Identifying Factors Leading To Bullying In Public Education Schools And Preventive And Therapeutic Alternatives

Introduction

A safe learning environment is essential for students of all ages. Without it they are unable to focus on learning the skills needed for a successful education and future (Domitrovich et al., 2017). When violence is part of the educational setting, all students are affected in some way. Our students face allot of issues in school which is could effective their outcome and one of the most problem is One of the most bad behaviour has spread (bulling), bullying that impacts girls and boys inside and outside of school at both primary and secondary school age and is recognized as a social problem both by academic researchers and in the ‘real world’ by the media and by anti-bullying charities (Olweus & Limber, 2010). Although bullying is a widely used concept there is no universal definition. Research on bullying has been conducted over the past four decades looking at various aspects from prevalence and severity to coping strategies and effectiveness of interventions. If you are facing challenges in this area, seeking education dissertation help can provide valuable insights and guidance.

Studies suggest that, it is only minority people who are involved in bullying. Moreover, studies by Zablotsky et al., 2014) while citing Sutton et al. (1999) statistics on bullying, indicate that between 10% and 20% of students in England had been bullied six months prior to the survey. Additionally, Oliver & Candappa, (2003), on their study “Tackling bullying”, the study revealed a ‘low level’ of bullying in schools. However, Barlett & Coyne (2014), argued that, the prevalence of bullying is influenced by several factors such as its time span examined and its definition. However, these outcomes were contradicted by other studies by Englander (2017) who suggest that bullying and other new form of bullying in schools are on increase not just an elementary school but also in colleges and high School. The study also associates these increases to the current increase in suicide activities in schools. With the increased bullying rates, most students adopt to the use of drugs and unfortunately, pupils in the middle school and now beginning to abuse drugs. This reveal a very serious problem in Elementary schools. This brings the question of the safety of children in school, their health and emotions.

To start with, the prevalent bullying definition focus majorly on acts which are aggressive such as psychological. Additionally, it involves three dimensions definition which includes being referred to as a repeated, intentional and a clear imbalance of power where the victim possesses less power compared to the bully. This is a definition by Olweus 1993) though other scholars like Cowie and Jennifer (2008) also perceived bullying as defined in the three dimensions. Studies have however, indicated that, bullying lacks an internationally recognized single definition, hence remaining an ‘elusive’ concept (Cowie and Jennifer 2008; Chan 2009). On the other hand, Olweus, (1993) definition has been criticized by some scholars such as Walton (2005) who question how many times/repetitions are required to determine whether bullying has occurred. Similarly, Lee (2006), also asks whether bullying is lesser if it occurs just once. Cullingford and Brown (1995) also criticize the definition by suggesting that individual can be hurt by inadvertent remarks as well as attempts to bully. However, Ofsted (2003) and Lee (2006) suggest that, pupils can escape taking responsibility for bullying by saying, that, they did not mean to bully their fellow and that they were only joking. This is an indication that, from this confusion, bullying is a difficulty is a difficulty subject to handle especially in schools since there are still debate as indicated above and as well, there is not ideal definition of the extent of bullying. However, the challenge arises since, studies suggest that, bullying is witnessed in 25% primary schools in Britain and 10% secondary schools. While statistics indicate that about half of the children in the world were exposed at least once to bullying during the school stage, and that 10% of them are subjected to a type of violent pressure on a regular basis (O'Moore, 2017).

Surveys in Saudi Arabia, according to the National Committee for Childhood, indicate that (57.1 percent) of boys and (42.9 percent) of girls suffer from bullying in schools which is a widespread phenomenon among young people and it is used to describe interpersonal relationships characterized by an imbalance of power. In this relationship often show aggressive (Alzahrani, 2012). Moreover, the study suggests that, behaviour and intentional "harm doing" repeated over time. The prevalence of bullying among youth has been reported to vary widely among countries (5.1%-41.4%) and this behaviour seems generally higher among student boys than girls. Several school interventions have been developed to reduce bullying, but reported inconsistent results possibly related to limitations in the study design or to other methodological shortcomings. However, other studies have demonstrated that, teachers who should intervene to prevent bullying sometimes are not concerned with reinforcing desirable behaviour. They rather punish disruptive behaviour, therefore putting less impact to the bullying behaviour. For instance, the study indicates that, once teachers observe behaviour which are aggressive, they respond promptly with progressive punishments and shaming which is not effective way of contributing to behaviour change. This therefore makes the intervention made by schools to prevent aggressive behaviour questionable.

Zhang at al., (2019) suggested that, behaviours associated with bullying are extensive in Western countries; however, there is no national data which is available regarding this evidence in contemporary China. The outcome of the study indicated that 6.3% of children reported having been bullied in the last 3 months, while 2.5% of children admitted to bullying other students, and 2.2% said they were bullied and bullied others in that same time frame. Besides, more boys than girls reported bullying others and being victims of bullying. Perpetrating and being a victim of bullying are associated with poorer psychosocial adjustment, although different patterns are observed among bullies, those bullied, and those who bully others and have been bullied. Health care professionals should be sensitive to bullying behaviours when identifying students with psychosocial maladjustment. Moreover, programs designed to prevent and intervene in school bullying would benefit from a holistic approach. Current studies have informed our understanding of the prevalence and associated risk factors of bullying behaviours among school-aged children in contemporary China in several ways. For instance, to deal with bullying as per Zhang at al., (2019) it is significant to develop holistic prevention programs, employ health care professionals who sensitive to bullying issues when school-aged children display psychosocial problems and substance use and develop intervention programs targeting for elementary and junior middle school students. This framework gives some ways which can be of great importance while dealing with both short- and long-term bullying effects.

In a study by Mari (2019) suggested that, involvement of adolescent in bullying is linked to both mental health and sleep problems although the nature of this association is still unclear today. Moreover, it’s linked to low academic outcomes due to little attention. Thus, this study’s objective was to (a) estimate whether being involved in bullying as a bully, victim, or bully-victim is linked to greater mental and sleep problem. Moreover, the study was aimed at estimating the potential mediating impact of mental and sleep health problems on the link between academic outcome and bullying. In addition, a study conducted in 2012 in a population-based in Norway, Hordaland, and which surveyed 10,220 adolescents. The study also revealed that, all types on bulling’ involvement had higher rates of mental health problems compared to adolescents who were never involved in bullying. However, the victims had anxiety and depression symptoms and, bullies’ higher rates of conduct problems. On the other hand, individual bully-victim categories had a significantly shorter sleep duration, increased insomnia prevalence and lower grade point average (GPA) as compared with individual who were never involved in any bullying activity. However, the study did not reveal any significant relation between bullying involvement and school absence. Furthermore, involvement in bullying and GPA indicated complete mediation for bully-victim and bullies. The study also revealed partial mediation for victims through sleep duration, conduct problems, and symptoms of depression and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The study therefore concluded that, bullying was strongly associated with sleep and mental health disorders, in addition to decreased academic outcome. This finding reveals the significance of addressing bullying involvement especially in childhood and other development stages (Mari,2019). Hysing et al., (2019) also support this research by claiming that, bullying has been identified to have both short- and long-term effects including the bullies themselves. Some of the effects includes sleep and psychological effects as per the study. Continue your journey with our comprehensive guide to Gender Gap in Town Council Survey.

In another study by Atik & Güneri, (2013), which was aimed at exploring the roles of individual factors such as; gender, self-esteem, age, locus of control, as well as loneliness; parenting style, and academic achievement among students who have been discriminated and either involved in bullying ( victims, bully/victims and bullies) and students who have never been involved in bullying. The study’s participants comprised of 742 middle school pupils of which 393 were girls and 349 were boys. The outcome of the study indicated that, with higher locus of control, increased age, lower strictness/supervision scores as well as being male increased the chances of being a bully. In contrast, a higher locus of control, low acceptance, higher loneliness score, increased chances of being a victim. Moreover, higher psychological autonomy, higher loneliness, lower strictness, lower acceptance/involvement as well as low academic achievement scores increased the chances of being a bully/victim. Moreover, Atik & Güneri (2013), suggested that, parental style variables play a major role in the involvement in bullying. Moreover, individual factor such as loneliness was more powerful predictor compared to other predictors in bullying and bully/victims especially from uninvolved students. Besides, gender and age as per Atik & Güneri (2013), were stronger predictors compared to other predictors in bullying. The outcome also suggested revealed an important information to school counsellors and psychologist concerning bullying behaviour. Additionally, the study gave insights which can assist in planning appropriate preventive strategies for dealing with students involved in bullying with knowledge that verbal bullying is the most prevalent, pupils may benefit from interventions like social skills, problem solving as well as interpersonal skills for them to develop better ways of interacting.

The increased prevalence among male students reveal that intervention and prevention programs requires to be gender sensitive. Additionally, social support is one of the protective factors in resisting victimization and bullying and which should be provided by peers or teachers to lonely and academically underachieving, because these learners are mostly the victimization targets. Similarly, students who have been involved in victimization should be encouraged to become involved in peer networks as per Holt & Espelage (2007). Lastly, the study reveals that, students who are involved in bullying viewed their parents to be less involved, loving, as well as less responsive. Such students also believed that, their parents provided less parental control, monitoring, and supervision. This suggests that parental efforts to provide a warm, supportive, as well as consistent home environment with adequate adult monitoring can help reduce bullying behaviour (Atik & Güneri, 2013).

A research conducted by Doumas & Midgett (2019), suggested that, educators play very critical role in prevention of bullying. The study was examining the views of the teacher on the extent and the ways in which they were most likely to intervene in bullying occurrence. The participants of the report comprised of 136 teachers from junior high schools in which 107 were females while 29 were males all from Finland. Their service years ranged from newly qualified to 20 years of experience. 70 teachers had previous training in the subject. The outcome of the study suggested that, generally, teachers were most inclined to discipline the bullies. This was followed by enlisting other adults, working with bullies, working with victims, and finally ignoring the incident. The study also suggested that, anti-bullying training was very crucial factor in explaining how teachers handled bullying. For instance, the teachers who had more than 20 years of experience revealed that they would work with the bully compared to teachers who had less years of service. This implied that, anti-bullying training was very crucial in handling bullying (Sairanen, 2019). Other studies suggest that, the most effective way of intervening bullying was via conducting survey to determine the extent of bullying, notifying teachers, students, school staff, parents as well as the community members about bullying behaviours and increasing supervision where bullying behaviour were likely to occurs (Englander, 2017).

On a stud by Zhang & Wang, (2019), which was aimed at examining the impact of an anti-bullying activity which uses conversational virtual agents on students’ attitudes toward bullying challenges. In the study, 89 fifth-grade students were assigned to one of three groups: (a) bully’s role agents (b) victim’s role agents and (c) teacher’s role agents. The study indicated that, the bully agent argued that, bullying behaviours was acceptable while on the other hand, the victim agent suggested that bullying behaviour was not accepted at all. Furthermore, the teacher agents taught on the types of bullying and their negative consequences. Later the participants completed an anti-bullying attitude test at pre- and post-test. The results of the test indicate that, the attitudes of students toward bullying problems had a more positive responses after the implementation which used the conversation-bot. also the outcome suggested that, agent’s role influenced students’ attitudes toward the anti-bully factor.

A study by Young (2019), suggested that, the challenges of bullying in schools especially in K-12 environments, was still a serious issue. It also revealed that, the relationship between practice and research is a key factor to successfully reducing bullying problems. Data-based model and theoretically driven approaches of bullying preventions are crucial in reducing bullying incident in schools.as per the article, anti-bullying programs requires to be designed to raise awareness concerning bullying, which would increase student’s bullying report by changing their attitudes toward bullying challenges. Concurrently, practical aspects like convenience, affordance, as well as user-friendliness are factors which should not be ignored while adopting anti-bullying programs. The study adopts a feasible approach to an easy-to-use method for anti-bullying in real-classroom settings. This program is very effective especially while an institution fails to have enough infrastructure for developing anti-bullying programs due to its huge demand to install. The research also reveals that, the use of conversation-bots might be successfully reduce bullying and change students’ attitudes (Young, 2019).

Stives et al., (2019) in a study which adopted qualitative data from 54 parents in a southeaster state and which explored the advice offered by parents to their children about bulling and bullying instances suggested that parents were fearful of their children becoming victim of bullying and reasons behind their fear. The finding of the study suggested that, the message given by parents on bullying occurrence were similar to those provided by schools as part of their bullying prevention efforts. However, misunderstandings about bullying and bullying responses among parents limit the effectiveness of the strategies they suggest for their children. Implications for bullying prevention programs and research. Stives et al., (2019) also provided a more detailed finding on more specific detail regarding how a parent advises their child to respond to bullying. The study revealed that, most parents suggest, that their children who are bystanders to bullying should intercede on behalf of the child who is being bullied. From the study’s outcome, it was also revealed that, parents are most likely to encourage their child to avoid bullying and report the bullying to an adult.

Cantone et al., (2015) found that bullying (and cyberbullying) is a widespread phenomenon among young people and it is used to describe interpersonal relationships characterized by an imbalance of power. In this relationship often show aggressive behaviour and intentional "harm doing" repeated over time. The prevalence of bullying among youth has been reported to vary widely among countries (5.1%-41.4%) and this behaviour seems generally higher among student boys than girls. Several school interventions have been developed to reduce bullying, but reported inconsistent results possibly related to limitations in the study design or to other methodological shortcomings they conclude that while there is evidence that programs aimed at reducing bullying can be effective in the short term, their long-term effectiveness has not been established and there are important differences in the results based on gender, age and socio-economic status of participants.

A study in 2009 by Alwwad whose aim was to identify the bullying issue in Saudi and its outcome suggested that he most type of bulling was the body bullying followed by psychological bullying. The study suggested an introduction of a national program to protect student by limit bullying at school, targeting for all member at school (head teacher, principle, administrative, teachers, students, parents).

Albugmi study in 2009 which surveyed 369 students in girls’ school 56% from student face bullying from other student in intermediate school, another study in 2014 which surveyed 12,757 students indicated how much student suffer from aggressive attitude. It also discovered that, more than half student had faced a bulling attitude however other study conducted by Alissa in 2011 revealed that nearly half of student faced a bullying one year before the research and after the completion of the study, he concluded that, nearly half of student had experienced bulling in secondary school.

As result of bulling spread in school environment the Saudi minster of education to study these issues and find way to handle it by

1. Launch the behaviour and attendance guide.
2. In 2003 Establish the student supervisor unit
3. Limit children harm in 2002
4. Establish (Rafq) program.
5. In 2003 project to overcome the children aggressive behaviour in primary age.
6. Run a training course for student and the school staff
7. Launch a child phone line for protection and support.
8. Disrupted a leaflet to make the family aware of the bulling
9. Training the student supervisor to discover the early cases of bullying
10. In 2004 make a partnership between the national committee for child hood and the (UNICEF)
11. IN 2011 established the national family safety program for bullying prevention
12. In 2014 they organize a national conference to prevent the bulling at school.

Above that the bulling problem not stop yet in the newspaper three incident has been occurred in three schools in different regions which is make or Saudi societies worried and upset student in September student died in Riyadh by strangle them in 2 of October 2019 student died intermediate school Jedah because bushing them and in November student has stabbed by knife

In 2019 a study by Alomrai discovered that, the reality of school bullying among primary school students was high (3.65). This led bullying, it came high. The absence of statistically significant differences for the reality of a problem Bullying among primary school students and methods of prevention and treatment are due to the variables "age, job title". And based on my findings the study recommended the activating the role of primary school teacher in developing the values of tolerance and democracy and rejecting differences and accepting other, by including them in academic programs and emphasizing them in the interaction relationships between members of the school community, and activating the role of councils. Parents exchange information between the family and the school, and enhance trust between the two sides, which helps reduce the bullying problem that hinders the process Educational.

The study of Sakran and Alwan (2016) which was aimed to identify the global construction of bullying as an integrative concept as well as the prevalence and justification for the bullies and the differences in their degree, which may be due to) the school stage, the educational average, Number of friends in one year, number of friends over one year, number of friends younger than one year, place of friendship, suggested that, 1 Bullying phenomenon is a one-dimensional phenomenon. 2 There are justifications for a phenomenon. Bullying, convinced by the bully. 3The highest prevalence of bullying in the intermediate stage, but not the highest degree.so this recent incident and recent research emerge us to study this problem.

The aim of research

1. To write a policy paper to know the factors leading to the negative bullying behaviours in public education schools and provide preventive and therapeutic alternatives to reduce these behaviours from children’s perspectives, and parents where bullying exists in their everyday experiences of school.
2. To provide recommendations that could contribute to getting rid of bullying in school and to find alternative program to limit these issues from around the world.

The research questions

1. What are the reasons that lead to bullying among students from the point of view student?
2. What are the ways to confront the school bullying among intermediate and high school students and how we can make a protection and treatment by using practical program to treat it?

The method

Using a qualitative method in my research because it very precise methods and procedures, all of which are associated with specific terminology and a range of principles arising from probability theory”. Additionally, Cohen et al., (2005, p. 501) explained the advantage of using quantitative methods: “Quantitative data analysis is a powerful research form, emanating in part from the positivist tradition. It is often associated with large scale research, but can also serve smaller scale investigations, with case studies, action research, correlation research and experiments”. Moreover, questionnaires can save time: ‘the greater the amount of information, the more economical of time it is to use a questionnaire’ (Wallace, 1998, p. 130). Wallace points out that conducting 60 ten-minute interviews will take at least 10 hours, not counting travel time. Under such circumstances, ‘use of a questionnaire may be the only sensible choice’ (Wallace, 1998, p. 130). In my view that is why the interpretive angle is important because you can get a more sophisticated understanding of the differences between the people that quantitative researchers put in to the same category and thus blur or erase those differences. Finding approaches that combine qualitative and quantitative strategies, will therefore enrich and provide theories and reasons, to why things are the way they are. Hence my approach to this study.

Johnson and Christensen (2012) point out that quantitative research rests on the assumption that ‘cognition and behaviour are highly predictable and explainable’, and that ‘most quantitative researchers try to identify cause and effect relationships that enable them to make probabilistic predictions and generalizations” (p. 33). The concepts of representativeness and generalization is core to the positivists’ approaches. These assumptions are not adopted in interpretivist research and indeed contradict the qualitative view that social behaviour and experience is very complex and is not easily amenable to the construction of ‘laws’ of behaviour. For this reason, and for the need to enable better understanding of the program under investigation, my study has not relied on the use of statistical approaches and used mainly descriptive statistics percentages.

(being) an activity that permeates all stages of a study’ and points out the types of problems researchers encounter in the course of their work, such as the difficulties met in trying to gather data on all the variables which it had been hoped to study. There is likely to be some data loss in one form or another and ‘data analysis must contend with that eventuality’.

Denscombe (2007, p. 284) urges caution in the pursuit of quantitative data, reminding us that these are ‘only as good as the methods used to collect them and the questions that are asked’. He also points to the dangers of the quantitative data researcher becoming ‘obsessed with the techniques of analysis’ and data overload. Some of these cautions might well be drawn to the attention of qualitative researchers. In my research, I used both qualitative and quantitative approaches in the collection of my data. The use of questionnaires enabled me to explore the views of teachers and students, through their responses to a combination of closed-ended and a few open-ended items. I strongly believe that a quantitative approach was very suitable to address the research questions, since it helped to address the perceived obstacles to the delivery of the project or math-science programme (‘McGraw-Hill’) or ‘cooperative learning’ in a numeric way (Denscombe, 2007). Using a survey from fife regions for all student in intermediate and secondary schools the sample is a Multi-stage (cluster) which is a common sampling design where randomization units varies from the unit of observation. This indicate that, the unit at which the treatment is assigned (i.e. community, school) is different than the unit at which surveys are administered (i.e. household, student) and also for big inquires of geographical area ‘(Etikan and Bala, 2017).

The research will use all school in five regions they going to select the five regions randomly by but the name of all 13 regions in box then select randomly just five and the aim is to do the research in the five school.

References

• Alzahrani, H. A. (2012). Bullying among medical students in a Saudi medical school. BMC research notes, 5(1), 335.
• Atik, G., & Güneri, O. Y. (2013). Bullying and victimization: Predictive role of individual, parental, and academic factors. School Psychology International, 34(6), 658-673.
• Barlett, C., & Coyne, S. M. (2014). A meta‐analysis of sex differences in cyber‐bullying behaviour: The moderating role of age. Aggressive behavior, 40(5), 474-488.
• Cantone, E., Piras, A. P., Vellante, M., Preti, A., Daníelsdóttir, S., D’Aloja, E., ... & Bhugra, D. (2015). Interventions on bullying and cyberbullying in schools: A systematic review. Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health: CP & EMH, 11(Suppl 1 M4), 58.
• Chan, P. C. (2009). Psychosocial implications of homophobic bullying in schools: A review and directions for legal research and the legal process. The International Journal of Human Rights, 13(2-3), 143-175.
• Cohen, A. D. (2005). Strategies for learning and performing L2 speech acts. Intercultural pragmatics, 2(3), 275-301.
• Cowie, H., & Jennifer, D. (2008). New perspectives on bullying. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
• Cullingford, C., & Brown, G. (1995). Children's perceptions of victims and bullies. Education 3-13, 23(2), 11-16.
• Denscombe, M. (2007). The good research guides. Berkshire. England: McGraw-Hill Education.
• Domitrovich, C. E., Durlak, J. A., Staley, K. C., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Social‐emotional competence: An essential factor for promoting positive adjustment and reducing risk in school children. Child development, 88(2), 408-416.
• Doumas, D. M., & Midgett, A. (2019). The Effects of Students’ Perceptions of Teachers’ Antibullying Behavior on Bullying Victimization: Is Sense of School Belonging a Mediator? Journal of Applied School Psychology, 35(1), 37-51.
• Englander, E. K. (2017). Understanding Bullying Behaviour. American Federation of Teachers, Winter.
• Holt, M. K., & Espelage, D. L. (2007). Perceived social support among bullies, victims, and bully-victims. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36(8), 984-994.
• Hysing, M., Askeland, K.G., La Greca, A.M., Solberg, M.E., Breivik, K. and Sivertsen, B., 2019. Bullying involvement in adolescence: implications for sleep, mental health, and academic outcomes. Journal of interpersonal violence, p.0886260519853409.
• LeBlanc, J. C. (2001). Bullying: It's not just a school problem.
• Lee, C. (2006). Exploring teachers' definitions of bullying. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 11(1), 61-75.
• Ofsted, L. (2003). management: What inspections tell us. Office for Standards in Education, London.
• Oliver, C., & Candappa, M. (2003). Tackling bullying: Listening to the views of children and young people. Nottingham: DfES.
• Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2010). Bullying in school: evaluation and dissemination of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 80(1), 124.
• O'Moore, A. M. (2017). Bullying in Britain and Ireland: an overview. In Bullying (1989) (pp. 3-21). Routledge.
• Stives, K. L., May, D. C., Pilkinton, M., Bethel, C. L., & Eakin, D. K. (2019). Strategies to combat bullying: parental responses to bullies, bystanders, and victims. Youth & Society, 51(3), 358-376.
• Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999). Social cognition and bullying: Social inadequacy or skilled manipulation? British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17(3), 435-450.
• Wallace, I. F. (1998). Language, speech, and educational outcomes of otitis media. Journal of Otolaryngology, 27.
• Zablotsky, B., Bradshaw, C. P., Anderson, C. M., & Law, P. (2014). Risk factors for bullying among children with autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 18(4), 419-427.
• Zhang, H., & Wang, Y. (2019). Bullying victimization and depression among young Chinese adults with physical disability: Roles of gratitude and self-compassion. Children and Youth Services Review.