JUNE 2014

Focus: Bullying

This edition of the WSSDA Research Blast focuses on school bullying. The overview centers on
how to understand bullying, the effects bullying has on children and adults, cyberbullying and
suggestions for preventing bullying at school.

Understanding bullying

There is no collectively agreed upon definition of school bullying but most agree that it is
unwanted, hostile behavior involving a real or perceived power imbalance. It may be repeated
over a length of time and is verbal, social, physical or digital (as with cyberbullying) in nature.
Many believe that bullying is merely part of growing up and that kids should learn to deal with it.
While some evidence suggests that students can be better taught how to handle bullying,
research shows that its long-lasting effects should not be ignored.

To effectively confront bullying, it is important to understand it. A popular belief is that bullies
pick on others to make up for their low self-esteem. However, new research from UCLA
suggests that bullies often have extremely high levels of self-esteem and are seen as the “cool
kids” by both students and staff. By gaining power, they gain a huge ego boost. This is
especially apparent in the first year of middle school when challenging transitions can lead to
reliance on primal tendencies like dominance.

Difficult transitions are not the only cause of bullying. Students may resort to bullying others in
response to family hardships, poor academic performance, peer pressure or as a result of being
bullied themselves.

Recent research revealed that 49% of U.S. students in grades 4-12 reported being bullied at
school at least once in the previous month. Bullying’s growing frequency might be due to newer
forums such the internet and smartphones. However, 41 states have adopted anti-bullying laws
for public and private schools which could shed positive light on the elevated numbers. Students
are becoming more aware of bullies and how to recognize them. This has led to an increase in
the number of reported incidents rather than an increase in activity itself.
Effects of bullying

The effects of childhood bullying are wide-ranging and long-lasting. Bullies, victims, the school
and the community at large suffer as a result of bullying activity. Identifying these effects
amplifies the need to create and execute effective anti-bullying policy.

Children who are victims of bullying can experience a gamut of problems. They are more likely
to experience physical symptoms like headaches and sleeping problems and mental issues
such as depression, anxiety, low self-esteem and suicidal thoughts or actions. These feelings
may cause victims to become hostile and lash out at others in a violent manner. Victims may
also be afraid to go to school and lose interest in academics, resulting in a greater likelihood of
dropping out. In Washington State alone, 10% of school drops outs did so because of repeated
bullying.

School bullies also suffer as a result of their behavior. They are more likely to engage in criminal
behavior like theft and vandalism, as well as carry a weapon. They tend to be involved in
frequent fights, have poorer academic performance and are more likely to drink alcohol and
abuse drugs.

Bullies and their victims may seem like the only obvious parties to suffer from the effects of
bullying. However, the school and community are impacted as well. Bullying can lower the
school’s reputation and standard of education. The environment can become one of disrespect
and fear causing the students to dislike going to school and the staff to appear incompetent.

The effects of childhood bullying can last well into adulthood. Recent studies from the University
of Warwick and Duke University Medical Center discovered victims and children who were both
bullies and victims suffered from poorer health, behavior and personal success as adults.
Victims and bully-victims, particularly those who suffered from chronic bullying, were at an
especially high risk for bad outcomes. They experienced a greater likelihood of being diagnosed
with a serious illness or psychiatric disorder, tended to smoke regularly and took longer to
recover from illness. Both groups also had poorer financial and educational outcomes and had
greater difficulty keeping a job.

Since bullying’s effects can last a lifetime, it is critical to control and eliminate it as much as
possible. Research has proven that the outcomes can have serious implications on a person’s
ability to live a healthy, prosperous life. An educator’s main goal is to prepare children for the
challenges and realities of the real world. Preventing the harmful effects that may come from
bullying is a key element in that preparation.

Cyberbullying

In our digital age, we have the ability to be connected every second of every day through
smartphones, computers and portable tablets. This “connectedness” has given rise to a new,
non-traditional form of bullying: cyberbullying. According to JAMA Pediatrics, it is defined as an
“aggressive, intentional act or behavior that is carried out by a group or individual using
electronic forms of contact, repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend
himself or herself.” Cyberbullying can occur via any electronic means including social networks,
email, blogs, text/instant messaging and online games.

Cyberbullying differs from traditional bullying in several ways:

 A unique user mindset in which the bully can remain anonymous and the victim unaware
of who is harassing him/her
 The unrestricted reach of the internet provides opportunity for bullies to victimize their
targets at any time and place
 Digital messages and content can quickly spread to countless people and remain online
for an infinite amount of time
 The technology informational gap that often exists between students and parents can
restrict adults’ understanding of the acronyms, word variations and icons used
 Students do not equate cyberbullying with more traditional forms of “schoolyard” bullying

Cyberbullying’s effects are much the same as other forms of bullying - mostly poorer academic
performance and lower self-esteem. But a recent study by JAMA Pediatrics uncovered that
cyberbullying causes suicidal thoughts in children more often than traditional bullying. Digital
material is stored online and reaches wider audiences causing victims to recall their
experiences more regularly.

The possible effects of cyberbullying and our increasing dependence on technology make it
essential for schools to create anti-cyberbullying policy that works. Due to the unique nature of
cyberbullying, traditional anti-bullying policies may not be sufficient to deal with this growing
problem. While each school must adopt a policy that is customized to their needs, it should be
rooted in proactive approaches and clearly define what constitutes acceptable online behavior.
Creating school-level Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) that extend to home internet and cell
phone use is a promising option, but past attempts have caused disputes and litigation about
the protective authority of the school and parents.

Preventing bullying

Schools have the important responsibility of providing a safe environment for students during
school hours. Studies show that when bystanders take action, bullying stops more than half the
time (57%) within 10 seconds. Each school should tailor anti-bullying policy to fit its unique
circumstances, but there are general steps that school staff can take to limit bullying incidents,
including:

 Assessing the problem to determine how often, where and how bullying occurs
 Engaging parents and students to create awareness and generate input for a bullying
prevention program
  Creating policies and rules to establish a climate where bullying is not acceptable
 Building safe school environments through school activities, newsletters and meetings
that promote tolerance and respect
 Educating the student body and staff by integrating bullying prevention with classroom
assignments
 Providing a support system where a child feels safe to report bullying and counselors are
available to talk with both victims and bullies

While effective programs can vary by school needs, research shows that whole-school
approaches tend to have the greatest impact. One popular method is the Olweus Bullying
Prevention Program. The program addresses bullying on the school, classroom, individual and
community levels and has emerged in numerous studies as one of the most successful
curriculums. Though many schools struggle to fund anti-bullying programs, there are numerous
grants, foundations and government resources available to help defer the costs.

According to the American Psychological Association, fewer incidents of bullying can create an
overall more positive school climate leading to:

 Better student attendance and study habits

 More motivation and commitment to achieve academic success
 Greater engagement in cooperative learning
 Achievement of higher grades, test scores and subject mastery

Bullying prevention programs may curb bullying activity in schools, but they likely will not solve
the problem completely. It is essential to take immediate and appropriate disciplinary action
when incidents occur. Common punishments include detention, suspension, revocation of
privileges and expulsion. Teachers and administrators should also understand when bullying
crosses the line into criminal behavior such as harassment or assault.

School bullying

In the spirit of this discussion, we have gathered five pieces of research and literature.
 “Psychologist’s studies make sense of bullying” is an article about a study conducted at
UCLA that challenged the assumption that bullies pick on others as a result of low self-
esteem. Researchers examined the link between bullies and coolness as well as why
this connection is absent in elementary school but suddenly appears during the first year
of middle school.
 “Study: Anti-Bullying Programs May Have Opposite Effect” offers the suggestion that
school anti-bullying programs may be having an adverse effect on students.
Researchers found that schools with such programs had a higher rate of bullying
incidents than schools without programs. It is possible that students are inadvertently
learning how to better conceal bullying but they may just be reporting the occurrences
more frequently.
  “Impact of Bullying in Childhood on Adult Health, Wealth, Crime and Social Outcomes” is
a 2013 study on the effects of childhood bullying on aspects of adult life. It examines the
negative outcomes that being a bully, victim or bully-victim can have on physical and
mental health, behavior, financial difficulties and educational outcomes in adulthood.
 “Cyber-Bullying: Developing Policy to Direct Responses that are Equitable and Effective
in Addressing this Special Form of Bullying” is an analytical review aimed at identifying
the successful components anti-cyberbullying policy. The authors make
recommendations for policymakers on what to understand about cyberbullying before
crafting policy and how to successfully implement the finished product.
 “What works in preventing bullying: effective elements of anti-bullying programmes” is a
review of 59 school anti-bullying programs designed to determine the program factors
most associated with a decrease in bullying activity. The authors advocate for programs
based on Dan Olweus’ anti-bullying system and offer specific recommendations on how
to apply his principles on the individual level, school-wide and in the classroom.

Psychologist’s studies make sense of bullying

By Judy Lin

This article presents findings from a study by Jaana Juvonen, a UCLA Professor of
Developmental Psychology. The research focuses on the popular belief that children resort to
bullying others to make up for their low self-esteem.

To test this theory, more than 2000 Los Angeles middle school students and teachers were
asked to anonymously identify which kids in their schools were the bullies and bullying victims
and which kids were the most and least popular. Contrary to common beliefs, Juvonen found
that most bullies have very high levels of self-esteem. They are often seen as the coolest kids in
school by both teachers and students. On the other hand, the bullying victims are seen as very
uncool.

The study expanded to assess 4th and 5th graders in comparison to the middle school students.
It revealed that the bully-coolness link is nearly absent in elementary school, but suddenly
appears during the first year of middle school. Juvonen concludes that this is due to the often
difficult transition from elementary to middle school. Students must adjust to larger student
bodies, different teachers in each class and moving from one class period to the next. Not
knowing where to fit in may bring forth a primal tendency to rely on dominant behaviors. As
bullies gain power by making themselves leaders, they also gain a major ego boost. The victims
often blame themselves and don’t know how to stop the attacks.

Juvonen suggests that teachers and administrators can help stop bullying by providing
opportunities for bullies to channel their energy in positive ways during the challenging transition
to middle school. She advocates giving the student a special role or duty, making sure that
victims receive the appropriate attention and resources, and encouraging friendships through
buddy programs.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/stories/bullying-jaana-juvonen-233108
Study: Anti-Bullying Programs May Have Opposite Effect
By Allie Bidwell

Anti-bullying programs are becoming more common in schools in an effort to end physical and
emotional bullying. However, a new study from the University of Texas, Arlington suggests
these programs may be doing the opposite.

Criminologist Seokjin Jeong and doctoral student Byung Hyun Lee compared data from the
2005-2006 Health Behavior in School-Aged Children survey with data from their own survey on
school climate and violence prevention strategies. Results showed that students at schools with
anti-bullying plans are more likely to be bullying victims than students at schools without
programs.

It is possible that programs are teaching students what a bully does and looks like and
unintentionally telling bullies how to better hide their behaviors from adults. Bullies may also
learn anti-bullying practices, but choose not to apply them, causing these strategies to fail.
Instead of only using pre-emptive programs, schools should consider plans that establish
complete change within the school: hiring security guards, installing metal detectors and holding
random searches of student backpacks and lockers. Pinpointing the dynamics between bullies
and victims may help to determine suitable methods for dealing with the problem.

The growing number of reported bullying incidents in schools with anti-bullying programs is not
necessarily bad according to Bridgewater State College psychology professor Elizabeth
Englander. Bullying is not inevitably more common, students may be reporting occurrences
more often, which is exactly what the programs encourage.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/13/study-anti-bullying-programs-may-have-
opposite-effect

Impact of Bullying in Childhood on Adult Health, Wealth, Crime and Social

Outcomes
By Dieter Wolke, William E. Copeland, Adrian Angold and E. Jane Costello

This University of Warwick and Duke University Medical Center study is the first to examine how
childhood bullying affects a wide range of areas in adulthood. These include health, risky and
illegal behavior, wealth and social relationships.

Of the 1,420 students assessed during childhood, 1,273 were surveyed again as young adults.
They were classified into three categories: victims only, bullies only and bully-victims. The last
had bullied others and been victims of bullying. Using the Young Adult Psychiatric Assessment,
each individual was evaluated on physical traits, mental health issues, past behaviors,
educational and career successes and personal relationships. Hardships such as family
stability, dysfunction and maltreatment were accounted for so that the results were not skewed.
The analysis uncovered:

 Bully-victims suffered from poorer health in adulthood. They had a greater likelihood of
being diagnosed with a serious illness or psychiatric disorder, regular smoking and took
longer to recover from illness.
 Bully-victims were involved in riskier behaviors. They were more likely to have felonies
and/or struggle with substance abuse
 Victims and bully-victims experienced poorer financial and educational outcomes and
had more trouble keeping a job

Victims of chronic bullying in particular were found to be at greater risk of experiencing social
and financial problems than victims who had been bullied only once.

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/16/0956797613481608.full

Cyber-Bullying: Developing Policy to Direct Responses that are Equitable

in Addressing this Special Form of Bullying
By Karen Brown, Margaret Jackson and Wanda Cassidy

This review of previous studies offers recommendations for implementing effective anti-
cyberbullying policy. Developing policy can be difficult because of tensions between freedom of
speech, children’s best interests and the protective authority of the school and parents. It is
essential to have input from policymakers, school officials, parents and students.

Policymakers need to understand the extent and severity of the problem as well as:

Considering all forums where cyberbullying may happen. This includes chat rooms, cell phones,
email, blogs, social networks, etc.

Understanding the unique user mindset. The ability to withhold an identity can create a lack of
inhibition. Kids may engage in certain behavior because the interaction is not face-to-face.

Cyberbullying can occur anytime and anywhere making it difficult for victims to escape ridicule

Unlike “traditional” bullying, cyberbullying may endure for an infinite amount of time through
online posts

Taking these unique conditions into account, the authors recommend:

 Bridging the “netspeak” and informational gap that often exists between students,
parents and educators by understanding online language and incorporating specific
guidelines into policy
 Creating school board and individual school level Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) that
extend to home internet and cell phone use
 Producing thorough board policy to address the specific roles of staff, students and
parents
 Clearly defining what constitutes acceptable online behavior
  Using policy to develop procedures for dealing with online student misconduct

Successful policy must be rooted in proactive strategies. It must change online student
behavior, encourage victims to report bullying and deter bullies from further abuse. It is
important that schools adopt unique guidelines tailored to their circumstances, enforce them
regularly and review them annually to determine effectiveness.

http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ843445

What works in preventing bullying: effective elements of anti-bullying

programmes
By Maria M. Ttofi and David P. Farrington

This analysis examines 59 school anti-bullying programs and identifies the aspects most related
to a decrease in bullying. The authors categorize and evaluate 20 elements commonly found in
anti-bullying programs. These include classroom rules and management, curriculum materials,
disciplinary methods, teacher training and playground supervision.

Seven key factors were connected with decreased bullying: parent training, improved
playground supervision, disciplinary methods, school conferences, information given to parents,
classroom rules and classroom management. Program duration and intensity also played a role
in success. Plans influenced by Dan Olweus’ system proved to be the most successful in
preventing bullying activity. Olweus’ method targets:

 The individual - talking with bullies, victims and their parents, enforcing non-hostile, non-
physical discipline, offering support and training and talking with children not involved in
bullying to teach them how to effectively help
 The school - staff and parent meetings, increasing lunchtime supervision, improving
facilities, and a surveying students and parents
 The classroom - providing information about bullying, assigning students to create and
abide by a list of classroom rules and using activities to help students learn to better deal
with bullying

The most important links to a decline in victimization were: use of anti-bullying videos,
disciplinary methods, work/mediation with peers, parent training and cooperative group work
between staff members. None of the elements examined were associated with an increase in
victimization.

The authors believe that school anti-bullying programs should combine the successful
components cited in this review with Olweus’ method. Programs should be targeted at children
11 years and older.

https://www.bullyingpreventioninstitute.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=Ufod4vzsiXs%3D&tabid=72