According to McCormac
According to McCormac (2014), 36% of the victims between eleven and seventeen years of age reported bullying incidents while 64% did not. Physical bullying was most often reported but other forms such as exclusion, spreading rumors, being coerced to do undesired things, and ridicule were rarely reported. The students who reported bullying perceived that staff handled the problems seriously. Almost 99% of the teachers felt an obligation to prevent bullying (Dake et al., 2003).
Around twenty-eight percent of students between twelve and eighteen years of age admit having experienced cyber, verbal or physical bullying (Ansary, Elias, Greene, and Green, no comma (2015). The likelihood of being bullied at elementary school level was 19% in the U.S., 11% in Finland, and 50% in Ireland. Dake et al. (2003) reported the rate of bullying others was 14% in the U.S., 4% in Finland and around 50% in Ireland. High cases of bullying took place in primary schools and steadily declined in secondary schools. The most notorious sites for bullying were playfield, classroom and hallways.
The effects of bullying
The rising cases of school-based suicides and homicides have attracted academic scholars to critically investigate the root causes behind bullying. The 1999 attack at Columbine High School by two teenagers was devastating. It created an image that schools were no longer safe havens for the children, teachers, staff, and any other person within the school building and grounds. The two perpetrators killed themselves after killing thirteen people and injuring twenty three others. The shooting was linked to bullying (Tonso, 2002).
Bullying has taken a new turn, now occurring on social networking sites (Sahin, 2010). Students are using cell phones and computers to send abusive messages and threats to other students via social networking sites. As an example of an extreme outcome, a thirteen year old boy committed suicide due to cyber bullying (Dake et al., 2003).
Teachers blamed parents’ attitudes, social media, family environment, Internet, and socio-economic status as the main elements that contributed to bullying (Dake et al., 2003).Another cause of bullying was that bullies had a history of being bullied, persecuted, attacked, threatened or injured themselves (Duy, 2013).
Bullying has a negative effect on the victims’ schooling. Its sociological and psychological effects continue to the late stages of life. The effects are also felt by the bullies and witnesses. Skinner, Babinski, and Gifford (2014) reported that bullying caused lower grades. Similarly, a survey on grade 10 students by Vreeman and Carroll (2007) showed that the victims were more likely to get suspensions and have higher absenteeism rates. Bullying sometimes at fourteen years led to convictions; personal violence and drug abuse were common in bullies in at later years (Ahtola, Haataja, Kärnä, Poskiparta, and Salmivalli, 2013).
Other effects of bullying are lack of sleep, lack of social acceptance, anxiety, anger, fear, hostility, helplessness feelings, and low self-esteem (Juvonen, Yueyan & Espinoza, 2011).,period loneliness, suicide attempts, problems with socialization, Breaking the law is common among bullies. Examples are is carrying a weapon, vandalism, and general problems adhering to the law, absenteeism, fighting, stealing, and future engaging in criminal behaviors. Particularly affecting school work are in the future, mental disorders, low school bonding, and absenteeism,period Bullying involves health issues such as headaches, fatigue, stomachaches and lack of appetite (Juvonen, Yueyan & Espinoza, 2011). This was a world record for sentence length so I broke it up for you.
Preventing bullying
The incidence of bullying can be reduced by enacting anti-bullying laws. A federal law, Cyberbullying Enacted Legislation, was passed in 2006 to make cyber bullying a crime. In 2008, California passed a law allowing the school administrators to discipline cyber bullies (Ansary et al., 2015). Moreover, several conferences were held in 2011 to find bullying prevention measures. Edmondson and Zeman (2011) recommended that the government must raise bullying awareness, publicize prevention measures, and pass anti-bullying laws. Television media must also air bullying-education programs and reduce children’s exposure to programming the programs which foster fosters bullying. Programs which portray manhood, video gaming and bravery can encourage bullying as students imitate them as role models.
Many schools are also implementing anti-bullying interventions (Ahtola et al., 2013). Interventions utilize strategies for reforming student behaviors and attitudes. Common examples of intervention measures are using informative activities, anti-bullying teachings, parents’ meetings, organizing seminars, and forming committees. Sahin (2010) observed that some schools did not align preventive actions with a specific program in Turkey. This was attributed to lack of research on bullying prevention. Programs which focus focused on peer engagement or minimal intervention were ineffective while video presentations were more effective.
A whole-school approach can minimize bullying. Dake et al. (2003) found that around 86% of elementary school teachers counseled both victims and bullies. In Canada, teachers never or only occasionally conversed with students on bullying. This mechanism is reactionary and not preventive and does not fit with the whole-school approach. A whole-school approach changes classroom and school rules aimed at the behavior, changes student perceptions, and assists students to comprehend bullying effects (Vreeman& Carroll, 2007). It also involves teacher training, conflict resolution training, and counseling. A notable example of a whole-school approach is the bullying prevention program of Norway (Dake et al., 2003). Their program comprises parents parents’ awareness, student bully questionnaires for students, organizing anti-bullying conference conferences, supervision during breaks, operation of a bullying prevention committee, classroom rules rebuking bullying, regular classroom meetings, and holding talks with bullies and their parents . The program reduced the incidence of bullying by half.
Another example is the ‘Steps to Respect’ Steps to Respect (STR) program (McCormac, 2014). Observation of students in elementary school showed that bystander feedback accelerated bullying. In consequence of this, the STR a ‘Steps to Respect’ (STR) program was introduced and it encouraged friendship, acknowledging and responding to bullying, less aggression, more positivity in playground behavior, less acceptance of bullying, increased bystander responsibility, decline in gossip, and increased adult responsiveness to bullying. Students’ perceptions also improved after the program. The teachers commented that the program was useful. Sahin (2010) concludes that programs should be long term and linked to the school context and all the stakeholders should be involved for them to be effective. In sum, a whole-school approach lowers violence, increases victim empathy and improves victims’ self-efficacy.
