Republic of The Philippines

Province of Cagayan
Municipality of Ballesteros
Northern Cagayan Colleges Foundation Inc.

Title:
The Effect of Bullying to Learners Mental Health
 INTRODUCTION:

Bullying in childhood has been classified by the WHO as a major public health problem and
for decades has been known to increase the risk of poor health, social and educational
outcomes in childhood and adolescence Characterised by repeated victimisation within a
power-imbalanced relationship, bullying encompasses a wide range of types, frequencies and
aggression levels, ranging from teasing and name calling to physical, verbal and social abuse
The dynamics within such relationships become consolidated with repeated and sustained
episodes of bullying: bullies accrue compounding power while victims are stripped of their
own and become progressively less able to defend themselves and increasingly vulnerable to
psychological distress

There is now substantial evidence that being bullied as a child or adolescent has a causal
relationship to the development of mental health issues beyond the early years of life,
including depression, anxiety and suicidality. As such, addressing the global public health
problem of bullying in childhood has received increasing international attention. education
has focused further attention on bullying in its digital form, so-called ‘cyberbullying’, the
prevalence of which is feared to be increasing

Bullying involves repeated hurtful actions between peers where an imbalance of power exists
conducted a review of the mental health consequences of bullying for children and
adolescents and found that bullying is associated with severe symptoms of mental health
problems, including self-harm and suicidality. Bullying was shown to have detrimental
effects that persist into late adolescence and contribute independently to mental health
problems. Updated reviews have presented evidence indicating that bullying is causative of
mental illness in many adolescents

Those who experienced bullying more than once a week had poorer mental health than
children who experienced bullying less frequently.
As most adolescents spend a considerable amount of time at school, some of school
environment has been a major focus of mental health research concluded that school is a
potential protective factor against mental health problems, as it provides a socially supportive
context. However, it may also be the primary setting for protracted bullying and stress.
Another factor associated with adolescent mental health is parental socio-economic status. A
systematic review indicated that lower parental is associated with poorer adolescent mental
health. However, no previous studies have examined whether SES modifies or attenuates the
association between bullying and mental health. Similarly, it remains unclear whether school
related factors, such as school grades and the school environment, influence the relationship
between bullying and mental health. This information could help to identify those adolescents
most at risk of harm from bullying.

Kids who are regularly targeted by bullies often suffer both emotionally and socially. Not
only do they find it hard to make friends, but they also struggle to maintain healthy
friendships.

Part of this struggle is directly related to low self-esteem. A lack of self-esteem is a direct
result of the mean and hurtful things that other kids say about them. When kids are
continually called "fat" or "losers," they begin to believe these things are true.

Bullying victims also tend to experience a wide range of emotions. They may feel angry,
bitter, vulnerable, helpless, frustrated, lonely, and isolated from their peers. Consequently,
they may skip classes and resort to drugs and alcohol to numb their pain. And if bullying is
on-going, they may develop depression and even contemplate suicide

If no intervention takes place, eventually kids can develop what is known as "learned
helplessness." Learned helplessness means that the targets of bullying believe that they
cannot do anything to change the situation.
As a result, they stop trying. Then, the cycle down into depression becomes more severe.
This leads to a feeling of hopelessness and the belief that there is no way out.

As bullied kids grow into adults, they may continue to struggle with self-esteem, have
difficulty developing and maintaining relationships, and avoid social interactions. They also
may have a hard time trusting people, which can impact their personal relationships and their
work relationships.

They may even start to believe lies about bullying, such as convincing themselves that the
bullying wasn't as bad as they remember. They also may engage in self-blame.

Aside from the bumps and bruises that occur during physical bullying, there are additional
physical costs. For instance, bullied kids often experience anxiety. This stress on their bodies
also will result in a variety of health issues, including being sick more often and suffering
from ulcers and other conditions caused by persistent anxiety.

Bullied kids also may complain of stomachaches and headaches And the bullying they
experience may aggravate other pre-existing conditions like eczema. Skin conditions,
stomach issues, and heart conditions that are aggravated by stress all worsen when a child is
being bullied.

Kids who are bullied often suffer academically, too. Bullied kids struggle to focus on their
schoolwork. In fact, slipping grades is one of the first signs that a child is being bullied

Kids also may be so pre-occupied by bullying that they forget about assignments or have
difficulty paying attention in class.

Additionally, bullied kids may skip school or classes in order to avoid being bullied. This
practice also can result is falling grades. And when grades begin to drop this adds to the stress
levels the bullied child is already experiencing.

For instance, kids scored lower on standardized tests in schools with a lot of bullying than
kids in schools with effective anti-bullying programs. One possible reason for the lower
scores in schools with pervasive bullying is that students are often less engaged in the
learning process because they are too distracted by or worried about the bullying.
Additionally, teachers may be less effective because they must spend so much time focused
on classroom management and discipline instead of teaching. The good news is with proper
support and intervention, most kids targeted by bullies will overcome bullying and things will
get back to normal. But left unchecked, bullying can cause the victim to pay a high cost in
long-term consequences.

When a child is bullied, it is not uncommon for the parents and siblings to also be affected.
Parents often experience a wide range of consequences including feeling powerless to fix the
situation. They also may feel alone and isolated. And they may even become obsessed with
the situation often at the expense of their own health and wellbeing.

It also is not uncommon for parents to feel a sense of failure when their child is bullied.

Not only do they feel like they failed to protect the child from bullying, but they also may
question their parenting abilities. They may even worry that they somehow missed the signs
of bullying or that they did not do enough to bully-proof their child along the way.

Research shows that the effects of bullying last well into adulthood. In fact, one study found
that the consequences of being bullied by peers may have a greater impact on mental health
in adulthood than originally thought

Some students (most likely girls) defend victims by attempting to stop the bullies or comfort
the victimized students (Yun, 2019). Even when defenders are not able to stop the bullying,
victims who are defended by their peers show lower levels of anxiety and depression
(Salmivalli, 2014) and higher feelings of school belonging (Laninga-Wijnen et al., 2022).

What's more, the impact may be even more significant than being mistreated by adults.
Remember, the experiences that people have while they are children help mold them into the
adults that they later become. So it is not surprising that the effects of bullying linger well
into adulthood. This then helps to influence their future mindset, including how they view
themselves and others.
 Conceptual Framework

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

1.What are the
demographic profile of
the respondent? Data
1.1 Age Analysis
1.2 Sex
1.3 Third Year Data Collection
College Students and Organization
2. What are the factors
that causes bullying in
Administration of
terms of. Self – Esteem
tests and Self
A. Psychological
efficacy test Implementation
B. Sociological
Comparative of Proposed
C. Physical
Analysis Intervention
Appearance
Programs for
3.What are the effects Difference in
of bullying to the lives respondents’
Participants
of individual in terms
observance on the with low level
of:
effects of bullying esteem and self
3.1 Psychological
efficacy.
3.2 Social

3.3 Emotional Correlational

4. Is there a significant Analysis
relationship between
bullying and mental Relationship of
health to the childs Observance on
mental health the effects of
? bullying and its
impact

FEEDBACK

Figure 1. Conceptual Model

The figure shows the flow of the activities in this study. The input covers the data gathered
from the respondents which include their personal demographic profile and information need
for this study. The process column represents the activities for determining the self esteem
and self efficacy of a child. The outputs represents the developed enhancement program

Statement of the Problem

Every year there is a certain number of children that facing bullying like
person with disablilities, poor people, and members of lgbt community. School bullying is a
widespread issue which affect the student in several ways. This research aims to determine
what are the effects that could influence the student possibly after being bullied, specifically
answer the following problem

1.What are the demographic profile of the respondent?

1.1 Age
1.2 Sex
1.3 Third Year College Students

2. What are the factors that causes bullying in terms of.

A. Psychological
B. Sociological
C. Physical Appearance

3.What are the effects of bullying to the lives of individual in terms of:
3.1 Psychological
3.2 Social
3.3 Emotional

4. Is there a significant relationship between bullying and mental health to the childs mental
health?
Significance of The Study

The researcher initiated this study to investigate and hopefully tried to determine what could
be the possible crucial and non – crucial effect of bullying to the mental health of the
learners. The following will benefit in this study.

School Administrators:
This study will give them a hint to improve their motivational and
teaching materials, techniques or methods and skills in open forum to learners who really
need their guidance

Teachers:
They will be aware about the kind of attitude their learners is possessing.
It will give them a indication on how they will help and encourage their child to avoid
eschew bullying

Future Researchers:
The researcher near the future will make use of the results of
our present study. This research will serve as their basis or hyphothesis and resemblance to
their future study.

Students:
This study will encourage them to change their attitudes towards other
people. It will serve as a medicine to cure the minds of every individual to become open
minded about the consequences of their action.

Scope and delimitation:

This study will limit the effects of bullying to the mental health of
the students. The study only focus to the Elementary Learners who are studying to all
elementary schools in the town of Ballesteros. Each respondent will be given a set of
questionnaires determining their self - esteem the covered school year was 2022 – 2023
Definition of Terms

To facilitate understanding and clarifty of the purpose of this research

work, some important terms are defined operationally and conceptually
Anxiety - a feeling of worry, nervousness, or unease, typically about an imminent event or
something with an uncertain outcome
Basis - the underlying support or foundation for an idea, argument, or process.
Bullying - Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior among school aged children that
involves a real or perceived power imbalance.
Consequences - a result or effect of an action or condition.
Depression - a common and serious medical illness that negatively affects how you feel, the
way you think and how you act. Fortunately, it is also treatable. Depression causes feelings of
sadness and/or a loss of interest in activities you once enjoyed.
Emotional - arousing or characterized by intense feeling.
Enhancement - an increase or improvement in quality, value, or extent.
Hopelessness - a feeling or state of despair; lack of hope.
Mental Health - a person’s condition with regard to their psychological and emotional well-
being.
Preoccupied - engrossed in thought; distracted.
Psychological - of, affecting, or arising in the mind; related to the mental and emotional state
of a person.
Self Efficacy - refers to an individual's belief in his or her capacity to execute behaviors
necessary to produce specific performance attainments
Self Esteem - confidence in one's own worth or abilities; self-respect.
Significant - sufficiently great or important to be worthy of attention; noteworthy.
Social Interaction - the process of reciprocal influence exercised by individuals over one
another during social encounters.

Substantial - concerning the essentials of something

Vulnerable - susceptible to physical or emotional attack or harm

 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

FOREIGN LITERATURE

Bullying is widely documented to be a significant problem in schools in Australia and

throughout the world. Although bullying exists in a variety of contexts, this thesis examines
bullying specifically within the school context.
What is bullying?
Bullying (physical, psychological or social) occurs when there is an imbalance of
power between the bully and the victim, there are repeated negative actions against the
victim,
and there is a deliberate intention on the part of the bully to cause harm (Olweus, 1997; Slee,
1995). Put simply, bullying constitutes a systematic abuse of power (Smith & Sharp, 1994),
and is a unique subset of aggression including the intention to cause harm (Smith, 2014).
There are a number of forms that bullying can take. The more overt forms of bullying
include physical and verbal abuse, while covert or relational bullying includes such
behaviours
as social exclusion, isolation and spreading rumours (Smith, Pepler, & Rigby, 2004).
Relational aggression specifically refers to the use of peer relationships to cause harm such as
the spreading of rumours, damaging peer relationships or reputation, threatening to end
friendships and exclusion from social groups (Orpinas, McNicholas & Nahapetyan, 2015).
More recently cyberbullying, which is bullying carried out in an electronic context such as
through text messages, e-mail, social media or instant messages has emerged as another
distinct form of bullying (Kowalski, Schroeder, Giumetti & Lattanner, 2014).
In recent years, there has been a surge in interest, publicity, and research in the area of
bullying. Cook, Williams, Guerra, Kim and Sadek (2010a) when reviewing the literature on
the topic, found that only 190 articles had been published in peer reviewed journals in the 20
years ranging from 1980 to 2000, whereas there was in excess of 600 in the 10-year period
between 2000 to 2010. While this does not appear to be the result of an increase in bullying
over recent years (see Rigby & Smith, 2011), it certainly reflects a current concern regarding
the prevalence of bullying and the serious and long-term consequences that can result.
Australian. A number of Australian studies have looked at the prevalence of bullying
within Australia. Earlier, Rigby (1997) aggregated the results of a number of independent
school surveys conducted over several years, resulting in a sample of 38,000 Australian
school
children aged between 7 and 17 years. The results indicated that one in six children were
bullied by their peers each week or more frequently and that over the course of a year
approximately half of all of these students were victimised at least once (Rigby, 1997). A
further large scale aggregation of self-report bullying data from over 25,000 8 to 18 year-old
Australian students between 1993 and 1996 found that 16% of girls and 21% of boys reported
being bullied at least once a week or more often (Rigby & Slee, 1999). Forero, McLellen,
Rissel and Rauman (1999) surveyed 3,918 Australian students in Grades 6, 8 and 10 over 115
schools. They reported that 12.7% of students were the victims of bullying.
More recently, the Australian covert bullying prevalence study used a sample of 7,418
students aged between 8 and 14 years and found that 27% of students reported being the
victim of bullying every few weeks or more often, with the highest prevalence rates being for
Grade 5 (32%) and Grade 8 (29%) students (Cross et al., 2009). Teasing was identified as the
most commonly occurring form of bullying within this study, followed by telling rumours
(Cross et al., 2009). In relation to covert bullying specifically, 16% of students reported being
3
the victim of such bullying every few weeks or more often, with Grades 5-8 reporting the
highest prevalence rates (18-20%). The most prevalent forms of covert bullying were being
ignored, and being excluded or not being allowed to join in. Leach and Rickwood (2009)
reported a slightly higher rate of 38.5% of their sample of students in Grades 7 and 8
reporting
being bullied within the school semester.
Age. The prevalence rates of bullying has generally been reported to decrease over the
school years, with the highest incidence occurring within the later primary years or at the
transition to high school (Nansel et al., 2001; Olweus, 1991; Pepler, et al., 2006). The
increase
at this time has been hypothesised to be the result of young people negotiating new
unfamiliar
peer groups and the lower levels of direct adult supervision and relationships with teachers in
high school (Pellegrini et al., 2010). Further, the rates of overt bullying appear to decline
steeply over the years, and it has been suggested that this may be accompanied by a rise in
the
rate of covert bullying as young people become more socially sophisticated and develop more
complex relationships with each other (Olweus, 1991). This is consistent with the earlier
work
of Björkqvist, Lagerspetz and Kaukiainen (1992a), and Björkqvist, Österman and Kaukiainen
(1992b) who presented a developmental theory of aggressive behaviours, which are proposed
to appear initially in children as direct physical aggression, then direct verbal and lastly as
indirect aggression. This is hypothesised to be the result of age related changes and
development of increasing verbal and social skills over childhood and teenage years, such
that
young children with more limited social skills would preferentially use physical aggression,
then as verbal skills improve more verbal aggression would be seen, then lastly indirect
aggression when social skills are more developed (Björkqvist et al., 1992a)

Stable Victimisation. Amongst these prevalence rates there are a minority of children
who appear as stable victims from as early as five or six years old (Kochenderfer & Ladd,
1996). Stable victimisation appears to be the result of a vicious cycle of victimisation over
time, in which adjustment (such as levels of anxiety, depression, self-esteem, and loneliness)
of victims is increasingly negatively affected by victimisation; which leads to more
victimisation, and further adjustment difficulties over time. Longitudinal studies have
provided evidence that victimisation is often a precursor to poor adjustment, with
victimisation being associated with later loneliness, school avoidance, poor physical and
mental health, and peer rejection (Hodges & Perry, 1999; Kochenderfer & Ladd, 1996;
Rigby,
1998a). Such stable patterns have also been noted in later primary school (Chan, 2006), and
in
secondary school (Rigby, 1997). While there is not yet any direct evidence that those children
who are identified as persistent victims in early primary school remain victims throughout
childhood and adolescence, the repeated findings of stable victims at various ages and the
causal relationship between victimisation and adjustment difficulties suggest that, in at least a
significant minority of children, victimisation begins very early in childhood and is ongoing.
This is also concerning as it relates to polyvictimisation, in which children are the victims of
multiple forms of aggression (i.e., physical assault, maltreatment, sexual abuse, bullying).
Research in this areas suggests that children who are the victim of one type of violence are
significantly more likely to go on to experience other types of violence, and that being a
victim of multiple forms lead to higher levels of distress and more lasting emotional harm
(Finkelhor, Turner, Hamby & Ormrod, 2011; Turner, Shattuck, Finkelhor & Hamby, 2016).

National and government approaches to bullying in schools. In 2003 Australia

introduced the National Safe Schools Framework (NSSF), an integrated national policy for
the
prevention and management of bullying, violence and other aggressive behaviours, which
was
further revised in 2011 (NSSF, 2011). The NSSF was developed by the then Commonwealth
Department of Education, Science and the Arts and acts as a resource to inform practice that
promotes children’s physical, social and emotional health. The framework incorporates state
and territory and non-government schools. It comprises a set of guiding principles, and
implementation resources to aid schools in putting into place measures to ensure the safety
and
wellbeing of students. The elements schools are encouraged to use to implement the NSSF
(2011) include: leadership commitment to a safe school; a supportive and connected school
culture; policies and procedures; professional learning; positive behaviour management;
engagement, skills development and safe school curriculum; a focus on students’ wellbeing
and student ownership; early intervention and targeted support; and partnerships with
families
and community. The framework includes a Student Wellbeing Hub and the Bullying. No
Way!
website that are online resources for school staff, students, parents and professionals for
strategies and resources relating to the implementation of the framework. All individual
schools within Australia were initially mandated to implement the National Safe Schools
Framework, and therefore have an anti-bullying policy in place. However, more recently this
has shifted to being encouraged to implement it, but with no specific mandatory
requirements.
Unfortunately, there have been some questions regarding the extent to which the NSSF
has been successful, with Cross and colleagues (2011) reporting on a study of teachers’
perceptions regarding the implementation of the original NSSF in 2003, their capacity to
address bullying and students’ self-reported prevalence of bullying four years following the
introduction of the NSSF. They found rates of bullying remained relatively unchanged, and
teachers reported that schools had not widely implemented NSSF recommendations or felt
able to appropriately address bullying when it arose.
Internationally, there are similar government policy initiatives in response to
addressing bullying in schools. In 2009 the most populous providence of Canada introduced a
policy encouraging all schools to have a School Improvement Plan that includes a school-
wide
bullying prevention plan detailing what bullying is, raising awareness of bullying, and
outlining strategies for prevention and management of bullying when it occurs (Ministry of
18
Education, 2012). The United States of America have a similar policy and also provide an
online hub, Stopbullying.gov, created in 2011 to provide information on bullying education,
prevention and how to respond to bullying, which is jointly run by the Department of
Education, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice
(Stopbullying.gov, 2015). A number of other countries have similar policies or legislation for
dealing with bullying on a national level (Kazarian & Ammar, 2013).
Within school approaches. There is both an acknowledgment of and evidence
supporting the important role played by the school environment in the lives of young people
and their well-being (Carr, 2006). Given that the majority of young people spend a significant
amount of time in school and the central role that schools play in the lives of many of these
children, it is not surprising that schools are regarded as ideal settings for delivering programs
aimed to prevent problems or build skills to better cope with life challenges. This is certainly
the case in relation to the delivery of programs to address issues of bullying.
Within the literature related to bullying programs within schools there exists a number
of different intervention types. Universal programs involve all individuals within a particular
population or community participating. This has the possible advantage of avoiding or
minimising participant stigma and also has the ability to reach a wider range of individuals
rather than just those with a narrow range of risk factors specifically identified (Offord,
2000).
Universal interventions also generally have the advantage of lower drop out rates and higher
participation rates than selective or indicated prevention (Clarke et al., 1995; Shochet et al.,
2001). Curriculum based approaches use classroom level intervention to provide information
and skills to children through didactic teaching, activities, discussion and multi-media. These
programs often include psychoeducation, social skills, conflict resolution skills, and skills for
managing emotions and behaviours. Targeted interventions are those that target individuals
who manifest some risk factor for the development of a specific problem (selective
prevention) or who show already subclinical symptoms of the disorder (indicated prevention;
Gordon, 1987).
A review of the literature was undertaken to examine the effects of specific bullying
programs in schools. Smith, Schneider, Smith and Ananiadou (2004) summarised the
research
to date at the time on whole-school anti-bullying programs and found that the majority of
programs did not produce significant change in self-reported bullying or victimisation.
Specifically, for those programs that used a control group, 86% of self-reported victimization

outcome differences were negligible or negative, and 100% of self-reported bullying outcome
differences were negligible or negative. However, this study did find that programs that
incorporated formal monitoring of fidelity to the program yielded more positive outcomes
than
those that did not.

Summary
Taken together the literature suggests that bullying is a significant problem in schools
and one that requires and benefits from intervention at the policy, whole-school and
individual
level. Given that there are many children who are involved in some way in a bullying
interaction, universal interventions may be a particularly useful and important, as well as
resource and cost effective, approach to intervention. The findings that teachers are often not
aware of or involved in bullying situations and that students are more willing to seek help
from a friend (Rigby, 1997), provide further support for the possible utility of universal, skill
building interventions which include bystander behaviour. Finally, given the finding that poor
social problem solving skills is a common predictor for involvement in bullying as both a
bully, victim and bully/ victim and possibly a moderator of negative outcomes, there is strong
justification for developing interventions within this area that incorporate social problem
solving skills as a core component.

The literature is quite rich when investigations involve the effects of school, families, teacher
characteristics, parental schooling, student gender, cognitive ability in various social
dimensions such as Hanushek (1986), Farkas et al. (1990), Card and Krueger (1992), Farkas
et al. (1997), Murnane et al. (2000), Kerckhoff et al. (2001), Riani and Rios-Neto (2008). On
the other hand, the amount of work that has addressed the effect of bullying on academic
performance is limited (Ponzo, 2013).

Besides that, bullying is a widespread problem, it is also very costly, especially because not
only sufferers but also those who cause bullying suffer negative consequences throughout
life, Sarzosa and Urzúa (2015). By repeating this behavior several times, the oppressor can
express emotional frailty and high level of psychic suffering. According to some data that
was produced by a website managed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
called stopbullying.gov, 160,000 children miss school every day in the US due to fear of
being bullied (this represents 15% of all students missing classes); Bullying sufferers are
between 2 to 9 times more likely to consider suicide than non-bullying sufferers; In the UK at
least 50% of the suicides among young people are related to these experiences and of every
ten students, one leaves school or move to another one due to the stress and traumas that are
commonly related to bullying.
Researchers as Bowles and Herbert (1976) have discussed the importance of non-cognitive
skills as good indicators of success in life. They argued that non-cognitive skills can be
considered even more important than cognitive abilities to determine various factors
throughout people’s lives. In the same sense, Almlund et al. (2011) also consider traits of
more malleable personalities more important throughout the life cycle than cognitive factors,
which becomes highly stable at around 10 years. The study suggests that interventions that
are capable of changing personality traits are promising ways for combating poverty and
social disadvantages. Gensowski (2014) points out that lifetime earnings are substantially
influenced by education and personality traits.3
In a British study of the National Institute of Child Development, Brown and Taylor (2008)
investigated the effect of school bullying. The results suggest an adverse effect on the
accumulation of human capital. The impact of bullying on 16-year-old school teenagers is
equivalent to the effects of class size. The effect of class size disappears for young people at
more advanced ages, however, the effect of bullying remains during adult life, directly
influencing the salaries received during the life cycle and indirectly through the levels of
schooling reached. Harmon and Walker (2000) argued that levels of schooling at higher ages
are not affected by class size, but contact with bullying has an impact on educational level
throughout life.
The study by Kibriya et al. (2015) analyzed school bullying in Ghana from a survey of 7323
8th grade students in 2011. The results show a negative impact of bullying on math scores
and the magnitude of the effect found was greater among girls. The effect of bullying
decreases in the case of students who have a female teacher. The authors used Propensity
Score Matching and a series of robustness to validate their results. For them, bullying policies
must take into account the gender of students.
Sarzosa and Urzúa (2015) used a structural model through a longitudinal research with young
people to estimate the effects of bullying based on the identification of latent abilities. The
authors find that non-cognitive,4 as opposed to cognitive, abilities significantly reduce the
chances of bullying, or cyberbullying during high school. The structural model allowed us to
estimate the mean effect of treatment (ATE) with children who practice bullying and are
bullied at age 15 and various outcomes measured at age 18. The effect is damaging for both
groups and the damage differences occur because of how cognitive and non-cognitive
abilities attenuate or aggravate the consequences. For them, the development of non-
cognitive skills is fundamental in any policy to combat bullying.
Heckman et al. (2006) used data from a representative sample of young Americans aged 14–
21 from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth in 1979 to determine that non-cognitive
skills are at least as important as cognitive abilities5 when explaining some social
performances throughout life. For example, non-cognitive skills appear to have a strong
influence on decision-making about school choices, work choices, and profession. In
addition, such skills are important in explaining the chance of someone engaging in risky
behavior.
For Brown (2004) the period of adolescence is very vulnerable to social pressure and young
people seek to be part of a group and desire popularity. According to Bursztyn and Jensen
(2015) adolescents may be more likely to give in to such pressure and engage in behaviors
that may have long-term effects. The authors analyzed a computer learning program, used in
more than 100 predominantly American schools through natural and field experiments. For
the authors, when the effort is observable to their peers, students can avoid social sanctions
according to the norms in force. At the first moment of the experiment, the individual results
were secret, but after a period the program started to generate public rankings and this led to
the introduction of the ranking leading to a decline of 24% in performance. Classes with
“honor classes” have an inverse effect, that is, when the rule is to have good grades, being in
the ranking increases the popularity, encouraging the effort, since when the norm is to be a
normal student and to have average grades the efforts are not to stand out.
Most of the studies claim that bullying leads to poor academic performance6 and lower
incomes after school completion (Le et al., 2005, Kosciw et al., 2013, Ponzo, 2013, Kibriya
et al., 2015). According to Boulton and Underwood (1992) some aspects that may explain
these results of worst outcomes in terms of academic success are the following: bullying
victims have a higher tendency to report unhappiness and loneliness at school, as well as
reporting having fewer close friends. In addition, another study done by Kumpulainen et al.
(2001), Fekkes et al. (2006) showed that victims of bullying are more likely to develop new
psychosomatic and psychosocial problems compared to children who were not bullied,
therefore difficult time to deal with loneliness, anxiety and depression, which can be related
to academic performance with the expected struggles students might have when facing such
challenges.
The theme is very relevant for national and international literature. Quantitative evidence of
this problem in the context of developing countries has been scarce and the causal direction
remains unclear. Our study aims to fill this gap in the literature. We use a rich dataset from
Joaquim Nabuco Foundation that allows us to identify the children who suffered bullying and
be the first study that estimate the causal impact of bullying in Brazil. In this case, a
randomized control trial would be ideal for the investigation, however it would be unethical
to have a child being put in this situation. Therefore, it is challenging to draw causal
inferences about the relationship between bullying and school performance.
Besides concerns regarding the over selection and endogeneity bias, students’ performance
might also get affected by peer effect environment both inside and outside school. According
to Kibriya et al. (2015) it is possible that a student has a lower academic performance because
of being a victim of bullying, or the likelihood of a student being bullied is higher due to
worst academic performance itself. Ponzo (2013) attempted to solve the reverse causality
problem by employing a non-parametric method, in the case, the author used Propensity
Score Matching. Using only a linear regression analysis may underestimate or overestimate
the effect of bullying. Hence, we decided to employ the Propensity Score Matching to reduce
selection bias and estimate the average effect of bullying that will be described in detail in the
next sections.
Bullying is no longer considered as a normal rite of passage, but a primary public health
problem, which is known to pose serious long-term impacts in schools (Swartz, 2016). Some
children and youths are victims of bullying in schools, and they are bullied through different
electronic means (Swartz, 2016). It is well established that bullying among children and
youths
lead to different physical symptoms such as headache and sleep disturbances. Bullying in
schools
also leads to anxiety, depression, and substance use, especially among youths Menesini &
Salmivalli, (2017). Similarly, perpetrators experience long-term consequences such as higher
risks for depression and can engage in activities, such as vandalism and theft (Swartz, 2016).
Bullying has been witnessed in some of the Cameroon schools. Elamé (2013) explained that
in
Cameroon, school children experienced different types of bullying, such as physical bullying,
which has been an intercultural challenge. Bullying in Cameroon is attributed to intercultural
education, and the majority of immigrants are the most affected population.
This chapter throws more light on the definition of bullying, the types of bullying which
include physical, verbal, social, and cyberbullying, and the incidence/prevalence of bullying.
The
literature in this section was reviewed on bullying and school environment, bullying and
academic performance, and bullying, and mental health.

According to Durdle (2008), bullying has emerged across studies in Europe and later
Australia, where it is perceived to be much noted as a global problem. According to
Arseneaut et
al. (2006), the victim of bullying is a risk factor for poor academic performance and mostly in
elementary and middle age schools. Based on the 2009 report, it is known that 90% of
students
have been bullied, and their grades dropped (National Center for Education Statistics 2009).
A previous literature review by Veentra et al. (2004) noted that bullying and victimization are
common in elementary and secondary schools worldwide. The estimated rates of bullying
and
victimization range from 15% to 25% in Australia (Rigby & Slee, 1991; Kliepera &
Gasteiger
Kliwpera, 1996), England (Whitney & Smirth, 1993; Wolke, Woods, Stanford, & Schulz,
2001),
Finland (Kumpulainen et al., 1998; Kumpulainen & Rasanen, 2000), Germany (Wolke et al.,
2001), Norway (Olweus, 1978,1993b), and the United States (Nansel et al., 2001, p.672).
Bullying is the act of intentionally harming someone, verbally, psychologically, or
physically. Bullying is often repeated over time and involves an imbalance of power. The acts
of
bullying include hitting, pushing, or unwelcome physical contact, teasing and name-calling,
reiterated omission of an individual from games and activities, sending threatening or
meanspirited messages in the form of text, chat or voicemails, and spreading of deleterious
rumors
(Olweus, 2005).
It could be a threat or physical use of force aiming at an individual, another person, or a
specific group, which can result in injury, death, physical damage, and or mental disorder.
Bullying is also a state of discomfort that occurs in many parts of the world today (Bonke,
2005).
Olweus (2001) defines bullying as a subcategory of inter-personal aggression characterized
by
intentionality, repetition, and an imbalance of power with abuse of power being the primary
distinction between bullying and other forms of aggression. Bullying usually takes several
forms,
from direct physical harm (physical bullying) to verbal taunts and threats (verbal bullying); to
exclusion, humiliation, and rumor-spreading (relational or social bullying); to electronic
harassment using text, emails, or online medium (cyberbullying). Although physical and
cyberbullying is often of greatest concern, social and verbal bullying is the most common
form
experienced by students (Vaillancourt, 2010). Espelage (2004) sees bullying as an ecological
phenomenon that is established and perpetuated over time as a result of the complex interplay
between the individual child, family, peer group, community, and culture. Bullying is usually
inherited by some individuals from their parents to achieve some goals forcefully (Mitchel,
2015)
“Bullies are often people who have been bullied or abused themselves.Sometimes they are
experiencing life situations they cannot cope with, that leave themfeeling helpless and out of
control.” (TktTuder, 2000). This kind of people are frustratedand stressed as well, because
this feeling of anxiety provokes them to bully or hurtothers to release the frustration that they
feel. Also people who are bully have such bigpride which makes them boastful and careless
towards others.
“Bullies can suffer long-term effects of bullying if their behaviour is notaddressed.
Compelling research confirms that bullies are twice as likely as their peersto have criminal
convictions and four times more likely to be multiple offenders.” (Abel,2010). Sometimes a
bully can actually hate the way they treat their victims butsomehow feel justified in doing so
since they are abused by others as well. This feelingtends to override the feeling of empathy
which makes for a psychological mess for thebully. Feeling conflicted about their behaviour
is also a source of stress that makes themwant to bully more. If a bully is not stopped and
treated then the chance of themstopping and becoming a different and healthier person is very
slim and their behaviourwill continue into adulthood, affecting the type of life they
lead.According to a site Theravive.com,“Many victims need counselling to come togrips with
the bullying and to help rebuild their lives as bullying can lead to depression
panic attacks, and physical ailments such as ulcers”. Children who are bullied oftensuffer
academically due to the fact that they fear going to school where the source oftheir stress
resides. Some children are so affected by bullying that they choose not tofurther their
education due to fear of having to face bullying in other atmospheres suchas college. Many
people who are bullied are so hurt by the cruel treatment that theycontemplate suicide and
some actually attempt and succeed in taking their own lives.“There is often no end to
bullying for victims. Devastating effects of bullying is thepattern it creates in victims’ minds
and personalities that can last their whole life.”(Abel,2010).
Harlow and Roberts (2010) found that bullying is predicted by the lack of the same protective
factors as substance abuse. They also found that interventions that increase protective factors,
such as impulse control and attachment to family, also reduce bullying victimization.
Smokowski and Kopasz (2005) reviewed the literature on bullying and interventions and
concluded, “Bullying is a serious threat not only to those involved, but also to the entire
school environment…” They also found that, “Bullying creates short- and long-term
consequences for both the victim and the bully. Victims may suffer from low self-esteem,
loneliness, depression, anxiety, absenteeism, and academic difficulties.”
Faith, Kenya and Malcom (2008) discuss the long-term negative effects of peer victimization,
i.e. bullying. Bullying in elementary school is associated with a variety of negative outcomes.
The authors discuss the potential of early interventions for reducing mental health issues and
alcohol abuse in adults.
Gronna and Selvin (1999) analyzed achievement scores from 46 schools and found that after
controlling for student characteristics, that school safety was significantly related to math and
reading standard scores among eighth graders.
Vreeman and Carroll (2007) reviewed outcome studies from several types of bullying
prevention programs. They found that programs using the “whole-school” approach and
mentoring programs had the greatest impact of bullying.
SENATE BILL 2677 (MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO. 2011) (Bullying)
Concepts and Experiences of Bullying in the Elementary Level by Catherine O. Espero and
Mary Grace DP. Espinosa
(http://journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/ali/article/viewFile/1765/1681)
Fighting bullying in schools By Katherine Evangelista (INQUIRER.net)

Not too long ago bullying behaviors by adolescents and their peers were
viewed as a nonnal part of being a teenager. The common viewpoint that kids
can be cruel has been accepted by society and as a normal part of growing up by
both boys and girls alike. It is very rare that an individual doesn't know,
remember, or perhaps was a victim of bullying themselves sometime during their
childhood and adolescence. According to bullying researcher, John Hoover found
in his 1992 study that 14 percent of all students in rural Midwestern USA had
been moderately to severely traumatize by a bully at some point in their school
career. (Hoover, 2000) It hasn't been until the latest violent and fatal high school
shootings in American society that local communities, school administrators,
teachers, parents, and students have begun to take a zero tolerance policy and
attitude towards bullies and bullying behaviors. Even though school wide
programs have been enacted, bullying behaviors are still prominent within our
schools and unfortunately the numbers of incidences of school violence and
shootings have increased.

In 2014, the Centers for Disease Control and Department of Education (Stopbullying.gov,
2021a) released the first federal definition of bullying. The definition includes three core
elements:

unwanted aggressive behavior

observed or perceived power imbalance
repetition or high likelihood of repetition of bullying behaviors.
Sampson (2009) proves that there are 2 core factors of bullying: detrimental actions, which
constantly repeat, and an imbalance of power between the bully and the victim.

Menesini and Salmivalli (2017) allocate 3 reference points to consider aggressive behaviour
as bullying: (1) repetition, (2) intentionality and (3) an imbalance of power.

Papanikolaou, Chatzikosma, and Kleio (2011) believe that it is the lack of parent’s
involvement in educational process of their children that cause bullying in school. In occurs,
when parents punish their children without justification, or when they do not apply sanctions
even when children deserve punishment.

Colino et al., (2021) stress that bullying can exist in many forms: it can be bodily (strikes,
attacks); oral (threatening, giving nicknames); or mental (ignoring, telling stories, etc).
Besides, cyberbulling (bullying through social networks or messengers) is also widerspread
and traumatic for the child.

Al-Ali and Shattnawi (2018) state that this phenomenon negatively affects both the victim
and the bully. Victims complaine of a huge number of psychosomatic diseases connected
with bullying: depression; sleep problems; nightmares; headache, etc. Besides, there are
suicidal tendencies both in behavior of victims and bullies.
In order to overcome this negative phenomenon Divecha (2019) proposes to: build positive
school climate, apply social and emotional learning, take into account individual differences
between children, involve parents.
Rosenkrantz (2021), in her turn, suggests to: diagnose the problem, create an intervention
plan, encourage peer support, model proper behavior.
The lecturers of Lesley University (2016) propose the following ways to combat bullying in
educational institutions: to teach students kindness and empathy; create for them
opportunities for connection; identify “gateway behaviors”; use the arts to create context;
minimize “concentric circles” in schools; participate in simulations.

Research into bullying began in the 1970s with a small number of seminal
articles. Since that time researchers have concentrated on determining the actions that
constitute bullying (Arora, 1996; Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz, & Kaukiainen, 1992; Mynard,
Lawrence, & Joseph, 2000); the characteristics of both children who bully and their
victims (Bosworth, Espelage, & Simon, 1999; Coie, Dodge, Terry, & Wright, 1991;
Olweus, 1980; Perry, Williard, & Perry, 1990; Schwartz, Dodge, & Coie, 1993); the
development of effective intervention and prevention strategies (Hawker & Boulton,
2000; J. D. Smith et al., 2004); and the effects of being bullied (Ambert, 1994; Mynard,
Joseph, et al., 2000; Roland, 2000) As has been stated above, no research has been done
to determine the latent, unseen, processes and mechanisms at play when bullying affects
children (Ladd & Troop Gordon, 2005; Morrison, 2006; Rigby, 2002b; Rivers et al.,
2007).

One of the issues with Olweus’ (1994) definition is that it does not take into
account critical incidents that elicit ongoing fear in those victimized, who worry that the
unwanted aggression will reoccur. Olweus’ definition also does not acknowledge that
the bullying student’s perception of the victimized youth is central to establishing a
power imbalance. For example, while educators may not perceive students of equal
size and physical strength as having an asymmetrical power relationship, it is possible
that the victimized students feel unable to defend themselves because of differences in

social status. Having a comprehensive definition is important for establishing the true
prevalence of bullying and victimization (Vaillancourt et al., 2008) and for identifying the
developmental course, predictors, and outcomes of bullying. Prevention science is
predicated on a foundation of sound scholarship that includes a valid assessment of the
phenomenon so that insight into processes and mechanisms can be identified, with the
ultimate goal of ameliorating the problem.
In 2018, the Ontario Ministry of Education (the Ministry) authored the following
definition of bullying, which takes into account the aforementioned nuances and
ambiguities. Specifically, the Ontario Ministry of Education defines bullying as:
“…typically, a form of repeated and aggressive behaviour directed
at an individual or individuals that is intended to cause (or should be
known to cause) fear and distress and/or harm to another person’s body,
feelings, self-esteem, or reputation. Bullying occurs in a context where
there is a real or perceived power imbalance.”
Vaillancourt (2018) argued that the Ontario Ministry of Education’s bullying
definition is the best in the world. It allows for the inclusion of critical incidents; it
includes intentionality and perceived power imbalance; and it captures the types of
harm bullying causes its targets, along with the various forms bullying takes.
Specifically, the Ministry states that bullying can be physical (e.g., hitting, shoving,
stealing, or damaging property), verbal (e.g., name-calling, mocking, or making sexist,
racist, or homophobic comments), social (e.g., excluding others from a group or
spreading gossip or rumours about them), written (e.g., writing notes or signs that are
hurtful or insulting), and electronic, which is also known as cyber-bullying (e.g.,

spreading rumours and hurtful comments by email and text message and on social
media sites).
It is common for cyber-bullying to be treated as a distinct form of bullying in the
scientific literature, the media, and in education. However, studies using sophisticated
analytic techniques to assess the overlap and uniqueness of the various forms of
bullying suggest that there is substantial commonality. All forms of bullying overlap and
co-occur, are predicted by similar factors, and are associated with comparable
outcomes. Accordingly, the current state of knowledge indicates that the extent of
difficult outcomes experienced by children who are bullied is linked to the frequency and
severity of the abuse, rather than the type of abuse (e.g., Bradshaw et al., 2013;
Haltigan & Vaillancourt, 2018; Nylund et al., 2007).

Al-Raqqa et al; (2017) assessed a study that sought to examine the effect of school bullying
on students' academic progress from the viewpoint of instructors. The results of a study on
students in Jordanian schools showed that bullies and their victims both had an impact on
kids' academic performance.
Michela Ponza (2013) undertakes a study discusses the reasons why bullying happens in
school and how it affects academic performance. The study involved Italian students in
grades 4 and 8, and the empirical results point to the fact that being bullied at school
significantly lowers a student's academic performance in both grade levels.
Robin M. et al; (2013) conducted research and examines the relationship bullying incidents
involving children and teenagers. The study's findings indicated that bullying victims have
the most detrimental scores in almost all areas of life psychological health, physical health,
and academic performance.
Maqsood Ahmad et al; (2012) conducted a study on the students of primary schools in Sindh.
The objective of the study was to determine how bullying affected children'
academicperformance. The finding suggests that the rate of bullying is comparatively higher
in primary school than in other districts of Sindh.
Desarro (2014) examines a study on the immediate and long-term consequences of
bullying on studies. According to the research, there is no gender difference in bullying, and
young kids are more likely to experience bullying's short-term effects. In the long run,
nevertheless, the disparities that exist now vanish.
Oliveira et al; (2017) investigated a study on the students of public schools in the city
of Recife, Pernambuco which seeks to measure the math score of students. The findings
suggested that bullying harms mathematics and that the victim can deal with bullying with
the help of social and emotional skills.
Nadine block (2014) investigated a study that aims to understand how bullying
impacts a student's ability to succeed academically so that the teachers can better help and
support the students who are being bully-victims. The study shows that the students who
are being bullied are afraid of coming to school, therefore, absenteeism will increase, in this
way they are unable to concentrate on their academics and their success is hindered.
Skrzypiec (2008) Studies on the repercussions of bullying on individuals' academic
performance and on their mental health status also focused on their social and emotional
well-being. The result analyses show that the victims report very serious difficulty in paying
attention and concentrating in class because of fear associated with bullying.

Bullying affects a student’s academic achievement in various ways (Ammermueller,2012).

Bullying behaviors can be classified as either direct (such as teasing, threatening, hitting,or
stealing) or indirect (such as rumor spreading or social isolation). Bullying is any
behaviorthat is initiated by one or more students against a victim or victims that causes
physical orpsychological intimidation. This Bullying behavior can contribute a negative
effect to victims ora student whether emotional, social, or academic in times of
school.Bullying leads to numerous physical and psychological long-term and short-term
effects.A victim can grow up to have numerous health problems such as anxiety, headaches,
nausea,ulcers, insomnia, kidney complaints, skin rashes, irritable bowel syndrome, raised
bloodpressure, loss of confidence, bursting into tears, suicide (Mega Essays, 2020). There
arehundreds of different things bullies can do to victims. They can physically and mentally
scarthem by their actions. They can physically hurt their victims by kicking, hitting, pitting,
etc.They can verbally hurt their victims by mocking, taunting and teasing them, or they
canindirectly bully their victim. This category can be broken down further still into
intimidation andsocial alienation. Physical bullying also occurs when the bully physically
harms something orsteals.

According to Rachel Pomerance Berl (2013), ever since, mistreatment in middle school has
been arite passage. Only recently did the people saw the wrongness of it. Many organizations
and group of peoplehad campaigns against bullying. Anti-bullying campaigns kicked into
high gear in recent years amid highprofile cases, Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover of
Massachusetts and Ty Field-Smalley of Utah, two 11 year oldswho committed suicide after
enduring relentless bullying by their peers. According to the National CrimeVictimization
Survey from 2005 to 2011, 28% of ages are 12 to 18 are being bullied and 9% are victims
ofcyber-bullying. In the survey it was observed that the rates haven’t increased but haven’t
dropped either.Deborah Temkin, bullying prevention manager for the RFK Speak Truth to
Power Program, said "It tells usthat perhaps our efforts aren't strong enough." Temkin
dismissed a recent study released in the Journal ofCriminology that showed their anti-
bullying efforts are not working. She said that schools must find thespecific approach that
works for them which requires surveying their students and analyzing the schoolenvironment
to apply a thoughtful strategy. There are things that might work for some schools but might
not for some.
Bullying incidences peak in middle school, says Robin Young, program manager for the
NationalCrime Prevention Council. These are the years when kids start to recognize each
other’s differences.Cliques and social caste system take shape and everybody wants to fit in.
In that context, bullying canresult from jockeying for social status. However, it was more
than just that. The one doing the bullying maybe getting bullied by someone else. And the
person he bullies might bully someone else it will just be acycle of abuse. This can greatly
affect a child’s growth because bullies can develop aggressive behaviorwhile children who
are being bullied will be living with anxiety and depression.According to US Rep. Mike
Honda (2013), he had experienced bullying himself when he returnedto California. Bullying
affected his self-esteem and ability to succeed in school but he overcame his
bullyingexperience through his parents’ support. He said that teachers and professionals who
work with students

need to be equipped with knowledge and training for addressing bullying. They should know
how to handlecases of bullying. However, it is not only the responsibilities of the educators
but it is also the responsibilityof each of us. We should change the society’s attitude toward
bullying, we should learn to understand andaccept our differences — which most people use
as basis of bullying. According to the American Academyof Pediatrics, many young people
suffered anxiety, depression, embarrassment and isolation, some eventook their own lives.

Preventing bullying is a community effort. Whenever we see something wrong or harmful,

weshould not just stand by and watch it happen.
We should stand up and speak out. It is not only theresponsibility of the government; parents,
teachers, students, activists and community members must joinforces to effectively change
our attitude towards bullying.

need to be equipped with knowledge and training for addressing bullying. They should know
how to handlecases of bullying. However, it is not only the responsibilities of the educators
but it is also the responsibilityof each of us. We should change the society’s attitude toward
bullying, we should learn to understand andaccept our differences — which most people use
as basis of bullying. According to the American Academyof Pediatrics, many young people
suffered anxiety, depression, embarrassment and isolation, some eventook their own lives.
Preventing bullying is a community effort. Whenever we see something wrong or harmful,
weshould not just stand by and watch it happen. We should stand up and speak out. It is not
only theresponsibility of the government; parents, teachers, students, activists and community
members must joinforces to effectively change our attitude towards bullying.According to the
article of Marc A. Brachett and Susan E. Rivers (2014), the current anti-bullyingprograms are
not working. The campaigns are more focused on addressing the system of bullying; not
theunderlying causes which likely include a lack of emotional intelligence. Emotional
intelligence needs to be acentral component. What children need is an education in emotional
intelligence that can help preventchildren from hurting their peers and help targets of bullying
manage their fear and anxiety. The results ofthis kind of education will be having a better
school, happier and effective educators and students and adecline in bullying. However,
adults need training, too. They can’t teach their children or students if theydon’t know
anything about it. A teacher can’t teach math if she didn’t know anything about
algebra,geometry, calculus, etc., and same goes with teaching emotional intelligence.

There is a great deal of current research on bullying (Wang & Iannotti, 2012). Among a few
others, it is the ‘topic de jour’ in education. However, this did not minimize the importance of
helping children and making every effort to mitigate, even eradicate bullying in schools.
Bullying and other forms of harassment hurt students, hinder their academic/socio-emotional
progress, affect school climate and are detrimental to the larger social order as a whole.
Bullying
has been recognized as a major health concern and has resulted in several very serious
consequences. I sought to assist in this noble effort to address this issue by extending research

on the thoughts, perceptions and beliefs of school administrators, who are primary players in
leading the endeavor to address this problem.
The following chapter explored bullying, first from a historical perspective and then
described the types of bullying, definitions, types of victims and other related information.
Next,
I looked at suggested causes of student aggression and strategies for mitigating bullying
incidents. Furthermore, I undertook a review of research and information of federal
guidelines,
state bullying laws and regulations and state department of education model policy
development.
Lastly, the final section I discussed the tenets of theoretical frameworks used in my study to
help
understand issues related to administrators’ self-efficacy and motivation. Interspersed in my
discussion of this work, I integrated my own reflections drawn from my personal and
professional experiences. This information laid a foundation for my study of middle-school
administrators and their perceptions, values, beliefs and abilities relative to addressing
bullying
in their schools.
This chapter presents a literature review about concepts and perspectives relevant
to bullying in schools. Bullying is considered a pervasive social problem affecting
schools and students, as well as often being associated with tragic outcomes such as
suicide (Jimerson et al., 2010; Pepler & Craig, 2008; Smith, Pepler, & Rigby, 2004). This
is considered pervasive because bullying has become part of school culture; meaning, one
can expect that in any school environment, there will always be students who are getting
bullied in one way or another. This problem can be mild, such as in teasing an individual
for being somewhat different than the others, or the problem can more severe wherein the
victim is experiencing marginalization or even physical assault from others.
Different stakeholder groups have been pressuring schools to address the problem
of bullying, with many of them responding by means of a broad range of anti-bullying
programs (Garandeau, Poskiparta, & Salmivalli, 2014; Jones & Augustine, 2015; Lee,
Kim, & Kim, 2015). However, in spite of the different approaches and rates of adoptions
of various anti-bullying programs, there does not seem to be any noteworthy decline in
the incidence of bullying in schools, and cyberbullying has been on the rise (Borgwald &
Theixos, 2013; Carter & Wilson, 2015; Davison & Stein, 2014; Finkelhor, Turner,
Ormrod, & Hamby, 2010; Korenis & Billick, 2014). This lack of improvement suggests
schools are not effective in their efforts to curb bullying. There could be a problem in
implementation, especially in schools where funding issues could interfere with
the administration’s enthusiasm for solving this issue.
According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) bullying is defined as unwanted
aggressive behavior by other young learners.
or perceived power imbalance, and is repeated multiple times (CDC, 2019). Nested within the
broad category of bullying are four primary subtypes: physical, verbal, relational, and cyber.
Physical bullying is a direct form of bullying that involves physical aggression, such as
hitting,
kicking, pushing, and shoving (Gladden, Vivolo-Kantor, Hamburger, & Lumpkin, 2014).
Verbal
bullying, another direct form of bullying, though not physically aggressive, typically involves
name-calling, teasing, and threatening (Gladden et al., 2014). In contrast, relational bullying
refers to indirect nonphysical aggression, such as social exclusion, social rejection, and rumor
The impetus for the modern study of bullying is commonly attributed to Dan
Olweus’ seminal Scandinavian-based research published in 1973 and later introduced to
the United States as a book titled Aggression in the Schools: Bullies and Whipping Boys
(Smith, 2004). However, the serious nature of bullying was not recognized outside of the
research field until the early 1980s, when the Ministry of Education in Norway initiated a
national anti-bullying campaign promoting bullying prevention programs in all schools.
The campaign followed three adolescent suicides connected to severe cases of school
bullying (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). From that point forward, research on bullying
spread from Scandinavia to countries around the world (e.g., Australia: Rigby & Slee,
1993; Finland: Salmivalli, Lagerspetz, Björkqvist, Österman, & Kaukiainen, 1996;
Greece: Andreou, 2004; Japan: Kanetsuna, Smith, & Morita, 2006; Pakistan: Shujja &
Atta, 2011; Singapore: Kwan & Skoric, 2013; Sweden: Nilsson, Gustafsson, & Svedin,
2012). In 2010, the Handbook of Bullying in Schools: An International Perspective was
published, a testament to over 30 years of theoretical, empirical, and practical findings
from leading researchers around the world.

Similar to the series of events in Norway, research on bullying in U.S. schools did
not gain momentum until the mid-1990s when public concern was fueled by national
media coverage of bullying. This included alarming reports that perpetrators of school
shootings had been bullied by their peers. The spotlight on bullying led many states to
enact anti-bullying laws and to consider implementation of bullying prevention programs
(Limber & Small, 2003). The lag in U.S. attention to bullying is a major reason for the
lack of a U.S. presence in earlier bullying research and the need for more research on
bullying among U.S. children and adolescents.
Despite a growing body of bullying research, prevalence estimations have been
and continue to be challenging to determine due to variations in how bullying has been
defined and measured over time. A frequently cited study has been that of Nansel et al.
(2001), consisting of a nationally representative sample of U.S. students in Grades 6 to
10. Results showed that approximately 30% of students reported moderate to frequent
involvement in bullying as either a bully (13%), victim (11%), or bully-victim (6%). In
2004, estimations of bullying involvement across 25 countries, ranged from 9% in
Sweden to 54% in Lithuania (Nansel et al., 2004). The authors speculated that
discrepancies in international prevalence rates could be attributed to sociocultural
variables which differentially reinforce or inhibit bullying behaviors across countries.
Cook, Williams, Guerra, and Kim (2010) conducted a cross-national meta-analysis to
examine variability in prevalence rates for children and adolescents ages 3 to 18.
Prevalence rates for the United States were higher in this study: bullies (17.9%), victims
(21.5%), and bully-victims (7.7%). This may have been a result of having younger
participants who tend to report higher rates or due to variations in methodology. Cook et
al. found that prevalence rates across countries varied by the informant used (e.g., teacher
or peer) and time referent period (e.g., past week or past year). Cook et al. concluded that
more research is needed before variations in national prevalence rates can be attributed to
differences in culture or in methodology.

LOCAL LITERATURE