Bullying is usually described as intentional abuse or intimidation having an aspect of actual or perceived strength imbalance and repetition over time (Nickerson, 2019 stated in Shamsi, Andrades & Ashraf, 2019). Bullying can be detrimental to a child’s health and well-being (US. National Centre for Statistics, 2001). Children who are bullied can end up depressed and have low self-confidence and self-esteem (Williams, Forgas & Von Hippel, 2013). However, further bullying can result in self-harm and suicide (Kim & Leventhal, 2008).

A retrospective study showed that over 25000 children have been bullied during the school year (Egan & Perry, 1998, cited in Ribgy, 2003). Bullying has also resulted in absenteeism from school with 19% of boys and 25% of girls (Tritt & Duncan, 1997, noted in Rigby 2003).

Bullying is an emerging serious problem in schools worldwide resulting in physical and mental health problems in children (Shamsi, Andrades & Ashraf, 2019). The, types of bullying include physical bullying, verbal bullying and cyberbullying (Lien, Green, Welander-Vath & Bjertness, 2009, cited in Shamsi, Andares & Ashraf, 2019) and the incidence of bullying varies from groups to places. Bullying is firstly common in early childhood years and continues to top in the secondary school years (Gini & Pozzoli, 2009, cited in Shamsi, Andares & Ashraf, 2019). The incidence of bullying is common on the way to and from school, lunch breaks and locations such as playgrounds, cafeterias, toilets, hallways and even in the presence of teachers in classrooms.

The most frequent occurrence of bullying is outside the schools, which is 65.4%, whereas 32% occurs in school canteens, 25.5% happens in classrooms and 11.8% takes place in toilets (Konstantina & Dimitrus, 2010, cited in Shamsi, Andares & Ashraf, 2019). Bullying in the course of early childhood years can moreover persist into teen years and leave lifelong scars. Bullying can also lead to issues such as bed-wetting, stomach-ache, headache, low self-esteem and depression. Feelings of depression is the most common outcome for bullying, which 73.9% are reported, alongside with 69.6% of headaches, 68% of low self-esteem and 24.8% of suicidal thoughts (Shetgiri, 2013, cited in Shamsi, Andares & Ashraf, 2019).

Bullying in schools is consequently being recognized as an essential public health problem worldwide. Bullying is increasingly posing enormous challenges to the educational system inflicting a negative impact on academic performance, student health and well-being and safety (Lai, Ye & Chang, 2008, cited Shamsi, Andares & Ashraf, 2019). Therefore, teachers must continue to be at the frontline to deal with behavioural problem in children. This means that they must have considerable expertise of dynamics of school bullying for correct identification, intervention and prevention of such incidents. Research shows, that teachers’ ability to identify bullies and victims is influenced by means of the age of students, frequency of contacts with students, the nature or type of bullying behaviour, knowledge and understanding of the degree of bullying and their responsiveness towards children (Maunder, Harrop & Tattersall, 2010, cited in Shamsi, Andares & Ashraf, 2019).

Teachers should, therefore, be considered as useful resources in encouraging school and community-based healthcare providers to screen for health-related risk factors in victims of bullying (Konstantina & Dimitrus, 2010, cited in Shamsi, Andares & Ashraf, 2019). Regarding the definition of bullying 81% of teachers were able to answer correctly, which 84.3% of physical bullying was reported, alongside with 30.1% verbal bullying and 32% cyberbullying. They are placed in a position to recognize bullying early on and liaise with the healthcare providers for timely intervention. Healthcare providers help screen for physical and psychiatric illnesses, counsel families, and be convincing advocates for bullying in schools (Stephens, Cook-Fasano & Sibbalucca, 2018, cited Shamsi, Andares & Ashraf, 2019).

A range of meta-analyses exist that synthesise the findings of a significant number of evaluations of anti-bullying interventions. These meta-analyses include evaluations from a range of countries, and in both primary and high schools. They point out that anti-bullying interventions can be effective at reducing bullying in schools, although the findings are mixed. A number of clear themes emerge from the research that point out what types of strategies are likely to have the strongest effect on reducing and stopping bullying in schools. Evidence suggests that successful anti-bullying interventions: take a holistic, whole-school approach, include educational content that supports students to develop social and emotional competencies, and learn appropriate ways to respond to bullying behaviours, provide support and professional development to teachers and other school staff on how best to maintain a positive school climate, ensure systematic program implementation and evaluation.

The strategies that schools take to counter bullying can be classified as either ‘preventative’ or ‘responsive’. Preventative strategies aim to stop bullying from happening in the first place, whilst responsive strategies are the steps taken to resolve the problem after bullying has occurred. The two strategies are not completely distinct: responsive strategies also aim, for example, to prevent bullying behaviours from taking place again in future. Nonetheless, the two types of strategies are discussed one by one here for the sake of clarity.

In order to be effective, however, school anti-bullying policies need to be sufficiently comprehensive. A number of content analyses of schools’ anti-bullying policies suggest that there are gaps in many policies (Marsh, McGee, Hemphill & Williams 2011; Smith, Smith. Osborn & Samara 2008)

There are 9 points that school anti-bullying policies must address: whole-school, collaboratively developed policies, plans and structures for supporting safety and wellbeing, clear procedures that enable staff, parents, carers and students to document confidentially any incidents or situations of child maltreatment, harassment, aggression, violence or bullying, clearly communicated strategies for staff to follow when responding to incidents of student harm from child maltreatment, harassment, aggression, violence, bullying or misuse of technology, agreements for responsible use of technology by staff and students, regular risk assessments of the physical school environment (including off-campus and outside school hours related activities), leading to the development of effective risk-management plans, established and well-understood protocols about appropriate and inappropriate adult-to-student contact and interactions within the school context, effective strategies for record keeping and communication between appropriate staff about safety and well-being issues, a representative group responsible for overseeing the school’s safety and wellbeing initiatives, protocols for the introduction of casual staff, new staff and new students and families into the school’s safety and wellbeing policies and procedures (Australian Government Department of Education and Training 2016).

Bullying prevention is effective at reducing bullying in schools and other institutions. Bullying, especially physical can result in absenteeism from school, depression and eventually death. Intervention from pre-school years is designed to reduce bullying in all institutions. However, bullying prevention can be successful if anti-bullying packages are comprehensive. There is also evidence to suggest that bullying prevention aims to stop the occurrence of bullying in the first place. Importantly, the nine anti-bullying policies should be effective in either preventing or reducing bullying in institutions. Therefore, bullying be avoided in institutions, and comprehensive interventions are needed to prevent bullying from an early age.

Reference List

• Australian Government Department of Education and Training 2016, National Safe Schools Framework, Student Wellbeing Hub, viewed 23 May 2017, https://www.studentwellbeinghub.edu.au/ educators/nssf#/element/policies-and-procedures/characteristics.
• Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation 2017, Anti-bullying interventions in schools – what works? Viewed 22 September 2019
• Egan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (1998). Does low self-regard invite victimization? Developmental psychology, 34(2), 299.
• Gini, G., & Pozzoli, T. (2009). Association between bullying and psychosomatic problems: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 123(3), 1059-1065.
• Kim, Y. S., & Leventhal, B. (2008). Bullying and suicide. A review. International journal of adolescent medicine and health, 20(2), 133-154
• Konstantina, K. A. P. A. R. I., & Pilios-Dimitris, S. T. A. V. R. O. U. (2010). School traits as predictors of bullying and victimization among Greek middle school students. International Journal, 94.
• Lai, S. L., Ye, R., & Chang, K. P. (2008). Bullying in middle schools: An Asian-Pacific regional study. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9(4), 503-515.
• Lien, L., Green, K., Welander-Vath, A., & Bjertness, E. (2009). Mental and somatic complaints associated with school bullying 10th and 12th grade students from cross sectional studies in Oslo, Norway. Clinical Practise and Epidemiology in Mental Health, 5(6).
• Marsh, L., McGee, R., Hemphill, S. A., & Williams, S. (2011). Content analysis of school anti-bullying policies: a comparison between New Zealand and Victoria, Australia. Health promoting journal of Australia, 22(3), 172-177.
• Maunder, R. E., Harrop, A., & Tattersall, A. J. (2010). Pupil and staff perceptions of bullying in secondary schools: comparing behavioural definitions and their perceived seriousness. Educational research, 52(3), 263-282.
• Nickerson, A. B. (2019). Preventing and intervening with bullying in schools: A framework for evidence-based practice. School mental health, 11(1), 15-28.
• Rigby, K. (2003). Consequences of bullying in schools. The Canadian journal of psychiatry, 48(9), 583-590.
• Shamsi, N. I., Andrades, M., & Ashraf, H. (2019). Bullying in school children: How much do teachers know? Journal of family medicine and primary care, 8(7), 2395.
• Shetgiri R. (2013). Bullying and victimization among children. Advances in pediatrics, 60(1), 33–51.
• Smith, P. K., Smith, C., Osborn, R., & Samara, M. (2008). A content analysis of school anti?bullying policies: progress and limitations. Educational Psychology in Practice, 24(1), 1-12
• Stephens MM, Cook-Fasano HT, Sibbaluca K. (2018). Childhood bullying. Implications for physicians. AmFam Physician.; 97(3): 187-92.
• Tritt, C., & Duncan, R. D. (1997). The Relationship Between Childhood Bullying and Young Adult Self?Esteem and Loneliness. The Journal of Humanistic Education and Development, 36(1), 35-44.
• U.S. National Center for Education Statistics. Student Reports of Bullying: Results From the 2001 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (PDF) (Report).
• Williams, K. D., Forgas, J. P., & Von Hippel, W. (2013). The social outcast: Ostracism, social exclusion, rejection, and bullying. Psychology Press.

Cite this page

Bullying in Schools. (2021, Jan 15). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/bullying-in-schools/

"Bullying in Schools." PapersOwl.com , 15 Jan 2021, https://papersowl.com/examples/bullying-in-schools/

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Bullying in Schools . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/bullying-in-schools/ [Accessed: 27 Sep. 2024]

"Bullying in Schools." PapersOwl.com, Jan 15, 2021. Accessed September 27, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/bullying-in-schools/

"Bullying in Schools," PapersOwl.com , 15-Jan-2021. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/bullying-in-schools/. [Accessed: 27-Sep-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Bullying in Schools . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/bullying-in-schools/ [Accessed: 27-Sep-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

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

Other recent articles

Greater Good Science Center • Magazine • In Action • In Education

What Are the Best Ways to Prevent Bullying in Schools?

All 50 U.S. states require schools to have a bullying prevention policy.

But a policy, alone, is not enough. Despite the requirement, there’s been a slight uptick in all forms of bullying during the last three years. Bullying can look like experienced basketball players systematically intimidating novice players off the court, kids repeatedly stigmatizing immigrant classmates for their cultural differences, or a middle-school girl suddenly being insulted and excluded by her group of friends.

Bullying occurs everywhere, even in the highest-performing schools, and it is hurtful to everyone involved, from the targets of bullying to the witnesses—and even to bullies themselves. October is National Bullying Prevention Month, so it’s a good time to ask ourselves: What are the best practices for preventing bullying in schools? That’s a question I explored with my colleague Marc Brackett from the Yale Center for Emotional Intelligence, in a recent paper, Rethinking School-Based Bullying Prevention Through the Lens of Social and Emotional Learning , that reviewed dozens of studies of real-world bullying prevention efforts.

As we discovered, not all approaches to bullying prevention are equally effective. Most bullying prevention programs focus on raising awareness of the problem and administering consequences. But programs that rely on punishment and zero tolerance have not been shown to be effective in the U.S.; and they often disproportionately target students of color. Programs like peer mediation that place responsibility on the children to work out conflicts can increase bullying. (Adult victims of abuse are never asked to “work it out” with their tormentor, and children have an additional legal right to protections due to their developmental status.) Bystander intervention, even among adults, only works for some people—extroverts, empaths, and people with higher social status and moral engagement. Many approaches that educators adopt have not been evaluated through research; instead, educators tend to select programs based on what their colleagues use.

We found two research-tested approaches that show the most promise for reducing bullying (along with other forms of aggression and conflict). They are a positive school climate, and social and emotional learning.

Building a positive school climate

School climate can be difficult to define, though possible to measure . It is the “felt sense” of being in a school, which can arise from a greeting, the way a problem is resolved, or how people work together; it is a school’s “heart and soul,” its “quality and character.” Schools with a positive climate foster healthy development, while a negative school climate is associated with higher rates of student bullying, aggression, victimization, and feeling unsafe.

GGSC Online Courses for Educators

A suite of practical, self-paced courses to help build kinder, happier schools

The elements of a positive climate may vary, but may often include norms about feelings and relationships, power and how it is expressed, and media consumption. Social norm engineering is a conscious process that builds a positive culture among student peers and school adults that becomes self-reinforcing. Like a healthy immune system, a positive school climate promotes optimal health and reduces the chances of dysfunction or disease.

Leadership is key to a positive climate. Is bullying minimized as a “normal rite of childhood,” or is it recognized as the harmful peer abuse that it is? Do leaders understand that uninterrupted, severe bullying can confer lifelong negative consequences on targets of bullies, bullies, and witnesses? Are school leaders committed to promoting all children’s positive psychological health, or do they over-rely on punishing misbehavior? Can they discern between typical developmental processes that need guidance versus bullying that needs assertive intervention? Are educators empathic to their students, and do they value children’s feelings?

Next, are teachers prepared to deal with bullying? Students consistently report that teachers miss most incidents of bullying and fail to help students when asked. A majority of teachers report that they feel unprepared to deal with classroom bullying. Some teachers bully students themselves , or show a lack of empathy toward children who are bullied. Teachers report that they receive little guidance in “classroom management,” and sometimes default to the disciplinary strategies they learned in their own families growing up.

However, reforming school climate should involve all stakeholders—students and parents, as well as the administrators and teachers—so a school’s specific issues can be addressed, and the flavor of local cultures retained. School climate assessments can be completed periodically to track the impact of improvements.

Advancing social and emotional learning

Social and emotional learning (SEL) is well known, and involves teaching skills of self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, responsible decision making, and relationships management. (Full disclosure: Brackett and I are affiliated with the SEL program RULER .)

Evidence-based SEL approaches have been shown to deliver cost-effective, solid results. Numerous meta-analyses , research reviews , and individual studies of hundreds of thousands of K-12 students show that SEL improves emotional well-being, self-regulation, classroom relationships, and kind and helpful behavior among students. It reduces a range of problems like anxiety, emotional distress, and depression; reduces disruptive behaviors like conflicts, aggression, bullying, anger, and hostile attribution bias; and it improves academic achievement, creativity, and leadership.

A 2012 study of 36 first-grade teachers showed that when teachers were more emotionally supportive of students, children were less aggressive and had greater behavioral self-control, compared to the use of behavior management, which did not improve student self-control. One 2018 meta-analysis showed that developing emotional competence was protective against becoming a victim of bullying; social competence and academic performance were protective against becoming a bully; and positive peer interactions were protective against becoming a bully-victim (one who has been bullied and bullies others). A series of longitudinal studies showed positive effects into midlife (e.g., fewer divorces, less unemployment) and even cross-generational effects of early SEL. Compared to a matched control group, the children of the adults who participated in the Perry Preschool Project had less criminal involvement and higher educational and employment achievement. A cost-benefit analysis of six SEL programs found them to be good investments, with $11 saved for every $1 spent.

Teachers also benefit from SEL. Those with emotional and social skills training have higher job satisfaction and less burnout, show more positive emotions toward their students, manage their classrooms better, and use more strategies that cultivate creativity, choice, and autonomy in their students. Teachers report that they want more SEL support to cultivate their own emotional and social skills, and to better understand their students’ feelings. But few teacher training programs focus on growing the teachers’ emotion regulation skills.

Bullying at different age levels

SEL approaches should be developmentally wise , since what is salient and possible for children changes at different ages.

For example, preschoolers are expelled from school at the highest rates of all, but the neurological hardware for their self-control is only just developing. Only then are the connections between the emotion circuitry and the more thinking regions of the prefrontal cortex beginning to be myelinated (insulated for faster connectivity), something that will take until the mid 20s to complete. An SEL program like PATHS or RULER that teaches young children language for feelings, and strategies for thinking before acting, can develop better self-regulation.

Sometimes, adults confuse normal developmental processes with bullying. For example, children begin to reorganize their friendships midway through elementary school, something that can naturally create hurt feelings and interpersonal conflict. It should not be misconstrued as bullying, though, which involves intentional, repeated aggression within an imbalance of power. Normal development also includes experimenting with power, and these normal dynamics should be guided safely toward developing a healthy sense of agency, rather than a hurtful exertion of power over someone else.

Finally, the onset of puberty marks the beginning of heightened sensitivity to social relationships, an especially important time to cultivate skills for kinder, gentler relationships. Unfortunately, this is the period when bullying spikes the highest. And while some strategies work well for younger children (for example, advising them to “tell a trusted adult”), this option may fail with teens, and the breakpoint seems to be around the eighth grade. Older teens require approaches that are less didactic and leverage their need for autonomy, while affirming their values and search for meaning. Physiologically, the brain changes during puberty confer a second chance for recalibrating their stress regulation system. That opportunity should be constructively seized.

Approaches should also take into account individual differences between children. Even SEL programs can stumble here, over-relying on just one or two emotion regulation strategies, like breathing or mindfulness. But children vary in their temperaments, sensitivities, strengths, and vulnerabilities. The best SEL approaches guide students toward discovering strategies that work best for them—strategies that are emotion- and context-specific, personalized, and culturally responsive. This approach requires unconventional flexibility on the part of the educators.

And, finally, approaches work best if they are not standalone pedagogies or from kits that end up in the classroom closet at the end of the year. In order to be effective, skills should become fully embedded across the curricula and the entire day, in all settings, and implemented by all adults—in other words, infiltrating the ecosystem. Only approaches used and taught as intended are successful.

Schools can’t do this alone

Families matter, too. Bullying in schools sometimes arises from harsh parenting practices or sibling bullying at home.

Even parents’ workplaces matter. Adults experience bullying in their workplaces at about the same rate as children in schools, and it’s even found among teachers and in senior living communities . In other words, bullying is not just a childhood problem; it is a pervasive human problem. And children are not buffered from the wider social world—bullying of children who belong to groups targeted in the national political discourse has spiked on playgrounds nationwide.

Ultimately, we need a substantial shift in our mindsets about the importance of children and their feelings. Children are more likely to thrive when we nurture their humanity, and offer them language and strategies and values to help them identify, express, and, thus, regulate their feelings. When parents, teachers, and administrators gain new awareness into the complex roots of bullying and adopt new strategies for addressing it, schools can lead the way. The kids are counting on us.

Now Accepting Applications!

Join Greater Good Educators to build kinder, happier schools where everyone belongs.

About the Author

Diana Divecha

Diana Divecha, Ph.D. , is a developmental psychologist, an assistant clinical professor at the Yale Child Study Center and Yale Center for Emotional Intelligence, and on the advisory board of the Greater Good Science Center. Her blog is developmentalscience.com .

You May Also Enjoy

Could Gay-Straight Alliances Reduce Bullying?

The Bully Problem

How Bullied Children Grow into Wounded Adults

Eight keys to end bullying.

Playground Heroes

How to Bullyproof Your Kid

• Skip to main content
• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

A Plus Topper

Improve your Grades

Bullying in Schools Essay | Essay on Bullying in Schools for Students and Children in English

February 13, 2024 by Prasanna

Bullying in Schools Essay:  The use of coercion, force, threat to aggressively abuse or dominate is known as bullying. However, bullying and conflict are not the same things. Bullying involves an imbalance of physical or social power but so is not the case in conflicts. Bullying is not a onetime thing but in fact, is a behaviour that is repetitive.

Bullying takes places in all places, but one place of bullying that popular media focuses on is bullying that takes place in schools. Bullying in schools is extremely common and takes place at varying levels.

You can also find more  Essay Writing  articles on events, persons, sports, technology and many more.

Long and Short Essays on Bullying in Schools for Students and Kids in English

We are providing students with essay samples on a long essay of 500 words and a short essay of 150 words on the topic “Bullying In Schools” for reference.

Long Essay on Bullying in Schools 500 Words in English

Long Essay on Bullying in Schools is usually given to classes 7, 8, 9, and 10.

When a person is seen to use force, coercion and (or) threat to dominate, harm or abuse, someone is known as bullying. Bullying is characterized by an imbalance of social and (or) physical power, which differentiates it from conflicts and fights. It is a repeated form of behaviour and is a result of malicious intent, sadistic behavioural patterns or underlying trauma or confidence.

There are various forms of bullying, a few of them being:

• Physical bullying: This is the most common form of bullying, and the name suggests what it means. Physical bullying is when one uses physical strength to threat or dominate.
• Verbal bullying: In the case of verbal bullying, there is no physical strength involved and often leaves deep scars on the person being bullied.
• Social or Psychological bullying: This bullying takes place when a rumour or gossip goes on around a person, and everyone talks about is resulting in the one bullied being socially unacceptable.
• Cyberbullying: Cyberbullying came around along with the internet and with the social media platform gaining popularity. Talking about cyberbullying might need a completely different essay.
• Emotional bullying: Psychological bullying and emotional bullying might go hand in hand at times. It is when the bully is your friend or when the bully pulls out personal attacks to harm you emotionally or psychologically. It is proved that girls pull psychological and emotional bullying while the boys usually stick to physical bullying, but the tropes keep changing.

Bullying is or can be done individually or in a group. One can even remain anonymous when bullying. Bullying takes place at all levels of life, but one common place of bullying turns out to be schools.

Popular culture constantly brings into focus bullying in schools (especially high schools full of teens and young adults). Pop culture might even have had a role to play in the increase of bullying because pre-teens watching movies might even get inspired by the portrayal of bullies movies. A classic teen-drama movie that involves everyone bullying everyone that paved the way for bullying in the 2000s and 2010s is Mean Girls, later in the 2000s came another pop culture stop, Gossip Girl which is the epitome of Social, Verbal and Cyberbullying.

However, one should not be confused between a bully or a mean person. The later’s nature is so, and they do not have specific targets, whereas a bully can even be your friend or as sweet as honey. There are times when the blatant signs of bullying are not even present in a person from afar, but only the bully’s victim knows what is going on.

It is said that on an average one in every three children get bullied in schools. UNESCO also says that about 32% of students get bullied in schools all around the globe. When the behaviour of bullies is not checked in school when they are at the stage of growth, it continues to different stages of their lives and in turn affecting lives of those who they decide to bully.

Short Essay on Bullying in Schools 150 Words in English

Short Essay on Bullying in Schools is usually given to classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Bullying is defined as the use of coercion, force, the power to dominate and threat. There are different types of bullying, including physical, cyber, emotional, psychological, and verbal, amongst others, all of which are self-explanatory. They take place all around us, some we see, and some we don’t.

A common stage of life where bullying is prevalent are schools. Pop culture, throughout history, has often put the spotlight of school bullies in the reel world, but hardly any action has been taken in the real world. Around 31% of children, all around the globe get bullied, but not many of them face the consequences.

If children and teens are not stopped from pulling such aggressive, malicious behaviour (which is usually caused due to self-doubt and trauma, which although does not excuse one’s action) at an early stage, a report says that they might end up committing some form of criminal activity by their early or mid-twenties.

10 Lines on Bullying in Schools in English

• Bullying refers to the use of force or coercion to dominate or threat.
• One’s bullying is known as bullies.
• Bullying involves a physical or social power imbalance.
• There are various forms of bullying like physical, cyber, psychological, emotional and verbal.
• About one out of three children get bullied every day in schools.
• Bullying leaves the victim emotionally, psychologically and at times physically weak for a long time.
• Pop culture has always highlighted bullying in schools, and without supervision, children might be inspired from such topes of bullies portrayed.
• 31% of children get bullied in schools all around the globe.
• If the bullies are not stopped at an early stage, they carry this behaviour on to their lives outside the school where they might face serious consequences.
• A report says that most of the bullies, if not checked in schools, get involved in some form of criminal activity by the time they are 24.

FAQ’s on Bullying in Schools Essay

Question 1.  What does bullying mean?

Answer:  Bullying means the use of power, force and coercion to abuse and dominate.

Question 2. How does bullying take place?

Answer: Bullying takes place in various forms that include physical,emotional, verbal, and psychological and cyberbullying.

Question 3.  What happens toschool bullies after school?

Answer: Once school gets over, the bullies, if not corrected before that end up affecting the lives of all those who encounter them outside and according to statistics, might end up committing a crime.

• Picture Dictionary
• English Speech
• English Slogans
• English Letter Writing
• English Essay Writing
• English Textbook Answers
• Types of Certificates
• ICSE Solutions
• Selina ICSE Solutions
• ML Aggarwal Solutions
• HSSLive Plus One
• HSSLive Plus Two
• Kerala SSLC
• Distance Education

Students Experiencing Bullying

This information is designed to help teachers respond to students who may need support. It is not intended to be used as a diagnostic tool or to replace the use of formal assessments employed by mental health professionals. Additionally, it is important to consider the context of the situation, individual differences, and cultural and linguistic considerations.

Teachers are an important part of establishing and maintaining healthy environments for children to learn and grow. Teachers are critical contributors to promoting safe school interactions and facilitating positive relationships.

Download this Primer

More Primers

What is Bullying?

• Bullying, including cyberbullying, involves repeated actions intended to cause harm in relationships where there is a real or perceived power imbalance.
• Bullying can be verbal (e.g., purposeful humiliation, teasing, threatening), physical (e.g., hitting, kicking, shoving) or relational (e.g., social exclusion, spreading hurtful rumors).
• Bullying can occur in many contexts on school campus or off campus (e.g., in the virtual learning environment [VLE] or cyberbullying) Cyberbullying, for example, is not limited to either physical academic spaces or even the hours spent in them, but in fact, often occurs outside of both.
• Bullying and cyberbullying includes the interactions among students who bully, targets of bullying, and, at times, bystanders. Students may fall into one or more of these groups, depending on the social situation.
• Bias-based bullying is bullying that specifically targets a person because of characteristics of their identity (e.g., race, language, sexual orientation, ability, body size, gender identity, religion and/or practices).
• Cyberbullying is distinct from in-person bullying. It is willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices.
• Cyberbullying content can be very public and pervasive, and can exist permanently in a digital archive, such as via social media. It can also be targeted directly to a single student, such as via text or direct messaging.

How Does Bullying Affect Students?

There is the potential for long-term negative mental health outcomes (e.g., anxiety, low self-esteem, and depression) for youth whoare the targets of bullying as well as those who bully.  Schools with healthy climates that discourage bullying have better academic outcomes.

• Bullying may serve a function for students who instigate it (e.g., help them to achieve popularity, attention). Understanding the function that bullying serves can help teachers and professionals at school to identify other, more positive ways for students to succeed.
• Students who initiate bullying may have been in a situation where they themselves were bullied.
• Students who bully others are at a high risk for conduct problems (e.g., domestic violence, substance abuse).
• Students who bully others need support from teachers and professionals in the school.
• Students who engage in cyberbullying may feel more emboldened about doing so online than they would in person because of the actual physical separation, lack of school staff oversight, and/or anonymity offered by online communication.
• Students who are targeted for bullying are often members of historically marginalized groups, such as racial and ethnic minorities, the LGBTQ community, and children with different abilities.
• Students who are bullied can disengage from school, which can, in turn, negatively impacts their relationships and academic achievement. They may even engage in self-harm.
• Students who are bullied may seek self-protection behaviors such as avoiding recess, defending themselves, or, in cases of cyberbullying, attempting to retaliate in kind.
• Via device delivery, cyberbullying threatens the student with notifications, which can make them feel like the instigator is always near.
• Students who are bullied need support from teachers and professionals in the school.
• Students who are bullied should be encouraged to report bullying to trusted adults: a neighbor, mentor, parent, friend’s parent, teacher, coach, etc.
• Bystanders are students who observe bullying but are not directly involved in bullying. These witnesses often fear being victimized themselves.
• Bystanders can play four roles when they witness bullying:
• Assistant: these children may not lead in the bullying behavior, but serve as an “assistant” to the children who are bullying by encouraging the behavior or occasionally joining in.
• Reinforcer: these children are not directly involved in bullying, but they provide an audience. They will often laugh or provide other support for the children who are engaged in bullying, which may encourage the bullying to continue.
• Outsider: these children remain separate from the bullying situation – they do not reinforce the bullying behavior, but neither do they defend the child being bullied. They may not show that they are on anyone’s side. However, just providing an audience can encourage bullying behavior.
• Defenders: these children may intervene when bullying occurs, actively coming to the defense of or comforting the child being bullied.
• Bystanders can play an important part in calling out and reporting bullying, and stopping it from occurring.
• When bullying is ignored, bystanders may conclude these actions are condoned by the adults.
• Student witnesses who fail to intervene can experience guilt that they did not stop the incident.

In-person Bullying on School Grounds

• Name calling, fighting, humiliation, and public shaming in class or at school.
• Excluding someone from a group or event, such as from the lunch table.
• Gossiping or spreading rumors.
• Physical acts such as shoving, pushing, punching, stealing, or even attempting to intimidate a peer to help them cheat in class or on homework.
• Stalking and following.

Cyberbullying Via Classroom Chat, Social Media, or Gaming Platforms

• Name calling, fighting, humiliation, and public shaming online.
• Excluding someone from a chat or other online event.
• Gossiping or spreading rumors, sometimes through a false impersonation/avatar/online personality.
• Sharing incriminating or embarrassing pictures or texts.
• Cyberstalking, inauthentically responding to a post or message, trolling, and “catfishing” or false online personality.

What Can Teachers Do?

Do : Address the inappropriate behavior early and often.

Don’t ignore problematic behavior. Inconsistent responses increase the likelihood of the behavior recurring.

Do : Separately engage students who bully, targets of bullying, and bystanders in resolving the incident.

Don’t focus only on a single individual in the situation or meet with all parties at the same time.

Do : Use consequences that repair the harm and help the perpetrator understand the impact of their actions. Express belief in the bullying student’s ability to engage in positive behaviors and offer praise.

Don’t address the instigator with punitive, humiliating, and exclusionary disciplinary practices (e.g., suspension, public admission of guilt, zero tolerance policies).

Do : Empower bystanders to intervene and report incidents of bullying and affirm their integrity and courage.

Don’t assume that witnesses are uninvolved, even in the VLE.

Do : Be consistent. Set expectations for student behavior and remind students of the expectations frequently. Specific expectations will likely differ between in-person classes and the VLE. Take the time to address microaggressions at the time of the incident.

Specific expectations will likely differ between in-person classes and the VLE. Take the time to address microaggressions at the time of the incident. 

Don’t wait for a major event or a designated initiative (e.g., AntiBullying Week) to address behaviors.

Do : Accurately label the inappropriate behavior as bullying.

Don’t minimize or downplay an incident based on assumptions about student characteristics or relationships.

Recommended Practices

• Schools with safe and positive school climates often use an explicit social and emotional learning curriculum. Seek training on adopting a comprehensive social emotional learning curriculum to promote safe, positive school environments. Select a social emotional learning curriculum that specifically addresses bullying, cyberbullying, and bias-based bullying (bullying based on identity characteristics, such as race, language, gender). Consider the comfort of each student when planning meetings. Having the target of bullying and the instigator in the same room can be intimidating and embarrassing. Bystanders often wish to remain anonymous.
• With your students, develop a class contract that specifies mutual respect, inclusion, and anti-bullying. Refer to the contract throughout the year.
• Conduct classroom activities around bullying. Discuss its short-term and long-term impacts on health and personality. Have discussions to promote better peer relations.
• Discuss bullying in the context of students’ sociopolitical contexts, including the possibility of bullying targeting students because of their identity, and the importance of addressing bias-based bullying and hate speech.
• Be the adult your students need. Treat students with warmth and respect: Let students know that you are available to listen and help them.

Refer Students to Further Help if Needed

• Be familiar with your state’s antibullying legislation and your school’s and district’s policies regarding bullying.
• Encourage parents to report bullying to school staff, rather than attempting to resolve bullying incidents among themselves.
• Review your school policy for seeking student supports.
• Contact school counselors, psychologists, social workers, and other personnel.
• Stop Bullying
• BullyBusters Help & Advice
• Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence
• APA Bullying Resource
• Cyberbullying resources: Cyberbullying Research Center Common Sense KidsHealth Child Mind Institute Cyberbully411
• Institute of Education Sciences Research-Based Strategies for Effective Remote Learning 

Related Mental Health Primers

Trauma exposure , depression , stress , low self-esteem

Empirical Research

Acker, M.M. & O’Leary, S.G. (1987). Effects of reprimands and praise on behavior in the classroom. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 15, 549-557.

DuPaul, G.J., Eckert, T.L., & Vilardo, B.A. (2012).  The effects of school-based interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analysis, 1996-2010. School Psychology Review, 41, 387-412. 

Fabiano, G.A., Pelham, W.E. Jr., Coles, E.K., Gnagy, E.M., Chronis-Tuscano, A., & O’Connor, B.C. (2009).  A meta-analysis of behavioral treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Clinical Psychology Review, 29, 29-140.

Pfiffner, L.J., Villodas, M., Kaiser, N., Rooney, M., & McBurnett, K. (2013). Educational outcomes of a collaborative school-home behavioral intervention for ADHD. School Psychology Quarterly, 28, 25-36.

Sarver, D.E., Rapport, M.D., Kofler, M.J., Raiker, J. S., & Friedman, L. M. (2015). Hyperactivity in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): Impairing deficit or compensatory behavior? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43, 1219–1232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-0011-1

The Mental Health Primers are developed by the Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education . This resource was updated in October 2021 with support from cooperative agreement NU87PS004366 funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views or endorsement of the CDC or the Department of Health and Human Services.

These primers by the Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education (CPSE) help teachers identify behaviors in the classroom that are symptomatic of mental health and other psychological issues.

• Teaching and Learning Evidence-based Resources
• Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education
• Gifted and Talented Development
• APA Pre-K to 12 Education Advocacy

Last updated: October 2021

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Predictive factors regarding bullying behavior in romanian schools.

• 1 Faculty of Law and Administrative Sciences, Ovidius University, Constanta, Romania
• 2 Institute of Psychology and Philosophy of the Romanian Academy, Bucharest, Romania
• 3 Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ovidius University, Constanta, Romania
• 4 Faculty of Law and Administrative Sciences, Ovidius University, Constanta, Romania

Introduction: The present study investigates the phenomenon of bullying in schools in the city of Constanta, Romania.

Method: From the age point of view, we have had n  = 210 12-year-old subjects and 193 13-year-old subjects, and from the biological gender point of view, there were 234 girls and 169 boys. The study’s main objective was to investigate aggressive behavior in adolescents in a school context. The study is cross-sectional and aims to analyze behaviors and interpersonal relationships having as dependent variable “Conflicts in the school environment” and two independent variables, respectively “Aggressive Manifestations” and “Aggressive Behaviors,” used in proving the first hypothesis, dependent variable “Verbal attacks as an aggressor” and the predictive variables “Social exclusion” and “Conflicts within the school environment” used to demonstrate the second hypothesis and the dependent variable “Bullying behavior” and the predictor variables “Acceptance of unethical behaviors,” “Violation of privacy as an aggressor” and “Dissemination of information without authorization” used to demonstrate the third hypotheses.

Result: The results indicate significant correlations between aggressive behaviors and conflicts in the school environment ( r  = 0.596, p  < 0.001), suggesting that interventions must be integrated and address the underlying causes of aggressive behaviors and associated manifestations. The association between “Conflicts in the school environment” and “Aggressive behaviors” revealed a significant correlation ( r  = 0.387, p  < 0.001) and a moderate correlation between “Perception of conflicts” and “Aggressive manifestations” ( r  = 0.423, p  < 0.001).

Conclusion: The conclusions emphasize the importance of understanding the complexity of aggressive behavior dynamics and predictive factors for developing effective strategies for prevention and intervention in the educational environment. As a limitation of the study, it is advisable to follow the group of subjects from a longitudinal point of view to identify changes in the behavioral manifestations of these adolescents, in a school context.

1 Introduction

In Romania, bullying is a major problem in the school environment. According to the study carried out by the World Vision Romania Foundation (2021), approximately 46% of students reported that they were victims of bullying, while 82% of them witnessed such behaviors in their schools. The most common form of bullying identified is verbal, followed by social exclusion and physical violence. This situation is also confirmed by a study by the “Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University in Iași (2022), which shows that the prevalence of the phenomenon is high in both secondary and high schools, with a significant negative impact on mental health and academic performance of the students.

Research shows that boys are more often involved in physical bullying, while girls are more vulnerable to relational and online bullying. These forms of violence lead to serious psychological consequences, including anxiety and depression, and can contribute to lower school performance and school drop-out (World Vision Romania, 2021; Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, 2022).

In 2023, Save the Children Romania pointed out that almost 50% of students are exposed to bullying, and 4 out of 5 students have witnessed such incidents, highlighting the need for effective prevention and intervention programs (Save the Children Romania, 2023).

Order no. 6235/2023 approved by the Romanian Ministry of Education regulates the procedure for managing cases of violence against pre-schoolers, pre-schoolers, pupils, and school staff. This order sets out the steps to be followed by teachers and school management when a case of violence occurs, either inside or outside the school.

The present study mainly uses the social-cognitive theory of antisocial behavior to analyze the antisocial behaviors of adolescents in Romania. This theory was used to explore how environmental factors and cultural context influence the development and manifestation of antisocial behaviors in adolescents.

According to the social-cognitive theory, antisocial behaviors are acquired through observation and imitation in social interactions. They are influenced by the rewards and punishments that the individual perceives in his environment. This study validates the Spanish version of a self-report questionnaire of antisocial behaviors. It compares the results obtained between two distinct populations, highlighting both cultural differences and similarities in the manifestation of these behaviors ( Espejo-Siles et al., 2023 ).

For a more detailed understanding, the authors discuss environmental influences and how changes over time and in different cultural contexts can shape antisocial behavior, thus supporting the importance of the contextual approach in the development and implementation of antisocial behavior prevention programs.

The diversity of predictive factors for bullying behaviors includes both individual characteristics, such as early aggression and behavior problems, as well as socioeconomic factors. According to the studies carried out by Jansen et al. (2011) and Hwang et al. (2017) , aggression in the preschool period, low socio-economic status, and divorce represent significant elements that can lead to the involvement of adolescents in bullying behaviors.

These findings highlight the phenomenon’s complexity and indicate the need for an integrated effort in prevention and intervention.

Individual variables such as externalizing and internalizing behavior, along with contextual factors such as parental supervision and peer rejection, play a critical role in the development and extent of bullying. The studies carried out by De Sousa et al. (2021) and Fujikawa et al. (2018) emphasize the mediating importance of social skills and parenting practices in addressing these behaviors.

Research by Li et al. (2024) , Fu and Zhang (2020) , and Marciano et al. (2020) emphasize the importance of complex variables, from sleep problems and childhood abuse to parental psychological control and substance use, in influencing deviant behaviors, including bullying. These studies highlight the need for a holistic approach to understanding and combating bullying.

Negative childhood experiences and individual and social factors are considered predictors of bullying. Li et al. (2023) and Gilreath et al. (2022) identified a close link between bullying, sleep problems, childhood abuse, and psychosocial difficulties. Negative interactions with peers in the school environment are associated with maladaptive adjustments. These observations highlight the importance of early interventions and psychosocial support in preventing bullying behaviors.

Studies identify that gender differences and sexual orientation, along with physical and mental health factors, influence specific bullying behaviors. The study by Wang et al. (2023) indicates that adolescents with different sexual orientations face varying risks for eating disorders, which are related to bullying. Moreover, negative perceptions of the school climate contribute to the manifestation of violence, including bullying in the school context, according to Del Moral et al. (2019) .

The influence of social context and personality traits on the dynamics of interpersonal relationships in bullying is significant. Research conducted by Schuetz et al. (2022) reveals that students with special educational needs are more susceptible to occupying roles as aggressors or victims. Saarento et al. (2015) emphasize that the prevalence of bullying varies based on demographic factors, group culture, and the behavior of observers, suggesting the need for an approach that includes both individual and contextual factors.

The determinants of interpersonal relationships in bullying include peer rejection, insufficient parental supervision, and deficient social skills. The study by Low et al. (2018) demonstrates a correlation between inadequate parental supervision, peer rejection, and antisocial behaviors, including bullying, highlighting the importance of a positive school environment and healthy interpersonal relationships. Tsang and Hui (2015) stress the necessity of multi-level interventions, from individual to school-wide, to effectively address bullying.

The influence of social context and personality traits on the dynamics of interpersonal relationships in bullying is significant. Research conducted by Schuetz et al. (2022) reveals that students with special educational needs are more likely to occupy bully or victim roles. Saarento et al. (2015) point out that the prevalence of bullying varies depending on demographic, cultural, and observational behavioral factors, suggesting the need for an approach that includes individual and contextual factors.

Determinants of interpersonal relationships in bullying include peer rejection, insufficient parental supervision, and poor social skills. The study by Low et al. (2018) demonstrates a correlation between inadequate parental supervision, peer rejection, and antisocial behaviors, including bullying, highlighting the importance of a positive school environment and healthy interpersonal relationships. Tsang and Hui (2015) emphasize the need for multi-level interventions, from individual to school, to effectively address bullying.

Interpersonal relationships in the context of bullying are shaped by a balance between risk and protective factors. The research of Dugre et al. (2021) identifies cannabis use and victimization experiences as key elements in differentiating behaviors. At the same time, Pereda et al. (2022) show that corporal punishment and bullying in childhood can negatively influence later relationships. These findings highlight the importance of early support and socio-emotional interventions.

Thus, the impact of victimization, empathy, and socio-emotional skills on the dynamics of interpersonal relationships in cases of bullying is very well emphasized, a fact also demonstrated by the study of Espejo-Siles et al. (2020) , who show that while victimization increases the risk of violent behavior, empathy, and socio-emotional skills are activated as protective factors.

They emphasize the value of educational programs that promote the development of these skills to improve interpersonal relationships and reduce violence.

Perceptions of authority and social reputation significantly influence the complexity of interpersonal relationships in cases of bullying. Del Moral et al. (2019) note that adolescents involved in child-parental violence often display a negative attitude toward authority and aspire to a social reputation as non-conformists. This indicates an essential role of the social and school environment in the formation of aggressive behaviors and emphasizes the need for a comprehensive approach to prevent bullying.

At the same time, personal experiences and the cultural and social context play a particularly important role in the formation of attitudes and perceptions toward bullying and aggressive behaviors, as well as about the notions of morality and social responsibility. According to Kasimova et al. (2022) , clinical and social factors contribute to the manifestation of suicidal behavior, highlighting a direct connection between bullying experiences and negative attitudes, such as despair and lack of coping mechanisms. In a similar study, Sitnik-Warchulska et al. (2021) acknowledge the essential role of temperament and family environment in influencing reactions to bullying and adolescents’ propensity to seek support. This indicates that intervention strategies need to address a diverse range of factors to promote beneficial attitudes and behaviors.

Emergent factors, including racial discrimination and bullying experiences, along with wider socio-cultural influences, shape adolescent attitudes and perceptions, as evidenced by research, which shows that cumulative exposure to discrimination and bullying can exacerbate socio-emotional problems and risk of obesity, thus highlighting the interconnection between mental health and bullying experiences.

The interaction between individual behaviors and social attitudes, influenced by personal experiences and cultural context, is complex. The studies of Kulis et al. (2019) and Fu et al. (2018) highlight that alcohol consumption and prosocial behavior have significant effects on cultural values and attitudes toward bullying, which demonstrates the need for a deep understanding of social and cultural dynamics to develop effective prevention programs for adolescents.

Sexual and gender minorities face unique challenges related to bullying and personal safety, as shown by studies by Reisner et al. (2014) and Taliaferro et al. (2019) . Issues related to gender identity and sexual orientation require special attention in the development of bullying prevention strategies, emphasizing the importance of a safe and inclusive environment for all adolescents.

Gender differences play a significant role in the manifestation of violence, either in school or in relationships, as indicated by Baier et al. (2021) .

This suggests that attitudes and behaviors related to bullying require a specific approach, sensitive to the context and demographic characteristics of adolescents, to effectively address the phenomenon of bullying.

2 Research objective and research questions

The objective of the research is to identify and analyze the specific behaviors that can be considered predictors of aggression among adolescents in the school context in Romania. This approach involves a detailed investigation of behavioral variables and how they contribute to the manifestation of bullying behavior.

The initiated study was structured around the following fundamental questions, formulated to analyze the phenomenon of bullying and associated aggressive manifestations in the educational environment:

2.1 Research question 1 (RQ1): what are the predictive factors that contribute to the emergence and intensification of specific bullying behaviors?

Bullying is a complex phenomenon influenced by a variety of factors, including individual, family, group, school, socio-economic, and cultural.

2.1.1 Individual factors

Individual factors are among the most studied when discussing bullying. For example, children with an aggressive or impulsive temperament are more likely to become bullies in the school context. These children may have difficulty controlling their emotions, which makes them more likely to react violently ( Smith et al., 2019 ). Also, lack of empathy and a thinking style based on hostility have been correlated with an increased risk of aggressive behavior ( Olweus, 1993 ).

2.1.2 Family factors

The family environment plays an essential role in the development of bullying behaviors. An authoritarian parenting style, lack of affection, or exposure to domestic violence are factors that can contribute to these behaviors. Studies have shown that children who are raised in a dysfunctional family environment, where there is frequent conflict or abuse, are more likely to exhibit bullying behaviors ( Lereya et al., 2013 ). On the other hand, low parental supervision and poor communication between parents and children are also predictors of bullying ( Baldry and Farrington, 2000 ).

2.1.3 Group and school factors

The school environment and group dynamics play a significant role in the propagation of bullying. A school culture that tolerates violence or a lack of appropriate intervention by school personnel can intensify these behaviors. Additionally, belonging to a social group where bullying is seen as a way to gain status or power may encourage children to adopt these behaviors in order to fit in ( Salmivalli, 2010 ). Also, peer pressure and social norms supporting aggression are significant risk factors ( Espelage and Swearer, 2003 ).

2.1.4 Socio-economic and cultural factors

Low socio-economic status and social marginalization are also factors that can contribute to bullying. Children who come from low-income families or who belong to minority groups can become targets of bullying, but at the same time, they can develop aggressive behaviors as a form of defensive reaction ( Hong and Espelage, 2012 ). The cultural context, including community values and norms, influences the perception and acceptability of bullying behaviors ( Gini and Pozzoli, 2009 ).

2.2 GAP literature

Socio-economic and cultural factors are often considered among the least studied compared to individual, family, and group factors. Although there is research that explores the impact of socioeconomic status and cultural context on bullying, it is not as numerous or detailed as studies that look at individual psychological aspects, family dynamics, or school environment influences.

More specifically, studies of how cultural norms and community practices influence bullying or how socioeconomic factors contribute to vulnerability or aggressive behaviors are less frequent. Most research focuses on specific socio-cultural environments and does not provide a global overview. Also, the impact of cultural differences on the perception of bullying and the effectiveness of interventions is an area that needs more attention.

2.3 Research question 2 (RQ2): are social exclusion and conflicts in the school environment predictors of bullying behavior?

Social exclusion and conflicts in the school environment are important predictors of bullying behaviors. These aspects highlight the need for a complex intervention that addresses not only individual behaviors but also group dynamics and the school climate as a whole. Promoting an inclusive school environment and effective conflict management are essential to reducing bullying and improving student well-being.

2.3.1 Social exclusion

Social exclusion is a major factor that can favor the emergence of bullying behaviors. Studies show that students who are excluded or marginalized in peer groups are more likely to be victims of bullying, but may also become bullies as a way to gain power or social acceptance ( Twenge et al., 2007 ). Feeling isolated and lacking social support in the school environment creates a fertile ground for the development of aggression, as students may seek to assert control negatively by bullying others ( Bukowski and Sippola, 2001 ).

In addition, social exclusion can reinforce bullying behaviors, especially when peer groups encourage or tolerate such attitudes. Excluded students are often perceived as different or not conforming to group norms, making them easy targets for bullying ( Nansel et al., 2001 ).

2.3.2 Conflicts in the school environment

Frequent conflicts in the school environment, whether between students or between students and teachers, are strong predictors of bullying behaviors. Research suggests that a school climate characterized by unresolved conflict, tension, and violence increases the likelihood that students will resort to bullying as a way to manage these conflicts or express frustration ( Swearer et al., 2010 ).

Constant interpersonal conflicts can create a hostile school environment where bullying behaviors are seen as a solution to gain superiority or cope with social pressures. Studies show that when students are frequently exposed to conflict, either as witnesses or participants, it can normalize aggression and reduce empathy for victims ( Espelage and Swearer, 2004 ).

2.3.3 The interaction between social exclusion and school conflicts

Social exclusion and conflict in the school environment do not operate in isolation. In fact, these two phenomena can influence each other, increasing the likelihood of bullying behaviors. For example, social exclusion can lead to frustration and resentment, which, when combined with a conflictual school environment, can quickly escalate into bullying behaviors ( Juvonen and Graham, 2014 ). At the same time, a student involved in frequent conflicts may be marginalized by his peers, which may amplify the desire to reaffirm his status through acts of bullying.

2.4 GAP literature

Although there are studies that examine bullying in various cultural contexts, how specific cultural norms influence the relationship between social exclusion and bullying behaviors has not been sufficiently investigated. Research could examine in more detail how cultural values, such as individualism or collectivism, affect both the perception and prevalence of social exclusion and bullying.

The impact of social exclusion in the digital environment, such as social media, and how this interacts with conflicts in the school environment to promote bullying, is a relatively new and underexplored field. For example, how does exclusion from online groups or group chats contribute to school bullying behaviors?

There is a lack of longitudinal studies tracking the long-term impact of social exclusion and school conflict on the development of bullying behaviors and on the lives of adults who have been either bullies or victims. Further research in this area could provide essential information about long-term bullying prevention.

2.5 Research question 3 (RQ3): how is tolerance toward unethical behaviors and the publication of unauthorized information related to bullying behaviors among students?

The literature suggests that the tolerance of unethical behaviors and the publication of unauthorized information play a significant role in the increase of bullying behaviors in schools. Understanding these relationships is essential for developing effective prevention and intervention strategies that address not only bullying but also the moral and ethical norms of the school community.

2.5.1 Tolerance of unethical behaviors

Tolerance of unethical behaviors such as lying, betrayal of trust or manipulation can create an environment where bullying is more likely to occur and persist. When students perceive that such behaviors are acceptable or overlooked by teachers and peers, the moral norms that discourage aggression become eroded.

According to research, in an environment where unethical behaviors are tolerated, students may become more likely to resort to bullying to gain social advantages or to strengthen their status ( Rigby and Slee, 2008 ).

Studies suggest that when group moral norms are weak, students who might have moral qualms about bullying are encouraged to participate in or tolerate such behaviors ( Thornberg, 2010 ). For example, if students see that minor moral transgressions are not sanctioned, they may perceive bullying as an extension of accepted behavior.

2.5.2 Publication of unauthorized information

Publishing unauthorized information, especially in the digital context, is a critical aspect of modern bullying. When students share their peers’ personal information, images or messages without permission, this behavior not only violates privacy, but can lead to public humiliation and social isolation for the victims. These actions are often considered a form of cyberbullying, which has become an increasingly serious problem in contemporary schools ( Kowalski et al., 2014 ).

Research indicates that students who engage in unauthorized posting are not only bullies, but also potential victims, as such behaviors create a cycle of revenge and retaliation. Tolerance of such actions in the school environment can amplify bullying as students learn that they can harm others without suffering serious consequences ( Hinduja and Patchin, 2010 ).

2.5.3 The interaction between tolerance of unethical behaviors and the publication of unauthorized information

Tolerance of unethical behavior and the publication of unauthorized information are often interconnected and can feed into each other in the context of bullying. For example, in an environment where unethical behaviors are tolerated, students may feel free to share unauthorized information without fear of repercussions. At the same time, success in achieving a positive social reaction by sharing compromising information can further reinforce unethical norms ( Tokunaga, 2010 ).

2.6 GAP literature

Although the link between tolerance toward unethical behaviors and bullying is recognized, the specific psychological mechanisms through which these two phenomena influence each other have not been sufficiently researched. In particular, it would be important to investigate how students’ perceptions of the group’s moral and ethical norms influence their decisions to engage in bullying.

Limited longitudinal research examines the long-term effects of tolerance of unethical behaviors and involvement in whistleblowing on students’ psychosocial development. Studies could explore how these experiences influence individuals’ behaviors and ethical values in adulthood.

Little has been studied about how tolerance of unethical behavior and the publication of unauthorized information varies by cultural context. It would be interesting to explore how different cultural norms influence students’ perception and reaction to these behaviors.

Despite the increased attention to cyberbullying, there is a lack of research on the legal and ethical consequences of publishing unauthorized information in the school environment. A more detailed exploration of how school legislation and policy addresses these issues and the effect they have on student behavior would be useful.

Based on the analysis of the specialized release, the following hypotheses were proposed:

Hypothesis 1 ( H1 ): The existence of correlations between aggressive behavioral manifestations determines the emergence of bullying behaviors in the Romanian educational environment.

Hypothesis 2 ( H2 ): The existence of relationships between social exclusion and conflicts in the school environment are predictors of verbal bullying behavior in students acting as aggressors.

Hypothesis 3 ( H3 ): The existence of correlations between tolerance toward unethical behaviors and the publication of unauthorized information/violation of privacy are predictors of bullying behavior in students.

3 Materials and methods

3.1 participants.

The analysis of gender distribution within the studied sample indicates a preponderance of female participants, they represent 58.1% ( n  = 234) of the total subjects ( n  = 403). The percentage of male participants is 41.9% ( n  = 169). Valid percentages, which exclude missing cases from the calculation, maintain the same distribution, thus illustrating a balanced composition of the sample, with a slight overrepresentation of women. Cumulatively, valid percentages reach the 100% threshold, indicating that all participants were classified into one of the two gender categories, with no cases omitted or unclassified.

3.2 Instruments

The applied tool aims to evaluate the manifestations of bullying in the educational context. Its methodology is based on a questionnaire structured around Likert-type questions, offering five response options, and includes a total of 55 items grouped into three scales: Bullying behaviors and interpersonal relationships (14 items, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.833); Evaluation of behaviors related to bullying (22 items, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.894); Evaluation of attitudes and perceptions related to aggressive behavior (19 items, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.859).

For better structuring and understanding, each scale was subdivided into subscales by applying exploratory factor analysis, using the Varimax technique for optimization, and assessing the internal consistency of each subscale.

Thus, the Bullying Behaviors and Interpersonal Relations Scale was segmented into three distinct subscales: Conflicts in the school environment (five items, internal consistency of 0.739); Aggressive Behaviors (five items, internal consistency of 0.647, indicating a relatively low value) and Aggressive Manifestations (four items, internal consistency of 0.751).

The Bullying-related behavior assessment scale includes five subscales: Violation of privacy as an aggressor (five elements, with an internal consistency coefficient of 0.872); Social exclusion (six items, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.809); Verbal attacks as an aggressor (five items, internal consistency of 0.759).

Publishing information without authorization (three items, internal consistency of 0.747); Violation of privacy as a victim (three elements, internal consistency of 0.751).

Finally, the scale Evaluation of attitudes and perceptions related to aggressive behaviors is divided into three subscales: Aggression/violence (seven items, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.812); Perception/attitude toward bullying (seven items, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.733); Tolerance of unethical behaviors (five items, internal consistency of 0.674).

This detailed structuring facilitates a deeper understanding and a more rigorous analysis of the phenomenon of bullying in educational settings.

3.3 Procedure

For the implementation of the research, permission was obtained from the management of the schools that were part of our study. The questionnaire was completed both physically, by the students, and through the Google Forms platform, the students had access to the questionnaire through a link that was sent to them with the help of the class leader. Thus, non-probabilistic methods were used through the convenience samples method as well as through the quota method (maintaining an approximately equal proportion for the biological gender variable) to recruit students from the 5th and 6th grades, respectively, from different schools.

3.4 Data analysis

Dependent variables identified in the present research include conflicts in the educational context, verbal attacks, and bullying behavior.

The predictive elements that contribute to the phenomenon of bullying are represented by aggressive behaviors, conflict in the school environment, the phenomenon of social marginalization, as well as tolerance toward unethical behavior, the violation of the right to privacy in the position of the aggressor, and the dissemination of information without the explicit consent of the targeted persons.

The data analysis process was carried out through a set of statistical procedures, ranging from elementary to the most complex methods, applied specifically for each variable, to measure characteristic descriptive parameters.

To evaluate the degree of interdependence between the studied variables, the method of correlation analysis was used. In parallel, confirmatory factor analysis was used to identify the significant predictive factors influencing and shaping bullying behavior.

The variability of one variable about another was examined using ANOVA (analysis of variance), while the regression model was used to estimate the values of one variable according to another variable.

Statistical examination of the collected data sets, relating to the variables “Conflicts in the school environment,” “Aggressive behaviors” and “Aggressive manifestations,” in the context of a sample of 403 subjects, reveals diversity in the distribution of values. The mean values calculated for “Conflicts in the school environment” were 8.98, with a standard deviation of 4.007, indicating a moderate dispersion of responses around the mean value. In the case of the “Aggressive Behaviors” variable, the calculated mean was 6.33, with a standard deviation of 2.052, highlighting a narrower variation in the data. Regarding the variable “Aggressive Manifestations,” the recorded mean was 7.49, with a standard deviation of 3.427, illustrating a distribution with a relatively moderate dispersion.

From a psychological perspective, these results suggest that, within the educational context, the phenomenon of “Conflicts” is perceived as having the highest frequency and variability, followed by “Aggressive Manifestations” and subsequently by “Aggressive Behaviors.”

The higher average value associated with “Conflicts in the school environment” shows a general recognition of conflicts as a notable and problematic element in the educational environment. This, coupled with a significant standard deviation, indicates that individuals’ experiences of conflict vary considerably. “Aggressive behaviors,” recording the lowest mean and standard deviation, can be interpreted as less prevalent and more consistent among the analyzed sample.

However, the responses to the “Aggressive Manifestations” scale suggest that paying more attention to how aggression manifests and is perceived in the school setting is imperative. In conclusion, these findings emphasize the need to adopt different and personalized strategies to understand and effectively intervene in the problem of conflicts and aggressive behaviors in educational institutions.

In the analysis of the Pearson correlation coefficients for the variables “Conflicts in the school environment,” “Aggressive behaviors” and “Aggressive manifestations” in a sample composed of 403 subjects, the following significant results were obtained:

• The interaction between “Conflicts in the school environment” and “Aggressive manifestations” registered a correlation coefficient of 0.596, significant at the 0.00 level, reflecting a positive correlation of moderate to high intensity.

• This significant relationship suggests a significant association between the perception of conflicts and the frequency of aggressive manifestations, indicating the possibility that environments characterized by heightened conflicts favor the emergence of aggressive behaviors.

• The association between “Conflicts in the school environment” and “Aggressive behaviors” revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.387, significant at the 0.00 level, suggesting a positive correlation, but of weak to moderate intensity.

• The moderate correlation between “Aggressive behaviors” and the other two variables (having coefficients of 0.387 and 0.423) suggests that although there is a significant connection between aggressive behaviors, conflicts, and aggressive manifestations, this interconnection is not as strong as that observed between perceptions of conflicts and aggressive manifestations. This could indicate that the variable of aggressive behaviors is influenced by a wider spectrum of factors, not only by conflict dynamics or direct aggressive manifestations.

In conclusion, these findings emphasize a significant interdependence between conflicts in the school environment, aggressive behaviors, and aggressive manifestations.

These results emphasize the need to adopt integrated and well-founded strategies within educational interventions, to reduce the level of aggression and effectively manage conflicts in educational institutions. Thus, a thorough understanding of how these variables interact and influence each other in the specific context of the educational environment is essential.

The KMO coefficient is 0.649 ( Table 1 ), which allows us to moderately consider that these existing correlations between the studied variables are not due to chance and allows us to apply factor analysis to determine the degree of influence of conflicts in the school environment, an influence that is also determined by the aggressive behaviors manifested in the school.

Table 1 . KMO and Bartlett’s Test.

The model presented in Table 2 investigates the association between the dependent variable “Conflicts in the school environment” and two independent variables, namely “Aggressive Manifestations” and “Aggressive Behaviors.” The coefficient of determination, R Square ( R 2 ), recorded at the value of 0.377, illustrates the proportion of variation in the dependent variable (“Conflicts in the school environment”) that can be attributed to the influence of the combination of the two independent variables. The value of 0.377 indicates that approximately 37.7% of the dispersion of school conflicts is explained by the variability of aggressive manifestations and behaviors.

Table 2 . Model summary–the association between the dependent variable and the independent variables.

From a psychological perspective, these results indicate that, although aggressive manifestations and behaviors are relevant factors in the elucidation of conflicts in the school environment, there are other factors, that represent approximately 62.3% of the variation in school conflicts, and which are not included in this model.

These factors may include elements such as the climate of the educational institution, the dynamics of interpersonal relationships, external pressures, or the individual characteristics of students.

In conclusion, the statistical model underlines a moderate but significant association between “Conflicts in the school environment” and the independent variables “Aggressive Manifestations” and “Aggressive Behaviors.”

The Adjusted R-Square coefficient attests to an adequate fit of the model, and the F-statistic analysis confirms a notable contribution of the independent variables in explaining the observed variation in the dependent variable.

The statistical evaluation presented in Table 3 reveals that the results of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) are significant (with a Sig. value = 0.00), thus highlighting the relevance of investigating and systematically addressing aggressive behaviors and manifestations within educational interventions, to mitigate conflicts. Aggression, conceptualized through the prism of manifestations and behaviors, plays a significant role in the structure and evolution of conflicts in the school context. These findings suggest that prevention and intervention programs should aim not only at effective conflict management and resolution but also at identifying and addressing predisposing factors for aggressive behaviors and manifestations. A proactive strategy could include implementing social skills education programs, organizing workshops focused on anger and frustration management, and promoting programs aimed at cultivating empathy and awareness.

Table 3 . ANOVA analysis of variance, between the dependent variable and the predictor variable.

In conclusion, the results of the ANOVA analysis indicate a strong and statistically significant association between aggressive behaviors and manifestations and the frequency of conflicts in the school environment, thus constituting a robust foundation for the development and implementation of targeted and effective strategies aimed at improving the educational climate.

Examination of the coefficients of the regression model, presented in Table 4 , provides a detailed insight into the relational dynamics between the independent variables (“Aggressive Behaviors” and “Aggressive Manifestations”) and the dependent variable (“Conflicts in the school environment”). The interpretation of these data underlines the determining role of perceptions, attitudes, and social norms prevailing within educational institutions in shaping the behavior of students. In this context, aggressive manifestations can contribute to establishing a climate conducive to the development or escalation of conflicts.

Table 4 . Coefficients–the regression coefficient between the dependent variable and the predictor variables.

In the multiple regression, the potential predictors of bullying behavior were entered in the ascending order of the correlation coefficients obtained by each of them with conflicts in the school environment. The regression equation of bullying behaviors in the educational environment has the following elements:

• The Adjusted R -squared value of 0.374 means that the regression model explains 37.4% of the total variation in the dependent variable “conflicts in the school environment” based on the predictors included in the model. This represents a modified version of the R 2 coefficient, adjusted for the number of predictors present in the model and the sample size.

The proximity of the Adjusted R 2 value to the R 2 value suggests that adding additional predictors to the model was relevant and appropriate, without causing significant overestimation. The remaining variation refers to the proportion of the dependent variable’s variance that is not explained by the current model.

In this case, the remaining variation is 62.6% (100–37.4%), which means there are factors or confounding variables that could influence “conflicts in the school environment” but were not included in the current regression model. These factors include personal factors, such as students’ personality traits, for example, impulsivity and empathy, family factors, including family dynamics, parenting style, and the family’s socio-economic status, cultural and socio-economic factors, including cultural norms regarding aggressive behavior and the community’s socio-economic level, the influence of the online environment and social media, such as exposure to cyberbullying and the influence of social networks, school policies and programs, referring to the effectiveness of anti-bullying programs and the school’s disciplinary policies, interpersonal interactions, including relationships with peers and teachers and social support from friends and mentors.

• F -test (ANOVA) values and significance coefficients having values less than 0.000 confirm that the model is valid

Knowing the level of aggressive manifestations in the educational environment and aggressive behaviors using the regression equation - conflicts in the school environment = 2.339 + (0.322) aggressive behaviors + (0.615) aggressive manifestations - we obtain the level of bullying behaviors in the school environment.

The conclusions drawn from the data analysis suggest that both behaviors and aggressive manifestations are significant predictors of the incidence of conflicts in the school environment, with a relatively stronger influence exerted by aggressive manifestations. The coefficients of the model, the level of significance, and the established correlations confirm the existence of a robust and significant interaction between these variables and the frequency of conflicts in the educational environment ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1 . Scatterplot.

Examination of the scatterplot indicates that the regression model is appropriate for the data set analyzed, given that the residuals are generally evenly distributed with no evidence of heteroscedasticity or non-linearity. This infers that the regression model provides a reliable predictive estimate for the variable “Conflicts in the school environment,” except for potential extreme values (outliers) that may require further analysis. In the present case, the plot shows no pronounced patterns, suggesting that the variance of the residuals is relatively stable.

The statistical analysis was performed on a data set comprising three variables: “Verbal attacks as an aggressor,” “Social exclusion” and “Conflicts in the school environment,” each with several 402 observations. For the indicator “Verbal attacks as an aggressor,” the average of 6.02 reflects a moderate incidence of this type of behavior. This level of verbal aggression could signal the existence of tensions or communicative dysfunctions among students and can be interpreted as a marker of self-control deficits or of an institutional culture that does not sufficiently discourage aggressive behavior. In the case of the “Social exclusion” indicator, the average of 9.36 is the highest among the three variables, signaling a strong presence of the phenomenon of social marginalization among the participants. A standard deviation of 4.276 indicates a significant dispersion of experiences of social exclusion, suggesting notable differences between participants in this regard. A high mean in the context of wide dispersion may reflect a widespread problem with profound adverse psychological effects, such as feelings of isolation, depression, and anxiety, affecting individuals differently.

For the indicator “Conflicts in the school environment,” the mean of 8.96 suggests that conflicts are a significant problem, with a standard deviation of 3.992, also indicating a variety of students’ experiences related to these conflict situations. This value proximity between the media for conflict and that for social exclusion emphasizes that both phenomena are frequent and relevant problems, having the potential to negatively influence both academic performance and the emotional well-being of students.

The analysis of the data suggests that the phenomenon of social exclusion and conflicts in the school environment are more prominent than verbal aggression, although all three variables are present and could be interrelated. The high variability observed for social exclusion and school conflicts indicates a significant diversity of individual experiences, providing a starting point for the development of tailored interventions.

Although this analysis provides insight into the prevalence of these behaviors, it would be prudent to consider other variables, such as educational background, family relationships, and social support, to gain a deeper understanding of the causal factors and dynamics of these problems.

The correlational study examined the relationships between the variables “Verbal attacks as an aggressor,” “Social exclusion” and “Conflicts in the school environment,” using the Pearson correlation coefficient and evaluating the statistical significance of these correlations for several 402 observations for each variable.

The analysis revealed a positive correlation of moderate intensity (0.581) between the frequency of verbal attacks and the incidence of social exclusion, indicating a trend of simultaneous growth of these phenomena. This association suggests a potential interdependence between verbally aggressive behavior and social marginalization within the study population.

The relationship between “Verbal attacks as an aggressor” and “Conflicts in the school environment” was identified as positive, but of lower intensity (0.329), signaling a less obvious connection between verbal aggression and school conflicts. This suggests that although there is an association between the two variables, other factors may contribute significantly to the dynamics of conflict in the educational environment.

The correlation between “Social Exclusion” and “School Conflicts” (0.585) is comparable to that between verbal attacks and social exclusion, illustrating a moderate association. This correlation underlines a possible significant relationship between experiences of social exclusion and involvement in school conflicts, suggesting that marginalized students may be more susceptible to participating in conflicts or, conversely, conflicts may facilitate exclusion phenomena.

The statistical significance of all correlations at the 0.000 level (one-tailed) confirms the improbability of these relationships being the product of randomness, emphasizing the significant interdependence between verbal attacks, social exclusion, and school conflicts. These findings emphasize not only the coexistence of these behaviors but also the possibility of mutual influence.

In the context of educational interventions, it is essential to recognize the interconnected nature of these issues and to address common underlying factors such as institutional climate, social–emotional skills, and student support. The results emphasize the need for a holistic approach to managing school problems, rather than an exclusive focus on a single type of disruptive behavior.

Since the KMO coefficient is 0.603 ( Table 5 ), we can moderately consider that these existing correlations between the studied variables are not due to chance, which allows us to apply factor analysis to determine the percentage of influence of verbal attacks exerted by the aggressor based on conflicts in the school environment and the social exclusion they experience.

Table 5 . KMO and Bartlett’s test.

The study of the relationship between the predictor variables (“Social exclusion” and “Conflicts in the school environment”) and the dependent variable (“Verbal attacks as an aggressor”), as presented in Table 6 , requires a detailed analysis of each element of the model summary, addressing both statistical aspects and psychological implications. The multiple correlation coefficient ( R  = 0.581) denotes a correlation of moderate intensity between the predictor variables and the dependent variable, indicating that the level of social exclusion and the frequency of school conflicts have a moderate association with the prevalence of verbal attacks as a form of aggression. From a psychological perspective, this moderate correlation suggests that the social context and conflict situations in which students find themselves contribute significantly to the adoption of verbally aggressive behavior, possibly reflecting a self-defense mechanism or a means of expressing accumulated frustrations. The coefficient of determination ( R Square = 0.337) illustrates that approximately 33.7% of the variance of verbal attacks as an aggressor can be attributed to the influence of the combination of the predictor variables of social exclusion and school conflicts. The Adjusted R -Square index (0.334), which adjusts the R -Square for the number of predictors in the model and the amount of data, provides a more accurate assessment of the model’s predictive ability in the sample. The closeness of the Adjusted R Square value to R Square reaffirms the fit of the model and suggests that it is not over-fitted.

Table 6 . Model summary b the association between the dependent variable and the predictor variables.

The observation that the model explains approximately 33.7% of the variance in verbally aggressive behavior emphasizes that, although social exclusion and school conflicts are influential elements, there are other contributing variables, such as individual traits, family context, reference group influences, or other environmental factors.

The summary of the model shows a moderate but significant connection between social exclusion, school conflicts, and verbal attacks as an aggressor. The results emphasize the importance of analyzing social and environmental factors in understanding and addressing verbally aggressive behavior, while recognizing the contribution of other variables in this behavioral spectrum, which indicates the need for an integrated and exhaustive perspective in research and practice.

To investigate the existence of a significant statistical difference in the frequency of “Verbal attacks as an aggressor,” in the context of the influence of the predictor variables “Conflicts in the school environment” and “Social exclusion,” the analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied, as presented in Table 7 . The significance of the model, evidenced by a p- value (Sig. = 0.000) below the 0.05 threshold, confirms the statistical relevance of the model, indicating a significant association between the mentioned variables and the dependent variable.

Table 7 . ANOVA a analysis of variance, between the dependent variable and the predictor variable.

In the context of the influence of the predictor variables on the frequency of verbal attacks, the ANOVA results show that the model including the variables “Conflicts in the school environment” and “Social exclusion” explains an important portion of the variation in “Verbal attacks as an aggressor.” This demonstrates that the negative interactions characteristic of the school environment, in the form of conflicts and social exclusion, can have a considerable contribution to the manifestation of verbally aggressive behavior among students.

The evaluation of the coefficients within the regression model, according to the data presented in Table 8 , contributes to the elucidation of the degree of influence exerted by each predictive variable on the dependent variable, in this context, “Verbal attacks as an aggressor.”

Table 8 . Coefficients a -the regression coefficient between the dependent variable and the predictor variables.

In the multiple regression, the potential predictors of the bullying behavior of students in the position of aggressors were entered in the ascending order of the correlation coefficients obtained by each of them with the conflicts in the school environment. The regression equation of bullying behaviors in the educational environment has the following elements:

• The adjusted R 2 is 0.33, which means that 33% of the variation in bullying behaviors in the educational environment is explained by the predictors included in the regression model. The rest of the variance, 67% (100–33%), is explained by other variables that were not investigated in the present study (confounding variables). This indicates that there are other variables or factors influencing bullying behaviors that were not measured or included in this study, such as:

• Personal factors, including students’ personality traits, such as impulsivity and empathy,

• Family factors, such as family dynamics, parenting style, and the family’s socio-economic conditions,

• Cultural and socio-economic factors, including cultural norms regarding violence and aggressive behavior, as well as the community’s socio-economic level,

• The influences of the online environment and social networks, such as exposure to cyberbullying and the intensive use of social media platforms.

Other confounding variables could include the effectiveness of anti-bullying programs and school disciplinary policies, interpersonal relationships with peers and teachers, social support from friends and mentors, and the mental and emotional state of the students.

Knowing the level of aggressive manifestations in the educational environment and aggressive behaviors using the regression equation – verbal attacks as an aggressor = 3.343 + (0.294) social exclusion – (0.008) conflicts in the school environment – we obtain the level of bullying behaviors of students from the aggressor position.

The consistent and statistically significant coefficient associated with social exclusion reconfirms the relevance of this variable as the main predictor in the manifestation of verbal attacks. This implies that the phenomena of isolation or social marginalization are catalytic factors of verbally aggressive behavior.

In contrast, the insignificant and reduced coefficient for the variable “Conflicts in the school environment” suggests that, in this specific model and the context of the analyzed data, school conflicts lack a direct and significant influence on verbal attacks, especially compared to the impact exerted by exclusion social. This does not denote the insignificance of school conflicts per se , but rather a secondary role in this analytical framework.

The conclusions of the regression model emphasize the significance of social exclusion as an essential determinant in the etiology of verbal attacks as an aggressor. Although the variable “Conflicts in the school environment” did not demonstrate a significant influence in this model, its role in understanding the complexity of aggressive behavior in the educational sphere should not be neglected. Preventive and intervention strategies should recognize and address this complexity, focusing on strengthening social cohesion and improving the school climate to diminish manifestations of verbal aggression and cultivate a conducive and supportive educational environment.

Figure 2 shows a relatively uniform scatter of the points in the plot, which suggests that the model exhibits the property of homoscedasticity, i.e., it exhibits a constant variance of the residuals over the entire range of predicted values. The absence of a visible pattern of expansion or contraction of the residuals according to the standardized predicted values is a positive indicator and suggests a good fit of the model to the data.

Figure 2 . Regression graph.

The regression model assumes a linear relationship between the predictor variables and the dependent variable.

The fact that no systematic or skewed pattern is observed in the distribution of points on the plot supports the hypothesis that the assumption of linearity is properly met within this data set.

In conclusion, the graph indicates an adequate performance of the regression model, but also signals the possibility of improvement, especially due to the presence of extreme values (outliers) that can influence the results of the model. For a more comprehensive assessment and to make informed decisions about the model, it would be beneficial to check other regression diagnostics, such as the level of leverage and measures of influence, as well as a detailed analysis of outliers to understand why these observations deviate from the general trend of the model.

Examination of the descriptive statistics provides detailed insight into the data collected regarding aggressive behavioral manifestations and associated predictive factors, such as breach of confidentiality, dissemination of information without authorization, and acceptance of unethical behaviors, in a sample of 401 students.

The average values recorded, especially the average of 6.33 for the variable “Bullying behavior,” indicate a significant prevalence of aggression among students. The standard deviation of 2.056 for this variable reflects moderate variability in responses, suggesting differences in the degree of aggression reported by students.

The average value of 5.39 for the “Violation of privacy” variable highlights the presence of this phenomenon, although at a lower level compared to bullying behavior. A standard deviation of 1.659, less than that associated with bullying behavior, suggests greater consistency in student responses regarding privacy violations.

The mean of 3.50 for the variable “Dissemination of information without authorization” indicates a perception of a low frequency of this type of behavior among students. Conversely, the mean of 5.84 for the variable “Tolerance of unethical behaviors” suggests a moderate to high acceptance of unethical behaviors among students. The standard deviation of 2.381 for this variable indicates diverse opinions among students regarding the acceptability of unethical behaviors.

These values suggest that although bullying behaviors and tolerance of unethical behaviors are reported to be relatively common, the phenomena of privacy violations and unauthorized dissemination of information are perceived as less common. This could reflect a culture where certain forms of bullying and ethical violations are more accepted or overlooked compared to others.

Greater variability in tolerance of unethical behaviors could signal divergence within the school community regarding ethical norms and values. Differences in students’ perceptions of what is ethical or acceptable can influence both individual behavior and collective reactions to bullying by others.

The reduced mean value for disseminating information without authorization could indicate a clearer awareness of privacy and privacy issues in the digital space or the perception of more serious consequences for such actions.

Applying Pearson correlation analysis in this context reveals the magnitude and directionality of linear associations between four distinct variables: “Bullying behavior” “Invasion of privacy as a bully” “Dissemination of information without authorization” and “Acceptance of unethical behaviors” on a sample of 401 cases.

The moderate and positive correlations identified between “Violation of privacy as an aggressor” (0.388) and “Dissemination of information without authorization” (0.412) suggest a concurrent association between these behaviors; that is, the presence of aggressive behavior is frequently associated with the presence of other forms of aggression.

This observation could indicate common personality traits or a school environment that facilitates the manifestation of these behaviors.

The low correlations between “Acceptance of unethical behavior” (0.176) and the other variables involved in the study suggest that permissive attitudes are not necessarily direct predictors of aggressive manifestations. However, even a correlation of low strength can have important meanings in a sample of considerable size.

Except for the relationship between “Acceptance of unethical behaviors” and “Violation of privacy as an aggressor,” all correlations are statistically significant at the 0.000 or 0.002 level (one-tailed test), signaling a minimal probability that these associations are the result of chance.

Thus, the observed correlations highlight interconnections between various types of aggressive behaviors among students, the strongest relationship being between “Violation of privacy as an aggressor” and “Dissemination of information without authorization“. Although the correlation with “Acceptance of unethical behaviors” is significant, the intensity of this association is lower, which suggests that the permissive attitude is not as predictive of aggressive behaviors as the presence of other forms of aggression.

Since the KMO coefficient is 0.685 ( Table 9 ), we can moderately consider that these existing correlations between the studied variables are not due to chance, which allows us to apply factor analysis to determine the percentage of influence of bullying behaviors based on tolerance toward unethical behaviors, privacy violations by the aggressor, and the publication of unauthorized information.

Table 9 . KMO and Bartlett’s test.

The summary model evaluation, presented in Table 10 , explores the dynamics between three predictor variables: “Acceptance of unethical behaviors,” “Violation of privacy as a bully” and “Dissemination of information without authorization” — and the dependent variable “Bullying behavior.” The multiple correlation coefficient R , with a value of 0.470, reveals a correlation of moderate intensity between the predictor variables and the dependent variable, meaning that there is a tendency to increase the manifestations of bullying with the intensification of the values of the predictor variables. The coefficient of determination R Square, registering the value of 0.221, illustrates that the model explains approximately 22.1% of the variation in aggressive behavior. This suggests that although the model provides insight into aggressive behaviors, a significant percentage of variance is still not explained. A correlation of moderate intensity and an explanatory proportion of about 22% underlines the fact that attitudes toward unethical behaviors and online manifestations, such as privacy violations and dissemination of information without authorization, exert a recognized influence on bullying behaviors. However, these variables are not the only factors contributing to this behavioral dynamic.

Table 10 . Model summary–the association between the dependent variable and the predictor variables.

The analysis of variance (ANOVA) study, according to the data in Table 11 , is implemented to assess the existence of statistically significant differences between the means of various groups. In the context of regression analysis, ANOVA is used to test whether the proposed regression model that includes the predictor variables is significantly different from a null model—a model that assumes no relationship between the predictor variables and the dependent variable.

Table 11 . ANOVA a - analysis of variance, between the dependent variable and the predictor variable.

The ANOVA results demonstrate that the regression model, integrating the three predictors, contributes significantly to explaining the variation in aggressive behaviors. This observation indicates that the variables “Acceptance of unethical behaviors,” “Violation of privacy as an aggressor” and “Dissemination of information without authorization” have notable importance in decoding the dynamics of bullying behaviors within the examined population.

Table 12 shows the coefficients obtained in the multiple linear regression model, which investigates the impact of three independent variables — “Violation of privacy as an aggressor,” “Dissemination of information without authorization” and “Acceptance of unethical behaviors”— on the dependent variable “Bullying behavior.”

Table 12 . Coefficients a .

In the multiple regression, the potential predictors of bullying behavior in students were entered in the ascending order of the correlation coefficients obtained by each with privacy violation as the aggressor. The regression equation of bullying behaviors in the educational environment has the following elements:

• The adjusted R 2 is 0.221, which means that 22% of the actual cases of bullying in the educational environment are explained by this model, indicating a significant impact on bullying behavior and explaining part of its variance. Variables such as aggressiveness, privacy violations, and unauthorized dissemination of information (as inferred from the previous context) have a significant impact on bullying behavior and can explain part of its variation.

• The remaining 78% of the variance represents the part of bullying behavior variance that is not explained by the variables included in the current model. This highlights the existence of other confounding variables or factors that influence bullying behaviors that were not included in the study, such as:

• Family factors, including family dynamics, parenting style, and the presence of domestic conflicts,

• Socio-economic factors, such as parent’s education and income levels and the community’s economic conditions,

• Online environment influences, including exposure to cyberbullying and the use of social networks,

• Cultural factors, referring to cultural and social norms regarding violence and aggression,

• Individual personality traits, such as empathy and impulsivity,

• Aspects of the school environment, including school culture, anti-bullying policies, and teacher-student relationships,

• Peer group influences, such as peer pressure and belonging to social groups,

• Psychological factors, such as students’ mental and emotional states and the presence of psychological disorders.

F -test (ANOVA) values and significance coefficients having values less than 0.000 confirm that the model is valid.

Knowing the level of aggressive manifestations in the educational environment and aggressive behaviors using the regression equation – bullying behaviors = 2.883 + (0.291) violation of privacy as an aggressor + (0.407) publication of unauthorized information + (0.078) tolerance toward unethical behaviors – we obtain the level bullying behaviors of students in the educational environment.

In the analyzed model, the coefficient B of 0.291 indicates that a unit increase in “Violation of privacy as an aggressor” predicts an average increase of 0.291 units in bullying manifestations. This suggests a close association between privacy-violating behaviors and general aggression, highlighting the need to address respect for privacy in anti-bullying interventions.

The B-coefficient of 0.407 indicates that a unit increase in “Dissemination of information without authorization” is correlated with an average increase of 0.407 units in bullying behavior. This observation suggests that the influence of unauthorized dissemination of information on bullying is even more pronounced than that of invasion of privacy. This strong predictor could indicate a direct connection between disregard for the privacy of others and the propensity for aggressive behavior, thus directing educational programs to emphasize understanding of the repercussions of online activities.

The coefficient B of 0.078 reflects the fact that a unit increase in “Acceptance of unethical behaviors” is associated with an average increase of 0.078 units in bullying manifestations. Although this effect is smaller compared to the other two variables, a positive influence persists. This underlines the fact that permissive attitudes toward unethical behaviors can foster an environment conducive to aggressive manifestations.

In summary, the three variables—violation of privacy, unauthorized dissemination of information, and acceptance of unethical behaviors—are found to be significant predictors of bullying behavior. However, disseminating information without authorization stands out as having the most pronounced impact, followed by invasion of privacy, while accepting unethical behaviors has the least impact.

Figure 3 illustrates a scatterplot of the standardized residuals compared to the standardized predicted values obtained from a regression model with “Bullying Behavior” as the dependent variable.

Figure 3 . The regression scatterplot.

The pronounced residuals could reflect situations where the model failed to adequately capture student bullying behavior, possibly due to the omission of relevant factors from the analysis. An increase in the variance of the residuals consistent with the predicted values may signal a reduced fit of the model for subjects with more pronounced aggressive manifestations, which could be attributed to complex elements governing these behaviors.

Students associated with extreme values (outliers) could be characterized by particular circumstances or face a distinct social dynamic, which predisposes them to bullying behaviors.

Exploring and interpreting these cases could provide valuable insights essential for designing educational interventions.

The graph indicates a moderate ability of the regression model to predict bulling behavior, while also signaling the possibility of optimization of the model. This could involve the inclusion of new predictor variables or a deeper analysis of atypical cases. From the perspective of educational psychology, these findings can be applied to the development and implementation of more effective anti-violence programs, adapted to the diversity of students’ experiences and behaviors.

5 Discussions and conclusion

The analysis of bullying behaviors among adolescents, in the context of this study, reflects the complex interaction between individual and environmental factors. The results obtained emphasize the significant role of aggression, violation of privacy, and unauthorized dissemination of information, in line with the existing literature that identifies these aspects as relevant to bullying manifestations ( Li et al., 2024 ; Del Moral et al., 2019 ).

The finding that social exclusion and conflicts in the school environment significantly contribute to the escalation of bullying behaviors reiterates the importance of creating an inclusive and safe school environment. These findings are consistent with previous research emphasizing the need to proactively address conflict and promote social integration to reduce the prevalence of bullying ( Schuetz et al., 2022 ; Saarento et al., 2015 ).

Interestingly, although the acceptance of unethical behaviors seems to have a lower impact compared to the previously mentioned variables, this aspect does not diminish the importance of cultivating a robust ethical framework among students. This result suggests that although attitudes toward unethical behaviors are not direct predictors of bullying behaviors, they contribute to the general climate that may favor or discourage such manifestations.

The results also indicate a significant association between aggressive behaviors and the dissemination of information without authorization, underscoring the importance of education on the responsible use of technology. This aspect is essential in today’s context, where technology plays an increasing role in the lives of teenagers.

It is important to note that this study has specific limitations, being a cross-sectional rather than a longitudinal research. This limits our ability to establish causal relationships between variables and to observe the evolution of bullying behaviors over time. Data were collected at a single point in time, which may affect the interpretation and generalization of the results.

In the context of this study, it was noted that interventions should target both the aggressive behaviors themselves and the contextual factors that may influence them. Promoting socio-emotional skills and empathy, along with encouraging ethical behavior, are essential to address the phenomenon of bullying effectively.

The present study contributes to the existing literature by exploring in detail the predictors of bullying among adolescents, providing an integrated perspective on the interaction between individual characteristics and the socio-school context. The obtained results underline a complex set of variables that influence bullying behavior, among which aggression, violation of privacy, and dissemination of information without authorization stand out as having a significant impact.

The current study extends the literature by investigating the predictive factors of bullying among adolescents, providing an integrated analysis of the interactions between personal characteristics and the socio-school context ( Gómez-Ortiz et al., 2019 ).

The finding that social factors, such as social exclusion and conflicts in the school environment, exacerbate the manifestations of bullying highlights the importance of building an educational environment based on inclusion and effective conflict management. These findings reiterate the need for a multidisciplinary approach to the prevention and intervention against bullying, involving not only formal education but also the development of socio-emotional skills and the promotion of a positive school culture.

The study results highlight a complex array of variables that influence bullying behavior. Notably, aggression, invasion of privacy, and unauthorized dissemination of information are noted to have a substantial impact ( Clarke and Kiselica, 1997 ).

Previous studies confirm that social factors, such as social exclusion and school conflicts, amplify the manifestations of bullying, thus emphasizing the need for an inclusive and effective educational environment in conflict management ( Johnson and Smith, 2021 ).

At the same time, the influence of technology on bullying behaviors, especially the violation of privacy and the dissemination of information without authorization, underlines the importance of digital education among adolescents. This suggests that prevention programs should include components that encourage responsible use of technology and promote awareness of the consequences of online actions.

The study identified the significant influence of technology on bullying behaviors, particularly in the areas of invasion of privacy and dissemination of information without consent. These findings are consistent with research that emphasizes the importance of digital education for adolescents ( Miller and Connelly, 2021 ).

Although the study identified a relatively smaller influence of tolerance toward unethical behaviors on bullying, this aspect should not be neglected in the development of effective interventions. Promoting a strong moral framework and encouraging ethical behaviors can help create a school environment where bullying is explicitly discouraged.

Although a reduced influence of tolerance toward unethical behaviors on bullying was observed, this aspect remains crucial in the development of effective interventions. Interventions must be personalized and tailored to the specific needs of school communities, an aspect supported by the need for collaboration between educators, parents, and students to ensure a safe and supportive environment ( Williams et al., 2022 ).

At the same time, interventions must be personalized and adapted to the specific needs of school communities, considering the variety of factors that contribute to the phenomenon of bullying. Collaboration between educators, parents, and students is essential to the successful implementation of these strategies, thereby ensuring a safe and supportive environment for all adolescents.

The present study has theoretical implications, among which we mention:

The study can contribute to the expansion of existing theories about aggression, through the specific contextualization of cultural, social, and economic factors in Romania that influence bullying behavior. This can lead to adaptations of aggression theories that take into account specific local and regional variables.

The results of the study can validate the effectiveness of the socio-emotional competence model in the Romanian context, indicating the need to adapt educational programs to include specific components that address aggression and bullying behaviors.

By identifying the link between social exclusion and bullying, the study adds an important dimension to theories of social inclusion. This suggests that effective interventions must promote better social integration in schools as a strategy to prevent bullying.

We also highlight the practical implications, based on the results of the study, schools in Romania could develop and implement educational programs that incorporate education for socio-emotional skills, with an emphasis on empathy, anger management, and resilience. These programs can be integrated into the national curriculum as preventive measures against bullying.

Another practical implication refers to the involvement of teachers in recognizing early signs of bullying behavior and appropriate intervention is crucial.

Professional training should include specific modules on early intervention strategies and conflict management, adapted to the cultural and social context in Romania.

The implementation of clear and strict school policies on bullying can deter bullying behaviors and stabilize a safe and inclusive school environment, which can be seen as a third practical implication of the study. These policies should be well communicated to all members of the school community, from students to parents and school staff.

These theoretical and practical implications underline the importance of an integrated and well-grounded approach to combating bullying in Romanian schools, with potential benefits both at the individual level and at the level of the entire educational community.

Recommendations for future research include adopting a longitudinal design to observe the evolution of bullying behaviors and associated factors over an extended period, thus providing a deeper understanding of causal relationships. It is necessary to expand the sample to include a wider variety of schools and regions, thereby enhancing the representativeness and generalizability of the obtained results.

Integrating additional variables, such as the influence of the family environment and the impact of media, could provide a more complete perspective on the factors contributing to bullying behaviors.

Additionally, investigating gender differences in the manifestations and perceptions of bullying is essential for developing tailored interventions that address the specific needs of boys and girls.

In conclusion, our study adds a valuable contribution to understanding the bullying phenomenon, providing clear recommendations for future research and practical applications.

The continuation of research in this field is essential for the adaptation and constant improvement of scientific approaches in the prevention and intervention against bullying, with the ultimate goal of ensuring adolescents’ well-being and positive development in healthy and inclusive educational environments ( Harris and Jones, 2019 ).

5.1 Limitations of the study

Like any other research, the present study involves certain limitations. Firstly, the study was cross-sectional, with all instruments used in the study being completed at a single time point. Future studies could be conducted in multiple waves so that causal inferences can be drawn about the investigated relationships.

Secondly, all studied variables were measured with self-report questionnaires. In future research, performance could be measured based on objective indicators.

Thirdly, the study was cross-sectional, therefore no causal conclusions can be drawn. The investigated relationships may have meaning in several directions. Future research could use longitudinal designs in which data are collected at multiple time intervals to estimate the causal order of the investigated relationships.

The unexplained variance in this study suggests that there are a significant number of additional variables influencing bullying behaviors that were not included in this study. This underscores the need to extend the research to identify and measure these confounding variables in a longitudinal study so that more precise regression models can be developed and more effective interventions and policies for preventing and managing bullying in the educational environment can be created.

We intend to transform this study into a longitudinal one by conducting annual measurements on the studied cohort. This approach will allow for the comparison of results over time and an in-depth observation of the stability of bullying behaviors.

A longitudinal study offers a detailed perspective on the evolution and persistence of bullying behaviors among students. By collecting annual data, we will be able to analyze changes and constants in participants’ behaviors, providing a clearer understanding of the dynamics of bullying in an educational context.

Repeated measurements on the same cohort will allow for the observation of changes in behavior and the assessment of the long-term impact of contextual and individual variables. We will collect annual data on bullying incidents, including verbal attacks, and correlate these data with factors such as social exclusion, school conflicts, academic performance, and psychosocial health.

Longitudinal analysis will detect patterns of stability or change in bullying behaviors, providing a solid basis for recommendations on educational policies and intervention strategies. The results obtained will contribute to a deeper understanding of the bullying phenomenon and support the development of better-founded prevention and intervention programs.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by University Ethics and Deontology Commission, Ovidius University, Constanta, Romania No 7/10.07.2024. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardians/next of kin.

Author contributions

MR: Conceptualization, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing. MC: Supervision, Visualization, Writing – review & editing. MS: Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. TT: Conceptualization, Investigation, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the participants who were involved in the present research.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Baier, D., Krieg, Y., Hong, J. S., and Kliem, S. (2021). “Who beats their partner, and who beats their schoolmates? A comparison of teen dating and school physical violence perpetration in Lower Saxony, Germany” in Prevalence and predictors of teen dating violence: A European perspective. New directions for child and adolescent development . eds. I. Schuster and P. Tomaszewska (San Francisco, CA: Wiley Periodicals).

Google Scholar

Baldry, A. C., and Farrington, D. P. (2000). Bullies and delinquents: personal characteristics and parental styles. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 10, 17–31. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298(200001/02)10:1<17::AID-CASP526>3.0.CO;2-M

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bukowski, W. M., and Sippola, L. K. (2001). “Groups, individuals, and victimization: a view of the peer system” in Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized . eds. J. Juvonen and S. Graham (The Guilford Press), 355–377.

Clarke, E. A., and Kiselica, M. S. (1997). A systemic counseling approach to the problem of bullying. Elementary School Guidance & Counseling , 31, 310–325.

de Sousa, M. L., Peixoto, M. M., and Cruz, S. F. (2021). The association between externalizing and internalizing problems with bullying engagement in adolescents: the mediating role of social skills. Environ. Res. Public Health 18:10444. doi: 10.3390/ijerph181910444

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

del Moral, G., Suárez-Relinque, C., Callejas, J. E., and Musitu, G. (2019). Child-to-parent violence: attitude towards authority, social reputation and school climate. IJERPH 16, 1–15. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16132384

Dugre, J. R., Potvin, S., Dellazizzo, L., and Dumais, A. (2021). Aggression and delinquent behavior in a large representative sample of high school students: Cannabis use and victimization as key discriminating factors. Psychiatry Res. 296:113640. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113640

Espejo-Siles, R., Nasaescu, E., Zych, I., and Farrington, D. P. (2023). Spanish validation of the self-reported antisocial behavior questionnaire and comparison of adolescent antisocial behaviors between Pittsburgh and Cordoba. Crime Delinq. :001112872311649. doi: 10.1177/00111287231164919

Espejo-Siles, R., Zych, I., Farrington, D. P., and Llorent, V. J. (2020). “Moral disengagement, victimization, empathy, social and emotional competencies as predictors of violence in children and adolescents” in Children and youth services review , vol. 118 (Kidlington: Pergamon-Elsevier Science Ltd.), 105337.

Espelage, D. L., and Swearer, S. M. (2003). Research on school bullying and victimization: what have we learned and where do we go from here? Sch. Psychol. Rev. 32, 365–383. doi: 10.1080/02796015.2003.12086206

Espelage, D. L., and Swearer, S. M. (2004). Bullying in American schools: A social-ecological perspective on prevention and intervention . Mahwah, New Jersey, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Fu, X., Lv, Y., Yang, Z., Yu, X., and Wang, R. (2018). Chinese adolescents’ power distance value and prosocial behavior toward powerful people: a longitudinal study. PLoS One 13:e0208473. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208473

Fu, X., and Zhang, Y. (2020). Bidirectional relation between paternal/maternal psychological control and adolescent behavioral outcomes. J. Child Fam. Stud. 29, 1402–1412. doi: 10.1007/s10826-019-01615-1

Fujikawa, S., Ando, S., Nishida, A., Usami, S., Koike, S., Yamasaki, S., et al. (2018). Disciplinary slapping is associated with bullying involvement regardless of warm parenting in early adolescence. J. Adolesc. 68, 207–216. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.07.018

Gilreath, T. D., Montiel Ishino, F. A., Sullivan, K. S., and Okoror, T. A. (2022). Maladaptive coping among military-connected adolescents: examining combined risk using QCA. Front. Psychol. 13:948474. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.948474

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

Gómez-Ortiz, O., Romera, E. M., Ortega-Ruiz, R., Herrera, M., and Norman, J. O. (2019). Multidimensional social competence in research on bullying involvement: A cross-cultural study. Behavioral Psychology-Psicología Conductual , 27, 217–238.

Harris, A., and Jones, M. (2019). Leading effective collaborative professional learning: Connecting professional learning with children’s learning . Springer. 5.

Hinduja, S., and Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Arch. Suicide Res. 14, 206–221. doi: 10.1080/13811118.2010.494133

Hong, J. S., and Espelage, D. L. (2012). A review of research on bullying and peer victimization in school: an ecological system analysis. Aggress. Violent Behav. 17, 311–322. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2012.03.003

Hwang, S., Kim, Y. S., Koh, Y.-J., Bishop, S., and Leventhal, B. L. (2017). Discrepancy in perception of bullying experiences and later internalizing and externalizing behavior: a prospective study. Aggress. Behav. 43, 493–502. doi: 10.1002/ab.21707

Jansen, D. E. M. C., Veenstra, R., Ormel, J., Verhulst, F. C., and Reijneveld, S. A. (2011). Early risk factors for being a bully, victim, or bully/victim in late elementary and early secondary education. The longitudinal TRAILS study. BMC Public Health 11:440. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-440

Johnson, M., and Smith, K. (2021). Traditional Education in the Digital Age: Perceptions of Educators. Educational Technology & Society . 24, 152–168.

Juvonen, J., and Graham, S. (2014). Bullying in schools: the power of bullies and the plight of victims. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 65, 159–185. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115030

Kasimova, L. N., Svyatogor, M. V., and Sychugov, E. M. (2022). The role of clinical and social risk factors in the onset and development of suicidal behavior in adolescents and young adults. Suicidology 13, 74–91. doi: 10.32878/suiciderus.22-13-02(47)-74-91

Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., and Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: a critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychol. Bull. 140, 1073–1137. doi: 10.1037/a0035618

Kulis, S. S., Marsiglia, F. F., Nuno-Gutierrez, B. L., Corona-Lozano, M. D., Mendoza-Melendez, M. A., Kiehne, E., et al. (2019). Reciprocal effects of alcohol use and violence perpetration among early adolescents in Mexico: a gendered analysis. J. Youth Adolesc. 48, 1519–1531. doi: 10.1007/s10964-019-01014-1

Lereya, S. T., Samara, M., and Wolke, D. (2013). Parenting behavior and the risk of becoming a victim and a bully/victim: a meta-analysis study. Child Abuse Negl. 37, 1091–1108. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.03.001

Li, Y., Li, P., Yuan, M., Li, Y., Zhang, X., Chen, J., et al. (2024). Social-ecological perspective on the suicidal behaviour factors of early adolescents in China: a network analysis. General Psychiatry 37:e101317. doi: 10.1136/gpsych-2023-101317

Li, Y., Shang, Y., Yang, Y., Hou, C., Yang, H., Hu, Y., et al. (2023). Association of Childhood Adversities with psychosocial difficulties among Chinese children and adolescents. Int. J. Epidemiol. 52, 1887–1897. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyad117

Low, S. K., Tan, S. A., Nainee, S., Viapude, G. N., and Kailsan, R. (2018). “The Association of Parental Monitoring and Peer Rejection on antisocial behavior among Malaysian juvenile offenders” in Residential treatment for Children & Youth (Abingdon, Oxon, England: Routledge Journals, Taylor & Francis LTD.).

Marciano, L., Schulz, P. J., and Camerini, A.-L. (2020). Cyberbullying perpetration and victimization in youth: a Meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 25, 163–181. doi: 10.1093/jcmc/zmz031

Miller, C. J., and Connelly, S. (2021). Patient and provider predictors of telemental health use prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Psychologist.

Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., and Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. JAMA 285, 2094–2100. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.16.2094

Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do . Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Pereda, N., Greco, A. M., Diaz-Faes, D. A., Eisner, M., and Ribeaud, D. (2022). Early childhood predictors of teen dating violence involvement at age 17. J. Youth Adolesc. 51, 2219–2234. doi: 10.1007/s10964-022-01664-8

Reisner, S. L., Van Wagenen, A., Gordon, A., and Calzo, J. P. (2014). Disparities in Safety Belt use by sexual orientation identity among US high school students. Am. J. Public Health Nations Health 104, 311–318. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301745

Rigby, K., and Slee, P. T. (2008). Ethical dilemmas in school bullying research Int. J. Adolesc. Med. Health 20, 165–170. doi: 10.1515/IJAMH.2008.20.2.165

Saarento, S., Garandeau, C. F., and Salmivalli, C. (2015). Classroom-and school-level contributions to bullying and victimization: a review. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 25, 204–218. doi: 10.1002/casp.2207

Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: a review. Aggress. Violent Behav. 15, 112–120. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2009.08.007

Schuetz, J., Schipper, N., and Koglin, U. (2022). Bullying in school and cyberbullying among adolescents without and with special educational needs in emotional-social development and learning in Germany. Psychol Schools 59, 1737–1754. doi: 10.1002/pits.22722

Sitnik-Warchulska, K., Wajda, Z., Wojciechowski, B., and Izydorczyk, B. (2021). The risk of bullying and probability of help-seeking behaviors in school children: a Bayesian network analysis. Front. Psychiatry 12:640927. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.640927

Smith, P. K., Pepler, D., and Rigby, K. (2019). Bullying in schools: How successful can interventions be? Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Swearer, S. M., Espelage, D. L., and Napolitano, S. A. (2010). Bullying prevention and intervention: Realistic strategies for schools . New York: The Guilford Press.

Taliaferro, L. A., McMorris, B. J., Nicole Rider, G., and Eisenberg, M. E. (2019). Risk and protective factors for self-harm in a population-based sample of transgender youth. Archives Suicide Res. 23, 203–221. doi: 10.1080/13811118.2018.1430639

Thornberg, R. (2010). A study of children’s conceptions of school rules by investigating their judgements of transgressions in the absence of rules. Educ. Psychol. 30, 583–603. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2010.492348

Tokunaga, R. S. (2010). Following you home from school: a critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26, 277–287. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.014

Tsang, S. K. M., and Hui, E. K. (2015). “Preventing and combating school bullying: a conceptual review” in Student well-being in Chinese adolescents in Hong Kong: Theory, intervention, and research. Quality of life in Asia . eds. T. Y. Lee, D. T. L. Shek, and R. C. F. Sun (Singapore: Springer-Verlag Singapore PTE Ltd.). doi: 10.1007/978-981-287-582-2_4

Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., and Bartels, J. M. (2007). Social exclusion decreases prosocial behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 92, 56–66. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.56

Wang, Y., Ma, Z., Lu, S., Duan, Z., Wilson, A., Jia, Y., et al. (2023). Associations between sex differences, eating disorder behaviors, physical and mental health, and self-harm among Chinese adolescents. J. Eat. Disord. 11:30. doi: 10.1186/s40337-023-00754-7

Williams, R. J., Shaw, C. A., Belanger, Y. D., Christensen, D. R., El-Guebaly, N., Hodgins, D. C., et al. (2022). Etiology of problem gambling in Canada. Psychol. Addict. Behav. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/adb0000843

Keywords: bullying, aggression, adolescence, school environment, conflict

Citation: Rus M, Călin MF, Sandu ML and Tasențe T (2024) Predictive factors regarding bullying behavior in Romanian schools. Front. Psychol . 15:1463981. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1463981

Received: 12 July 2024; Accepted: 12 September 2024; Published: 26 September 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Rus, Călin, Sandu and Tasențe. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Mihaela Rus, [email protected]

† These authors have contributed equally to this work

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Friday 27 September 2024

• Leader comment
• Letters to the editor
• Sunday’s readings
• Faith features
• Book reviews
• Visual arts
• Performing arts
• Caption competition
• Out of the question
• 100 years ago

Updated anti-bullying guidance aims to protect freedom of expression in C of E schools

THE Church’s National Society for education has updated its latest anti-bullying guidance for church schools , after a period of consultation.

The guidance, Flourishing for All , includes advice on how to support gender-questioning pupils. It was first released in July ( News, 12 July ), and an updated version was published on Thursday.

This is to be rolled out to the C of E’s 4623 schools. It is said to be the final version; however, it will be reviewed again, and subject to further changes, once the Government’s guidance pertaining to Gender Questioning Children (2023) and the updated Relationships, Health and Sex Education (RHSE) guidance (2024) — still in draft form — have been finalised.

Significant changes in the church guidance include replacing the use of the acronym LGBT+ with LGB/GQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual/Gender Questioning) when referring to children and young people, in line with the Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSiE) 2024 document.

A paragraph pertaining to freedom of expression has been expanded. It still states that school leaders “will need to ensure a balance between enabling all parties to be heard whilst protecting those in their school community for whom listening to particular viewpoints on gender and sexuality can be painful”.

But it now adds: “This includes ensuring that pupils and adults who hold a particular view, on the basis of their religious or non-religious worldview, understand that they are legally entitled to do so. In Church schools, the expectation would be that all views are expressed in line with the pastoral principles cited above.”

Another new paragraph makes it clear that “It is not appropriate that a primary school’s strategy for combating bullying towards LGB/GQ pupils or LGBT+ adults should focus on any aspect of differing sexual practices (i.e. what people do with their bodies sexually, although human reproduction may be an element of the science curriculum).”

The definition of “transgender” has also been removed from the glossary, to make it clear that the document, when the word is used, is always referring to transgender adults.

Browse Church and Charity jobs on the Church Times jobsite

Other stories

Flourish network seeks to train young leaders in schools.

03 Jul 2024

‘Dignity’ at heart of C of E response to children who question gender

19 Dec 2023

Education: A simple legal change that may open school doors

20 Sep 2024

Interview: Lat Blaylock, RE adviser

24 May 2024

Community up in arms against schools merger in south London

Church schools to be given new guidance on gender-based bullying

05 Jul 2024

Scolding review of Soul Survivor scandal published

27 Sep 2024

Other Topics

Top Comment

Angela Tilby: Durham Cathedral symbolises resilience

I WAS in Durham last week, and took the opportunity to revisit the cathedral. I love this great fortress of a church

Job of the Week

Dean of chapel and college chaplain.

Winchester College offers the right candidates the exciting opportunity to join a special and unique setting at the heart of this historic foundation. On the appointment of the current incumbents to other roles beyond Winchester, the College seeks to restructure its Chaplaincy team and further develop the spiritual and pastoral leadership and ministry to the whole school community.

Appointments

Diocesan director of ordinands.

The Bishop of Llandaff is seeking to appoint a DDO who will act for and work closely with her in overseeing the preliminary assessment of candidates, working within the vocations team of the Diocese to encourage vocations to a range of ministries.

Find more jobs

Forthcoming Events

Green church awards.

Awards Ceremony: 26 September 2024

R ead more details about the awards

Inspiration: The Influences That Have Shaped My Life

September - November 2024

St Martin in the Fields Autumn Lecture Series 2024

tickets available

Through Darkness To Light: Advent Journeys

30 November 2024

More details to follow

Festival of Faith and Literature

28 February - 2 March 2025

The festival programme is soon to be announced sign up to our newsletter to stay informed about all festival news.

Festival website

Visit our Events page for upcoming and past events 

Most popular, church of england pensions board releases database to reveal ceo pay.

Body found in the search for missing hospital chaplain

Interview with Diarmaid MacCulloch on sex, marriage, and the Church

House of Bishops’ CNC debate rouses ire of central members

Church of England invests millions to slash its carbon emissions

Priest’s licence revoked after moving to join Free Church of England

Next Bishop of Wolverhampton regrets part in non-canonical ordination

Sydney diocese report warns of ‘impaired communion’ with Church of England

Factional fighting in the open at Barnabas Aid

Welcome to the Church Times

To explore the Church Times website fully, please sign in or subscribe.

Non-subscribers can read four articles for free each month. (You will need to register.)

Bullying in Public Schools and Steps that Can be Taken to Address It Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Bullying is an urgent, serious problem that occurs with alarming frequency in American schools. No child is protected from this phenomenon, which makes it necessary to find ways to combat it. Among the negative consequences of bullying, there are psychological problems among the younger generation and the appearance of a threat to security. Therefore, this persuasive paper will investigate the issue of bullying in the school setting and emphasize the need to improve programs to eliminate this threat to society.

The issue at hand is how society can take meaningful steps to help students in every school community, as a unified nation, and as sensitive adults. This includes assisting in coping and feeling safer in an environment where they spend most of their days. And second of all, students should consider an educational institution as a safe place in which they will not be exposed to any threats such as physical and emotional abuse. This is of critical importance, as it helps to protect children from further damage, which can be inflicted by bullying in the absence of ways to limit it.

The work will study data covering the number of students who were given a survey. Moreover, it will research the number of students reported being bullied or having been bullied. It will analyze the percentage of students who have been negatively affected by the phenomenon in high, middle, and elementary school. Unfortunately, a considerable number of students may have never reported being bullied and never received help and are not accounted for in the nationwide survey that will be conducted.

Furthermore, it is necessary to understand what bullying is in educational organizations. This phenomenon consists of violent actions that negatively impact individuals’ psychological and physical condition. The consequences of these are a decrease in academic performance and deviant behavior. Sources note that in 2019 the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) concluded that “about 1 in 5 high school students reported being bullied on school property in the last year” (“Fast fact: Preventing school violence,” n.d., para. 6). The reasons for such behavior may be any external characteristics of children, such as appearance, or other characteristics, such as behavior or interests that do not converge with the general ones (Menesini & Salmivalli, 2017). Bullying can occur on the territory of an educational institution both covertly and have an explicit character.

Bullying and abuse is often a problem that is quite difficult to identify and eradicate before it is strengthened. This paper will study the struggles faced by students who are being bullied on school premises and have no recourse to remedy the problem because they are not being listened to or are not being taken seriously enough. As a result, they find themselves dealing with fear, anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts or suicide, withdrawal, and poor performance in school. Research shows that “bullying is one of the phenomena linked to teen suicide. Teen suicide is the third leading cause of death for young people of 15 to 24 years” (Cuesta et al., 2021, p. 2). This makes it necessary to spread awareness about the threat of this problem both for young people and for educators, parents, legislators, and law enforcement.

It is worth noting that bullying is a problem of all ages and can manifest itself at any stage of learning. Thus, the study showed that 20.9% are bullied in elementary school, 21% in middle school, and 28% in high school (“Bullying in middle school,” n.d.; Loveless, n.d.; Patchin & Hinduja, 2020). These facts show the negative dynamics of the growth in the number of people who are exposed to adverse physical and psychological effects from other students. Moreover, it is emphasized that with age, the bullying of some students becomes more severe and dangerous. However, at an early age, bullying can leave a deep imprint due to the more vulnerable psyche of children.

A school shooting is one of the leading security threats resulting from bullying in the school environment. This problem is especially relevant in states where the sale and storage of firearms are allowed. The conducted research showed that “more than 7% of high school students had been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property one or more times during the 12 months” (“Fast fact: Preventing school violence,” n.d., para. 7). Moreover, “mass shootings, where four or more people-not including the shooter-are injured or killed, have averaged more than one per day this year” (Ledur et al., 2022, para. 2). These statistics show the critical need to solve the problem of this scientific work.

The second problem resulting from violent actions at school is an increase in suicide cases among adolescents. Not all students decide on this step, but many, especially in critical cases, have thoughts about this terrifying action. This is because young people face such psychological problems as depression, anxiety, and fear. In the absence of proper and timely treatment and assistance, many adolescents begin to suffer from the deterioration of their condition. Hence, it cannot be said that bullying is the direct cause, but they contribute to the increase in suicides and harmful actions towards oneself.

Introducing measures to eliminate bullying in schools should reduce the amount of stress and aggression in educational institutions. Hence, on the part of educators and school leaders, it is necessary to conduct training to spread awareness about the harm and negative consequences of bullying (U.S. Department of Education, 2022). It is important to introduce measures to unite students, establish friendly relations and create a positive environment (“Bullying and cyberbullying,” n.d.). This implies the introduction into the educational curriculum of such steps as teamwork, allowing students to get to know each other better and accept each other’s individual characteristics.

Legislative and law enforcement agencies should pay particular attention to this problem. Even though some measures are already being applied, they are not enough since the problem of bullying is still very relevant for schools in the United States of America. In addition to following and complying with their direct duties, law enforcers must take part in education about the danger of bullying and provide prevention information and resources. Hence, they can participate in events organized by schools and particular organizations and provide data and statistics about the problem. Moreover, it is possible to develop new programs and legislative projects that will restrict minors’ access to weapons. In addition, it is necessary to disseminate information about hotlines and organizations that can help teenagers in difficult situations and provide support and assistance.

In conclusion, the main task of this persuasive paper was to prove the need to solve the problem of bullying in an educational environment. This problem is of particular relevance and poses a threat to society, especially to students. The main issue is that in addition to psychological and physical violence, bullying at school can provoke such security threats as school shootings and suicide among teenagers. Therefore, educators and law enforcers should jointly take measures to help create a positive and danger-free environment for children.

Bullying and cyberbullying . (n.d.). School Savety.gov. Web.

Bullying in middle school . (n.d.). BRIM. Web.

Cuesta, I., Montesó‐Curto, P., Metzler Sawin, E., Jiménez‐Herrera, M., Puig‐Llobet, M., Seabra, P., & Toussaint, L. (2021). Risk factors for teen suicide and bullying: An international integrative review. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 27 (3). Web.

Fast fact: Preventing school violence . (n.d.). Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Web.

Ledur, J., Rabinowitz, K., & Galocha, A. (2022). There have been over 300 mass shootings so far in 2022 . The Washington Post. Web.

Loveless, B. (n.d.). Bullying epidemic: Facts, statistics and prevention . Education Corner. Web.

Menesini, E., & Salmivalli, C. (2017). Bullying in schools: the state of knowledge and effective interventions . Psychology, Health & Medicine, 22 (1), 240-253. Web.

Patchin, J.W., & Hinduja, S. (2020). Tween cyberbullying in 2020 . Cyberbullying Research Center and Cartoon Network. Web.

U.S. Department of Education. (2022). Report on indicators of school crime and safety: 2021 . Institute of Educational Sciences. Web.

• Stigmatization Among Adolescents
• Parental Involvement Plan in Education
• Social Influence on Bullying in Schools
• "Bullied: The Jamie Nabozny Story" Documentary
• Homosexual Students and Bullying
• Cheating in College and Its Negative Consequences
• Free Education and Its Main Advantages
• Communication and Assessment in Education
• School Punishments and Their Adverse Effects
• Procrastination Among College Students
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, March 5). Bullying in Public Schools and Steps that Can be Taken to Address It. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-in-public-schools-and-steps-that-can-be-taken-to-address-it/

"Bullying in Public Schools and Steps that Can be Taken to Address It." IvyPanda , 5 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-in-public-schools-and-steps-that-can-be-taken-to-address-it/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Bullying in Public Schools and Steps that Can be Taken to Address It'. 5 March.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Bullying in Public Schools and Steps that Can be Taken to Address It." March 5, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-in-public-schools-and-steps-that-can-be-taken-to-address-it/.

1. IvyPanda . "Bullying in Public Schools and Steps that Can be Taken to Address It." March 5, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-in-public-schools-and-steps-that-can-be-taken-to-address-it/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Bullying in Public Schools and Steps that Can be Taken to Address It." March 5, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-in-public-schools-and-steps-that-can-be-taken-to-address-it/.

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 .

• SYDNEY, NSW
• MELBOURNE, VIC
• HOBART, TAS
• BRISBANE, QLD
• ADELAIDE, SA
• CANBERRA, ACT

'Teachers don't see it': Tragic suicide of Sydney schoolgirl Charlotte, 12, prompts concern over how Aussie schools tackle bullying

• mental health

Send your stories to [email protected]

Auto news: No wiper fluid? The surprising things that can get you a defect notice.

Top Stories

Roosters caught in Hughes' storm as grand final booked

World sporting contest descends into 'race riot'

Man treated for deep cut after aggressive magpie swoops

Malthouse reveals premiership predictions ahead of AFL grand final

School officials see increase in cyberbullying in Peninsula School District

Rise in cyberbullying at peninsula school district.

Officials in the Peninsula School District are warning families of a rise in cyberbullying in recent months.

GIG HARBOR, Wash. - Officials in the Peninsula School District are warning families of a rise in cyberbullying in recent months.

In a letter sent on Sept. 17, Superintendent Krestin Bahr wrote students have been sharing unflattering and sometimes explicit photos of students and staff without their consent through social media, such as Instagram and Snapchat.

The Peninsula School District banned cell phone use during school hours last year and the district says staff will redouble efforts to monitor inappropriate cell phone use during the school day.

The district says it is assembling a Bullying Awareness and Prevention Task Force in coming weeks to improve understanding and responses.

When online harassment is reported to the district, Superintendent Bahr said they petition social media platforms to remove posts or sometimes ban accounts.

"It is deeply frustrating as an educator and as a parent to know that these companies do not prioritize moderating these accounts, nor do they offer reasonable help for school districts to prevent online bullying," said Bahr.

Anyone impacted by cyberbullying in the Peninsula School District is urged to report it to administrators, counselors or staff members and harassment can be reported anonymously through Hear Me WA .

MORE STORIES FROM FOX SEATTLE

Seattle's Climate Pledge Arena to refund concertgoers, pay nearly $478K in penalties

Murder-suicide suspected cause for I-5 North shut down in Everett, WA

Argument over motorcycle leads to deadly shooting in Graham, WA

Complaint alleges unethical, unprofessional conduct from Marysville superintendent

Seattle family members mourn couple who drowned while snorkeling in Maui

To get the best local news, weather and sports in Seattle for free, sign up for the daily FOX Seattle newsletter .