Theory of Knowledge ; Bullying in School Problems

Nazrin Huseynova

Bullying is one of the most worrying issues among teachers, parents, and
students. Hence, prevention action should be taken to prevent bullying at school.
The issue of bullying among schoolchildren is a global phenomenon that has
seriously increased in the recent years. According to Shakooret. al. (2012),
bullying has became a major concern in many parts of the world as school
children are bullied. Naturally, bullying prevention and anti-bullying program are
needed to prevent it from becoming more serious. In addition, Uba, Yaacob,
Juhari, and Talib (2010) emphasized that bullying has not just caused harm to
other students but also has reached to a dangerous level i.e. costing lives. This
suggests that bullying behavior among students in school should not be taken
lightly or regarded as school culture, and immediate action should be taken to
prevent bullying behavior from spreading and becoming uncontrollable. There
are several bullying prevention programs that have been implemented in
several European countries. Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP), a
leading prevention program, is one example. The main goals of OBPP are to
reduce the existing bullying problems among students, to prevent the
development of new bullying problems, and to achieve better peer relations
(Olweus et al., 2007). There are many bullying prevention programs that have
been developed and implemented with various approaches but not many are
related to bullying prevention programs that emphasize knowledge and
awareness of bullying behaviors among students. Although bullying is known to
be a serious and worrying issue in schools, it has not been given the appropriate
attention and emphasis by teachers, students, and parents (Shakoor et. al.,
2012). Most of the bullying prevention programs practice and implemented
only educate teachers and students on the actions to be taken to stop
bullying in school but few to none educate students to recognize and
distinguish the act of bullying (Pepler, Smith, & Rigby, 2004). Hence, actions are
only taken after bullying has happened (Furlong & Morrison, 2000), because they
are unable to prevent it as they do not know how to recognize bullying behavior.
To be equipped with the knowledge of bullying is to know the meaning of
bullying, the types of bullying, and to recognize the act of bullying. In addition,
students should also be educated on how to stand up against bullying as a victim
and as a bystander. it should be instilled in all students that bullying should
never be tolerated and should be reported to school authorities. On the other
hand, it is ideal to inform teachers on the importance of educating students on
bullying by teaching them to identify and recognize it as well as to stand up to
bullies and report any bullying to school authorities. However, teachers are
believed to be ‘powerful’ in stopping bullying if teachers acted towards cases
reported by students (Lindenberg, 2013).

Knowledge on Bullying Behavior

As bullying is not a new phenomenon and is a worrying issue among teachers and
students, it is crucial to educate and equip both alike with knowledge on
bullying behavior (Yaakub, Haron & Goh, 2010). A student with high levels
of knowledge about bullying behavior should know and understand well bullying
terms, concepts, characters, types of behavior, ways to deal, how to avoid it, how
to help victims, and the factors causing this behavior. Bullying behavior refers to a
situation where powerful individual or group of people, repeatedly and
intentionally cause injury or danger to people or groups of people who are
helpless to respond (Rigby, 2000). Bullying may persist from time to time and is
often hidden from the adults and persists if no action is taken. Bullying is also
known as a behavioral related problem that impacts the lives of many family
members especially their children (Cummings, Davies & Campbell, 2000).
Children who are bullied usually experience fear,humiliation, and frustration
that consequently causes low self-esteem, isolating themselves from their peers,
absences from school, and changes in personality, mood swings, depression, and
suicidal thoughts . Children and adults alike may experience many different types
of bullying. While some of them are obvious and easily identied, others
are subtler. There are many types of bullying: physical bullying, verbal
bullying, social bullying, and cyber bullying. Physical bullying includes hitting,
kicking, tripping, pinching, and pushing or damaging property. Physical bullying
causes both short-term and long-term psychological damage; for instance, it is
believed that long-term, victims may suffer from mental health problems after
being bullied (McDougall & Vaillancourt, 2015). The long-term consequences
include not sleeping well, a tendency to wet the bed, feeling sad, depression, low
self-esteem, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts (Shellard, 2002). Findings from
research showed that male school children are more involved, more
aggressive, and directly involved in bullying. They have a higher tendency for
bullying a victim physically when compared to female school children
(Scheithauer et. al., 2006). Card, Stucky, Salawani, and Little (2008) also
indicated that regardless of age, ethnicity, social class, or culture or nationality
that males are more likely to engage in physical bullying when compared to
females. Verbal bullying includes name calling, insults, teasing, intimidation,
homophobic or racist remarks, or verbal abuse. While verbal bullying can start off
harmless, it can escalate to levels that start affecting the individual target.Social
bullying, sometimes being referred as covert bullying, is often harder to
recognize and can be carried out in the absence of the victim. It is designed to
harm someone’s social reputation and/or cause humiliation. The victims would
normally possess low self-esteem, feeling oneself not good enough, or
depression when they face exclusion bullying (Boulton, Trueman, & Murray, 2008).
Cyber bullying can be overt or covert bullying behaviors using digital
technologies, including hardware such as computers and smartphones, and
software such as social media, instant messaging, texts, websites, and other
online platforms. It can happen at any time, in public or in private and
sometimes only known to the target and the person bullying. The knowledge of
bullying behavior benets many students when they face bullying situations
in school. It helps them to take the appropriate actions such as standing up
against the bully or reporting the bullying to the teachers when they
encounter one. Students would also learn that bullying is not right and will not
be tolerated. As such, it is anticipated that students with high level of bullying
behavior tend to not bully other students.

There are various denitions related to creative pedagogy. Creative pedagogy

involves teachers making learning more interesting and effective by using
imaginative approaches in the classroom (Cremin, Burnard, & Craft, 2006). To
implement creative pedagogy, teachers need to widen their understanding of
their own creativity, imaginative approaches, and repertoire of engaging
activities that they can employ in developing the capacity for original ideas and
actions. Creative pedagogy is closely linked to behaviorist theory and
humanistic theory. Behaviorist theory in creative pedagogy often discusses
external factors that inuence learner behaviors and personalities.
Behaviorist theory highlights learner behavior and learning outcomes after
exposure to creative learning. This theory also stresses learning outcomes
regardless if they are positive or negative.

Theoretical perspectives on understanding bullying and their implications

1. Developmental theory

Some explanations of bullying draw upon an understanding of child development.

They point out that bullying begins in early childhood when individuals begin to
assert themselves at the expense of others in order to establish their social
dominance. They tend at first to do so crudely, for instance by hitting out at
others, especially those less powerful than themselves, in an attempt to
intimidate them. But as Hawley (1999) points out, as children develop they begin
to employ less socially reprehensible ways of dominating others. Verbal and
indirect forms of bullying become more common than physical forms. In time, the
kind of behaviour that is generally labelled as "bullying" becomes relatively rare.
Consistent with this view is evidence that physical bullying is much more common
in early childhood than later, and that what is identified as bullying gradually
becomes less and less apparent as children become older (Smith & Sharp 1994).
However, as a comprehensive explanation of bullying this view fails to take into
account that although there is a general diminution in reported victimisation over
time, the trend is temporarily reversed when children move from primary to
secondary school and find themselves in a new environment which is less benign
(Rigby 1996). Clearly, social environmental factors must also be taken into
account. Nevertheless the developmental perspective is useful in providing
guidance as to how bully/victim problems can be tackled. For example, older
children are thought to be more likely to respond positively to problem-solving
approaches which require a more sophisticated appreciation of the options
available to them (Stevens et al. 2000).

2. Attributions to individual differences

Broad explanations in terms of developmental processes and environmental

influences fail to take into account individual differences between people that
may lead to interactions that result in one person bullying another. For example,
children who repeatedly bully others at school tend to be low in empathic regard
for others and inclined towards psychoticism (Slee & Rigby 1993). Children who
are frequently targeted as victims at school are inclined to be psychologically
introverted, to have low self-esteem and lack social skills, especially in the area of
assertiveness (Rigby 2002b). How such qualities arise has been subject to
considerable debate. Currently, it is generally acknowledged that genetic
influences play a part and these may interact with adverse social conditions to
which children may be exposed. For example, dysfunctional family life in which
children do not feel loved and/or feel over-controlled by parents can lead to them
acting aggressively at school (Rigby 1994), especially if the school ethos does nor
discourage aggressive behaviour.

There are limitations in this approach. In some relatively benign environments

introverted children with low self-esteem are not bullied; being aggressive and
generally unempathic does not invariably lead a child to bully others. There is, for
example, evidence that bullying is relatively rare in Steiner schools, which provide
a highly supportive social environment and respect for individual differences
(Rivers & Soutter 1996). Moreover, individuals who are dissimilar in personality
may belong to the same sociocultural group and seek collectively to impose on
those they regard as outsiders.Acknowledgment of the role of individual
differences in making bullying possible has led some schools to introduce
programs that can assist vulnerable children to defend themselves more
effectively, for instance through developing better social skills and learning how to
act more assertively. Anger management programs have also been developed to
help children who are prone to act aggressively to control their aggression.

3. Bullying as a sociocultural phenomenon

A further perspective seeks to explain bullying as an outcome of the existence of

specified social groups with different levels of power. The focus is typically on
differences which have a historical and cultural basis, such as gender, race or
ethnicity and social class. Major emphasis has been placed upon differences
associated with gender. Society is seen as essentially patriarchal. Males are seen
as generally having more power than females as a consequence of societal beliefs
that males should be the dominant sex. In order to maintain their dominance,
boys feel justified in oppressing girls. Numerous studies have, in fact, indicated
that boys are more likely than girls to initiate bullying (Olweus 1993; Smith &
Sharp 1994). Moreover, it is clear that boys are more likely to bully girls than vice
versa. For example, in a large-scale Australian study of some 38,000 children
(Rigby 1997) a much higher proportion of girls claimed to be bullied exclusively by
boys (22.1 per cent) than boys reporting being bullied only by girls (3.4 per cent).
With cross-gender bullying it is clearly mostly one-way traffic, and this may derive,
in part, from the way in which some boys have come to think about how they
should behave in the company of girls.

The process according to which boys come to develop characteristics which lead
to them engaging in oppressive behaviour is sometimes described as "the
construction of hegemonic masculinity" (Connell 1995; Gilbert & Gilbert 1998).
This is held not only to account largely for boys bullying girls, but also for boys
bullying boys who do not possess stereotypical masculine qualities. Such children
are commonly referred to as "gay" and may include children whose sexual
orientation is homosexual. The use of language with sexual connotations to insult
children regarded as "gay" is certainly widely prevalent in schools (Duncan 1999),
although the extent to which it occurs has surprisingly not, as yet, been
investigated. Explaining the bullying of girls by girls can invoke the notion of the
construction of femininity, with girls deviating from an idealised conception of
what it is to be feminine being more readily targeted.

It is sometimes claimed that bullying tends to be associated with racial or ethnic

divides. It is argued that some ethnic groups are more powerful than others
whom they seek to dominate. Typically, the less powerful are the victims of
colonialism. For example, Indigenous communities in Australia in the late
eighteenth century were subjected to British colonialism. Aboriginal people were
seen by many as inferior - and this perception still lingers in the minds of people
who retain racist beliefs. Through a process of cultural transmission, non-
Indigenous children may feel justified in bullying their Aboriginal peers. Evidence
from Australian studies suggests that indeed Aboriginal students are more likely
than other students to be the recipients of verbal abuse (Rigby 2002b). However,
some studies conducted outside Australia have not found that race or ethnicity is
significantly associated with peer victimisation (for example, Junger-Tas 1999;
Losel & Bliesener 1999). Despite claims that children are at risk of being bullied at
school by peers of a higher social class, research evidence is not supportive
(Duyme 1990; Olweus 1993; Ortega & Mora-Merchan 1999; Almeida 1999).

The sociocultural perspective on bullying can have striking implications for how a
school approaches the problem of bullying. Attention is directed towards how the
school curriculum in its broadest sense can influence children to accept and
respect sociocultural differences. It is suggested that not only should the school
curriculum explicitly and directly address issues related to differences in gender,
race or ethnicity and social class in order to counter prejudice and discrimination,
but importantly the mode of delivery of the curricula should indirectly address
bullying through the stimulus it provides to cooperative problem-solving,
emotional sensitivity and independent critical thinking. The Australian national
web site on bullying in schools (http://www.bullyingnoway.com.au), based mainly
on a sociocultural approach to bullying, has placed primary emphasis upon this
approach. Some writers embracing a sociocultural perspective in which gender
considerations are pre-eminent, have suggested that schools need to abandon
their current emphases upon "rationality", which is characteristic of masculinity, in
favour of exploring with students their expressive and emotional worlds (Kenway
& Fitzclarence 1997). The use of strict codes of behaviour governing bullying and
the use of counselling methods to deal with individual cases are equally abhorred.
Both are seen as based on an underlying faith in rationality and, as such,
essentially counterproductive. This view emphasises the use of the school
curriculum as a means of developing emotional understanding and positive
interpersonal relations rather than controlling undesirable behaviour through the
use of negative sanctions and/or counselling methods that impose authoritarian
solutions to bully/victim problems.

4. Bullying as a response to group and peer pressures within the school

This approach has something in common with the sociocultural approach in that it
conceives bullying as understandable in a social context. However, the context is
not defined according to sociocultural categories such as gender, race and class.
There is first a broad social context consisting of the behaviours and attitudes of
members of the entire school community. Individuals are seen as influenced to a
degree by their perceptions of what may be called the school ethos, and student
welfare polices may be systematically directed towards its improvement (Soutter
& McKenzie 2000). Secondly, students are powerfully influenced by a smaller
group of peers with whom they have relatively close association. Such groups are
typically formed within a school on the basis of common interests and purposes,
and provide support for group members. They may also constitute a threat to
outsiders, sometimes to ex-members, whom they may bully. Situations commonly
arise in a school whereby children are members of, and supported by, a group that
is, in some situations, more powerful than an individual or smaller group that they
wish to bully in some way. The motive may be a grievance or imagined grievance,
a prejudice (explicable in sociocultural terms) or simply a desire to have fun at the
expense of another person. Importantly, the acts of bullying are seen as typically
sustained by a connection with a group rather than by individual motives such as
personal malevolence. This view presupposes that bullying is typically a group
phenomenon. Early studies of bullying in Scandinavia adopted the term
"mobbing" suggesting that children are bullied by mobs (Olweus 1993). While this
may sometimes occur, more commonly the bullying is carried out by one or two
people with the passive support of others (Pepler & Craig 1995). When students
are asked whether they have bullied others as individuals or as members of a
group, among those who have bullied others about half admit to bullying alone;
others say they have acted as part of a group (Rigby 2002b).

The implications for schools are that they must be aware of the roles played by
groups as distinct from individuals. They need to identify groups and work with
them. Several methods have been devised for working with groups of children
who have bullied or are suspected of bullying others. One, the "no blame
approach" (Maines & Robinson 1992), involves a teacher or counsellor meeting
with the group of children identified as having bullied someone, in the company
of some other children. The teacher describes to the group the suffering that has
been endured by the victim, and the group is expected to consider ways in which
the situation can be improved. The "non-bullies" in the group are expected to
exert positive peer pressure, that is, influence the "bullies" to act more
benevolently towards the victim.

An alternative method, generally used with older children, called the "method of
shared concern" (Pikas 2002) involves working initially with individuals suspected
of being in a group that is bullying someone. The teacher's aim here is to
communicate his/her concern for the victim and invite (and then monitor)
responsible individual action - and in so doing to lessen the influence the group
may have on each individual's actions.

5. Bullying from the perspective of restorative justice

This perspective recognises that some children are more likely than others to be
involved in bully/victim problems as a consequence of the kind of character they
have developed. Children who bully others typically feel little or no pride in their
school and are not well integrated into the community (Morrison 2002). They
mishandle their emotional reactions to the distress they cause by not
experiencing appropriate feelings of shame; in fact, they tend to attribute
unworthy characteristics to those they victimise. By contrast, victims are prone to
experience too much inappropriate shame. To some extent, this perspective is one
that emphasises individual differences, as in (2) above. But in addition, an
important role is ascribed to the school community and to significant people who
are implicated in the problem. These can include family and friends of both bullies
and victims; that is, significant others who care about them. It is believed that
appropriate feelings of shame can and should be engendered in those who bully
others through exposing them to condemnation by those they have offended.
This, it is thought, can be done constructively in the presence of those whom they
care about and who care for them. Success is seen as greatly dependent on the
support provided by those who care about the perpetrator as a person and the
readiness of the community to forgive and provide sincere acceptance (Morrison
2002). This approach is concerned with "violations against people" and the
restoration of positive relationships rather than applying punishment for breaking
rules (Cameron & Thorsborne 2001).

Some schools have applied the ideas of restorative justice in a preventative way
through a Responsible Citizens Program that encourages students to develop
relationships with their peers that are characterised by respect and consideration
(Ahmed et al. 2001). Students have been helped through role-playing to resolve
conflicts with peers and identify and manage inappropriate feelings of shame.
There is some evidence that the program can increase students' feelings of safety
and the use of more adaptive means of shame management (Morrison 2002). No
reports, however, have yet been received on whether the incidence of bullying
has been reduced using this program. When serious cases of bullying occur, they
may be resolved through the use of a community conference in which victims are
encouraged to express their sense of hurt while perpetrators listen, become
contrite, and agree to compensate the victim.

Conclusions

Given that programs designed to reduce peer victimisation have met with only
limited success, it appropriate to examine the range of explanations offered to
account for bullying in schools and their implications for school policies and
practices. Five such explanations have been examined and each shown to make
some contribution to our understanding of bully/victim problems in schools. Each
has had some impact on what Australian schools are doing to counter bullying in
Australia. (Rigby 2001; Morrison 2002; Rigby & Thomas 2002). However, no single
view is sufficiently comprehensive in providing a definitive answer as to what is
"best practice". Therefore, in applying anti-bullying policies and procedures,
schools should consider the strengths and limitations of each suggested approach
and the appropriateness of its application to particular bully/victim problems.