Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 268 – 271

ERPA 2014

School bullying: the phenomenon, the prevention and the

intervention
Politi Elenia*
a
Aspete , ISAP station Irini, Athens- Neo Iraklion 141 21, Greece

Abstract

Nowadays, school bullying is an important issue which puzzles the school community. Researchers investigate the phenomenon
because they attempt to identify the problem and consequently to prevent and combat bullying in the school environment.
Olweus was the pioneer; the person who researched this educational issue and concluded to empirical outcomes. For this reason,
this presentation notes the significance of the research, shows some basic elements of the phenomenon and indicates the
importance of prevention and the intervention programs. Finally, the presentation reaches to results as regards bullying.
© 2014
© 2014 The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by
by Elsevier
ElsevierLtd.
Ltd.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the ERPA Congress 2014.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the ERPA Congress 2014.
Keywords:school bullying; prevention; intervention; programs; olweus; harassment; victimization.

1. Introduction

In education, the bullying issue was placed in the educational agenda by Olweus. Olweus (1978) defines bullying
as a process of harassment and the systematic victimization toward peers. In other words, he refers (1993) that the
student is bullied when he is repeatedly exposed to negative actions, which are organized by other stronger students.
According to the conference of Utrecht, the school bullying is referring to the violence which is caused to children
up to 12 years old and is characterized by repeated negative actions, such as teases, gestures, threats and sexual
implicit (Artinopoulou, 2001). In these occasions, it is also used the term victimization, which is connected with the
bullying because it accounts the victim’s unfair abuse (Crick, Bigbee 1998, Grotpeter, Crick 1996).
The basic characteristics of bullying behaviour are the repetition of the action and the targeting of weak children

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address:elenipoliti54@hotmail.com

1877-0428 © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the ERPA Congress 2014.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.193
 Politi Eleni / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 268 – 271 269

(Olweus,1993). In this way, school bullying is expressed as an aggressive behaviour which has essential
consequencesto school (Rigby, 1996).
As regards the criteria of repetition in bullying incidents, we should mention that there are some researchers who
do not accept it. Monks, Smith, Naylor, Barter, Ireland, Coyne (2009) note that only one incident of serious
harassment can be characterized as school bullying under certain conditions. More analytically, Lagerspetz,
Bjorkqvist and Peltonen (1988) believe that a separated incident is bullying behaviour when the victim has feelings
of fear and humiliation for a large period after the attack.
As far as the power imbalance is concerned, Olweus (1993) mentions that the bullying term cannot be used when
two students with an equal power can fight. In this point it is also important to notice that students in the early
childhood fight each other, but this fact does not have negative effects, because it is a social “game”, a way to relief
their energy. The basic point here is the sentimental reactions of the implementers. For instance, in the social
“game” of fight the children remain friends (Boulton, 1999). Furthermore, we must recognize the aim of physical
and psychological harm in order to identify the incident as bullying behaviour.
Bjorkvist, Lagerspetz, Kaukiainen (1992) detected two types of aggressiveness, namely the direct and the indirect
bullying behaviour. They define direct bullying type as a direct conflict, while the indirect bullying is expressing
with a convert way. Consequently, there are three types of bullying behavior. Firstly, the verbal bullying is
characterized by name calling, threats. Secondly, there is psychical bullying, the effects of which is kicking or
pushing other children. Thirdly, social exclusion is a most convert type of bullying (Crick, Grotpeter, 1995). The last
bullying type has to be further researched because it is the most convert way of aggressiveness and teachers cannot
easily recognize it (Crick, Bigbee, Howes, 1996).
In general, research shows that the bullies have some common characteristics. For instance, the bully does not
know how he can express and control his feelings and his anger. Moreover, bullies are children who usually have
experienced physical or psychological abuse by their family. Moreover, the research findings indicate that bullies are
derived by families which neglect child’s needs (Spyropoulos 2006).
On the other hand, the victims also have some basic characteristics. For instance, they are physical weaker than
their peers, so it is difficult to defend themselves. They are anxious and they feel stress in school environment. The
victims have few friends, but they are quiet and peaceful students. Furthermore, the research shows that the child-
victim feels insecure in the school, so he cries easily when he is in danger. The most important is that this child
believes that he is responsible of what is happening. As a result, the victims have low self- esteem.

2. The method

In the 1980s, Olweus designed anti-bullying methods and a bullying prevention program, which was applied to 42
schools in Bergen. The aims of the project were the reduction of bullying incidents inside and outside of school, the
avoidance of new bullying behaviours and the improvement of the relationships among peers (Olweus, 1999).
Generally, bullying prevention plays an essential role in the school environment. Therefore, children’s well-
being is depending on bullying prevention and intervention. The key point in Olweus prevention and intervention
was the implementation of teachers, parents, administrators and school staff. But to effectively deal with such a
sensitive issue, the whole school community should be well-trained. Especially nowadays, teacher’s role is multi-
dimensional, which requires lifelong learning and specialization.
To move on, Olweus’s prevention programme had a double action:
x in an individual level that was focus on student’s personal problems and
x in a systemic level that it was relied on the holistic change in the school environment. The success of the project
lied in the everyday attempt to reduce bullying incidents.
Moreover, the research suggests that the school has to provide a safe and school environment and also has to
establish certain behavioral rules. It is really essential to educate all students in diversity. The school counseling can
minimize the bullying incidents by providing support to bullies and to victims in order to be protected. Of course, the
teachers and the school staff must be well trained and always available, so they can effectively combat such
behaviours.
In this way, the school environment can ensure positive psychological climate, in which the students are able to
build strong bonds with their peers. All these strategies aim to sensitize the public, but most of all to provide an
270 Politi Eleni / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 268 – 271

equal school to all students. According to Olweus (1993), we can combat bullying behavior if we are focus on 3
levels:
x the school as a community,
x the classroom and
x individually to every child.
Generally, it is suggested to teachers to better supervise places where bullying occurs, such as the playground.
Olweus (1995) promoted the idea of parents’ direct involvement when bullying incidents happen. Also, the
community should provide counseling and psychological support to bullies, victims and their families. Finally, the
research shows that meetings, events and lectures can inform and sensitize people about the phenomenon (Olweus,
1997).
So it is evident that all bullying behaviours require direct intervention. The last 10 years in Norway, in Italy, in
Germany, in Belgium, in United Kingdom, a lot of campaigns have organized under collaboration with the
Department of Education in each country, with universities, Institutes and teachers’ trade unions. However, in case
of Greece, bullying is not referring in the Greek educational polices as a single problem.

3. Results

For this reason, the bullying incidents in Bergen reduced in 50% (Mpotsari, 2010) and the positive school climate
was risen dramatically (Limber, 2004).
Farrington and Ttofi (2009) researched the results of the prevention programs and found that the school bullying
was reduced by 20-23% and the victimization by 17-20%.
After 8 months of implementation of this prevention program, the results were positive. Generally, there was 48%
reduction of victimization in boys and 58% in girls. During the first 8 months of implementation, there was 16%
reduction of bullying incidents in boys-bullies and 30% in girls-bullies. (Olweus, 1995) After, 20 months, the same
programs achieved a reduction of 52% in boys-victims and 62% in girls- victims.
Moreover, the school climate was improved and the anti-social behaviour was decreased. This successful
implementation of anti-bullying strategies was the basis for other prevention programs in different countries.

4. Conclusion

The researchers must investigate more the bullying phenomenon, because it consists part of our society.
Children’s behaviour reflects the social environment, so there is no dilemma. The victims really suffer by the
bullying. They feel depressed, while at the same time their self-esteem is decreasing steadily. On the other hand, the
bullies are not educated to control their aggressive feelings, so their behaviour causes a lot of problems in their adult
life.
The aim of this presentation is to underpin the problem and to indicate some strategies to tackle the phenomenon.
Every child deserves equal educational opportunities and well-being in the school. For these reasons, further
research should be conducted to evaluate the phenomenon and to design suitable educational programs for
prevention and intervention.

References

Artinopoulou B. (2001) Violence in school :Research and Politics in Europe, Athens, Metaixmio
Ballard M., Argus T., and Rempley T. P. (1999) Bullying and School Violence: A proposed Prevention Program, NASSP Bulletin, 2, 38-47.
Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., & Kaukiainen, A. (1992) Do girls manipulate and boys fight? Developmental trends in regard to direct and
indirect aggression, Aggressive behavior, 18, 117- 127
Boulton, M. J., (1999) Concurrent and longitudinal relations between children’s playground behavior and social preference, victimization and
bullying, Child Development, 70, 4, 944- 954
Crick, N. R. & Bigbee, M.A. (1998) Relational and Overt forms of peer victimization: A Multi- informant Approach, Journal of consulting and
clinical psychology, 66, 337- 347
Crick, N. R. & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995) Relational aggression, gender and social psychological adjustment, Child Development, 66, 710- 722
 Politi Eleni / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 268 – 271 271

Crick, N. R., Bigbee, M.A., & Howes, C.( 1996) Gender differences in children’s normative beliefs about aggression:How do I hurt thee? Let me
count the ways, Child Development, 67, 1003- 1014
Farrington, D. P., & Ttofi, M. (2009) School based programs to reduce bullying and victimization. Campbell systemic reviews
Grotpeter, J. K., & Crick, N. R. (1996) Relational aggression, overt aggression, and friendship, Child Development, 67, 2328- 2338
Lagerspetz, K. M. J., Bjorkqvist, K., & Peltonen, T., (1988) Is indirect aggression typical of females? Gender differences in in aggressiveness in
11 to 12-year-old children, Aggressive Behavior, 14, 403- 414
Limber S. (2004) Implementation of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program in American Schools: Lessons learned from the field, 351-365
Monks, C. P., Smith, P., Naylor, P., Barter, C., Ireland, J., & Coyne, I. (2009) Bullying in different contexts: Commonalities, differences and the
role of theory, Aggression and violent behavior, 14, 146- 156
Mpotsari E., M., (2010) School bullying. Research results from the last two decades, Contemporary Issues in Education , 1, 23-42
Olweus, D., 1978 Aggression in the schools. Bullies and whipping boys. WashnigtonD.C., Hemisphere press (Wiley)
Olweus D. (1993) Bullying at School: What we know and what we can do, United Kingdom, Blackwell Publishing
Olweus, D., (1995) Peer abuse or bullying in school: Basic facts and a school-based intervention program, Prospects, 25, 133- 139
Olweus D. (1997) Bully/ Victim problems in school: Facts and Intervention, European Journal of Psychology of Education, 12, 495-510
Olweus D. (1999) Sweden. In the nature of school bullying: A cross-national perspective, London, Routledge
Rigby, K. (1996) Bullying in schools: and what to do about it. London, Jessica Kingsley
Second Hellenic Conference (2011) Findings for social support to victims- developing findings to design anti-bullying programs, Education
Sciences 2, 81-99
Second Hellenic Conference (2011) School bullying/ victimization, Education Sciences 3, 356-362
Spyropoulos F. (2006) The first step in delinquency, The art of crime, 4, Athens