Bullying in Schools, a Major Problem
Introduction
In the last three decades, there has been considerable quantitative research done by the researchers concerning bullying in schools and this research has been very useful in knowing its pros and cons. This research has helped in the determination and evaluation of the extent of bullying as a major problem. Researchers have also determined the causes and consequences of bullying.
Strong points of Bullying
It has also found out the culprits who are usually involved in bullying along with their types and genders. Both the offenders and victims experience and suffer tremendously due to the menace of bullying. According to the quantitative research, there are a number of adverse effects of bullying on the psychology and social behavior of the sufferers (see Kim & Leventhal, 2008; Kumpulainen, 2008; Nansel, Craig, Overpeck, Saluja, Ruan, and the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children Bullying Analyses Working Group (2004); Srabstein & Piazza 2008). Research on bullying has also been successful in exploring the behavioral patterns and views related to it. Not only this, the phenomenon is now well understood. Despite the fact that research done on the mentioned issue is almost always quantitative, researchers have also studied this issue by using qualitative methods for the collection of data. They have spent the last decade in analyzing this gathered data for studying the menace of bullying. These studies that are just few in number have been truly helpful in uncovering the intricacies involved in bullying and unfair treatment towards others. The unveiling of these complexities has consequently disclosed the meagerness of the preparation of the bullying construct. It won’t be incorrect to state that this problem needs to be researched in a consistent manner.
Different Perspectives of Bullying
The bullying construct and the problems associated with it have been identified by a number of authors. According to Arora (1996), Madsen (1996) and Bosworth et al. (1999), bullying has been defined differently in various surveys. However, regardless of its various definitions, it is possible that the people who answered the surveys had different concepts/ideas and this is the reason why their answers didn’t match up with the definitions that the survey included. For this reason, it is not astonishing that the survey data needs validity and verification. In the recent times, various researchers have necessitated to research on bullying considering it from a point of view that is social-ecological (Swearer & Doll, 2001; Swearer & Espelage, 2004). The reason behind this call is the conjectural perspective that has grown out of the contributions of Bronfenbrenner (1977, 1979) and Cairns & Cairns (1991).
The Social Relational Theory and The Theory of Status Relationships
Theories related to social-ecological perspectives place the individual in a context that is nested in his/her role in society. These social contexts consist of his near and dear ones including the family members, relatives, friends, acquaintances, school fellows, office colleagues, neighbors, the society and the general public. The theoretical work done in the contemporary times suggest that bullying can be understood really well by viewing it from this social-ecological perspective.
On the other hand, this perspective is really broad and because of this breadth, it is not possible for the social-ecological theory to figure out and get to the bottom of the inter-personal and related variables that act as contributors for bullying to exist. By knowing all there is to know, social ecological theory makes it easier for the researchers to have a bird’s eye view on the issue. However, this theory is unsuccessful in shedding light and focusing on the interactions that act as major contributors to the dynamics related to both bullies and victims of bullying. As a consequence, it is suggested that for understanding bullying and the aggression related to it that is mostly observed in teenagers; it is necessary to emphasize on the two additional theories related to social-ecological perspective. These two theories are known as the social relational theory and the theory of status relationships. The two mentioned theories begin by introducing relationship elements that intermingle with social contexts. In addition, these theories are also able to deal with bullying characteristics and associated aggression that are most obvious in the high school environment, that is to say intimacy, disagreement, supremacy, and position.
Social-Ecological Framework
The investigators of bullying issue have also proposed a framework related to social-ecological framework that describes the occurrence of bullying and related factors. It is exceedingly important for us to recognize and analyze the social ecology that helps in the establishment and maintenance of the behaviors related with bullying and victimization (Kerns & Prinz, 2002). This understanding and comprehension is necessary for the development and implementation of bullying prevention and intrusion programs that may prove effective in the future. It is an old concept that the individual is influenced and affected by the multiple environments. A lot of research has been done on this notion and people have also written a lot about it. It is not a new idea that family, society and culture play a very important role in molding the personality of an individual and there is a reciprocal interplay between a person and his/her environment (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). According to the ecological-systems theory, each and every one of the individuals is part of an interconnected system by which individuals are located at the center. This is from this centre that the individual moves out so that he/she could become a part of all the other systems that eventually help him to grow and develop personally/professionally (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).
Bronfenbrenner’s Theory
The interconnectedness of the said systems has been described that ultimately act together for having an impact on the behavior of individuals (Garbarino & DeLara, 2002). Thus, bullying and victimization are being considered as ecological observable facts that are recognized and complete unpredictably (Swearer & Doll, 2001). The Bronfenbrenner’s theory suggests that an infant is an indivisible component of a social network. This social network is consisted of four interrelated systems i.e. microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem. A number of psychologists have been influenced by Bronfenbrenner’s theory as far as the individual analysis is concerned along with its various environmental systems that have a huge impact. In view of this fact, the ecological systems theory has turned out to be a really significant theory and has also given a basis to the works and contributions of other theorists.
Four Interrelated Systems
The Micro-system is the immediate environment that directly affects people. It consists of one’s family, friends, relatives, colleagues and society. Micro-system is composed of people with whom one has a direct social interaction. According to this theory, people are not simple receivers of the experiences when they socialize with the mentioned social agents. Instead, people are the force that contributes in the micro=system and its construction. The relationship between the micro-systems in an individual’s life makes up the meso-system. The experiences one has with his family may affect his school life. For instance, neglecting on the part of parents may affect the relationship of a child with teachers at school. The exo-system can be defined as a system that does not allow an individual to play a constructive role in life experiences. However, the micro-systems of the life of such an individual are directly impacted by those non-constructive experiences. For example, if a child has a more close association with his father, he/she may have either a conflicting or a tight bond with his/her mother in case if the father goes abroad for a long period of time. The immediate culture of an individual makes up the involving his/her socioeconomic status, his/her ethnicity, neighborhood etc. For instance, belonging to a poor family may make a person hardworking.