Middle School Teachers' Understanding of School Bullying in Mainland China - Literature review Example

?Middle School Teachers' Understanding of School Bullying in Mainland China Table of Contents Middle School Teachers' Understanding of School Bullying in Mainland China 1 Table of Contents 2 1: General Information on the Previous Studies of School Bullying 3 1.1: Definitions of Bullying 3 1.2.Types of School Bullying 5 1.2.1.Direct Bullying 5 1.2.2.Indirect Bullying 5 1.2.3.Cyber Bullying 6 1.3.Main Studies Tendencies of School Bullying 6 1.3.1.Descriptive Study 8 1.3.2.Related Study 9 1.3.3.Intervention Study 11 2: Theories on School Bullying 13 2.1. External Deviation Hypothesis 13 2.2. Theory of Mind 14 2.3. Attachment Theory 14 2.4. Social Learning Theory 15 3: Teacher’s Perception on School Bullying 17 3.1. Teachers Definition on School Bullying 17 3.2. Teachers’ Understanding on Individual Character & Family Background of Bullies & Victims 17 3.3. Teachers’ Coping Strategy 18 References 20 1: General Information on the Previous Studies of School Bullying 1.1: Definitions of Bullying The aspect or notion of bullying has been measured to be an extensive problem that exists in the communities and especially in the schools. It needs to be stated in this context that bullying is considered to create an adverse impact on the environment prevailing in the schools and on the individual students as well. The right of the students in relation to carry out their learning procedure in a secure and protected environment eradicating the chances for any kind of apprehension to get interrupted apparently gets violated or negatively affected owing to the bullying activities. The concept of bullying was perceived at a certain point of time to be a ritual in relation to passage or rather a harmless form of conduct that aided in forming characters in the young age. However, presently this particular idea of bullying is considered to pose long-term physical, emotional and academic consequences on the bully as well as on the victim (Blazer, 2005). The increasing rate of bullying activities is gradually emerging to be a grave matter for numerous elementary students. Bullying is identified to be amongst the triggering factors of violence which calls for the immediate correction for this kind of a behaviour. The conduct of bullying is often regarded to be a form of personal conducts which is acquired from the surroundings. Therefore, it implies that bullying, being a learning behaviour, makes it competent of being assessed and altered according to the needed requirements that get deciphered from the evaluation (Blazer, 2005). According to Olweus (1996), a student is found to fall a victim to bullying behaviour when that specific individual constantly remains open to the elements related to abusive activities or nuisances and irritations caused by the other students. The main intention behind such kind of bullying activities is believed to be the foremost concern of gaining dominance and power over the other students or the individuals. Majorly, three different forms of bullying behaviour has been identified which entails physical form, verbal form and psychological form. The physical outward appearance of bullying behaviour is known to encompass kicking, pushing, property destruction, hitting, spitting and stealing. In the similar context, the verbal kind of bullying behaviour has been learnt to engage various activities such as depicting malevolent wit, making coercion, screening hurtful behaviour and name calling. Furthermore, the psychological form of bullying activities is found to entail influencing social relationships, extortion, spreading rumors, intimidation and segregation from a certain peer group (Blazer, 2005; Cohn & Canter, 2003). The aspect of this particular kind of behaviour, i.e. bullying, is learnt to engage two vital constituents that have been recognised as the psychological or the physical form of threats often found to take place frequently with time along with the factor of power imbalance. It becomes quite imperative to be mentioned in this respect that there are certain kinds of behaviours and specifications which forms an exception with regard to the mentioned notion of bullying. Behaviours or activities such as teasing, fighting and taunting is stated to differ or rather is not regarded as bullying in case two individuals are found to be of just about the similar psychological or physical power. Bullying behaviour usually includes hurtful conducts against those individuals who are considered to be weaker and incapable of protecting themselves owing to inadequate strength or size or even in instances when the sufferer gets outnumbered or is found to be psychologically inflexible by a certain degree (Blazer, 2005; Olweus, 1993). 1.2. Types of School Bullying Bullying is known to include numerous diverse kinds of behaviours among which the major types can be identified as ‘direct bullying’, ‘indirect bullying’ and ‘cyber bullying’. 1.2.1. Direct Bullying Direct bullying is described as a manner of physical bullying which involves the acts of physically harming an individual. Direct bullying is the process or activity which causes damage in a material or tangible manner to an individual (James, 2010). Direct bullying is also referred to as overt bullying and entails physical deeds for instance punching and kicking. This form of bullying is even known to engage explicit verbal activities; for instance, name-calling as well as offending in the presence of other peers (Bullying No Way, 2012). 1.2.2. Indirect Bullying Indirect bullying is learnt to involve actions that are perceived and believed to cause damage to an individual affecting their emotional beliefs. Instances of indirect bullying could be spoiling or stealing ones belongings which could further lead to emotional injury to the victims. This particular form of bullying is also referred to as covert bullying at times. This form of bullying is considered to be of a restrained kind, executed in non-physical form which is tough to be identified or viewed by others and is also performed in a concealed manner. The behaviours related to indirect bullying are majorly found to cause injury by way of spoiling the social repute of the victim, peer associations and self-respect or sense of worth in other individuals. Covert or indirect bullying is stated to involve the frequent use of hand gesticulations along with strange or intimidating looks. It encompasses constant activities or rather behavioural actions such as whispering, blackmailing, revealing secrets, spreading anecdotes, threatening, criticising clothes, stealing friends and also disapproving of personalities among others (James, 2010). 1.2.3. Cyber Bullying Cyber bullying is considered to be a current observable fact which has been found to lure soaring amount of attention during the previous decade. This form of bullying is also learnt to engage the usage of electronic means; for instance, the email, mobile phones and the internet. This form of bullying is often regarded to be specifically nasty and sadistic as spiteful messages as well as images are capable of being circulated quickly within a mass of students thereby, creating an unhealthy environment for education. It has been noted with reference to various evidences obtained from researches that cyber bullying entails a propensity to take place outside the school premises which again deliberates a significant challenge for the schools (Dehue & et. al., 2008; Smith & et. al., 2008; Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). 1.3. Main Studies Tendencies of School Bullying It has already been stated above that school bullying is observed to be a common phenomenon in the recent times, especially in the western countries. The idea of bullying was at a point of time considered to be merely a ritual in relation to passage or a reasonably harmless conduct which aids in constructing the character of young individuals. However, with the passage of time it has been found that bullying leads to gravely harmful consequences that are believed to have a long-lasting impression on both the victim as well as the bully. Bullying has often been incorrectly perceived to be a constricted range in relation to antisocial conducts which was supposed to remain restricted to the basic school alcove yards. It has been observed in numerous grave and harmful incidents that the assailants had been once a victim to bullying. This proved that the past occurrences of bullying emerged to have an imperative role to play in case of triggering such unwanted acts within the assailants (James, 2010). The tendencies in relation to school bullying have been measured to be numerous. Amongst the observed reasons, it has been found that students usually indulge in such activities quite often for the reason to conserve the firmness and the compliance of their concerned group along with attaining power of controlling others. The tendencies that lead towards bullying are generally accredited to not just the bullies but even the individuals acting as bystanders with regard to the physical as well as social problem of the victim. The individuals who are found to be involved with the acts of bullying have been observed to possess an aggressive attitude in comparison to the other individual students (Schafer & et. al., 2005; Smith, 2004; Carney & Merrell, 2001). The characteristics of these individuals are also found to differ which make it tough to typecast them from the social group. Few of these kinds of students are known to have underprivileged or inferior social competencies which directs toward complexities with regard to handling positive associations. On the contrary, few of the bullies were even found to possess advanced kind of social proficiencies which is supposed to facilitate them for the reason of influencing others (Vaillancourt & et. al., 2003; Sutton & et. al., 1999). From the stated features it can be well comprehended that the differences or variations in the features of the bullies makes it indistinct that whether the initiators of bullying activities suffer from the syndrome of lower degree of self-worth (Smith, 2004; O’Moore, 2000; Olweus, 1999). However, it has been deciphered from their characteristics that these individuals are assumed to probably belong to families which engage low parental screening as well as involvement along with insensitive and contradictory discipline (Pepler & et. al., 2008). 1.3.1. Descriptive Study Bullying is regarded to be amongst the widespread type of violence prevalent in society in the recent times. It was found with the assistance of various researches that approximately 30 percent of the entire students fitting into grades 6-10 are measured to be engaged in bullying related activities, or as an executor, victim or even at times both (Blazer, 2005; Harris & Wiloughby, 2003; Cohn & Canter, 2003; Bowman, 2001). Students are found to be actively engaged with bullying activities in their relevant schools. It has been observed in this respect that the inclination of being involved with such behaviour tends to augment during the period of basic grades, crest with regard to the middle school along with a drop off in terms of grades in 11 and 12 (Blazer, 2005; Olweus, 1993). The most widespread kind of bullying activity is considered to be harassment as well as verbal abuse accompanied with disparaging comments regarding the physical appearance and social isolation (Shellard, 2002). In the middle as well as high school level, the activities related to bullying generally include social segregation and teasing. However, it might also engage conducts related to threats, sexual as well as racial nuisance, property destruction, physical form of violence, theft, and public disgrace. In relation to the basic level of grades, bullying is supposed to be increasingly engaged with the facet of physically violent behaviour, but at the similar time is even typified by intimidation, social exclusion and teasing (Banks, 1997). These kinds of activities of bullying is learnt to recurrently take place in areas which be short of the supervision of adults such as locker rooms, cafeterias, bus stops, hallways and restrooms. Apart from the mentioned areas, the classrooms are even not considered to be completely protected against these kinds of conducts or behaviours (Shellard, 2002). It also needs to be mentioned in this regard that bullying activities even gets triggered by religion, gender, race and culture. Hence, it can be stated that both boys as well as girls remain engaged with bullying activities (Blazer, 2005; Cohn & Canter, 2003; Nansel & et. al., 2001). 1.3.2. Related Study The bullies are found to display an aggressive kind of activities or conduct towards their respective peers as well as adults in quite a few instances frequently. The bullies are known to hold positive approach towards violence along with being impetuous. These kinds of individuals exhibit a preference of dominating others, having lesser compassion for their victims and generally possessing lesser level of uncertainty or apprehension. They are likely to crave for dominance and power for the reason of deriving contentment from causing suffering to others. Regardless of the widespread opinion regarding bullies, they are usually known to have moderate to higher self-respect levels and also might be admired by both the classmates and the teachers along with performing well in their schools (Blazer, 2005; Shellard, 2002; Olweus, 1993). Majority of the development of bullying conducts is measured to take place in reaction to numerous factors at school, among peer groups and families. The regularity and graveness related to bullying is associated with inadequate administration by the adults on the children in their homes. It has been highlighted in various studies that bullies frequently share backgrounds where there is a prevalent use of physical punishment and also belonged to families where children were encouraged to physically retaliate for the purpose of dealing with problems. Therefore, it can be inferred that bullies had family backgrounds that lacked parental affection and engagement (Cohn & Canter, 2003). Studies have further ruled out the fact that the victims of bullying, especially the students can become victim of such acts just owing to their physical look such as obesity. The sole physical feature which made certain children vulnerable to bullying was measured to be their below standard physical strength and size. Furthermore, the majority of the victims were learnt to possess features such as being passive and displaying a tendency of being increasingly nervous, cautious, sensitive, insecure and quiet. The victims frequently displayed characteristics of being feeble or capable of being easily controlled (Shellard, 2002; Banks, 1997; Kreidler, 1996). It has been revealed through several researches that the victims had a superior dominance of domineering parents or even school staffs owing to which they habitually remain incapable of building their individual coping skills (Cohn & Canter, 2003). Parents are often considered to be amongst the imperative contributors in relation to structuring the development of peer associations of their children with the help of both direct as well as indirect ways (Ladd, 1992). Thus, it is quite evident that parents are mostly expected to create an influence with regard to the aspect of bullying engagement of the children by a certain extent. It was identified in this respect that bullying attitude is related with lower degree of involvement of the parents (Flouri & Buchanan, 2003). In this respect, it has frequently been identified that children who stay without adults for a longer period of time are more likely to get involved in activities like bullying peers (Espelage & et. al., 2000). Bullies are usually found to belong to families having authoritarian parents with characteristics of disregarding the factor of protesting by the children (Baldry & Farrington, 2000). The families of the bullies were also observed to be short of adequate structure and affection among the members (Oliver & et. al., 1994; Olweus, 1993b). The families also displayed lower degree of family consistency along with being high on the aspect of conflicts (Stevens & et. al., 2002; Bower & et. al., 1991). 1.3.3. Intervention Study It has already been mentioned above that bullying incidents are observed to prevail extensively in schools. The prevention as well as intervention research conducted by Olweus (1978) triggered several other researches in the similar field in order to comprehend such behaviours along with the other associated factors (Kim, 2006). Numerous intervention studies have been conducted against the factor of bullying with regard to several countries. The results of the studies were found to vary with regard to the concerned subject and learnt to be enthused by Norwegian countrywide campaign along with the growth of the anti-bullying program by Olweus (1978). The project of Sheffield was also stated to be inspired by the mentioned studies at a later point of time. Similar kinds of studies were also carried out across various countries for gaining an understanding regarding the notion of bullying. The intervention program of Olweus was found to deliver victorious consequences in Norway. However, the imitation of the program in the United States (US), Belgium and Germany entailed increased unpretentious success in comparison to Norway. The results with respect to the Sheffield project proved a decline in the victimisation rates to nearly 5 to 20 percent (Smith, 2004). Several factors were further assumed to be attributed for the differing success rates along with regarding them as indicators towards future (Smith & et. al., 2003). It was mentioned with regard to the manipulating factors behind the differing success rates that the character in relation to the intervention study might appear to be among the most palpable applicants till date. Conversely, no ‘magic ingredient’ was learnt to be revealed and the degree of intervention work, involving quite some fronts, was regarded as a good forecaster in relation to the consequences. It was disputed in this context that the most imperative aspect was the degree till which the schools considered accepting the ownership of the intervention work along with taking it to the forefront determinedly as well as effectually. This particular ideology seemed to be associated with the consequences increasingly in comparison to the degree till which the schools obtained encouragement from outside (Olweus & Enderson, 1998). 2: Theories on School Bullying 2.1. External Deviation Hypothesis It is widely believed that some sort of external deviation in the physical features of the individuals or the children; for instance, protruding teeth, glasses, ears and obesity triggers bullying behaviours on them. This particular view is supposed to be commonly possessed by the students in particular which makes them believe that such mentioned external deviations leads to victimisation. However, this specific hypothesis failed to attract any substantiation with regard to empirical analyses (Olweus, 1978). Therefore, numerous European studies proved the fact that these kind of external deviations involve an insignificant role in triggering bully or victim issues against the general assumptions (University of Colorado, 2006). 2.2. Theory of Mind The theory of mind is further known to relate to the daily capability of pointing or identifying the self-governing mental state or conditions towards others or even self for the reason of forecasting and elucidating behaviours (Premack & Woodruff, 1978). This particular theory has been considered as quite significant in explaining the children’s growing competence to assign ideas, intentions, thoughts, beliefs and feelings towards other individuals (Randall, 2001). In relation to the above mentioned context, it has been disputed that few aggressive adolescents are considered to be competent enough and in actuality makes use of their respective violent behaviour in adaptive manners. These few number of adolescents is known to hold an increased degree in relation to theory of mind along with applying it for their benefit to influence social conditions and gaining from their violence (Givens, 2009). 2.3. Attachment Theory The attachment theory is believed to offer an indispensable framework for the purpose of comprehending the influence of early emotional as well as social association with regard to the structures of cognitive-affective that are used by the children for building or rather forming the viewpoints regarding self, others and the society as a whole. This particular theory is known to deal with the social-emotional progress from the result-oriented viewpoint along with recognising a range of markers’ extrapolative regarding the later academic conduct, psychopathology and social capability. Attachment, in this context, is referred to as an affectional connection between the principal caregiver and the child (Ainsworth & et. al., 1978). Contextually, the attachment theory usually relates to the attachment association of a mother and the child and has been active in directing research in clinical intervention as well as emotional growth during the lifespan (Kennedy, 2004). Attachment theory is learnt to offer a consciousness as well as fresh connotation resulting from the history of a particular child along with the subtleness of the experiential parent, teacher and child behaviours in relation to the recent context. Therefore, the attachment theory states that the early experiences in relation to the concerned caregiver are quite significant in building protected attachment relationships which in turn guides or triggers certain behaviours within the children (Kennedy, 2004). This specific approach is thus, stated to entail the prospect of assessing the factor of continuity as well as discontinuity with regard to bully and victim activities in different ages. 2.4. Social Learning Theory The features of family background are known to associate with the engagement of bullying in school and even in the care homes. Further than the contribution made by the attachment theory, the social learning theory states that the influence of the family characteristics on the bullying activities might take place by means of social learning followed by persons learning bullying conducts with the help of observation, strengthening and role modeling (Monks & et. al., 2009; Baldry, 2003). 3: Teacher’s Perception on School Bullying 3.1. Teachers Definition on School Bullying The definition of bullying behaviour by the teachers was found to be partial to threats and physical assaults. According to the teachers, bullying definition just entailed physical aggression in comparison to ‘social exclusion’ or ‘verbal aggression’. Therefore, it has been mentioned in this context by Mishna & et. al. (2005) and James (2010) that the definition of bullying activities or behaviours by the teachers majorly includes direct bullying and thus restricts the expanded definition to it. 3.2. Teachers’ Understanding on Individual Character & Family Background of Bullies & Victims The bullies are considered to engage lower degree of parental screening as well as engagement followed by contradictory as well as unsympathetic discipline. The bullies are also stated to reflect quite aggressive features towards their peers and other community members at times. Underprivileged academic records, loneliness, greater use of drug as well as alcohol and record of illicit behaviour are usually associated as individual characteristics of the bullies by the teachers (James, 2010). The victims of bullying behaviour are usually found to entail characteristics such as lower degree of self-esteem along with displaying increased level of inclination towards apprehension as well as melancholy. The family backgrounds of the victims are also probable of engaging overprotective parents. The victims are further assumed to have previous bullying experiences from their respective siblings. Children having physical or any other form of disabilities are also considered as characteristics which makes them prone to falling victim to bullying behaviours. It has also been mentioned in this respect that remaining absent from schools has often been triggered to be another individual characteristic of the victims (James, 2010). 3.3. Teachers’ Coping Strategy Teachers are required to identify the locations involving increased bullying incidents and offer better structure of monitoring in such areas as a part of their coping strategy against bullying activities. It has been mentioned in this regard that the teachers need to position themselves in the doorways at the passing times aiding to control hallways as well as locker-time as these are the places where frequent happenings of pestering or bullying activities are reported the most within schools. The teachers also require developing few class regulations in order to prevent bullying. Role-playing exercises as well as relevant assignments needs to be taught by the teachers to those students who are learnt to be directly engaged in bullying. These exercises or rather the curriculum endeavours are likely to teach such individuals substitute ways of interactions which would likely prevent them from getting further indulged in bullying activities. Other coping strategies such as group work, circle time and peer education as well as support also needs to be made use of by the teachers. Cooperative form of learning exercises are required to be undertaken by the teachers to endorse communication involving the students with their respective peers for the reason of lessening the likelihood of social isolation. Positive kinds of reinforcements such as coaching, praising, modeling and prompting also needs to be practiced by the teachers as their coping strategy (Ross, 2006). In this respect, it was further mentioned by Naylor & et. al. (2001) that bullying can be identified as a sequential phenomenon being highly centred on a regular exploitation of power held by the children among their peers, especially in the secondary schools. The repeated occurrences of such misconducts within the schools can be further noted as the result of the existing degree of inequality in terms of power held by the bully and by the victim, thus creating a situation favourable for the bully to avoid any constraint owing to the chances of fighting back. With a more in-depth point of view, school bullying can be described as the situation where a group or an individual student attempts to isolate a particular child with the sole intention to harass or even harm that child either physically or psychologically. In this regards, the school authorities should consider acknowledging the facts owing to which the incident of bullying has taken place also taking into consideration the consequences led by such acts. The schools can also attempt to signify appropriate policies in order to restrict children from getting engaged with such acts. Frequent counselling can also be attributed as a vital measure to prohibit bullying acts within schools. Furthermore, adequate training should be provided to the teachers in identifying bullying from an in-depth point of view categorising both mental and physical harms (Urbanksi & Permuth, 2009). References Ainsworth, M. d. S. & et. al., 1978. Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale. Baldry, A. C., 2003. Bullying in Schools and Exposure to Domestic Violence. Child Abuse and Neglect, Vol. 27, pp. 713-732. Baldry, A. & Farrington, D. P., 2000. Bullies and Delinquents: Personal Characteristics and Parental Styles. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 10, pp. 17-31. Banks, R., 1997. Bullying in Schools. ERIC Digests [Online] Available at: http://www.ericdigests.org/ [Accessed June 27, 2012]. Blazer, C., 2005. Literature Review on Bullying. Office of Accountability and Systemwide Performance, pp. 1-16. Bowers, L. & et. al., 1992. Cohesion and Power in the Families of Children Involved in Bully/Victim Problems At School. Journal of Family Therapy, Vol. 14, pp. 371-387. Bowman, D. H., 2001. Survey of Students Documents the Extent of Bullying. Education Week on the Web [Online] Available at: http://www.edweek.org/ew/index.html [Accessed June 27, 2012]. Bullying No Way, 2012. Types of Bullying. Resources. Carney, A. G. & Merrell, K. W., 2001. Perspectives on Understanding and Preventing an International Problem. School Psychology International, Vol. 22, pp. 364-382. Cohn, A. & Canter, A., 2003. Bullying: Facts for Schools and Parents. National association for School Psychologists [Online] Available at: http://www.naspcenter.org/ [Accessed June 27, 201]. Dehue, E. & et. al., 2008. Cyber Bullying: Youngsters’ Experiences and Parental Perception. Cyber Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 11, pp. 217-223. Espelage, D. L. & et. al., 2000. Examining the Social Context of Bullying Behaviours in Early Adolescence. Journal of Counseling and Development, Vol. 78, pp. 326-333. Flouri, E. & Buchanan, A., 2003. The Role of Mother Involvement and Father Involvement in Adolescent Bullying Behaviour. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol. 18, pp. 634-644. Givens, J. E., 2009. Does Theory of Mind Mediate Aggression and Bullying in Middle School Males and Females? University of Nebraska, pp. 1-170. Harris, S. & Willoughby, W., 2003. Teacher Perception of Student Bullying Behaviours. ERS Spectrum, Vol. 21, Iss. 3, pp. 11-18. James, A., 2010. School Bullying. University of London, pp. 1-21. Kennedy, J. H., 2004. Attachment Theory: Implications For School Psychology. Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 41, Iss. 2, pp. 247-259. Kreidler, W. J., 1996. Smart Ways to Handle Kids Who Pick On Others. Instructor, Vol. 105, Iss. 2, pp. 70-74. Kim, S. J., 2006. A Study of Personal and Environmental Factors Influencing Bullying. University of Munich, pp. 1-199. Mishna, F & et. al., 2005. Teachers’ Understanding of Bullying. Canadian Journal of Education, Vol. 28, Iss. 4, pp. 718-738. Monks, C. P. & et. al., 2009. Bullying in Different Contexts: Commonalities, Differences and the Role of Theory. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, Vol. 14, pp. 146-156. Nansel, T. R. & et. al., 2001. Bullying Behaviours Among U.S. Youth: Prevalence and Association with Psychosocial Adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 285, Iss. 16, pp, 2094-2100. Naylor, P. & et. al., 2001. Coping Strategies of Secondary School Children in Response to Being Bullied. Child Psychology & Psychiatry Review, Vol. 6, No. 3. Oliver, R. & et. al., 1994. Family Issues and Interventions in Bully and Victim Relationships. School Counselor, Vol. 41, pp. 199-202. Olweus, D., 1978. Aggression in the Schools: Bullies and Whipping Boys. Hemisphere Press. Olweus, D., 1993. Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do. Blackwell Publishing. Olweus, D., 1996. Bully/Victim Problems at School: Facts and Effective Intervention. Reclaiming Children and Youth, pp. 15-22. Olweus, D. & Endresen, I. M., 1998. The Importance of Sex-of-Stimulus Object: Age Trends and Sex Differences in Empathic Responsiveness. Social Development, Vol. 3, pp. 370-388. O’moore, M., 2000. Critical Issues for Teacher Training to Counter Bullying and Victimization in Schools. Aggressive Behaviour, Vol. 26, pp. 99-111. Pepler, D. & et. al., 2008. Developmental Trajectories of Bullying and Associated Factors. Child Develoment, Vol. 79, pp. 325-338. Premack, D. & Woodruff, G., 1978. Does the Chimpanzee Have A Theory of Mind. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, Vol. 4, pp. 515-526. Randall, P., 2001. Bullying in Adulthood: Assessing the Bullies and Their Victims. Psychology Press. Ross, W., 2006. A National Perspective of Peer Victimization: Characteristics of Perpetrators, Victims and Intervention Models. National Forum of Teacher Educational Journal, Vol. 16, Iss. 3, pp. 1-15. Schafer, M. & et. al., 2005. Bullying Roles in Changing Contexts: The Stability of Victim and Bully Roles From Primary to secondary School. International Journal of Behavioural Development, Vol. 29, pp. 323-335. Shellard, E., 2002. Recognizing and Preventing Bullying. The Informed Educator Series. Smith, P. K. & et. al., 2003. Interventions to Reduce School Bullying. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 48, pp. 295-303. Smith, P. K., 2004. Bullying: Recent Developments. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 98-103. Smith, P. K. & et. al., 2008. Cyber Bullying: Its Nature and Impact in Secondary School Pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 49, pp. 376-385. Stevens, V. & et. al., 2002. Relationship of the Family Environment to Children’s Involvement in Bully/Victim Problems at School. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 31, pp. 419-428. Sutton, J. & et. al., 1999. Social Cognition and Bullying: Social Inadequacy or Skilled Manipulation. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, Vol. 17, pp. 435-450. University of Colorado, 2006. Blueprints For Violence Prevention Model Programs. Program summary [Online] Available at: http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/modelprograms/BPP.html [Accessed June 27, 2012]. Urbanksi, J. & Permuth, S., 2009. The Truth About Bullying: What Educators and Parents Must Know and Do. R&L Education. Vaillancourt, T. & et. al., 2003. Bullying is Power: Implications for School-Based Intervention Strategies. Journal of Applied School Psychology, Vol. 19, pp. 157-176. Ybarra, M. L. and Mitchell, K. J., 2004. Online Aggressor/Targets, Aggressors and Targets: A Comparison of Associated Youth Characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 45, pp. 1308-1316. Read More