Bullying & Gender-Based Violence in Schools: Assessing the Problem and Developing Interventions Essay

Bullying & Gender-based violence in schools: Assessing the Problem and Developing Interventions By Shabina Rehman Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Management & Science University, Shah Alam, Malaysia. E-Mail: [email protected] com & Sultan Rehman Sherief Lecturer, Department of Business Administration, Management & Science University, Shah Alam, Malaysia. E-Mail: [email protected] edu. my ABSTRACT This article purports to re-introduce the phenomenon of bullying& gender-based violence in order to facilitate readers with an updated version about the problem- from different perspectives, by researchers of national & international scope.

In the African continent, bullying in school is generally sexual and gender-based. An analysis of some of the most important risk factors has been done to provide a clear picture, which will enable the development of effective interventions. The main objective of this article is to provide suggestions in developing a systemic approach to curb bullying. Useful strategies have been suggested to tackle this problem which is very important to the educationists worldwide.

Keywords: Bully, aggression, gender-based violence, personality, peer group, media 1 I. INTRODUCTION Bullying is not a new problem for schools, since it has been present for a long time; however only in recent years is its importance recognized. This is a specific phenomenon of school violence, which affects schools around the world regardless of national borders, geography or politics (Debarbieux, 2003). Defining bullying is no small task, especially if we seek a definition which is agreed upon by researchers of the phenomenon.

Nonetheless, despite the many proposed definitions, we can affirm that most share a common characteristic: bullying is identified as a specific conduct of aggressive behavior (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). The definition offered by Olweus (1993), states that “bullying is a set of physical and /or verbal behaviors that a person or group of persons, directs against a peer, in hostile, repetitive and ongoing fashion, abusing real or fictitious power, with the intent to cause harm to the victim. This definition establishes fulfillment of certain criteria in order for the behavior exhibited to be defined as bullying: • • • an imbalance of power between the victim and the aggressor, to be understood as a dishonest, domineering, opportunistic and illegitimate use of power over one’s opponent; incidence and duration of the bullying situation with a minimum incidence of once per week and a minimum duration of six months; intentionality and proactive character of the aggression, since one is seeking to obtain some social, material or personal benefit, without prior provocation.

Ever since the initial pioneer studies by Olweus in Scandinavian countries, many other studies have followed. In the first phase of research, most studies focused on an attempt to define the problem. (Olweus, 1993; Rivers & Smith, 1994; Crick, Casas & Ku, 1999), giving way to the other studies addressing the incidence of the problem (Boulton, 1993; Olweus, 1996; Smith, Morita, Junger-Tas, Olweus, Catalano & Slee, 1999; Defensor del Pueblo, AA.

VV. , 1999), an aspect which still concerns us today and is reflected by specific studies published in the last five years (Carney & Merrel, 2001; Solberg & Olweus, 2003; Toldos, 2005; Avile’s & Monjas, 2005; Cerezo & Ato, 2005; Ramirez, 2006).

The detailed description of the phenomenon then encouraged the appearance of studies concerned with describing the agents involved (Rigby, 1997; Monks, Smith & Swettenham, 2003; Veenstra, Lidenberg, Oldehinkel, De winter, Verlhulst & Ormel, 2005; Camodeca & Gossens, 2005; Perren & Alsaker, 2006); with analyzing the problem’s risk factors (Lahey, Waldman & Mc Burnett, 1999; Kokkinas & Panayiotou, 2004; Farrington, 2005) and analyzing the effects of the problem particularly among its victims (Crick & Grothpeter, 1995: Perren & Alsaker , 2006). As a final result of all the prior research as well as results from current studies, there is now an increase in research focused on the design, development and systematic evaluation of intervention programs ( Cowie & Olaffson, 2000; Trianes & Garcia, 2002; Elinoff, Chafouleas & Sassu, 2004; Nordhagen, Neilsen, Stigum & Kohler, 2005; Benitez, Ameida & Justicia, in press). II. VARIOUS FORMS OF BULLYING Olweus’s definition needs to be expanded with regard to the nature of the behaviors exhibited.

Some authors including Olweus himself distinguish between direct and indirect aggressions of the bullying phenomenon (Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz & Kaukianen, 1992; Olweus, 1993) or overt as compared to covert aggressions (Crick, Casa & Ku, 1999). • Direct or overt aggressions, includes both physical (kicks, punches, pushes, threats with weapons, etc. ) and verbal (insults, blackmail, etc. ). • Similarly, indirect or covert aggressions can be of a physical nature (hiding property, damaging materials, stealing, etc. and those of a verbal nature (name calling, spreading rumors). Bullying may further be classified into physical and psychological types which may usually occur together. Forms perpetrated by teachers and other school staff, with or without the overt or tacit approval of education ministries and other authorities that oversee schools include corporal punishment and other cruel and humiliating forms of punishment or treatment, sexual and gender-based violence, and bullying.

Forms of violence perpetrated by children include bullying, sexual and gender-based violence, schoolyard fighting, gang violence, and assault with weapons. Technology provides a new medium for bullying using the Internet and mobile phones, and has given rise to new terms such as ‘cyber-bully’ and ‘cyber-bullying’. Studies suggest that sexual harassment of schoolgirls is common throughout the world, to varying degrees by teachers themselves as well as by students, and that it may be particularly common and extreme in places where other forms of school violence are also prevalent.

As we can observe, hostile behaviors displayed by aggressors go beyond mere harassment, and both direct and indirect aggressions can be verbal, psychological or involve social exclusion. III. FORMS OF BULLYING IN AFRICAN SCHOOLS In the African continent, the most common type of bullying in schools is the sexual and gender-based violence. Gender-based violence stems from gender inequality, stereotypes and socially imposed roles. Sexual violence, including sexual harassment towards girls may be motivated by the desire to punish or humiliate girls because of their sex or sexuality, or by sexual interest and ravado. It also serves to intimidate, humiliate and diminish girls. This is demonstrated by the widespread practice of blaming girls who are victims of rape, and wherein 3 gender discrimination is an unquestioned norm, blaming girls may extend to almost any kind of sexual harassment, assault or exploitation. A study in Ethiopia found that students attributed the sexual harassment of girls to the way the girls dressed and not to boys’ attitudes toward girls. (Mengistu,1997).

In a United Nations Secretary-General’s Study on Violence against Children, (2005) in West and Central Africa, teachers justified sexual exploitation of female students by saying that their clothes and behavior were provocative, and that the teachers were far from home and in sexual need. In sub-Saharan African countries, the average rate of HIV prevalence among girls and young women aged 15 to 24 years is now three times higher than the average rate among boys and young men of that age.

Sexual violence is increasingly recognized, although still under-studied, as an important factor in these increases. (UNAIDS, 2006). An analysis of data from the Global School- Based Student Health Survey (GSHS) found that in Namibia, 19% of both boys and girls answered ‘yes’ when asked if they had “ever been physically forced to have sex. ” In Swaziland, 9% of boys and 10% of girls said ‘yes’; in Uganda, 13% of boys and 25% of girls; in Zambia, 30% of boys and 31% of girls; in Zimbabwe, 11% of boys and 14% of girls. WHO, 2003-2005) In 1999, research based on a sample of 10,000 schoolgirls in Kenya found that one-third were sexually active and that, of those, 40% said their first encounter was forced, usually by a male student. (Youri, 1994) Forced sex is a risk factor for HIV/AIDS. This is a growing concern in the context of schools in Eastern and Southern Africa (as in other regions), the Regional Consultation held for the Study identified sexual harassment and abuse by students and teachers, usually male, against female students as major problems.

Participants of the Consultation attested to cases of teachers promising higher grades in exchange for sex with girls, and also that girls who become pregnant as a result of sexual abuse by teachers or students are often expelled from school. In some countries, marriage of a pregnant girl to her abuser may absolve him of legal responsibility, increasing the risks of forced marriage. A study conducted by UNICEF (2004) found that such sexual abuse was common in all countries of West and Central Africa, and that Ministries of Education were aware of it and considered it to be one of the main reasons why girls drop out of school.

A Human Rights Watch study (2001) found that sexual harassment and abuse of girls by teachers and students in South African schools was widespread and that girls were raped in school toilets, empty classrooms, dormitories and hostels. In a recent survey in Ghana, 6% of schoolgirls said teachers had blackmailed them, threatening to give them lower grades if they refused to have sexual relations. Twothirds of them had not reported the incidents due to feelings of shame, advice that they should be tolerant, and their belief that no action would be taken against the culprits.

A small percentage of boys had experienced 4 sexual harassment, too. Of the boys, 24% admitted they had participated in rape, including gang rape. Of the girls, 14% said they had been raped by boys close to them. (Brown, 2003). IV. ANALYSIS OF RISK FACTORS Risk factors make it more likely that a child will be a victim or perpetrator of violence in schools, while protective factors make it less likely. Both individual and external characteristics (including beyond the school), influence the increase and decrease the likelihood that a child will be involved in school violence or seriously harmed by it when it occurs.

Research on risk factors for violence against children specific to schools is lacking for the full range of international contexts, and tends to focus on peer violence. In general, research from mainly industrialized countries suggests that influences tend to change with developmental stage: for example, the influence of family is stronger for young children, while the influence of peers is stronger for adolescents. Consistently emerging from research as significant risk factors specific to schools are poor academic performances, high absenteeism, leaving school early, and unstructured free time.

In addition, many of the factors identified in research about other aspects of life are also likely to be relevant to schools – for example, pro-violence attitudes, risk-taking, weak social ties, affiliation with anti-social peers, poor parent–child relationships, drug abuse, harsh, lax or inconsistent discipline, or poor parental monitoring. i) Characteristics of the Family, Home and Parents’ Child-Raising Styles The family is the first socialization model for children, and doubtless is a key element in the origin of violent behaviors.

A large number of studies have investigated family influence in the aggressive child and the child at risk (Harris & Reid, 1981; Morton, 1987; Patterson, Debaryshe & Ramsey, 1989; Patterson & Yoeger, 2002; Farrington, 2005), and they identify the following family aspects as predictive factors of violent behavior: • Family de-structuring: change in traditional roles, absence of one parent, lack of attention, etc. • Abuse and violent modeling in the nuclear family, where the child learns to solve conflicts using physical harm or verbal aggression. Family models where one learns that power is exerted by being the strongest, with a lack of negotiation & dialogue. • Child raising methods with lax, inconsistent practices, restrictive practices, or in some cases excessively punitive practices are the most important factors, along with poor supervision. • Lack of affection between spouses, with absence of security and emotional warmth. Children are socialized from a very young age; they are taught how to handle frustration to react in certain situations and to solve problems effectively. Most of this early socialization takes place at the child’s home, in 5 he family nest and the evidence is clear: parents of aggressive children punish them frequently, more consistently and ineffectively. They also tend to be coercive and manipulative with their children and they fail to reinforce their children’s positive, prosocial behaviors. A coercive style in the parent/ child relationship leads parents to unconsciously reinforce coercive behavior in their children since the latter are rewarded when they stop bothering or manipulating their parents. These children learn that aggressive behavior usually leads them to getting what they want.

Parents who are careless who reject their children or who are negligent also have a high risk that their children become involved in violent acts. Neglect or lack of parental follow up of their children has been labeled as a factor which increases the risk of delinquency, resentment in the child, etc. which can be expressed through poor school performance and antisocial behavior. Children whose parents are antisocial also have a high risk of falling into delinquency and violence. Part of this risk is related to the violent or criminal behavior of their parents or it can be related to an inherited temperament.

Finally we must note that children who are victims of abuse by their parents during childhood have a higher risk of being involved in violent acts during the adolescence. (Farmington, 2005) In a study by Thornberry (1994), 38% of young people from non-violent families admitted having been involved at some time in violent acts. This percentage increases to 60% when we speak of children who belong to families where any type of violent acts occurs (domestic violence, hostile family atmosphere, child abuse) and even 78% when children of these families are under the influence of all three types of violence.

Results from this study suggest a significant influence from ongoing exposure to acts of violence and victimization as an underlying factor in development of violence in the child. (ii) Personality, temperament & impulsiveness Certain personal characteristics such as sociability or impulsiveness can explain how one reacts in certain situations (Farmington, 2005). Several studies have found a relationship between violent behavior, impulsiveness and the child’s temperament (Brier, 1995).

A temperament characterized by high levels of activity, inflexibility, difficulty in life transitions and being prone to frustrations and distraction makes the child less understanding, have less self-control and being more impulsive. Some of these children fall under clinical profiles such as hyperactivity or opposition conflicts, and a relationship exist between these clinical profiles and through risk of committing delinquent or violent acts. The longitudinal study led by Caspi (2000) showed a strong relationship between a difficult temperament at three yrs of age, and a later display of violent behaviors.

Chess & Thomas (cited in Farrington, 2005) reached a 6 similar conclusion relating a difficult temperament at four yrs of age, characterized by irritability, low obedience and poor adaptability, with poor psychological adjustment between ages of 17 and 24 yrs of age. (iii) Intelligence, school achievement & social adjustment Several papers have documented the importance of a limited intelligence and school achievement as important predictors of behavior disorders, delinquency and anti social behavior more frequently and commonly by students older than themselves.

This age difference is accentuated in primary school and is weaker in secondary school, just as it is supported by other studies (Olweus, 1993; Rigby, 1997; Nansel, 2001) (iv) Influence of the Peer Group, the School & the Social Context According to Lipsey & Derzon (1998) having delinquent peer group is an indicator which precedes development of violent behaviors. In this sense, it is clearly apparent that violent young people associate with peers who have behavior problems and that the latter reinforce their anti-social behavior.

A peer group with behavior problems also has a negative influence regarding school, as expressed by: school absenteeism, lack of identification with other students and with teachers, lack of commitment to one’s studies, etc. On the other hand, there are factors internal to the school institution itself which encourage development of violence, since the school stratum itself presupposes a certain format and certain basic principles of socialization.

Fernandez (1998) indicates the most significant traits that can provoke appearance of abusive conduct also include: a) lack of common reference criteria among the teachers b) problems of school organization c) appearance of different cultural values due to immigration d) roles & relationships between teachers & students e) relationships among the students f) size of the school facilities and g) punitive and sanctioning strategies used by the schools to address violent acts among students.

Outside of the school the relationship between violence and certain community indicators may be caused by: a) lack of neighborhood organization b) changes of family residence c) lack of parental supervision of their children’s behavior d) strong presence of drugs & gangs, f) precarious socio-economic contexts etc. (Coulton, Korbin & Su 1998).

Violence at school is to a large degree, a reflection of what happens in the neighborhood and in the social context where the individual lives, to the extent that a significant relationship has been established between the quantity of violence in the neighborhood where the child lives and the level of violence seen at his school. (Ascher, 1994) 7 (v)The Media The media are being questioned as a first catalyst of information. The content of the media message presents violence as something immediate ordinary and frequent.

The level of physical violence in cartoons is being discussed by everyone in public debate. Furthermore, children and adolescents are frequently exposed to intense levels of televised violence whether through films, music channels, videogames, cell phone messages, newspapers, news broadcasts, etc. Several studies have reached conclusions that exposure to violent acts is strongly associated with the risk of suffering or being involved in aggressive or violent behaviors (Derksen & Strasburger, 1996) There seem to be three clear effects of violence in the media. ) First children exposed to high levels of violence in the media more easily accept aggressive attitudes and after witnessing violent acts, they begin to behave more aggressively with their peers. b) Second, chronic exposures extended over a period of time can desensitize the child toward violence and its consequences. c) Third, children accustomed to seeing violence in the media perceive a violent world where one must fight to subsist; they have a growing fear of becoming a victim in that world and they develop the need to fight and abuse others so as not to become victims themselves.

It is true that not all children who grow up watching large quantities of televised violence end up becoming violent adolescents or adults; however, they do show more aggression when they are small and especially after they have watched violence. By contrast children who watch programs with pro-social content are less aggressive more cooperative and have more desire to share their things with other children. V. USING RESTORATIVE STRATEGIES TO TACKLE SCHOOL VIOLENCE a) Suppressive Strategy vs. Restorative Strategy There have been two major strategies for tackling school violence – a suppressive strategy and a restorative strategy.

Broadly, the former values establishing blame, while the latter values accountability as well as restoring relationships. Restorative strategy is a collective term which covers a wide spectrum of tactics relating to restorative practices. These practices range from informal restorative statements, impromptu conference to as formal as third party formal mediation session or family group conference. It’s real focus place upon restoration of relationships, not just resolving disputes without real reconciliation (Umbreit, 1995; Wachtel, 1997). A Suppressive strategy is basically a punitive approach which is bully-focused and blame- driven.

In Hong Kong, school managers tend to reply overly on harsh punishment and deter students from engaging school violence. Teachers used to correcting student’s wrong-doing publicly will make the bullies ashamed. However, 8 the heavy use of punitive measures, as opposed to resolving conflicts through restorative practices, may make the relationships between bullies and victims much worse. (Morrison, 2002) Scholars have found that overreaction might intensify the delinquent problem and inadvertently promote further delinquency (Gray, 1994; Wong, 1999).

Unlike the suppressive strategy, a restorative strategy aims to involving the conflicting parties to resolve conflicts and rebuild a relationship. Having known that bullying is negatively associated to a harmonious school environment; and positively associated with violence-prone values and poor individual’s psychosocial conditions- this strategy designs to mobilize resources to develop ways of changing attitudes and habits of the bullies, through restorative practices. This strategy is necessary for creating a counter culture of school violence and breaking the vicious cycle of bullying.

The following steps may be taken to counter bullying in a restorative manner• To encourage victims to tell the truth and help them to develop a strong character. • To educate bullies who lack social skills and remind them not to seek attention in a teasing way. • To shame bullies who intend to do harm through re-integrative shaming method without negatively labeling them • To promote a peaceful environment by using restorative practices such as use of third-party mediation method or peer mediation program. (Braithwaite, 1989). VI.

A SYSTEMIC APPROACH TO CURB SCHOOL VIOLENCE Bullying and victimization need to be addressed from a systemic perspective. In order to intervene successfully to stop these problems, action must be taken on many levels. It illustrates that interventions should be implemented not only with the bully and victim, but also within the school, within the peer group (classroom and playground), and with parents. a) Systemic Principles for Anti-Bullying Interventions The following principles of the systemic approach are important to remember when addressing bullying and victimization. • Bullying and victimization do not occur in isolation. We need to extend our focus beyond the bully and the victim to include: peers, school, parents, community, and society. To address the problem effectively, change is required at all of these levels of the system. Implementing an anti-bullying program is a complex and a prolonged process because of its systemic nature. 9 • • Recognize the roles and responsibilities of bullies, victims, peers, teachers, counselor, principal, community. Unless the adults in the school change their attitudes and behavior, the students will not.

Leadership to address bullying problems is essential for change. Source: Making a Difference in Bullying, Debra J. Pepler & Wendy Craig, April, 2000. 10 b) Creating a Whole School Policy A whole school policy needs to be created, which will prove to be the keystone of anti-bullying interventions. It should be a statement of the rights, roles, and responsibilities of all members of the school community. It must include a commitment to address bullying, a definition, and processes to prevent and intervene.

A steering committee to develop and implement Whole School Policy should essentially include the school principal, representatives from parent council, teachers, other school staff, and students. A whole school policy should define the specific goals for this school community and must include: • adult). • Strategies for preventing bullying: – develop awareness and pro-social attitudes – teach children to avoid bullying – promote cooperative interactions – Staff model positive conflict resolution. Reporting: – steps for children and staff to report bullying – ensure communication, recording, follow-up • Responding to bullying: – develop formative consequences – who is responsible for immediate and follow-up responses – strategies for supporting bullies and victims – when are parents involved • Implementation: – changes required in school organization and interactions – time and resources required, available strengths – necessary training for staff, students, parents, and community • Assessment: -information and strategy to monitor effectiveness of policy, prevention, and intervention A definition of bullying: types, severity, identification, dynamics (e. g. , child-child, adult-child, child- 11 VII. How Can These Solutions Be Implemented? a) Formative Consequences for Bullying In all cases, the aggresors should be held responsible for their bullying behavior. It is important to remember, however, not to bully the bully as this generates feelings of hostility and alienation. The following is a range of consequences that not only provide a clear message that bullying is unacceptable, but also build awareness and skills to promote the students’ responsibility.

We refer to these as formative consequences, as they provide support for students to learn the skills and acquire the insights that they are lacking. In this way, the consequences for bullying can provide an opportunity to educate and support students who are in difficulty. Through formative consequences, students who bully can learn to turn their negative power and dominance into positive leadership. • Withdraw privileges (e. g. , recess, basketball practice) and replace with an instructive activity. • Make amends that are formative (i. e. , work in cafeteria in school and give money to the victim). • Activities that promote perspective taking skills and empathy (e. g. novel study, story writing, drawing a picture of what it feels like to be a victim). • Bully reflects on his/her own strengths and weaknesses. • Role-play the victim of the same behaviors with the teacher. • Observe acts of kindness around the school and in the community. • Encourage the bully to identify the link between power (or strength) and kindness. It is important for them to view prosocial behavior as worthwhile, valid, and consistent with positive leadership. • Lead a class discussion on the harmful effects of bullying. b) Principles and Strategies to Support the Victim of Bullying When dealing with a bullying problem, it doesn’t help to instruct the victim to solve the problem herself.

Children who are persistently victimized have most likely exhausted their strategies for responding to bullying. Each time they have been bullied, they have most likely tried something to stop it. By the time they approach an adult, they may have reached the end of their tolerance because no strategy they have tried has been successful in stopping the bullying. Furthermore, peers consider it “acceptable” to bully someone with low social status. Therefore, it is essential that an adult assists the victim and intervenes to shift the power imbalance between the victim and bully. The goal is to take the power to torment away from the bully and to protect and empower the victim. • Reassure the victimized child that it is her right to feel safe at school. Assure the student that you view the bullying as serious and that her concerns and fears are justified. 12 • Counsel to support victim to cope with effects of bullying. • Generate a list of possible responses that she could use if similar attacks occur. Ensure that the victim understands the importance of confiding in an adult if this form of harassment occurs again. • Provide the student with language to speak out for herself. Empower her to speak out against her own victimization and that of others. • Develop strategies to strengthen and protect the victimized girl. • Build on her strengths to develop confidence. • Ensure that she has others to support her and enhance her social status. This support can be built in numerous ways: (1) connecting the victim with prosocial peers from her own age group; (2) Being friendly with an older girl in the school might provide a confidant, someone who can keep an eye on the victim, and start rebuilding the victim’s social status. c) Principles and Strategies for Dealing with Parents Schools occasionally find dealing with parents of bullies and victims a challenge. It is essential, however, to build the links between the family and school in order to support both the children who are aggressive and those who are the victims of bullying. The following are principles that can be suggested in connecting with parents. Always contact and inform of problem • Convey school’s concern • Work together to gain understanding • Be supportive • Recognize differences in family values • Use a problem solving approach • Provide the school’s perspective and school plans for monitoring the problem • Invite future communication and collaboration in supporting the children at risk. d) Strategies for Staff in Supporting Victims • Talk to victim and take her story seriously. Although it is often difficult to observe girls’ bullying, students seldom make up stories of this form of harassment. Assure victim that you will be responsive and tell her that you want her to keep you informed. • Talk to victim’s parents; express concern and determination to take action. • Identify perpetrator(s). • Identify peer group that is backing the bully. 13 • Take the girl who is bullying to the principal’s office and report concern. • Support victim in conjunction with principal. Assess their level of support and create opportunities for them t gain peer support • Provide class wide lessons in assertiveness strategies for standing up to bullies • Identify two or three prosocial peers in class and provide them with activities to work on with the victim • Work collaboratively with the victim’s family to support and protect the student • Encourage the student to experience accomplishments in a favored domain • Promote assertiveness and social skills • Coach the student in ways to respond if it happens again e) Principles and Strategies at the Peer Level Peers play a central role in bullying interactions. But they are reticent to intervene due to fear, lack of strategies and skills, group dynamics, lack of understanding their role and status management.

Hence watching bullying interactions inadvertently supports the bully and the lack of action to support victim reinforces him. A few strategies have been suggested to deal with the issue of motivating peers into playing an active role to curtail bullying in schools. • Develop a code of behavior and rules about bullying • Consistently monitor bullying and provide consequences for it • Conduct regular class meetings to discuss bullying • Educate students about bullying • Integrate issues of bullying into the curriculum through activities such as drama, books, films, story writing, and art • Discuss power and how it can be used aggressively • Highlight everyone’s role in bullying • Create a supportive and cooperative climate to ensure students are not marginalized. Create climate that permits and supports those who disclose victimization • Develop attitudes and activities that promote empathy for victims • Recognize and discuss dilemma for peers • Differentiate tattling and reporting • Develop language and scripts for intervening when you see someone being bullied 14 • Teach skills for intervening VII. Conclusion Bullying is a problem at school: its consequences affect all agents involved, and indirectly, the rest of the educational community that must coexist with the effects being produced. Research on this problem has covered much ground, and yet there is still a long way to go for researchers focused on analysis of the problem. Implementing an Anti-Bullying Program is a complex and prolonged process.

Implementation must be systemic or total and it should be at all levels of the school. However, change in students’ behaviors will not occur without change in the adults’ behaviors, and when change takes place within the school staff, students, bullies and victims, as well as the parents, significant decreases in bullying can be realized. VIII. Bibliography • AA. VV. (1999). Ombudsman’s Report on school violence. Madrid : Ministrio del Interior • Aviles, J. M. & Monjas, I. (2005). Study on theincidence of indimation and bullying in compulsory secondary education, using the questionnaire on intimidation and bullying. ) Anales de Psicologia, 21 (1), 27-41. • Benitez, J. L. ; Almeida, A & Justicia, F. (in press).

Student Friendship league, developing students’ social skills for confronting bullying. Infancia y Aprendizaje. • Bjorkqvist, K. , Lagerspetz, K. & Kaukianen, 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. (1993). Aggressive fighting in British school children. Educational Studies, 19, 19-39. • Brier, N. (195). Predicting antisocial behavior in youngsters displaying poor academic achievement: A review of risk factors. Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 16, 271-276. • Brown C (2003). Sexual Abuse of School Children in Ghana.

Cape Coast, Ghana, Centre for Development Studies, University of Cape Coast/UNICEF. • Camodeca, M. & Goossens, F. (20050. Aggression, social cognitions, anger and sadness in bullies and victims. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46 (2), 186-197. • Carney, A. g. & Merrell, K. W. (2001). Bullying in schools: Perspective on understanding and preventing an international problem. School Psychology International, 22(3), 364- 382. • Caspi, A. (2000). The child is father of the man: personality continuities from childhood to adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 158-172. • Cerezo, F. & Ato, M. (2005). Bullying in Spanish and English pupils : a sociometric perspective using the BULL-S questionnaire.

Educational psychology, 25(4),353-367. 15 • Coulton, C. ; Korbin, J. & Su, M. (1998). Measuring neighborhood contxt for young children in an urban area. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24. • Cowie, H. & Olafsson, R. (2000). The role of peer support in helping the victims of bullying in a school with high levels of aggression. School Psychology International, 21(1), 79-95. • Crick, N. R. & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Children’s treatment by peers: victims of relational and overt aggression. Developmental Psychology, 35, 367-385. • Debarbieux, E. (2003). School violence: a worldwide problem. www. unesco. org • Derksen, D. J. & Strasberger, V. C. (1996).

Media and television violence: effects on violence, aggresson and antisocial behaviors in children. In A. M. Hoffman (Ed. ) Schools, violence and Society. Wesport, CT: Praegar. • Elinoff, M. Chafouleas, S. & Sassu, K. (2004). Bullying: considerations for defining and intervening in school settings. Psychology in the Schools, 41(8), 887-897. • Espelage, D. & swearer, S. M. (2003). Research on school bullying and victimization: what have we learned and where do we go from here? School Psychology Review, 32, 365- 383. • Farrington, D. (2005). Childhood origins of Antisocial behavior. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 12, 177-190. • Fernandez, I. (1998).

Prevention of violence & conflict resolution. School climate as a quality factor. Madrid: Narcea. • Gray, P. (1994). Inside the Hong Kong Juvenile Court: The Decision-making Process in Action. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong. • Griffin, R. & Gross A. (2004). Childhood Bullying: current empirical findings and future directions for research. Aggressive & violent behavior, 9, 379-400. • Harris, A. & Reid , J. B. (1981). The consistency of a class coercive child behaviors across settings for individual subjects. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 9, 219-227. • Human Rights Watch (2001). Scared at School: Sexual Violence against Girls in South African Schools.

New York, Human Rights Watch • Monks, C. , Smith, P. & Swettenham, j. (2003). Aggressors, victims and defenders in preschool: peer, self and teachers reports. Merril-Palmer Quarterly, 49(3), 453-469. • Morton, T. (1987). Childhood aggression in the context of family interaction. In Crowell, D. : Evans, I. M. & O’Donnel, C. R. (eds). Childhood Aggression and violence. New York: Plenum press. 16 • Nansel. , T. ,Craig. W. , Overpeek, M. , Daluja, G. & Raun, W. (2004). Crossnational consistency in the relationship between bullying and psychosocial adjustment. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 158, 730-736. • Nordhagen, R. , Nielsen, A. , Stigum, H. & Kohler, L. (2005).

Parental reprted bullying among Nordic children: a population based study. Child: Care, Health & Development, 31 (6), 693-701. • Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. • Olweus, D. (1996). The revised Olweus Bully/victim questionnaire. Mimeo, Bergen, Norway: Research Centre for Health Promotion, University of Bergen. • Patterson, G. & Yoerger, K. (2002). A developmental model for early and late onset delinquency. In Reid, G. Paterson y J. Snyder (eds). Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis and model for intervention. Washington, DC: American Psychological association. • Pepler, D. Craig. W. (2000). Making a Difference in Bullying. Report No. 60, LaMarsh Centre for Research on Violence and Conflict Resolution. • Perren,s. & Alsaker, F. D. (2006). Social behavior and peer relationships of victims, bully victims and bullies in kindergarten. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47(1), 45-57. • Ramirez, S. (2006). Bullying among school children and other problem behaviors for coexistence: A study from the context of the class group. Unpublished Doctoral thesis. University of Granada. • Rigby, k. (1997). Bullying in Australian Schools- and what to do about it. London: Jessica Kingsley. • Rivers, I. & Smith P. K. (1994).

Types of bullying behavior & their correlates. Aggressive Behaviour, 0, 359368. • Smith, Pk, Morita, Y, Junger tas, j. , Olweus, d. , catalano, r. , & Slee, P. , (eds) (1999). The nature of school bullying: A cross national perspective. London: Routledge. • Solberg, M. , & Olweus, D. (2003). Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the Olweus Bully/victim questionnaire. Aggressive Behaviour, 29, 239-268. • Terefe D, Mengistu D (1997). Violence in Ethiopian Schools: A Study of Some Schools in Addis Ababa. In: Ohsako T (Ed). Violence at School: Global Issues and Interventions. Paris, UNESCO IBE. • Thrornberry, T. P. (1994). Violent families and youth violence.

Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. • Toldos, M. P. (200%0. Sex 7 Age Differences in self estimated physical, verbal and indirect aggression in Spanish adolscents. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 13-23. 17 • Trianes, M. V. & Garcia, A. (2002). Socioeffective education and interpersonal conflict prevention at school. 44, 175-189. • The World Health Organization (2003–2005) http://www. who. int/chp/gshs or http:// www. cdc. gov/gshs for surveys conducted in for Botswana, Chile (metropolitan area), China (Beijing), Guyana, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Namibia, Oman, Philippines, Swaziland, Uganda, UAE, Venezuela (Lara), Zambia and Zimbabwe (Harare). • Umbreit, M. S. (1995).

The Development and Impact of Victim-Offender Mediation in the United States, Mediation Quarterly, 12 (3), 263-276. • UNICEF (2004). Analyse regionale sur l’exploitation sexuelle en Afrique de l’Ouest et du Centre : evolution de la situation, progres accomplis et obstacles a surmonter depuis le Congres de Yokohama en 2001. UNICEF, West and Central Africa Regional Office. • United Nations Secretary-General’s Study on Violence against Children (2005). Regional Desk Review: West and Central Africa. Available at: http://www. violencestudy. org/r27. • UNAIDS (2006). 2006 Report on the Global AIDS Epidemic. Geneva, Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. • Veenstra, R. , Lindenberg,S. , Oldehinkel, A. J. , De Winter, A. f.. , Verhulst, F. c. & Ormel, J. (2005). Bullying & victimization in elementary schools: a comparison of bullies, victims, bully/victims and uninvolved preadolescents. Developmental Psychology, 41(4), 672-682. • Wachtel, T. (1997). Real Justice: How We can Revolutionize our Response to Wrongdoing. Pipersville, Pennsylvania: The Piper’s Press. • Wong, D. S. W. (1999). Culturally specific causes of delinquency: implication for juvenile justice in Hong Kong, Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work, 9 (1), 98-113. • Youri P (Ed) (1994). Female Adolescent Health and Sexuality in Kenyan Secondary Schools: A Research Report. Nairobi, African Medical and Research Foundation. 18