Psychology Sample Essay Paper on Bullying

Bullying

Abstract

The issue of bullying is an important matter in several schools. Anti-bullying initiatives have been extensively employed to deal with the issue. The problem has currently attracted much attention. Schools are currently devoting relevant assets into the anti-bullying initiatives, regardless of the limited supporting proof of the efficiency of the programs.

Introduction

The act of bullying is a kind of violence presently considered as endemic in schools. In the U.S., over 5 million pupils through the eighth grade have been exposed to bullying. Studies on bullying have focused on explicit kinds of anti-bullying initiatives to determine the efficiency in schools and for the pupils in minimizing the number of bully reports (Bear & Blank, 2012). This paper therefore discusses current research on five anti-bullying programs created and employed among schools today.

Anti-Bullying programs

  1. The Bully Buster program

This program describes bullying as frequently distressing, with culprits causing victims injury. It is a psycho-educational program intended to help teachers gain skills, techniques as well as strategies that prevent bullying. This comprised of training sessions for teachers, 7 modules that deal with the recognition of aggression including increment of the awareness of bullying, identifying the bully, identifying the victim, taking control, resolution and intervention, the role of deterrence, easing the suffering, as well as giving surviving skills. Others are mediation skills, teacher handbook, as well as teacher support group. Newman-Carlson and Horne (2004) evaluated this program utilizing a quasi-investigational pretest and posttest control group strategy. The teacher handbook comprised of classroom guidance teachings so that teachers could use in teaching the bullying deterrence skills (Newman-Carlson &Horne, 2004).

The researchers stimulated collegiate teacher support teams of 5 to 10 teachers that could meet and serve as the continuing resource of classroom teachers for the purpose of: sharing their success tales, seeking advice from other teachers, obtaining additional classroom activities, dispelling fears and feel supported, developing joint problem solving skills. 15 educators received treatment and 15 educators made up the control team (Bauer et al, 2007). These educators taught 6th to 8th grade in a public school system in the South-eastern U.S. Measurements included disciplinary referrals, the Educator Inventory of Skills and Knowledge (EISK), the Educator Efficacy Scale (EES), and the Educator Efficacy and Attribution Measure (EEAM). Others were the Osiris School Administration System Activity Tracker (OAS), by the use of these mechanisms, Newman-Carlson and Horne discovered that the dependent variable of educators’ knowledge/utilization of intervention skills (EISK) and the dependent variable of educators’ self-efficacy in operating with different kinds of children increased, whilst the dependent variable of classroom bullying went down. In a quasi-investigational study by Bell, Raczynski& Horne (2010), this program was assessed for efficacy.in this study, the program was overseen in shortened form.

The abbreviated elements of the program included training for the educators, a teacher handbook and selected classroom activities from any of the 7 modules of the bully buster program, as well as educator support team sessions whereby challenging situations were to be addressed through role play. The experimental sample of the research comprised 488 school children in the 6th to 8th grades being taught by 52 educators in a public middle school in south-eastern U.S. the dependent variable of educator self-efficacy indicated a substantial variance on the Educator Expectancy as well as Efficacy Measure, though not on the educator sense of efficacy scale. The dependent variable of educator awareness/insight indicated no substantial change as determined by the school safety problems educator as well as the educator classroom climate. The dependent variables of learners’ insight of school climate, levels of ill-treatment as well as safety issues indicated no significant change as determined by the Learner’s classroom climate. The dependent variable of reporting of the bullying conduct augmented significantly as determined by parents on the problem behavior incidence scale (Bell et al, 2010).

  1. Olweus Bullying Prevention program (OBPP)

Bullying in accordance with this program is defined as hostile conduct that is deliberate and that involves an inequity of power. This concerns school-wide, classroom, individual as well as community strategies that establish a safe school environment, improve peer relationships as well as increase perception of and minimize the chances and rewards for bullying conducts. Olweus & Limber (2010), in their research, sought to determine the efficacy of this program. A quasi investigational design was not used because all schools in Norway implemented the program, which eliminated the possibility of using control schools. This program focuses on minimizing bullying and improving peer relations through the reconstruction of the school climate and establishment of a sense of oneness among the school children and adults in the school. Elements of the program include, school-level elements, classroom level elements, individual level elements as well as community level elements. The school level elements comprised of an evaluation of the nature and occurrence of bullying within the school, the formation of a board to organize the programand establish a system ensuring adult supervision of the school children outside the class. The classroom elements comprised the definition and enforcement of regulations against bullying, discussions as activities for the purpose of reinforcing ant-bullying values and customs. The individual elements intervene with school children with a past of bullying or ill-treatment (Olweus & Limber, 2010, p. 127).

This program targets the issue of bullying at 3 levels: the institute, classroom as well as the individual. The programaddresses the issue of bullying with numerous strategies at each level. At school level, pupils are issued with anonymous questionnaire, twenty five to forty five minutes long to evaluate the nature and occurrence of bullying in school. The survey is carried out in the mid of the school year before the initiative is introduced. Moreover, the school management organizes a conference day during which the consultants and the school management discuss about the findings from the pupil questionnaires, acquaint themselves with the program and its impacts, establish a bulling deterrence organizing committee, and plan for  implementation. The organizing committee comprise of representatives from all the constituencies that are involved with the school. The school level element is also comprised of the adult monitoring of the institute sections that are regularly the environment for bullying such as the playground (Olweus & Limber, 2010). The outcome of the study indicated a reduction in self-reported bullying and antisocial conducts.

  1. Safe School Ambassadors program

In a quasi-investigational research conducted by Pack, White, Raczynski & Wang (2011), this  indicated efficacy in minimizing bullying and maximizing awareness of bullying situations within schools. This program introduced by community matters, includes a student centered approach with the aim of minimizing bullying incidence and improving school environment. The program seeks at identifying and recruiting student frontrunners and then to train them to identify, deter and address the issues of aggression and ill-treatment of others. For this research, 5 middle schools in Texas were evaluated within 2 years. 3 institutes received treatment and were harmonized with 2 control institutes. In each of those treatment schools, approximately 80 students were recognized as socially prominent leaders of different groupings within the school. Through 3 original surveys and chosen school data, the researchers evaluated the dependent variables, which included the intervention behaviors in eyewitnesses, the number of incidences of reported bullying as well as suspensions as a result of bullying. This program was found to establish a greater rate of active bullying involvement for the male representatives in comparison to the control schools (Pack et al, 2011).

  1. The Take the Lead program

Research was conducted by Domino (2013), on the Take the Lead program in a pretest and posttest cohort strategy. The objective of the program is to maximize the social knowledge of school children in the social skills scale. The goals of this include self-evaluation and self-insight, establishing confidence and competence, establishment of stronger basic communication skills, and problem resolution skills. This program includes educator training, classroom management lessons that are centered on knowledge, skill, as well as application as parent training. Participant in this study included all the 7th grade students in a suburban public school in south-western Connecticut. The dependent variables of bullying and ill-treatment and determined by the peer relations questionnaire were significantly minimized by this program (Domino, 2013).

  • KiVa Anti-bullying program

In a quasi-investigational study, Karna et al. (2013) evaluated the efficacy of this program. This program was introduced to deter the national tendency of bullying. The program is predicated on the notion that positive change in the eyewitnesses’ conduct will minimize the rewards gained by bullies and their drive to bully others. The program strongly stresses on the understanding, self-efficacy as well as anti-bullying attitudes of onlookers (Karna et al, 2013). The elements of this  include classroom teachings, a virtual learning setting or older pupils, well established graphics and symbols, educator training as well as school groups to tackle bullying cases. The experimental sample for this research included 74 classes of 1st to 3rd grade students and 73 classes of 7th to 9th grade students. The revised Olweus questionnaire and a participant role questionnaire indicated a 20% reduction in ill-treatment in comparison to the control schools. In grade 7 to 9, the greatest effects were seen in the male population when measuring the dependent variable of bullying and ill-treatment (Karna et al, 2013).

Conclusion

This paper outlines current research on five anti-bullying programs created and implemented in schools today. These programs include; The Bully Buster program, Olweus Bullying Prevention, Safe School Ambassadors program,The Take the Lead program and KiVa Anti-bullying program. All these programs were found to be effective in dealing with the issue of bullying in the various schools. All the above five programs used ill-treatment and bullying as the key dependent variable in evaluating the results of their programs, though each of the programs utilized different measures to do so.

References

Bauer, N. S., Lozano, P., &Rivara, F. P. (2007). The effectiveness of the Olweus Bullying Prevention program in public middle schools: A controlled trail. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, 266-274.

Bear, G. G., & Blank, J. (2012). Fact sheet #2: Bullying prevention. Consortium to Prevent School Violence.

Bell, C. D., Raczynski, K. A., & Horne, A. M. (2010). Bully Busters abbreviated: Evaluation of a group-based bully intervention and prevention .GroupDynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice,14(3), 257–267.doi:10.1037/a0020596

Domino, M. (2013).Measuring the impact of an alternative approach to school bullying. Journal of School Health,83(6), 430–437. doi:10.1111/josh.12047

Karna, A., Voeten, M., Little, T. D., Alanen, E., Poskiparta, E., &Salmivalli, C. (2013). Effectiveness of the KiVaAntibullying : Grades 1–3 and 7–9.Journal ofEducational Psychology,105(2), 535–551. doi:10.1037/a00304I7

Newman-Carlson, D., & Horne, A. M. (2004). Bully Busters: A psychoeducational intervention for reducing bullying behavior in middle school students.Journal of Counseling & Development,82(3), 259267.

Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2010).Bullying in school: Evaluation and dissemination of the Olweus Bullying Prevention program. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,80(1), 124–134. doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.2010.01015.x

Pack, C., White, A., Raczynski, K., & Wang, A. (2011). Evaluation of the Safe School Ambassadors : A student-led approach to reducing mistreatment andbullying in schools.Clearing House,84(4), 127–133. doi:10.1080/00098655.2011.564974