View Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program PDF

Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program:
Implementing an Effective Whole-School Program to Manage Bullying,

Enhance Prosocial Behaviour, and Boost Student Well-Being in the
Upper Primary Grades
Linda R. Finger
BA(Hons) (University of Western Sydney)
A thesis submitted to the University of Western Sydney in fulfilment of the

requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Psychology)
2009
Volume I
Linda R. Finger 2009

DEDICATION
To my wonderful husband Marcus Hardie Hamilton. You have been nothing but
supportive, encouraging, and understanding of the PhD journey. Thanks for making
countless breakfasts and lunches for me (and not complaining one little bit!). That is
true dedication. This is our time now.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my supervisors, Professor Rhonda G. Craven, Professor Herbert

W. Marsh, Dr Roberto H. Parada, and Dr Alexander Seeshing Yeung, for inviting me back to
CER (formally SELF) and giving me the opportunity to achieve this PhD. It was an exciting
project where I gained so many new skills. I could not have achieved this without your
continued supervision, support, and positive energy. I promise I wont fly off to ski in Austria
for 2 years after this.
The support and assistance of my fellow colleagues within CER has been incredible.
Thank you to Dr Gawaian Bodkin-Andrews, Lucy Griezel, Natasha Magson, Dr My Trinh
Ha, and Kurt Marder for assisting in the data collection periods, and for providing continued
support throughout my PhD. You guys are what make CER such a great place to work. Thank
you to Deborah Blackmore, Ferina Khayum, Kate Johnson, Melissa Johnson, and Nutan
Muckle for their continued administrative support. Thank you to Lisa Car for helping during
moments of crisis, and also for your expert graphic design assistance. Thank you to Professor
Margaret Vickers for your valuable input during the finalisation stages of my thesis. And
especially I would like to give a huge thank you to Dr Marjorie Seaton who helped me
incalculably during my final year. For this I am greatly appreciative.
I would like to extend a massive thank you to all the schools, Principals, APs,
teachers, students, parents, and administrative staff who have been involved in this project.
Thank you for all your hard work, efforts, feedback, encouragement, and patience. In
particular I would like to thank Barbara Myors, Trish Haynes, Dr Jennifer Fraser and Rosalie
Knispel, Kevin Mills, Carmel Agius and Robert Ruggeri, Anne Marrins and Stan, Michael
Tonnett and Mary-Anne Gatt Petrinin, Sergio Resato and Avril Llewellyn, and Suzanne
Savage.
Thank you to Catholic Education, Diocese of Parramatta, for all your support and
collaboration. Especially thank you to Dr Michael Bezzina, Elizabeth Rowe, John Penny, and
John DeCourcy.
Thank you to all those people involved in the production of the Beyond Bullying
DVD. Wow, what an experience. Thank you to Fadle El-Harris, Aaron Sweetman,
Mohammed, Liz and the Filmotion crew; Steve Bergin, Pip Russell, Dan Sweetman, and
Angela Field from Toasted Tv and thank you Network Ten; Matt Glendenning from Design
of the Times who developed our animated characters Lia and Ty; Gillian and Eliot Reynolds
from SongCave Studios for bringing the music; Seraya Young for bringing more music; Huw
Parkinson for bringing our characters to life; Zayann Jappie and Steve Karouche for your
voiceovers; Stuart Liddell for the backing music; Gary Hardmann and Australian Sound
Music for your expert advice in sound and voiceovers; my supervisors; CEO staff Elizabeth
Rowe and John Penny; Shayna McAuliffe from Movie World; my CER colleagues; Danielle
Wilkinson for your expert opinion; my family; Mark; and Suzanne Savage, students and staff
from Mary Immaculate Primary School for making so many intelligent comments on camera
that it was hard to pick which ones to use.
Thank you to all my friends who have been so supportive. I would especially like to
thank my close friends Manjusha Vijayan, Bettina Stevanovic, and Kathryn Cassidy for your
understanding, continual support, and encouragement throughout my candidature.
And lastly I would like to thank my family, Mum (Dorothea Finger), Dad (Norbert
Finger), Mother (Maureen Hamilton), Father (Bruce Hamilton), Sabrina Finger, Mario
Weitzel, Annie, Christie Hamilton, Andrew Hamilton, Kate Hamilton, Meg Hamilton, and
Mark Hamilton, who have always been there for us and who are always looking out for our
best interests.
STATEMENT OF AUTHENTICATION
The work presented in this thesis is, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
original except as acknowledged in the text. I hereby declare that I have not submitted
this material, either in full or in part, for a degree at this or any other institution.
______________________________________
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Volume I
TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume I ............................................................................ i

LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................... xiv
LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................xvii
LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................... xx
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. xxi
CHAPTER 1 Introduction.......................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2 Primary School Bullying: Definitional Issues, Methodological
Research Gaps, and Measurement............................................................................. 6
Introduction ............................................................................................................... 6
What is School Bullying? .......................................................................................... 7
Core Components in Defining School Bullying.................................................... 8
Repetition, repetition, repetition........................................................................ 9
Who is involved?.............................................................................................. 10
Intention to harm ............................................................................................. 11
Power............................................................................................................... 13
Summary of core components in defining bullying ......................................... 15
Forms of Bullying Used by Students................................................................... 15
Physical ........................................................................................................... 16
Verbal. ............................................................................................................. 16
Social ............................................................................................................... 16
Cyber ............................................................................................................... 16
Summary of types of bullying........................................................................... 17
Innovative Elements to Understanding Bullying: What Bullying is Not ............ 17
Teasing............................................................................................................. 17
Conflict between peers..................................................................................... 19
Summary of what bullying is not ..................................................................... 20
Defining Bullying for this Study ......................................................................... 21
Summary of the operational definition of bullying for this study .................... 22
Summary of What is School Bullying................................................................. 22
Why Investigate School Bullying? .......................................................................... 22
Consequences to Involvement in Bullying.......................................................... 23
Mental Health Outcomes ................................................................................. 23
School Impacts................................................................................................. 24
Bullying over time............................................................................................ 25
Summary of consequences to involvement in bullying .................................... 26
School Bullying: Sex Differences and Developmental Trends ........................... 26
Sex differences. ................................................................................................ 26
Prevalence of bullying in secondary schools .................................................. 27
Prevalence of bullying in primary schools ...................................................... 29
Prevention of bullying in primary schools ...................................................... 30
Summary of developmental trends and sex differences ................................... 31
Summary of Why Bullying should be Investigated............................................. 31
A Review of Methodological Issues within Bullying Literature: What We Know
and Where to Go From Here ................................................................................... 32
Fundamental Issues of Measurement: Validity ................................................... 32
Three types of validity...................................................................................... 32
The nomological approach.............................................................................. 34
Summary of fundamental measurement issues ................................................ 34
Use of Single-Item Scales.................................................................................... 34
The problem with single-item measures .......................................................... 35
Review of research using multiple-item scales................................................ 36
An a priori theorem in the development of multiple-item measures................ 37
The Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument (APRI; Parada, 2000) ................. 38
Summary of the use of single-item scales in bullying research....................... 39
Analysis of Dichotomous Variables Using Continuous Data ............................. 39
Techniques used to dichotomise data. ............................................................. 40
Problems of misclassification with the use of dichotomisation ....................... 41
The fallacies of dichotomisation...................................................................... 42
The underlying assumption behind dichotomisation ....................................... 44
Summary of the use of dichotomisation in bullying research.......................... 44
Summary of Methodological Issues: Validity ..................................................... 45
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................... 45
CHAPTER 3 Risk Factors to Involvement in Bullying, and Strengthening

Whole-School Research Approaches ....................................................................... 46
Introduction ............................................................................................................. 46
Social Identity Theory ............................................................................................. 47
Power, status, and the social hierarchy: peer influence in shaping bullying ....... 48
Social Interaction Model ..................................................................................... 49
The Reluctance of Peers in Assisting the Target ................................................. 50
Summary of Social Identity Theory .................................................................... 52
Self-Concept Theory................................................................................................ 52
Multidimensional Conceptualisations of Self-Concept....................................... 53
The Connection between Self-Concept Theory and Bullying Behaviours.......... 54
Bullying and being bullied: reciprocal relations.................................................. 58
Summary of Self-Concept Theory....................................................................... 59
School Bullying Prevention within a Whole-School Framework ........................... 60
Impacting on the Peer System to Prevent School Bullying................................. 61
How Reciprocity Impacts on the Prevention of Bullying.................................... 63
Prevention of Bullying Using Self-Concept Theory ........................................... 63
Prevention of Bullying at the School Level......................................................... 64
Family Influence on Bullying and how the Family Implications in its Prevention
............................................................................................................................. 67
Summary of Preventing Bullying Within a Whole-School Framework.............. 71
Anti-Bullying Programs Implemented within Real Schools: How Effective Have
They Been? .............................................................................................................. 71
What is a Whole-School Approach? ................................................................... 72
The Bergen Study: Olweus (1993) ...................................................................... 75
Sheffield Study (England): Whitney, Rivers, Smith, and Sharp (1994).............. 76
Irish Nationwide Anti-Bullying Program: OMoore and Minton (2005)............ 77
Finnish Anti-Bullying Intervention: Salmivalli, Kaukiainen, And Voeten (2005)
............................................................................................................................. 78
Steps to Respect Project: Frey, Hirschstein, Snell, Edstrom, MacKenzie, &
Broderick (2005).................................................................................................. 79
Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program (Australia): Craven & Parada
(2002); Parada (2006); Parada, Craven, & Marsh (2008) ................................... 80
Strengthening School Bullying Prevention Research.......................................... 81
Summary of Whole-School Bullying Prevention Programs................................ 84
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................... 85
CHAPTER 4 The Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program ............................ 86

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 86
The Beyond Bullying Primary Program.................................................................. 87
Theoretical Framework........................................................................................ 89
Genuine Commitment.......................................................................................... 89
Teacher Training.................................................................................................. 89
Overview of BB and its resources.................................................................... 90
Education on bullying...................................................................................... 91
Self-concept enhancement strategies............................................................... 92
Behaviour management strategies................................................................... 93
Active supervision............................................................................................ 98
Coping Strategies ............................................................................................ 99
Overview Teacher Training Day ..................................................................... 99
Measurement and Analysis................................................................................ 100
Summary of the Beyond Bullying Overview .................................................... 100
The Role of the School: Creating an Anti-Bullying School Climate .................... 101
School Policy..................................................................................................... 101
School commitment........................................................................................ 102
Definition of bullying..................................................................................... 103
How bullying affects students and the wider school community ................... 104
How the school and school members are responsible for preventing bullying
....................................................................................................................... 104
How the school will manage bullying and adhere to procedures ................. 105
Curriculum Activities ........................................................................................ 108
Overview........................................................................................................ 108
Key Topics ..................................................................................................... 108
Age-appropriate activities ............................................................................. 111
Age-appropriate material .............................................................................. 111
Providing A Safe Environment.......................................................................... 113
Consistency in policy implementation ........................................................... 113
Altering the school environment.................................................................... 113
Summary of the Role of the School................................................................... 114
The Role of Stakeholders ...................................................................................... 114
The Role of the Teacher .................................................................................... 114
The Role of Students ......................................................................................... 114
Stop ................................................................................................................ 115
Help ............................................................................................................... 115
Tell ................................................................................................................. 116
Summary of the Stop, Help, Tell procedures ................................................. 116
The Role of Parents ........................................................................................... 117
Summary of the Role of the Stakeholders ......................................................... 118
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................. 119
CHAPTER 5 Aims, Hypotheses, Research Questions, and Their Rationale ..... 120
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 120
Study 1: Psychometric Assessment of Instrumentation ........................................ 121
The Problem ...................................................................................................... 121
Aims................................................................................................................... 121
Statement of Hypotheses and Research Questions............................................ 122
Hypothesis 1.1.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of APRI-BT ........ 122
Hypothesis 1.1.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the First and Second-
Order APRI-BT with Confirmatory Factor Analysis..................................... 123
Hypothesis 1.1.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the First and
Second-Order APRI-BT with Confirmatory Factor Analysis........................ 123
Hypothesis 1.1.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of APRI-BT for Year, Gender,
and Year by Gender Groups.......................................................................... 124
Hypothesis 1.2.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of APRI-PR ........ 124
Hypothesis 1.2.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the APRI-PR with
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ....................................................................... 124
Hypothesis 1.2.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the APRI-PR
with Confirmatory Factor Analysis ............................................................... 125
Hypothesis 1.2.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of APRI-PR for Year, Gender,
Hypothesis 1.3.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of the SDQI-E .... 125
Hypothesis 1.3.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the SDQI-E with
Hypothesis 1.3.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the SDQI-E with
Hypothesis 1.3.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of SDQI-E for Year, Gender,
Hypothesis 1.4.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of ACSI .............. 127
Hypothesis 1.4.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the ACSI with
Hypothesis 1.4.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the ACSI with
Hypothesis 1.4.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of ACSI for Year, Gender, and
Year by Gender Groups................................................................................. 128
Hypothesis 1.5.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of pASBS ............ 128
Order pASBS with Confirmatory Factor Analysis ........................................ 128
Hypothesis 1.5.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the pASBS with
Hypothesis 1.5.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of pASBS for Year, Gender,
Hypothesis 1.6.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of CDI-10........... 129
Hypothesis 1.6.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the CDI-10 with
Hypothesis 1.6.3: Factorial Invariance Testing of CDI-10 for Year, Gender,
Hypothesis 1.7.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of BBPS.............. 130
Hypothesis 1.7.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the BBPS with
Hypothesis 1.7.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the BBPS with
Hypothesis 1.7.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of BBPS for Year, Gender, and
Year by Gender Groups................................................................................. 131
Research Question 1.8.1: Structural integrity of the T1 assessment battery 131
Research Question 1.8.2: Between network relations of the assessment battery
latent constructs at T1 ................................................................................... 131
Research Question 1.9.1: Structural integrity of the T3 assessment battery 131
Research Question 1.9.2: Between network relations of the assessment battery
latent constructs at T3 ................................................................................... 131
Rationale for the Hypotheses and Research Questions ..................................... 132
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.1.1 1.1.4: Psychometric Testing of APRI-BT . 132
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.2.1 1.2.4: Psychometric testing of APRI-PR . 133
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.3.1 1.3.4: Psychometric testing of SDQI-E.... 134
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.4.1 1.4.4: Psychometric testing of ACSI ........ 135
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.5.1 1.5.4: Psychometric testing of SBS .......... 136
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.6.1 1.6.4: Psychometric testing of CDI-10 .... 137
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.7.1 1.7.4: Psychometric testing of BBPS ....... 138
Rationale for Research Questions 1.8.1 - 1.9.2: Structural integrity and
between network relations of the T1 and T3 assessment battery .................. 138
Study 2: Impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program..................... 139
The Problem ...................................................................................................... 139
Aims................................................................................................................... 139
Statement of Hypotheses and Research Questions............................................ 140
Hypothesis 2.1.1: Impact of BB on total bullying (APRI-BT) ....................... 140
Hypothesis 2.1.2: Impact of BB on total bullying (APRI-BT) used by critical
groups ............................................................................................................ 140
Hypothesis 2.1.3: Impact of BB on physical, verbal, and social forms of
bullying (APRI-BT)........................................................................................ 140
bullying (APRI-BT) used by critical groups .................................................. 140
Hypothesis 2.2.1: Impact of BB on total target experiences (APRI-BT)....... 140
Hypothesis 2.2.2: Impact of BB on total target experiences (APRI-BT)
experienced by critical groups ...................................................................... 141
Hypothesis 2.2.3: Impact of BB on physical, verbal, and social forms of target
experiences (APRI-BT) .................................................................................. 141
Hypothesis 2.2.4: Impact of BB on physical, verbal, and social forms of target
experiences (APRI-BT) experienced by critical groups ................................ 141
Hypothesis 2.3.1: Impact of BB on participant roles (APRI-PR).................. 141
Hypothesis 2.3.2: Impact of BB on participant roles (APRI-PR) used by
critical groups................................................................................................ 141
Hypothesis 2.4.1: Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E) ........................... 142
Hypothesis 2.4.2: Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E) for critical groups
....................................................................................................................... 142
Research Question 2.4.3: Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E)............... 142
Research Question 2.4.4: Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E) for critical
groups ............................................................................................................ 142
Hypothesis 2.5.1: Impact of BB on coping strategies (ACSI) ....................... 143
Hypothesis 2.5.2: Impact of BB on coping strategies (ACSI) of critical groups
....................................................................................................................... 143
Hypothesis 2.6.1: Impact of BB on total school belonging (pASBS)............. 143
Hypothesis 2.6.2: Impact of BB on total school belonging (pASBS) of critical
groups ............................................................................................................ 143
Hypothesis 2.6.3: Impact of BB on support, rule acceptance, and attachment
school belonging factors (pASBS) ................................................................. 143
school belonging factors (pASBS) of critical groups .................................... 144
Hypothesis 2.7.1: Impact of BB on depression (CDI-10).............................. 144
Hypothesis 2.7.2: Impact of BB on depression (CDI-10) by critical groups 144
Hypothesis 2.8.1: Impact of BB on knowledge about bullying and action to
prevent bullying (BBPS) ................................................................................ 144
prevent bullying (BBPS) for critical groups.................................................. 144
Rationale for the Hypotheses and Research Questions ..................................... 145
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.1.1 to 2.2.4: Impact of BB on bullying behaviours
and target experiences (APRI-BT) ................................................................ 145
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.3.1 to 2.3.2, and Hypotheses 2.5.1 to 2.5.2: Impact
of BB on participant roles (APRI-PR) and coping strategies (ACSI) ........... 145
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.4.1 to 2.4.2 and Research Questions 2.4.3 to 2.4.4:
Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E) ........................................................ 146
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.6.1 and 2.6.2: Impact of BB on school belonging
(pASBS).......................................................................................................... 147
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.7.1 and 2.7.2: Impact of BB on mental health
(CDI-10) ........................................................................................................ 147
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.8.1 and 2.8.2: Impact of BB on Knowledge and
Action (BBPS)................................................................................................ 147
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................. 148
CHAPTER 6 Methodology ..................................................................................... 149

Introduction ........................................................................................................... 149
Overview of the Recruitment Process and Research Design ................................ 150
Study 1: Psychometric Assessment of Instrumentation ........................................ 151
Participants ........................................................................................................ 151
Instruments ........................................................................................................ 152
Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument-Bully/Target (APRI-BT; Parada, 2000)
....................................................................................................................... 153
Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument-Participant Roles (APRI-PR; Parada,
2000).............................................................................................................. 154
Self-Description Questionnaire I-Extended (SDQI-E; Marsh, 1990b; Marsh,
Ellis, Parada, Richards, & Huebeck, 2005) .................................................. 155
Adolescent Coping Strategies Index (ACSI; Parada, 2006).......................... 156
Pre-Adolescent School Belonging Scale (pASBS; Parada & Richards, 2002)
....................................................................................................................... 157
Child Depression Inventory-10 (CDI-10; Kovacs, 1981) ............................. 158
Beyond Bullying Program Scale (BBPS; Finger, 2006) ............................... 158
Research Design ................................................................................................ 159
Procedure for Administering Questionnaire ................................................. 160
Ethical Considerations .................................................................................. 160
Statistical Analyses............................................................................................ 162
Statistical Software ........................................................................................ 163
Data Screening .............................................................................................. 163
Reliability....................................................................................................... 165
Assessment of Construct and Convergent Validity (Factor Structure) ......... 165
Factorial invariance across and between critical groups (Year by Gender) 170
Summary of Study 1 Methodology ................................................................... 172
Study 2: Impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program..................... 172
Participants ........................................................................................................ 173
Instruments ........................................................................................................ 176
Research Design ................................................................................................ 176
The Control group ......................................................................................... 176
Statistical Analyses............................................................................................ 177
Statistical Software ........................................................................................ 177
Data Screening .............................................................................................. 177
Multilevel modeling ....................................................................................... 177
Data preparation for multilevel modeling..................................................... 179
Orthogonal contrasts for Hypotheses and Research Questions 2.1.1-2.7.2 . 179
Orthogonal contrasts for Hypotheses 2.8.1-2.8.2 ......................................... 182
Summary of Study 2 Methodology ................................................................... 183
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................. 183
CHAPTER 7 Study 1 Results: Psychometric Assessment of Instrumentation.. 184

Introduction ........................................................................................................... 184
Overview of Analyses ........................................................................................... 185
Reliability .......................................................................................................... 185
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ........................................................................... 186
Invariance Testing ............................................................................................. 187
Hypotheses 1.1.1 1.1.4: Psychometric Assessment of APRI-BT....................... 188
Hypothesis 1.1.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of APRI-BT ........... 188
Overview........................................................................................................ 188
Results of internal consistency for the APRI-BT ........................................... 188
Summary ........................................................................................................ 189
Hypotheses 1.1.2 and 1.1.3: Assessment of Construct and Convergent Validity of
the First and Second-Order APRI-BT with CFA .............................................. 190
Overview........................................................................................................ 190
Results of construct and convergent validity of the APRI-BT ....................... 190
Summary ........................................................................................................ 193
Hypothesis 1.1.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of APRI-BT for Year, Gender,
and Year by Gender Groups .............................................................................. 193
Overview........................................................................................................ 193
Results of factorial invariance of the APRI-BT ............................................. 193
Summary ........................................................................................................ 198
Summary of Hypotheses 1.1.1 1.1.4............................................................... 198
Hypotheses 1.2.1 1.2.4: Psychometric Assessment of APRI-PR ....................... 199
Hypothesis 1.2.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of APRI-PR ........... 199
Overview........................................................................................................ 199
Results of internal consistency for the APRI-PR ........................................... 199
Summary ........................................................................................................ 200
the APRI-PR with CFA ..................................................................................... 200
Overview........................................................................................................ 200
Results of construct and convergent validity of the APRI-PR ....................... 200
Summary ........................................................................................................ 201
Hypothesis 1.2.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of APRI-PR for Year, Gender,
and Year by Gender Groups .............................................................................. 202
Overview........................................................................................................ 202
Results of factorial invariance of the APRI-PR............................................. 202
Summary ........................................................................................................ 205
Hypotheses 1.3.1 1.3.4: Psychometric Assessment of SDQI-E ......................... 205
Hypothesis 1.3.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of SDQI-E.............. 206
Overview........................................................................................................ 206
Results of internal consistency for the SDQI-E ............................................. 206
Summary ........................................................................................................ 207
the SDQI-E with CFA ....................................................................................... 207
Overview........................................................................................................ 207
Results of construct and convergent validity of the SDQI-E ......................... 208
Summary ........................................................................................................ 208
Hypothesis 1.3.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of SDQI-E for Year, Gender, and
Year by Gender Groups..................................................................................... 210
Overview........................................................................................................ 210
Results of factorial invariance of the SDQI-E............................................... 210
Summary ........................................................................................................ 212
Hypotheses 1.4.1 1.4.4: Psychometric Assessment of ACSI ............................. 213
Hypothesis 1.4.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of ACSI.................. 213
Overview........................................................................................................ 213
Results of internal consistency for the ACSI ................................................. 213
Summary ........................................................................................................ 215
the ACSI with CFA ........................................................................................... 215
Overview........................................................................................................ 215
Results of construct and convergent validity of the ACSI ............................. 216
Summary ........................................................................................................ 217
Hypothesis 1.4.4: Invariance testing of ACSI for Year, Gender, and Year by
Gender Groups................................................................................................... 217
Overview........................................................................................................ 217
Results of factorial invariance of the ACSI ................................................... 217
Summary ........................................................................................................ 219
Hypotheses 1.5.1 1.5.4: Psychometric Assessment of pASBS .......................... 220
Hypothesis 1.5.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of pASBS............... 221
Overview........................................................................................................ 221
Results of internal consistency for the pASBS ............................................... 221
Summary ........................................................................................................ 222
the First and Second-Order pASBS with CFA.................................................. 222
Overview........................................................................................................ 222
Results of construct and convergent validity of the pASBS ........................... 222
Summary ........................................................................................................ 224
Hypothesis 1.5.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of pASBS for Year, Gender, and
Overview........................................................................................................ 224
Results of factorial invariance of the pASBS................................................. 224
Summary ........................................................................................................ 227
Hypotheses 1.6.1 1.6.4: Psychometric Assessment of CDI-10 .......................... 227
Hypothesis 1.6.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of CDI-10 .............. 228
Overview........................................................................................................ 228
Results of internal consistency for CDI-10.................................................... 228
Summary ........................................................................................................ 229
Hypothesis 1.6.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of CDI-10 with CFA...... 229
Overview........................................................................................................ 229
Results of construct validity of CDI-10 ......................................................... 229
Summary ........................................................................................................ 231
Hypothesis 1.6.3: Factorial Invariance Testing of CDI-10 for Year, Gender, and
Overview........................................................................................................ 231
Results of factorial invariance of CDI-10 ..................................................... 231
Summary ........................................................................................................ 233
Hypotheses 1.7.1 1.7.4: Psychometric Assessment of BBPS............................. 234
Hypothesis 1.7.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of BBPS................. 234
Overview........................................................................................................ 234
Results of internal consistency for the BBPS................................................. 235
Summary ........................................................................................................ 235
the BBPS with CFA........................................................................................... 235
Overview........................................................................................................ 235
Results of construct and convergent validity of the BBPS............................. 236
Summary ........................................................................................................ 237
Hypothesis 1.7.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of BBPS for Year, Gender, and
Overview........................................................................................................ 237
Results of factorial invariance of the BBPS .................................................. 237
Summary ........................................................................................................ 239
Research Questions 1.8.1 1.9.2: Psychometric Assessment of Instrument Battery
............................................................................................................................... 240
Research Questions 1.8.1 and 1.8.2: Assessment of W1 Instrument Battery
Validity .............................................................................................................. 241
Overview........................................................................................................ 241
Results of assessment of W1 instrument battery validity............................... 241
Summary ........................................................................................................ 245
Research Questions 1.9.1 and 1.9.2: Assessment of W3 Instrument Battery
Validity .............................................................................................................. 245
Overview........................................................................................................ 245
Results of assessment of W3 instrument battery validity............................... 246
Summary ........................................................................................................ 249
Summary of Research Questions 1.8.1 1.9.2.................................................. 250
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................. 251
CHAPTER 8 Study 2 Results: Impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools

Program.................................................................................................................... 252
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 252
Overview of Analyses ........................................................................................... 253
Hypotheses 2.1.1 2.3.2: Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program Outcomes on
Bullying Behaviours, Experiences of Being Bullied, and Participant Roles......... 255
Hypothesis 2.1.1: Impact of BB on Total Bullying Behaviours (APRI-BT) .... 255
Overview........................................................................................................ 255
Model 1: Variance components model .......................................................... 256
Model 2: BB effects model of Total Bullying................................................. 257
Summary ........................................................................................................ 258
Hypothesis 2.1.2: Impact of BB on Total Bullying (APRI-BT) used by Critical
Groups ............................................................................................................... 258
Overview........................................................................................................ 258
Model 3: Year and gender interaction effects model .................................... 259
Summary ........................................................................................................ 261
Hypothesis 2.1.3: Impact of BB on Physical, Verbal, and Social Forms of
Bullying (APRI-BT) .......................................................................................... 261
Overview........................................................................................................ 261
Model 2: BB effects model of physical, verbal, and social forms of bullying 263
Summary ........................................................................................................ 265
Hypothesis 2.1.4: Impact of BB on Physical, Verbal, and Social Forms of
Bullying (APRI-BT) used by Critical Groups................................................... 265
Overview........................................................................................................ 265
Summary ........................................................................................................ 268
Hypothesis 2.2.1: Impact of BB on Target Experiences (APRI-BT) ................ 269
Overview........................................................................................................ 269
Model 2: BB effects model of Total Target experiences................................ 270
Summary ........................................................................................................ 272
Hypothesis 2.2.2: Impact of BB on Total Target (APRI-BT) experienced by
Critical Groups .................................................................................................. 272
Overview........................................................................................................ 272
Summary ........................................................................................................ 274
Hypothesis 2.2.3: Impact of BB on Physical, Verbal, and Social Target
Experiences (APRI-PR)..................................................................................... 274
Overview........................................................................................................ 274
Model 1: Variance components model. ......................................................... 275
Model 2: BB effects model of physical, verbal, and social forms of target
experiences. ................................................................................................... 276
Summary ........................................................................................................ 278
Hypothesis 2.2.4: Impact of BB on Total Bullying (APRI-BT) experienced by
Critical Groups .................................................................................................. 278
Overview........................................................................................................ 278
Summary ........................................................................................................ 280
Hypothesis 2.3.1: Impact of BB on Participant Roles (APRI-PR) .................... 281
Overview........................................................................................................ 281
Model 2: BB effects model of Participant Roles............................................ 283
Summary ........................................................................................................ 285
Hypothesis 2.3.2: Impact of BB on Participant Roles (APRI-PR) used by Critical
Groups ............................................................................................................... 286
Overview........................................................................................................ 286
Summary ........................................................................................................ 290
Hypotheses 2.4.1 2.7.2: Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program Outcomes on
Psychosocial Correlates to Bullying (Self-Concept, Coping Strategies, School
Belonging, and Depression) .................................................................................. 291
Hypothesis 2.4.1 and Research Question 2.4.3: Impact of BB on Self-Concept
(SDQI-E) ........................................................................................................... 291
Overview........................................................................................................ 291
Model 2: BB effects model of Self-Concept ................................................... 294
Summary ........................................................................................................ 300
(SDQI-E) for Critical Groups ............................................................................ 300
Overview........................................................................................................ 300
Summary ........................................................................................................ 310
Hypothesis 2.5.1: Impact of BB on Coping Strategies (ACSI) ......................... 311
Overview........................................................................................................ 311
Model 2: BB effects model of Coping Strategies........................................... 312
Summary ........................................................................................................ 313
Hypothesis 2.5.2: Impact of BB on the Coping Strategies (ACSI) of Critical
Groups ............................................................................................................... 316
Overview........................................................................................................ 316
Summary ........................................................................................................ 319
Hypothesis 2.6.1: Impact of BB on Total School Belonging (pASBS) ............ 319
Overview........................................................................................................ 319
Model 2: BB effects model of Total School Belonging.................................. 321
Summary ........................................................................................................ 322
Hypothesis 2.6.2: Impact of BB on the Total School Belonging (pASBS) of
Critical Groups .................................................................................................. 322
Overview........................................................................................................ 322
Summary ........................................................................................................ 325
Hypothesis 2.6.3: Impact of BB on Support, Rule Acceptance, and Attachment
Types of School Belonging (pASBS)................................................................ 325
Overview........................................................................................................ 325
Model 2: BB effects model of support, rule acceptance, and attachment types
of school belonging........................................................................................ 327
Summary ........................................................................................................ 329
Types of School Belonging (pASBS) of Critical Groups.................................. 329
Overview........................................................................................................ 329
Summary ........................................................................................................ 333
Hypothesis 2.7.1: Impact of BB on Depression (CDI-10) ................................ 333
Overview........................................................................................................ 333
Model 2: BB effects model of Depression ..................................................... 334
Summary ........................................................................................................ 336
Hypothesis 2.7.2: Impact of BB on Depression (CDI-10) by Critical Groups.. 336
Overview........................................................................................................ 336
Summary ........................................................................................................ 339
Hypotheses 2.8.1 and 2.8.2: Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program Outcomes
on Student Knowledge of Bullying and Action to Prevent Bullying .................... 339
Hypothesis 2.8.1: Impact of BB on Knowledge and Action of Bullying
Prevention (BBPS) ............................................................................................ 340
Overview........................................................................................................ 340
Model 2: BB effects model of Knowledge about bullying and Action to prevent
it ..................................................................................................................... 341
Summary ........................................................................................................ 342
Hypothesis 2.8.2: Impact of BB on Knowledge and Action of Bullying
Prevention (BBPS) for Critical Groups ............................................................. 342
Overview........................................................................................................ 342
Summary ........................................................................................................ 347
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................. 348
CHAPTER 9 Discussion.......................................................................................... 349

Introduction ........................................................................................................... 349
Study 1 Discussion: Psychometric Assessment of Measures................................ 350
Key Findings: Psychometric Properties of Instrumentation.............................. 351
Summary of Key Findings for Study 1.............................................................. 356
Study 2 Discussion: Impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program .. 357
Key Findings: Impact on Bullying, Target Experiences, and Participant Roles357
Key Findings: Impact on Psychosocial Correlates ............................................ 362
Key Findings: Impact on Student Knowledge and Preventative Action ........... 368
Summary of Key Findings for Study 2.............................................................. 369
Strengths and Limitations ...................................................................................... 370
Implications for Theory, Future Research, and Practise ....................................... 377
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................. 374
CHAPTER 10 Summary......................................................................................... 376

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 383
Volume II
APPENDIXES.......................................................................................................... 401
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 Key Topics, Descriptions, and Value of the Topics Raised in the Beyond
Bullying Upper Primary Schools Program ............................................................... 109
Table 6.1 Participant Sample Sizes for Critical Groups and Culture....................... 152
Table 6.2 Student Participant Sample Sizes for Critical Groups and Culture.......... 175
Table 7.1 Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the First and Second-
Order APRI-BT Factors Assessed Across the Total Sample as well as by Gender,
Year, and Gender by Year Groups of the Upper Primary Participants .................... 189
Table 7.2 Parameter Estimates including Item Factor Loadings, Latent Factor
Correlations, and Model Fit for the First and Second-Order APRI-BT ................... 191
Table 7.3 CFA with Model Fit Across Critical Groups and Factorial Invariant
Testing of Year, Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the First-Order APRI-BT
................................................................................................................................... 195
Testing of Year, Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the Second-Order APRI-BT
................................................................................................................................... 197
Table 7.5 Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the Four APRI-PR
Factors Assessed Across the Total Sample as well as by Gender, Year, and Gender by
Year Groups of the Upper Primary Participants ...................................................... 200
Correlations, and Model Fit for the APRI-PR .......................................................... 202
Testing of Year, Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the APRI-PR .................. 204
Table 7.8 Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the Twelve SDQI-E
Correlations, and Model Fit for the SDQI-E ............................................................ 209
Testing of Year, Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the SDQI-E .................... 211
Table 7.11 Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the Three ACSI
Correlations, and Model Fit for the ACSI................................................................. 216
Testing of Year, Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the Three Factor ACSI .. 218
Table 7.14 Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the First and Second-
Order pASBS Factors Assessed Across the Total Sample as well as by Gender, Year,
and Gender by Year Groups of the Upper Primary Participants.............................. 221
Correlations, and Model Fit for the First and Second-Order pASBS ....................... 223
Testing of Year, Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the First-Order pASBS .. 226
Table 7.17 Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the One Factor CDI-
10 Assessed Across the Total Sample as well as by Gender, Year, and Gender by Year
Groups of the Upper Primary Participants............................................................... 228
Table 7.18 Parameter Estimates, Uniqueness, Correlations and Model Fit for First-
and Second-Order CFA of CDI-10 Item Loadings to their A Priori Factors for W1
Participants Model 1 ................................................................................................. 229
Table 7.19 Parameter Estimates, Uniqueness, Correlations and Model Fit for First-
and Second-Order CFA of CDI-10 Item Loadings to their A Priori Factors for W1
Participants Model 2 ................................................................................................. 230
Table 7.20 Invariant Testing of Year and Gender with Chi-Square, Degrees of
Freedom and Fit Indices of the CDI-10 .................................................................... 232
Table 7.21 Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the Two BBPS
Year Groups of the Upper Primary Participants at W3............................................ 235
Correlations, and Model Fit for the BBPS at W3...................................................... 236
Testing of Year, Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the BBPS at W3 ............. 238
Table 7.24 Parameter Estimates including Item Factor Loadings, and Model Fit for
the W1 Battery of Instruments ................................................................................... 242
Table 7.25 Correlation Coefficients for W1 Latent Factors within the Battery of
Instruments ................................................................................................................ 244
Table 7.26 Parameter Estimates including Item Factor Loadings, and Model Fit for
the W3 Battery of Instruments ................................................................................... 247
Table 7.27 Correlation Coefficients for W1 Latent Factors within the Battery of
Instruments ................................................................................................................ 248
Table 8.1 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Total Bullying ....................... 256
Table 8.2 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Total Bullying............................. 257
Table 8.3 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Total Bullying
................................................................................................................................... 259
Table 8.4 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Physical, Verbal, and Social
Forms of Bullying ...................................................................................................... 262
Table 8.5 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Physical, Verbal, and Social Forms
of Bullying.................................................................................................................. 263
Table 8.6 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Physical,
Verbal, and Social Forms of Bullying ....................................................................... 266
Table 8.7 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Total Target.......................... 269
Table 8.8 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Total Target................................ 270
Table 8.9 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Total Target
................................................................................................................................... 273
Table 8.10 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Physical, Verbal, and Social
Forms of Target Experiences .................................................................................... 275
Table 8.11 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Physical, Verbal, and Social
Forms of Target Experiences .................................................................................... 276
Table 8.12 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Physical,
Verbal, and Social Forms of Target Experiences...................................................... 279
Table 8.13 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Participant Roles................ 282
Table 8.14 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Participant Roles...................... 283
Table 8.15 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Participant
Roles .......................................................................................................................... 287
Table 8.16 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Self-Concept ....................... 292
Table 8.17 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Self-Concept ............................. 296
Table 8.18 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Self-Concept
................................................................................................................................... 302
Table 8.19 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Coping Strategies ............... 311
Table 8.20 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Coping Strategies ..................... 314
Table 8.21 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Coping
Strategies ................................................................................................................... 317
Table 8.22 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Total School Belonging ...... 320
Table 8.23 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Total School Belonging ............ 321
Table 8.24 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Total School
Belonging................................................................................................................... 323
Table 8.25 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Support, Rule Acceptance,
Attachment Types of School Belonging ..................................................................... 326
Table 8.26 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Support, Rule Acceptance,
Attachment Types of School Belonging ..................................................................... 327
Table 8.27 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Support, Rule
Acceptance, Attachment Types of School Belonging................................................. 331
Table 8.28 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Depression.......................... 334
Table 8.29 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Depression................................ 335
Table 8.30 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Depression
................................................................................................................................... 338
Table 8.31 Model 1: Variance Components Model for Participant Roles................ 340
Table 8.32 Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Knowledge about bullying and
Action to prevent it .................................................................................................... 341
Table 8.33 Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Knowledge of
Bullying and Action to prevent it............................................................................... 343
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1. Beyond Bullying Primary Model .............................................................. 88

Figure 4.2. Procedures for managing bullying behaviours........................................ 107
Figure 5.1. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Adolescent Peer Relations
Instrument Bully/Target ......................................................................................... 123
Instrument Participant Roles .................................................................................. 124
Figure 5.3. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Self Description Questionnaire
I Extended............................................................................................................... 126
Figure 5.4. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Adolescent Coping Strategies
Indicator..................................................................................................................... 127
Figure 5.5. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Pre-Adolescent School
Belonging Scale......................................................................................................... 128
Figure 5.6. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Child Depression Index 10
item scale ................................................................................................................... 129
Figure 5.7. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Beyond Bullying Program
Scale........................................................................................................................... 130
Figure 6.1. Timeline of data collection across each study......................................... 151
Figure 6.2. Hypothesised First-Order Factor Structure of the Adolescent Peer
Relations Instrument-Bully/Target. ........................................................................... 167
Figure 6.3. Student Cohorts Involved in Study 2. ..................................................... 176
Figure 6.4. Baseline control condition versus experimental condition research design.
................................................................................................................................... 181
................................................................................................................................... 254
Figure 8.2. Predicted mean standardised Total Bullying based on the equation for
Model 2 of the analysis.............................................................................................. 258
Figure 8.3. Predicted mean standardised Total Bullying score for critical groups based
on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis .............................................................. 260
Figure 8.4. Predicted mean standardised Bully Social score based on the equation for
Figure 8.5. Predicted mean standardised Bully Physical score between Males and
Females in Years 5 and 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis........... 268
Figure 8.6. Predicted mean standardised Bully Verbal score between Males and
Figure 8.7. Predicted mean standardised Total Target based on the equation for Model
2 of the analysis ......................................................................................................... 271
Figure 8.8. Predicted mean standardised Target Social score based on the equation for
Figure 8.9. Predicted mean standardised Target Social score for Year 5 and 6 Students
based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis .................................................... 281
Figure 8.10. Predicted mean standardised Passive Reinforcer score based on the
equation for Model 2 of the analysis ......................................................................... 285
Figure 8.11. Predicted mean standardised Ignore/Disregard score based on the
Figure 8.12. Predicted mean standardised Advocate score based on the equation for
Figure 8.13. Predicted mean standardised Advocate score between Males and Females
in Years 5 and 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis ......................... 288
Figure 8.14. Predicted mean standardised Active Reinforcer score for Males and
Females based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis ...................................... 289
Figure 8.15. Predicted mean standardised Ignore/Disregard score for Males and
Figure 8.16. Predicted mean standardised Physical Appearance score based on the
Figure 8.17. Predicted mean standardised Peer Relations score based on the equation
for Model 2 of the analysis ........................................................................................ 298
Figure 8.18. Predicted mean standardised Opposite-Sex Relations score based on the
Figure 8.19. Predicted mean standardised Same-Sex Relations score based on the
Figure 8.20. Predicted mean standardised Emotional Stability score based on the
Figure 8.21. Predicted mean standardised General Self-Esteem score based on the
Figure 8.22. Predicted mean standardised Physical Appearance score between Males
and Females in Years 5 and 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis .... 304
Figure 8.23. Predicted mean standardised Parental Relations score for Years 5 and 6
students based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis ...................................... 305
Figure 8.24. Predicted mean standardised General Schooling score for Years 5 and 6
Figure 8.25. Predicted mean standardised Opposite-Sex Relations score for Years 5
and 6 students based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis ............................ 306
Figure 8.26. Predicted mean standardised Emotional Stability score for Years 5 and 6
Figure 8.27. Predicted mean standardised Physical Appearance score for Male and
Female Years 5 and 6 students based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis .. 308
Figure 8.28. Predicted mean standardised Verbal Schooling score for Male and
Figure 8.29. Predicted mean standardised Emotional Stability score for Male and
Figure 8.30. Predicted mean standardised Honesty/Trustworthiness score for Male
and Female Years 5 and 6 students based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
................................................................................................................................... 309
Figure 8.31. Predicted mean standardised Avoidance score based on the equation for
Figure 8.32. Predicted mean standardised Problem Solving score based on the
Figure 8.33. Predicted mean standardised Support Seeking score based on the
Figure 8.34. Predicted mean standardised Problem Solving score for Year 5 and 6
Figure 8.35. Predicted mean standardised Problem Solving score for Males and
Figure 8.36. Predicted mean standardised Total School Belonging score based on the
Figure 8.37. Predicted mean standardised Total School Belonging score for critical
groups ........................................................................................................................ 324
Figure 8.38. Predicted mean standardised Support score based on the equation for
Figure 8.39. Predicted mean standardised Attachment score based on the equation for
Figure 8.40. Predicted mean standardised Support score between Males and Females
in Years 5 and 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis ......................... 332
Figure 8.41. Predicted mean standardised Rule Acceptance score between Males and
Figure 8.42. Predicted mean standardised Depression score based on the equation for
Model 2 of the analysis............................................................................................ 3333
Figure 8.43. Predicted mean standardised Depression score for Males and Females
Figure 8.44. Predicted mean standardised Action score between Males and Females in
Years 5 and 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis ............................. 344
Figure 8.45. Predicted mean standardised Knowledge score for Year 5 and Year 6
Figure 8.46. Predicted mean standardised Knowledge score for Males and Females in
Year 5 and Year 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis ...................... 346
Figure 8.47. Predicted mean standardised Action score for Year 5 and Year 6 students
LIST OF APPENDIXES
Volume II
Appendix 1 Teacher Manual.................................................................................. 401

Appendix 2 Single-Item Measures used for the School Report............................. 547
Appendix 3 Example of Individual School Report................................................ 551
Appendix 4 School Report with Data from All Schools ....................................... 562
Appendix 5 Example of a School Feedback Presentation ..................................... 584
Appendix 6 Anti-Bullying School Policy Template.............................................. 592
Appendix 7 Structured Interview Form and Thinking Time Template ................. 600
Appendix 8 Teacher Activity Book and Curriculum Mapping ............................. 605
Appendix 9 Beyond Bullying Primary Schools DVD ............... see back inside cover
Appendix 10 Parent brochure .................................................................................. 722
Appendix 11 Parent and child brochure .................................................................. 725
Appendix 12 Flash Cards......................................................................................... 735
Appendix 13 Poster.................................................................................................. 744
Appendix 14 List of Additional Resources ............................................................. 746
Appendix 15 Newsletter articles.............................................................................. 747
Appendix 16 Scale Items and Corresponding Factors............................................. 762
Appendix 17 Example of CFA Output for Each Critical Group: APRI-BT............ 774
Appendix 18 Item Parcelling ................................................................................... 784
Appendix 19 Means and Standard Deviations......................................................... 785
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
I would really like to help stop bullying in this school. I for one have
been bullied before and its not fun.
Australian Primary School Student (personal communication,
November 24, 2005)
The social behaviour of children is often viewed as fun, playful, and filled
with laughter. However, there is a more ominous side: childrens social behaviour can
also be manipulative and cruel. School bullying is one of such behaviours. Bullying is
pervasive in Australia, and internationally. In Australia for example, research has
found that one in six children experience being bullied on a weekly basis (Rigby,
1997).
Bullying has short-term and long-term consequences, not only for those
individuals involved, but also for peers, teachers, schools, and the wider community.
For example, research has found that bullying contributes to peer rejection
(Deater-Deckard, 2001), delinquent behaviour (Rigby & Cox, 1996), criminality
(Eron, Huesman, Dubow, Romanoff, & Yarmel, 1987), psychological disturbance
(Kumpulainen, Rsen, & Henttonen, 1999), further violence in the school (Galinsky
& Salmond, 2002), depression (Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpela, Marttunen, Rimpela, &
1
Rantanen, 1999), low self-esteem (OMoore & Kirkham, 2001), and suicidal ideation
(Rigby & Slee, 1999). These negative impacts accrue into adulthood not only for
those who are bullied, but also for those who bully others too (e.g., Kaltiala-Heino et
al. 1999; Nansel, Overpeck, Saluja, & Ruan, 2004; Olweus, 1993c). For example, an
international research study by Olweus (1999) has found that students who are
involved in bullying others during the primary school years, are six times more likely
than students who were not involved in bullying, to hold a criminal conviction by
their adult years. The link between early involvement in bullying and later criminal
behaviours has concerned Australian government groups, such as the federal Attorney
Generals Department, whose Australian National Crime Prevention Strategy (1999),
highlights the need for early anti-bullying intervention as crucial in reducing crime
within Australia. Thus, early intervention has been advocated as vital to combat
bullying in primary schools, and to prevent long-term and wide-ranging socio-
economic and community costs (Nansel et al., 2001).
A whole-school approach to preventing school bullying is considered to be the
most effective means of decreasing bullying within schools (Salmivalli, 2001). A
whole-school approach was first tested by Olweus (1993b), who found that
involvement in bullying others and victimisation were reduced by 50% or more
(p. 113). However, no study using the same type of intervention since this 1993
research, has been able to replicate these results even with improvements to Olweus
whole-school model (e.g., inclusion of school policy; Whitney, Rivers, Smith, &
Sharp, 1994). The limited success of most research in demonstrating empirically the
effectiveness of whole-school approaches can be partly attributed to methodological
flaws plaguing bullying research, which include: (a) the failure of many researchers to
align their operational definitions to the way in which they measure bullying,
2
resulting in an inaccurate measurement of bullying; (b) significant measurement
issues, such as the use of single-item measures, dichotomous variables, and the use of
non-validated measures (see Finger, Marsh, & Craven, 2006); (c) the lack of
utilisation of longitudinal control-group designs; and (d) inadequate implementation
and reporting of the whole-school approach.
More recently, Parada, Craven, and Marsh (2008) have built upon Olweus
intervention approach to design an effective secondary whole-school bullying
intervention called the Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program (see Parada,
2006). A key to the success of the Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program was
Parada et al.s explicit addressing of the past limitations of bullying research. Some of
the developments included: (a) capitalising on recent advances in theory
(e.g., self-concept theory and social identity theory) and research to employ
psychometrically sound multidimensional measures of bullying and its correlates; (b)
the use of longitudinal research design to test the impact of the Beyond Bullying
Secondary Schools Program over time, using strong statistical tools, and
(c) whole-school approaches to preventing bullying (e.g., Griezel, 2007; Griezel,
Craven, Yeung, & Finger, 2009; Marsh, Parada, Craven, & Finger, 2004; Parada,
2006). Key features of this intervention included: a whole-school policy, a
teacher-managed whole-school program, specific behaviour management strategies
for teachers, curriculum activities that teach students to address bullying, and a parent
education program. The study by Parada et al. (2008; see also Parada, 2006) has
added to the international literature by providing a rare, baseline-control versus
experimental empirical study that evidences the effectiveness of this intervention in
addressing bullying. Currently, only a small number of studies in secondary schools
3
have begun to capitalise on these recent research advances and I am not aware of any
primary school research that has addressed these issues as yet.
The primary purpose of the present investigation is to apply recent advances in
bullying theory and research, largely derived from the previous work in secondary
schools, to evaluate the impact of a new bullying intervention for primary aged
children called the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program (BB). The overarching
aims of this study include to:
1) Demonstrate that each of the instruments used in the current study is a

psychometrically sound, valid, and robust measure of the latent constructs
under investigation, with Year 5 and Year 6 students;
2) Develop new instrumentation to evaluate BB;
3) Evaluate the effectiveness of BB on reducing bullying behaviours and
target experiences in the context of a longitudinal multi-cohort
control-group research design, employing robust statistical procedures
(contrast analysis of baseline and experimental conditions using multilevel
modeling techniques); and
4) Evaluate the effectiveness of BB on further psychosocial outcomes
(i.e., self-concept, coping strategies, participant roles, depression, and
school belonging) with the use of advanced statistical procedures.
A well-developed, theoretically grounded, and thoroughly tested whole-school
intervention to combat bullying is critical for assisting schools to manage bullying
behaviours effectively. This research project is a longitudinal multi-cohort
control-group research design. Tracking the development of bullying over time from
the baseline to the experimental year for students and schools makes the research
design unique to primary school bullying intervention research. It is expected that the
intervention should significantly reduce school bullying, increase awareness of what
bullying is and is not, increase helping behaviour between peers, reduce depression
experienced by students, increase students sense of belonging to their school,
increase important multidimensional self-concept factors that contribute to protecting
4
students from being involved in bullying, and increase the future life potential of
these primary aged students.
This research has the potential to provide valuable insight into the nature of
primary school bullying, as well as to inform interventions. Key strengths of the
present investigation include: (a) the inclusion of a longitudinal control-group
multi-cohort multi-occasion research design; (b) use of the most advanced statistical
procedures currently available in gaining the most accurate results for this design;
(c) the use of developmentally appropriate, multidimensional, and psychometrically
sound measures that are underpinned by recent advances in theory and research;
(d) testing the impact of a newly developed intervention that capitalises on advances
in theory and research; and (e) comprehensively testing the effects of the intervention
on distinct psychosocial outcomes (e.g., bullying, being bullied, self-concept, school
belonging, depression, and coping strategies).
5
CHAPTER 2
Primary School Bullying: Definitional Issues, Methodological
Research Gaps, and Measurement
A bully is not a special kind of person with some kind of pathology
inside. Nor is a victim like that... Any child can be a bully, and, for
that matter, a victim... The part of a bully, or of a victim, draws upon
stereotypes which fit some children more easily than others, but none
with enough accuracy to enable predictability without an unacceptably
high mistake rate.
Rogers (1991, p. 6)
Introduction
Chapter 2 provides an overview of the literature and methodology underlying
how bullying is defined, measured, and analysed in the current study. There are three
main areas outlined: (a) what bullying is and how bullying is defined for this study;
(b) the importance of investigating primary school bullying; and (c) a review of
methodological issues in school bullying literature and their implication for bullying
research, effective intervention, and the current study. The first section discusses the
6
core components of bullying; the forms of bullying that are used by students; how
defining what bullying is not, can further our understanding of what bullying is; and
how bullying is operationally defined for the present investigation. Secondly, this
chapter considers the consequences to involvement in bullying in terms of mental
health and school outcomes; it examines the developmental and sex trends in
secondary and primary school bullying research, and assesses the impacts and
importance of investigating bullying in primary schools. Lastly, the methodological
issues of previous bullying research is scrutinised in relation to validation of popular
bullying measures, the problematical use of single-item scales and dichotomous
variables in bullying research, and how methodology has implications for the
procedures used in the current study.
While much of bullying research in primary schools has been unable to shield
itself from the limitations of studies in secondary schools, a new line of research in
secondary schools, using robust methodological designs, measurement techniques,
and whole-school approaches to preventing bullying, is emerging as a new paradigm
for bullying research as a whole (e.g., Griezel, 2007; Marsh, Parada, Craven, &
Finger, 2004; Parada, 2006; Parada, Craven, & Marsh, 2008). The present
investigation is the first of its kind to adopt these new methodological approaches
within a primary school setting.
What is School Bullying?
One of the most influential definitions still used in bullying research was first
developed by Olweus: A student is being bullied or victimized when he or she is
exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more
students (1997, p. 496). Whilst this definition has been inherently useful in
advancing bullying research, it has also contributed to some significant limitations.
7
Most significant of which is the difficulty researchers are faced with when trying to
operationalise bullying. For example, it is unclear within this definition of bullying,
how much repetition is needed for someone to be classified as bullied; who is
involved; the forms of bullying which students may engage in; and what differentiates
these behaviours as bullying from other childhood behaviours (e.g., playful teasing).
Attempts have been made to address this issue by expanding the definition with what
are believed to be the core components of bullying.
Core Components in Defining School Bullying
According to Schuster (1996) there are four core components in defining
school bullying which help to differentiate bullying from other aggressive acts. These
include that bullying involves: (1) repeated acts; (2) a statement of who is involved;
(3) actions which are intended to harm the target; and (4) a power imbalance between
the person bullying and the person targeted. For example, bullying has been defined
as repeated intimidation, over time, of a physical, verbal, or psychological nature of a
less powerful person by a more powerful person or group of persons (Slee, 1996,
p. 64). However, these core concepts often present a major problem in how they are
applied to real life settings. Thus, a new line of operational definitions have been
proposed. These operational definitions have incorporated the notion of proactive
aggression and targeted behaviour. This was introduced by Elinoff, Chafouleas, and
Sassu (2004): bullying is a form of aggression that is hostile and proactive, and
involves both direct and indirect behaviours that are repeatedly targeted at an
individual or group perceived as weaker (p. 888). The notions of proactive
aggression and targeted behaviour are important developments in the evolution of a
definition of bullying and will be revisited in the next section that examines the core
components used to define bullying.
8
Repetition, repetition, repetition. Bullying is said to happen when aggressive
acts are repeated. The idea of repeated acts relates to bullying happening on more than
one occasion, and can also refer to the use of different or multiple types on separate
occasions. However, the definition of bullying which includes repeated acts of
aggression is a controversial one. The controversy lies not in whether acts of bullying
are repeated or not, but rather, how often they must be repeated to be considered
bullying. This controversy has consequences for the ways in which bullying is
measured and analysed in research.
Repeat or repetition can be defined as something that happens or is performed
more than once (Kent, 1986), and this can include twice. However, although many
research articles on bullying define bullying in terms of repeated acts, when bullying
is measured and analysed in these articles, it is not considered to happen twice or
more as repeated would imply, but on multiple occasions, such as at least once per
week (e.g., Solberg & Olweus, 2003). This presents a number of problems for
bullying research. Firstly, many researchers measure bullying as a dichotomous
variable where students are either involved in bullying or not (see later discussion of
dichotomous variables). As a consequence students are categorised into involved or
non-involved groups based on the frequency of these repeated acts of bullying
(e.g., Ahmed & Braithwaite, 2004; Solberg & Olweus, 2003). However, this presents
an inconsistency between the operational term of repeated and the research practices
used to measure repeated acts. Dichotomising variables would place students who
were involved less frequently than the cut off point (but still involved repeatedly, such
as more than once) into the non-involved group.
Secondly, for those researchers who create dichotomous variables, there is
little agreement between researchers about how many times bullying must happen for
9
a person to be considered as being involved repeatedly. Sometimes a cut-off score of
one standard deviation above the mean is used (e.g., Ahmed & Braithwaite, 2004;
Stevens, Van Oost, & De Bourdeaudhuij, 2000), other times it is once a week or
more (e.g., Olweus, 1986), such that categorisation of bullying, and the frequency of
repetition, varies across studies. Having different conceptions of how many times
repeated actions occur make comparisons between like studies difficult. This is the
case even when the same measure has been used.
To address these issues some researchers have begun advocating for bullying
to be analysed as a continuous construct (e.g., Elinoff et al., 2004; Espelage,
Bosworth, & Simon, 2001; Parada, 2006), rather than as a dichotomous construct
(whether it happens or not). This approach overcomes the limitations of previous
research and will be the approach employed in the present investigation.
Who is involved? Bullying is generally thought to involve those students who
bully others, and those students who experience being targeted. Yet, bullying is a
phenomenon which occurs largely in the peer environment. The social group is an
integral part of the bullying dynamic. Many people are involved in direct and indirect
ways, such as actively or passively reinforcing the bullying, ignoring the bullying, or
supporting the person being bullied (Salmivalli, Kaukiainen, & Lagerspetz, 1998).
Arora (1996) states even in the one-to-one bullying interaction the effect of this on
the group and the groups effect on the bullying are essential elements in the further
explanation of the interaction (p. 319).
Schuster (1996) proposes that a statement of who is involved is a core concept
to defining bullying in any research study. This can impact the way in which bullying
is researched and analysed. For example, if a researcher considers that all students can
be involved in bullying, bullying would be measured along a continuum of degrees of
10
involvement. In contrast, if a researcher considers that only a few specific students are
responsible for bullying others, bullying would be measured with a comparison of
students who are involved to those who are not involved. In addition, if a researcher
considers the peer group to be an integral component to the dynamic of bullying, a
measure and analysis of participant roles may also be included. Researchers should
strive to make it clear in their operational definition of bullying, which students they
consider to be involved in bullying, whether they perceive all students have the
potential to bully, or whether it is a select few who become involved.
Intention to harm. The issue of intentionality is a challenging one in bullying
research. There are many contexts in which bullying can happen for a reason. For
example, many researchers ascertain that bullying is an intentionally malice behaviour
actioned to harm the target (e.g., Rigby, 1998). This may be true in some cases;
however, it is also possible that students who engage in bullying do not themselves
recognise their intention to harm the other student or students, but use it as a means by
which they can ascertain their power within the peer group, or draw attention.
Harming someone may be the outcome, but not necessarily the reason. Although
bullying behaviours may potentially be motivated by numerous reasons, the issue of
intention and proactive aggression can still stand. Rather than considering bullying in
terms of intentionally hurtful behaviours designed to harm the target, bullying can be
viewed as an intentional behaviour actioned onto a target which causes harm.
This issue of intentionality also encompasses the intention which students who
bully use to pick on others. Elinoff et al. (2004) propose that bullying happens without
provocation. Bullying does not happen because a student is weak, nor is it due to a
reaction from another persons behaviour. The person bullying proactively seeks out
or chooses the target. In a discussion by Parada (2006) of the appropriateness of bully
11
and victim labels, Parada states it is likely that students are targeted due to
characteristics that the perpetrator assessed as making the selected student or students
an easier target than others around them (p. 16). A student who bullies is able to
assess their target and choose them, based on the knowledge that they will
overpower them in a certain situation, for whatever reason that may be. A person
bullying then must pre-meditate the targets response to ensure that the target will not
be able to stand up for themselves or retaliate (Parada, 2006), leading them to choose
a context in which they know they will hold more power (e.g., if they have friends
around to support them). For this reason Parada (2006) further asserts that the term
victim should be replaced with target. Parada suggests this is useful given there is
a negative stigma attached to the word victim which creates an assumption of the
target being at fault for the bullying. Including a definition of bullying which reflects
this target experience, and using words such as target as opposed to victim are
important not only in presenting a clearer definition of bullying, but in removing the
stigma and blame attached to those who are targeted.
It should also be noted that although the issue of intention is an important one,
this theme is largely ignored when bullying is measured in research (e.g., Sapouna,
2008). For example, popular single-item measures of bullying fail to discern whether
bullying is intentionally performed. These single-item questions ask students simply
how frequently they have been involved in bullying. Making it unclear whether
students answer with the concept of intentionality in mind. The operational definition
that is used is then inconsistent with the way in which students respond to a
questionnaire. The issue here lies with whether the measure of bullying, as answered
by the respondent, is reflective of how bullying is operationally defined by the
researcher. To overcome this issue one alternative would be with the use of a
12
behavioural measure that has the potential to directly tap the issue of intentionality
(e.g., crashed into a student on purpose as they walked by; Parada, 2000). This
creates the possibility of greater concordance between the researchers operational
definition and the respondents internal interpretation.
Power. A power imbalance is said to be what differentiates bullying from
other childhood behaviours such as teasing (Craven & Parada, 2002). When a power
imbalance occurs, it is considered that those who bully others hold power over the
person or persons they target. Parada (2006) suggests this issue of power is often
over-emphasised in research and is not necessary within a definition of bullying, as a
power imbalance is already implied via other definitional aspects.
In order to illustrate how power can be misunderstood, Parada provided an
example noting that whilst teachers are in a powerful position due to their authority in
the classroom, they can also be bullied by students. However, power can happen in
many ways. This includes (but is not limited to) having greater strength physically,
having faster verbal skills, having a larger social circle or higher status, and can also
happen in varying contexts (e.g., a surprise attack where the person being targeted is
caught off-guard and is not sure what to do in this situation). This power imbalance
prevents the person targeted from being able to stand up for themselves. If a teacher
were in a situation (e.g., being caught off-guard) in which they were unsure of how to
respond in that moment, their authoritarian power would be lost for that situation.
An important point which needs clarification is that although a power
differential can exist between the person bullying and the target, Parada also suggests
that power is transient. Power is a contextual and dynamic construct (Pratto &
Walker, 2001; Schwartz, Patterson, & Steen, 1995). It is not necessarily the bully who
is powerful or in power, but rather the context in which it happens that they are able to
13
possess greater power (e.g., they only bully when they have friends around). Thus, a
person can hold greater power in a particular context. A crucial consideration for the
context of power is that of the reciprocal relation between bullying and being bullied
(see Chapter 3). For example, a student who bullies others at school may be bullied by
their siblings at home, or a student who is bullied by bigger students goes on to bully
smaller students in younger years. This model of reciprocity illustrates the contextual
importance of bullying suggesting that being involved in bullying others can lead to
experiences of being bullied, and being bullied can lead to bullying others too. That
is, being able to over-power someone in one context does not mean being able to
overpower others in a separate context, but can include being overpowered
themselves in a separate context.
It is possible that the division in power becomes greater the more that the
students are involved in bullying. For example, a student may begin bullying to
dominate others. When this power is won, they continue to bully in order to
maintain their dominance. From a peer point of view, the target appears to be weak
and nobody wants to be friends with them (possibly for fear of being targeted
themselves). Students may prefer to side with the person bullying so that they will not
be bullied themselves. In turn, the bully is able to recruit more and more support from
others, incite less peer support for the target, which in turn increases their power
further in that context. The person bullying becomes increasingly powerful as time
goes on, and the target becomes less and less able to defend themselves. Although the
issue of power has been limited by circular arguments in bullying research (Parada,
2006), emphasising power in any operational definition of bullying remains important
to differentiating bullying from other aggressive acts.
14
Summary of core components in defining bullying. Many definitions of
bullying include core components which denote bullying (e.g., repeated and
intentional acts by someone with more power; Schuster, 1996). However, problems
occur when researchers fail to align their operational definitions with their research
practices undertaken. These have often been conflicting (e.g., the term repeated being
used as a definition of more than once, yet measured in terms of multiple occasions).
Developing an operational definition which is aligned to research practices is
important for being able to measure bullying more accurately, or at least more
accurately according to what bullying is perceived to be. More effort needs to be
made by researchers to ensure that the ways in which they measure bullying aligns
with their operational definitions of what bullying is. This study endeavours to align
the research paradigm used with a newly developed operational definition of bullying
that encompasses the four core components of bullying.
Forms of Bullying Used by Students
Researchers advocate that bullying can be manifested in three ways
(Crick et al., 2001; Lowenstein, 1977): physical, verbal, and social bullying. In
addition, these types have been recently extended with the introduction of the term
cyber bullying (Campbell, 2005; Griezel, 2007; Li, 2007; Strom & Strom, 2005).
What are missing in many definitions of bullying are the behavioural traits which
accommodate these forms. For example, what does a repeated physical bullying act
by someone with more power look like?
Arora (1996) states that bullying can only be conceptualized as a collection of
different actions, for which there are different motivations and different outcomes
(p. 322). In any definition of bullying, examples of behaviour are vital to our
understanding of what bullying is. For example, identifying subtle forms of bullying
15
is important to developing appropriate strategies to prevent and address each form of
bullying explicitly. Moreover, identifying subtle forms of bullying is important to
being able to accurately detect bullying in real life situations, and thereafter use
appropriate strategies to prevent bullying more effectively.
Physical. Physical bullying is characterised by behaviours that may include
hitting, kicking, pinching, throwing objects intended to hit someone, and taking
money or belongings from others. Physical bullying is usually easier to identify than
other forms as it is generally more direct and can cause visible injuries (e.g., cuts and
bruises; Smith, 2000). In its most subtle forms, indirect physical bullying can include
bumping into someone as they walk by, damaging or stealing a persons property
when they do not see it, and throwing objects at someone when they are not aware of
who it is.
Verbal. Verbal bullying can happen in many ways, often in conjunction with
other types of bullying (e.g., physical). Direct forms of bullying can include abusive
language being used, name-calling, swearing, making rude gestures, humiliating
someone, or making jokes about someone. More subtle forms can include
intimidation, or putting someone down.
Social. Social bullying is characterised by the hurtful manipulation of peer
groups. These behaviours are usually more subtle and can include the use of
spreading rumours, ostracism, making mean faces, ruining friendships, passing notes
around about someone, and social exclusion (e.g., not letting someone join in with the
activity, or inviting everyone to their house except the target).
Cyber. This type of bullying is relatively new, making its way with the
introduction of modern technology, (e.g., with the use of mobile telephones and the
16
internet). Although little research has been undertaken regarding the nature and
prevalence of this form, it is evident that this form of bullying is occurring (Griezel,
2007). Cyber bullying can take the form of both direct and subtle behaviours. Direct
behaviours include using a mobile phone to film a target being beaten up, and to take
embarrassing photos of someone, while more subtle forms can include posting nasty
words about a person on the internet, sending anonymous hurtful text messages, as
well as spreading rumours about someone via text messages to other people
(Kowalski, & Limber, 2007; Li, 2007.
Summary of types of bullying. The forms of bullying and target experiences
which will be examined in this study are physical, verbal, and social forms. Including
the forms and examples of behavioural traits are important to helping researchers to
understand what constitutes bullying. The operational definition used within this
study will be informed by the multidimensional conceptualisation of the nature of
bullying roles and their associated manifested behaviours.
Innovative Elements to Understanding Bullying: What Bullying is Not
Recently, bullying has been distinguished from other childhood behaviours
which are often mistaken for bullying (Craven & Parada, 2002; Finger, Craven,
Parada, & Yeung, 2007). Two behaviours which can easily be confused with bullying
include teasing and conflict between peers.
Teasing. Sometimes it may appear that childrens play is rough, yet is playful
in nature and intention (Craven & Parada, 2002). The issue of teasing within the
bullying framework originated with Swain (1998), and was later extended by Parada
(2006). According to Keltner, Young, Heerey, Oemig, and Monarch (1998), teasing
can be prosocial or antisocial. While antisocial teasing falls under the wider range of
bullying behaviours (e.g., name-calling) and is aimed to intimidate, prosocial teasing
17
serves to enhance peer relations. This latter type of teasing is playful and experienced
as a prosocial means of communication. However, the underlying purpose of teasing
is often ambiguous (Shapiro, Baumeister, & Kessler, 1991), making it almost
indistinguishable from bullying (Parada, 2006).
Shapiro et al. (1991) assert that teasing is used in peer groups as a positive
interaction between peers. Craven and Parada (2002) further emphasise that teasing
can be used as a means which allows peers to point out social deviations in socially
non-damaging ways. As such, teasing assists students in being able to learn about,
negotiate, and assume their social identities (Keltner, et al., 1998). Prosocial teasing
can serve to establish, maintain, and enhance interpersonal relationships and assist in
resolving conflicts (Barnett, Burns, Sanborn, Bartel, & Wilds, 2004, p. 293).
Craven and Parada (2002) propose that students may start out using non-
hurtful behaviours, but these can escalate into bullying or other aggressive behaviours.
In addition, Craven and Parada state that students who think they are just teasing
may find it acceptable to keep bullying others, and teachers who respond to playful
teasing as if it were bullying may overreact in their management of these behaviours.
Being able to determine exactly what is happening is crucial to accurately assessing
what type of situation it is, and how to deal with it most effectively.
What differentiates prosocial and antisocial teasing is the intention of the act,
and the power relationship between the peers. Antisocial teasing causes harm, is
intimidating, humiliating, and ridicules (Craven & Parada, 2002). Roberts and Morotti
(2000) suggest students are engaging in antisocial teasing when it is of high intensity,
repetitive, and experienced by the target as damaging. This type is perceived by the
person being teased to be damaging. It is also usually followed by the person who
engages in bullying, defending their behaviour with statements like I was just
18
mucking around, it was only a joke. The students who tease in this way use
explanations that include the words only and just to justify their behaviour (Frost,
1991). Students who use this type of teasing may be less likely to stop teasing as they
perceive (and insist) it is harmless, and they may also enjoy the social rewards that
result from antisocial teasing (Craven & Parada, 2002).
What further differentiates these two types of teasing is that antisocial teasing
is usually executed in one direction, such that the person bullying is usually the
person who teases in antisocial ways, and the person being targeted is not able to
reciprocate the tease. Thus, anti-social teasing can be seen as a form of bullying.
Conversely, prosocial teasing comprises behaviours in which no harm was intended.
This type of behaviour ensures that students are playing and able to interchange roles
(e.g., they reciprocate the behaviours, or at least they can reciprocate them if they
wanted to). The student being teased may also be laughing genuinely and there is
shared enjoyment between peers.
Conflict between peers. Another type of common peer interaction which can
be mistaken for bullying is conflict between peers (Finger, Craven, Parada et al.,
2007). Conflict is a phenomenon which may occur when a person strives to reach
their goals, but they are prevented from reaching them due to the actions of another
person attempting to reach their own goals (Deutsch, 1973; Johnson & Johnson,
1996). Like prosocial teasing, Johnson and Johnson (1996) stipulate that peer conflict
is a necessary and positive condition for development and growth of children and
adolescents (p. 463).
Under the social interdependence theory, Deutsch (1973) proposes that two
types of conflict exist: constructive and destructive conflict. Both constructive and
destructive conflict involve an aim to reach a particular goal or outcome. What
19
differentiates the constructive from the destructive kind is that constructive conflict
serves to maintain a respectable relationship with the other person involved (Johnson
& Johnson, 1996). Following constructive conflict, co-operation between those
involved takes place, and an outcome is sought that is aimed to maximize joint gain
(Johnson & Johnson, 1996, p. 470) from all sides involved, for long-term benefit. In a
school situation, this would involve students who are friends that want to remain
mutual friends. Whatever the reason for the conflict, both are hurt by the experience,
both students still want to be friends, and they are not turning against each other.
Johnson and Johnson further propose there are four characteristics to constructive
conflict (Johnson & Johnson, 1996): (1) communication is mutually open and honest,
as well as of an informing, and being informed nature; (2) perceptions about the other
person are more accurate; (3) trust and responsiveness characterise the relationship,
for example they are friends; and (4) each persons point of view is recognised, and
the people involved search for a mutually beneficial resolution. Constructive conflict
serves therefore to restore friendships. Destructive conflict, however, can be
conceptualised as bullying and serves to benefit only one party.
Summary of what bullying is not. The majority of definitions of bullying
attempt to clearly state what bullying is. Recent advancements to defining bullying
has extended our understanding of bullying with the incorporation of what bullying is
not (Craven & Parada, 2002; Finger, Craven, Parada et al., 2007; Swain, 1998). This
can help to differentiate subtle forms of bullying that can be easily confused with
typical childhood behaviours, and can potentially further assist students and teachers
in being able to accurately differentiate bullying in real life situations (Finger, Craven,
Parada et al., 2007). Conceptualising what bullying is not, will help to operationally
define bullying within this study, as outlined in the next section.
20
Defining Bullying for this Study
Within this study, bullying others and being bullied are defined in terms of the
core elements of bullying as identified in the previous section. This is supplemented
by an operational definition of the types of bullying and the behaviours these entail.
Bullying. A person or a group of people are engaging in bullying when

they are using proactive aggression that causes harm to one or more
targets. The persons who are targeted are unable to use effective means to
defend themselves in that situation. Other students may be involved by:
reinforcing the person bullying, ignoring the situation, or helping the
target. The forms of bullying which are used by those who engage in
bullying include physical, verbal, or social forms. Behaviours are
repeated with the same or with different bullying forms over time, and
more than one form can be used during one situation of bullying
(e.g., verbally abusing someone when they are physically bullying them).
Any student can engage in bullying behaviours.
Being bullied. A person or a group of people are being bullied when they
are being proactively harmed by one or more people, or by a group. The
persons who are targeted are unable to use effective ways to defend
themselves in that situation, and they perceive the actions to be
damaging. Other students may also be involved by: reinforcing the
person bullying, ignoring the situation, or helping the target. The bullying
may be of a physical, verbal, or social form that is repeated in different or
similar ways over time, or with more than one form of bullying occurring
during one situation of bullying (e.g., being verbally abused by someone
when they are also being physically bullied by them). Any student can be
potentially targeted.
Physical bullying. Physical bullying is defined as entailing direct or

indirect behaviours. Direct behaviours include: hitting, kicking,
punching, pushing, or spitting. Indirect behaviours can include: bumping
into someone on purpose as they walk by or locking someone in a room.
Verbal bullying. Verbal bullying is defined as entailing direct or indirect

behaviours. Direct behaviours include: hurtful, rude, abusive, or
humiliating comments against another person. Indirect behaviours can
include: intimidation by putting someone in their place or having the last
word.
Social bullying. Social bullying is defined as bullying using social

means. Behaviours include: rumour spreading, excluding someone from
activities or preventing access to the peer group, passing notes around
about someone, ignoring, or making mean faces at someone to indicate
they are not welcome. Social bullying is usually instigated in indirect
ways.
21
Summary of the operational definition of bullying for this study. Used in
conjunction with the four core components (repetition, who is involved, intention, and
power), the forms used by students (physical, verbal, social, and cyber), and what
bullying is not, the operational definition will be the basis for how bullying is
measured, analysed, and further implicates on the methods used to prevent bullying in
this study. It should be noted that the examples of physical, verbal, and social forms
provided are illustrations of what can happen. The behaviours are not restricted to
occur in these given ways only.
Summary of What is School Bullying
Understanding what bullying is has important implications for the way in
which bullying research is undertaken. To more accurately define bullying, recent
advances to definition include the incorporation of understanding what bullying is not
(Craven & Parada, 2002; Finger, Craven, Parada et al., 2007). This together with the
core components, and forms of bullying, help researchers to define bullying more
precisely. This helps researchers to understand the nature, determinants, and
consequences to bullying with more accuracy. The next section was designed to
discuss the consequences and the importance of school bullying issues.
Why Investigate School Bullying?
It is well established that bullying leads to negative impacts for those involved,
as well as negative impacts for the wider community. These consequences are
outlined in the following section. Bullying is a serious issue, particularly concerning
the later life consequences which prevent students involved reaching their full
potential during adult life.
22
Consequences to Involvement in Bullying
Mental Health Outcomes. Involvement in bullying has been linked to many
mental health issues including posttraumatic stress (Matthiesen & Einarsen, 2004),
psychotic-like symptoms (Campbell & Morrison, 2007), and somatic symptoms
(Rigby, 1998). The most popular mental health issue studied has been depression
(e.g., Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpela, Rantanen, & Rimpela, 2000; Rigby, 1998; Roland,
2002). These studies tend to use cross-sectional designs which show how depression
is correlated to involvement in bullying (e.g., Rigby, 1998). Although a clear relation
between involvement in bullying and depression have been established, it is not clear
which direction these relations lie (e.g., that being targeted leads to depression, or
depression makes a person more susceptible to being targeted, or that the effects are
reciprocal). Olweus (1993b) sought to investigate the long-term detriment of school
bullying on depression in later adult life and found that students who were bullied in
Years 6, 7, 8, or 9 tended to be more depressed at age 23 than students who were not
bullied during the same school years. As a result of the bullying, Olweus concluded
that bullying had left its scars on their minds (Olweus, 1993a, p. 33).
Marsh et al. (2004) investigated the long-term effects of bullying on
depression. In a longitudinal study of adolescent students with measures three times
over the course of one year, Marsh et al. found that although depression increased
over time for adolescent students, involvement in bullying did not lead to later
depression, but instead, depression made a person more susceptible to being bullied
later in the year. Similar results have been found between victimisation and
internalising problems (Hodges & Perry, 1999), suggesting mental health issues are
potential mechanisms which can make a person more vulnerable to being targeted.
23
Kaltiala-Heino et al. (2000) further suggests that the causal relations between
mental health issues and being bullied may not be uni-directional, but rather,
reciprocal. Although it is not clear how bullying is related to many mental health
concerns, when considering depression alone, the notion of reciprocity was not
supported for adolescent students in longitudinal causal research by Marsh et al.
(2004). However, Marsh et al. measured bullying for short-term effects over one year,
as opposed to long-term effects over many years. It is possible that for some students
depression can lead to being bullied, which can lead to further depression in later
adult years, entrenching the cycle. For primary school students, there is some
preliminary evidence to suggest that depression leads to being targeted, but it is
clearer that early involvement leads to later depression.
School Impacts. The impact of bullying does not stop at those involved but
effects schools and communities at large. When nothing is done to prevent bullying,
negative consequences which can arise include issues regarding school safety, distrust
amongst students, the formation of gangs (formal and informal), increased
occupational stress, and a poor educational environment. Previous studies have shown
that those students involved in bullying are also affected at the school level. While
bullies are unhappy and dislike school (Rigby & Slee, 1993), students who are bullied
fear going to school (Rigby, 1998). Involvement in bullying may then cause students
to feel like they do not belong at their school.
Belonging has been suggested as a fundamental human need (Baumeister &
Leary, 1995). School belonging plays an important role in a students identity. People
strive to identify with various groups. This may include belonging to a peer, sporting,
cultural, or institutional group. Baumeister and Leary stipulate that when belonging is
low, negative consequences such as increased mental health concerns and stress may
24
arise. In terms of school belonging for children, a sense of belonging to their school
plays an important role in how they experience the school academic sphere, peer
relations, and problems at school (Anderman, 2002; Snchez, Coln, & Esparza,
2005). Likewise, their experiences at school impinge on their sense of belonging. For
example, bullying has previously been shown to be linked with a more negative view
of connectedness with the school (Eisenberg, Neumark-Sztainer, & Perry, 2003).
A longitudinal secondary schools study of the effects of bullying on school
belonging was conducted by Parada (2006) and measured bullying three times over
one year (at the beginning, middle, and end of the school year). Findings suggested
that involvement in bullying and experiences of being targeted led to a later lower
sense of school belonging. More specifically, students who were bullied, or who
bullied others, had later lower acceptance of school rules, lower feelings of
attachment, and felt like they received less school support (three and six months later).
Bullying over time. Bullycide (bullying related suicide, whereby a person
commits suicide as a result of being chronically targeted), later criminality, and
aggressive tendencies are just some of the additional long-term damage that can occur
from involvement in school bullying. Olweus (1993a) ascertained that long-term
effects begin in early childhood and develop into serious adulthood issues for both the
perpetrators of bullying and those who are victimized by them. Consequences become
more severe for those children who are chronically involved (Rigby, 2001). These
effects deepen as the bullying continues, making it crucial to prevent bullying early.
Bullycide is a clear example of this. Sharp, Thompson, and Arora (2000) suggest that
ongoing bullying is difficult to prevent and requires long-term strategies to deal with
this. Preventing bullying early is therefore a necessary prerequisite to preventing the
long-term and compounding effects of bullying.
25
Summary of consequences to involvement in bullying. Experiencing and
engaging in bullying at any age has long-term detriments that prevent students from
reaching their full potential in life. These consequences are particularly salient for
those students who experience bullying during the primary years, as the potential for
long-ranging incidents are widened, and the long-term effects potentially more severe
for those students who are chronically involved. Preventing bullying for primary
school aged students is critical. The prevalence of bullying for this age group is
outlined in the next section, as well as the differences between involvement in
bullying by males and females.
School Bullying: Sex Differences and Developmental Trends
Sex differences. Males have often been cited as the more aggressive sex
(e.g., Tomada & Schneider, 1997). Empirical research generally shows this to be the
case. For example, Due et al. (2005) examined bullying in 28 countries and found that
males reported being bullied more than females, in all countries. Overall 18.4% of
males responded they were bullied, and 15.2% of females said they were bullied.
Prior to the recognition that females could be differentially aggressive to males, scores
on traditional aggressiveness measures (which exalted physical aggression) were so
low for females, that female aggressiveness was said to be redundant (Olweus, 1972).
However, Bjrkqvist (1994) suggested it was nonsensical (p. 177) to assert that
males are more aggressive than females when differences in the form of bullying are
likely to be qualitative, and related to both sex and developmental conditions.
Additionally, Crick and Grotpeter (1995) suggest that females may actually use a
more unique form of aggression than was tested in previous studies. Whilst previous
research shows that males tend to use more physical and verbal forms of bullying
(e.g., Bjrkqvist, Lagerspetz, & Kaukiainen, 1992; Tomada, & Schneider, 1997),
26
research to support the theory that females use more relational forms of bullying than
males, yields inconclusive results.
Some studies have found that males tend to use more of all three types of
bullying than females; including relational (Henington, Hughes, Cavell, & Thompson,
1998; Tomada, & Schneider, 1997), or have found no sex differences in the use of
relational aggression (Rys, & Bear, 1997). These studies all use respondents from the
primary school level (aged 5 to 10). Kaukiainen et al. (1999) has suggested that
relational forms of bullying occur once children gain some form of social intelligence
in adolescence. When developmental trends have been taken into account, Bjrkqvist
et al. (1992) has found that adolescent females (11 and 15-year-olds) tended to use
more indirect (relational) means of bullying than males, and that verbal and relational
bullying strategies were not yet fully developed in younger children (8-year-olds).
Using 15 to 16-year-old respondents, Salmivalli, Kaukiainen, and Lagerspetz (2000)
also found that adolescent females used more relational forms of aggression than
males; and furthermore, Crick and Grotpeter, (1995) found sex differences to exist
accordingly, even at the primary school level (Years 3 to 6).
In the only longitudinal research investigating sex differences to-date, Marsh
et al. (2004) found that males used more of all types of bullying. The highest
difference compared to females was found for physical types of bullying; however,
males nevertheless were found to be higher in social types of bullying, which is
thought to be the domain of female bullying.
Prevalence of bullying in secondary schools. While bullying research has not
consistently shown males to use more bullying than females, the prevalence of
bullying for primary and secondary students is also unclear. Most researchers contend
that between 15 and 20% of students are said to experience bullying at some point
27
during their schooling years (Batsche, 1997), yet estimates have been as high as 73%
(Elsea & Rees, 2001). According to Rigby (1997), bullying within Australian
secondary schools is said to occur on a weekly basis for approximately 1 in 6
children. An additional Australian study with predominantly secondary school
students has shown similar results with 12.7% being bullied, 23.7% bullying others,
and 21.5% involved in both bullying and being bullied (Forero, McLellan, Rissel, &
Bauman, 1999).
In an international study of bullying in over 28 different countries (including
European, Scandinavian, and American cultures), 123 227 students aged between
11 and 15 years responded to how often they had been bullied (Due et al., 2005). An
average of 18% of students said they were bullied sometimes or more, across all
schools. Responses varied across countries, with the lowest reported frequency of
bullying for females in Sweden (5.1%), and the highest for males in Lithuania
(41.4%). In addition, experiences of being bullied were reported to decrease with age
across all countries except Scotland.
In general, there is reasonable consensus among researchers that bullying
decreases with age (e.g., Due et al., 2005; Rigby, 2002). Smith, Madsen, and Moody
(1999) suggest bullying decreases as students mature and their social skills improve.
Moreover, Borg (1999) suggests that bullying changes from direct means, to more
indirect means as students get older. However, according to empirical evidence by
Marsh et al. (2004) in a longitudinal study with Australian secondary students, all
types of bullying (physical, verbal, and social) increased from Year 7 onwards, rather
than decreased as expected. In addition, bullying was found to be maintained at peak
levels from Years 9 to 11 (where measurement ceased). This was apparent even for
physical types of bullying, opposing Borgs assertion that bullying goes from direct to
28
more indirect means. Unfortunately, in terms of being bullied, Year 8 students tended
to bear the brunt of being bullied the most frequently. This Year 8 peak was found for
all types of target experiences, and tended to decline systematically in the following
years up to Year 11.
Prevalence of bullying in primary schools. Although there is data support for
bullying to peak during secondary school, it is now more widely accepted that
bullying appears well before students enter secondary school. However, studies in
which the prevalence of bullying is indicated are scarce in the literature for primary
aged children. Cases of bullying have depicted experiences of being bullied to be as
high as 40% and 49.8% for primary school students (Dake, Price, & Telljohann, 2003;
Wolke, Woods, Bloomfield, & Karstadt, 2000). More specifically, in a study of 1344
South Korean Year 4 students, 5.3% of students reported they were targeted, 12.0%
reported they engaged in bullying others, and 7.2% responded that they were both
targets as well as perpetrators of bullying (Yang, Kim, Kim, Shin, & Yoon, 2006).
Additionally, in a study of the short-term impact of bullying in three Indian primary
schools by Kshirsagar, Agarwal, and Bavdekar (2007), the prevalence varied from
18.5% in a girls only school, to 38.2% in one of the co-educational schools.
In an Australian study, Rigby and Slee (1991) found that being bullied
decreased from the age of 8 to 13. Conversely, Macklem (2003) found that female
students in particular, aged between 8 and 11 increased their use of social bullying as
they got older. Macklem contends this is because social bullying is more tolerated
among peers. However, there is no empirical evidence to suggest social bullying
increases, and no evidence that reveals which year bullying peaks at during the
primary years. Yet, it is evident that bullying occurs during the primary years, and
that the long-term consequences to involvement are potentially more severe for those
29
who are involved during the younger years, because the potential for long-term
chronic involvement is greater. Clayton, Ballif-Spanville, and Hunsaker (2001)
propose that in order to be truly preventive, programs should be implemented when
children are in elementary school, before the secondary school peak.
Prevention of bullying in primary schools. No matter which year an
intervention is being implemented, it is important that students receive resources
specifically designed for their developmental level. It is possible that interventions
focused on the social environment may be more appropriate for children who clearly
understand their role and the role of others within the peer group. Selman (1980)
argued that two factors contribute to healthy interpersonal relationships. The first
related to having an awareness of their own thoughts, and the second being having an
awareness of another persons points of view. This is known as Theory of Mind
(Doherty, 2009). He further proposed that this social awareness develops over time.
In terms of a whole-school approach and the social cognitive advancements of
children at different ages, the age of the most meaningful and largest learning
experience for peer interactions may be during the upper primary years. Quintana's
(1998) model of ethnic cognition, which is a close resemblance of the
ingroup-outgroup phenomena (e.g., the favouring of members who are part of a
persons own group, and having a dislike or indifference to persons who are members
of alternative groups), contends that from age 10, children begin to understand and
interpret not only meaningful hierarchical social categories, but they also identify the
corresponding social consequences of these categories, and the payoffs they provide
(e.g., high status versus low status social payoffs). At the same time, 10-year-old
children are thought to be at the stage of operational thought, whereby they begin to
appreciate the individual within a group context, and can see themselves through the
30
eyes of others (Selman, 1980). This formation and understanding of the role of self
and the role of other individuals within a social group, beginning at age 10, can equate
in the child's mind to viewing behaviours (pro-social and aggressive behaviours
included) as potential positive or negative payoffs in the peer group (see Chapter 3).
Elias et al. (2002) also suggests upper primary aged children are able to deal
with conflict and have an important need to belong. This need to belong in a peer
group is particularly salient for bullying and offers a potential explanation as to why
the effects of bullying can be so traumatic and long-lasting for children at and after
this age. Peer intervention is therefore useful during the upper primary years, and has
potential flow-on impacts that could prevent the high prevalence rates within the
secondary years.
Summary of developmental trends and sex differences. Developmental trends
and sex differences are important to understand prior to preventing the short- and
long-term effects of school bullying. While it is unclear how often bullying occurs, it
is well established that bullying does occur in the secondary as well as the primary
years.
Summary of Why Bullying should be Investigated
Involvement in bullying can potentially lead to debilitating psychological and
further aggressive consequences. These outcomes persist, particularly when
involvement in bullying is prolonged. While it is clear that decreasing bullying at an
early age is necessary to preventing later life effects, many questions still remain
about the consequences to bullying, and the frequency and intensity at which these
happen. Inconsistencies in research can be partly attributed to methodological
problems in school bullying literature. The methodological gaps of bullying research
are discussed in the next section.
31
A Review of Methodological Issues within Bullying Literature: What We Know
and Where to Go From Here
Advances in bullying research have been hampered by methodological issues.
How constructs are measured affect how constructs are understood, analysed, and
managed. This further implicates on our understanding of the nature of bullying, its
causes, consequences, and the prevention of it. Unfortunately, the measurement of
bullying has been hindered by the persistent use of questionable measurement and
analytical practices, such as the use of single-item measures, a lack of measurement
validation, and the use of dichotomous variables. The following section details the
problems in current bullying research, and provides suggestions on how these may be
overcome.
Fundamental Issues of Measurement: Validity
A prerequisite to empirical research is the appropriate operationalisation of a
hypothetical construct. The development of a valid instrument is part of this process.
Within school bullying research, assessment of the psychometric properties of
instrumentation that is used to measure bullying has often included an analysis of
reliability, but has often been to the neglect of validity (e.g., Christie-Mizell, 2003;
Craig, 1998). Validity relates to how accurately an instrument measures what it is
hypothesised to measure.
Three types of validity. Nunnally (1967) outlines three overarching types of
validity which are important prerequisites to determining whether an instrument
should be used. These are: (1) Predictive; (2) Content; and (3) Construct Validity.
Predictive validity relates to how well an instrument is able to predict the construct it
claims to measure. This can involve predicting the outcome of one variable as a
consequence of an alternative variable, or via correlational methods (e.g., predicting
32
experiences of being bullied with a measure of depression). While literature on
bullying often seeks to determine the consequences to involvement, to-date, there is
no overarching outcome or predictor to involvement in bullying, such that correlations
with outcomes or effects to bullying (e.g., the correlation between criminal behaviour
and engagement in bullying others) would lend themselves to determining the
adequacy of a bullying measure.
A more strategic approach to assessing validity could be via content validity.
Nunnally (1967) suggests there are two key themes which need to be taken into
account during instrument development: (1) items represent the construct to be tested;
and (2) the active researcher should undertake sensible methods of test development.
In order to pursue these two endeavours, the active researcher must work from a
strong underlying theory. Items thus must be chosen as good representations of those
constructs hypothesised. Nunnally (1967) suggests the pursuit of content validity is
usually a rational endeavour as opposed to one which can be empirically based.
Furthermore, he contends that while content validity is essential, this approach should
be undertaken during instrument development, such that when testing the validity of
an established or already developed scale, validation cannot be examined by content
alone (Nunnally, 1967).
Construct validity is a form of validation which investigates specific
hypothetical constructs that are postulated. This can involve examinations of factor
structure, as well as equality of variance across critical groups within a sample. This is
particularly important and can be thought of as the within-network design of
nomological research (Byrne, 1984; Cronbach & Meehl, 1955; Marsh, Ellis, Parada,
Richards, & Huebeck, 2005; Parada, 2006). This is an important and essential step
prior to conducting between-network research with abstract variables.
33
The nomological approach. In an attempt to connect theoretical paradigms to
methodological rigour, Cronbach and Meehl (1955) developed the nomological
approach which is a form of construct validity. While it has been suggested that
nomological validity is more of a philosophical approach, as opposed to a practical
research basis for assessment of construct validity (Trochim, 2006), recent research
has shown otherwise (Marsh, 1990c; 1993; Marsh et al., 2005; Shavelson, Hubner, &
Stanton, 1976). Nomological validity is said to be made up of within-networks as well
as between-networks designs (Cronbach & Meehl, 1955). Within-networks tend to
measure the construct validity within the measure, such as a consistent factor structure
for the given sample, or samples (Marsh et al., 2005). Between-networks refer to the
ways in which the hypothesised construct relates to other constructs of interest
(Byrne, 1984).
Bullying research has typically focused on the between-network design area,
investigating the relation of bullying to other constructs, often to the neglect of
instrument validation (e.g., Christie-Mizell, 2003). In pursuit of shifting the focus of
bullying research to more within-network designs, the current study will investigate
within-construct validation of a multiple-item measure of bullying.
Summary of fundamental measurement issues. Validity of within-networks
designs has been typically ignored in bullying research leading to the use of
unsubstantiated instruments to measure, analyse, and draw inferences about bullying.
This, together with additional measurement issues such as the use of single-item
scales, as outlined in the next section, exacerbates these problems.
Use of Single-Item Scales
Bullying was initially measured with the use of a single-item scale by Olweus
(1991). For example participants were asked How often have you been bullied in the
34
last 3 months (Olweus, 1991). Despite advances in our understanding of bullying
since Olweus study (e.g., Finger, Marsh, & Craven, 2006; Marsh et al., 2004; Parada,
2006), many researchers continue to measure bullying in much the same way, with
single-item referents (e.g., Baldry & Farrington, 2004; Sapouna, 2008).
The problem with single-item measures. The use of single-item measures may
seem more practical than multiple-item measures, as they take less time for
participants to respond, and are less costly in terms of instrument development,
printing, and data entry. While these can offer short-term gains during the data
collection period, they have the potential to cause two severe problems during
analysis. This includes (1) increased measurement error and (2) issues surrounding
student interpretation of the term bullying.
Measurement error is greater with the use of single-item than multiple-item
measures (Pellegrini & Long, 2002). This includes the increased likelihood of Types I
errors, where the null hypothesis is rejected when it is true (e.g., reporting a
significant difference when there was none). This can only be minimised with the use
of multiple-item questionnaires.
The second issue relates to student interpretation of the term bullying. When
students are asked to respond to single-item measures of bullying, a definition of
bullying is usually provided before students respond. Theoretically, this helps to
ensure that students respond to the researchers definition of bullying. However,
Arora (1996) states that students think differently about bullying than adults or
researchers. Students think of it in more physical ways, and when they answer
questions about bullying, students will revert back to their original definition of
bullying, even when they are provided with an operational definition by the
researchers (Arora, 1996). It is possible (and probable) that prevalence rates of school
35
bullying have, to-date, been poorly estimated because students respond to their own
perceptions of what bullying is, even when a definition of bullying is provided.
Bullying is a complex construct which may be more usefully understood in
terms of multiple referents and as a continuum. This complexity is not captured in
single-item measures because they fail to distinguish between the different forms of
bullying. While bullying research has routinely improved scales from single-item to
multiple-item, and moved from unidimensional theoretical perceptions of bullying to
multidimensional conceptions of the different forms of bullying, some inconsistencies
have still been found.
Review of research using multiple-item scales. Recently researchers have
developed multiple-item scales. These scales generally examine the different forms of
bullying. However, they fail to adequately differentiate between the types of bullying,
such as across different cohorts (e.g., Espelage, Bosworth, & Simon, 2000; Hoof,
Raaijmakers, Beek, Hale III, & Aleva, 2008; Jankauskiene, Kardelis, Sukys, &
Kardeliene, 2008; Rigby & Slee, 1993), or were not demonstrated to have sound
psychometric properties (e.g., Christie-Mizell, 2003). This can lead to questionable
practices, such as ad-hoc selection of items to measure bullying. For example,
Christie-Mizell used 10 items from the Behavior Problem Index (Peterson & Zill,
1986), and subjectively deemed these to reflect bullying behaviour. These items
included items such as the child is disobedient at school, the child hangs around
kids who get in trouble, and the child is not sorry for misbehaving. These items
clearly reflect delinquent or other antisocial behaviour more so than bullying.
Christie-Mizell nonetheless summed these to create a bullying score. While the scale
was found to have an acceptable reliability estimated ( = .78 and .79 for two time
36
waves of data respectively), the face validity and construct validity (e.g., confirmatory
factor analysis), of the 10-item measure were never discussed and are questionable.
Some researchers have developed conceptually stronger multi-dimensional
measures of bullying in terms of the specific focus of bullying (physical, social,
verbal). Whilst this is a useful endeavour, they have continued to measure an overall
conception of bullying with the use of problematic single-item measures. For
example, Craig (1998) used a multiple-item behavioural scale to measure three forms
of bullying (physical, verbal, and indirect types), but measured overall bullying with
the use of two single-item bullying and being bullied questions: (1) How often have
you taken part in bullying others/ been bullied since the beginning of the term? and
(2) How often have you taken part in/ been bullied in the last five days?.
An a priori theorem in the development of multiple-item measures. In
research where the types have been identified using a multiple-item behavioural scale,
documentation of a specific a priori factor structure has often been problematic. For
example, Bjrkqvist et al. (1992) used exploratory factor analysis with an 8- and 15-
year-old cohort. With the 8-year-old participants, Bjrkqvist et al. were able to extract
three factors: Relational Aggression, Direct Aggression, and Social Withdrawal,
whereby direct aggression was not differentiated between physical and verbal types.
With the 15-year-old cohort, they extracted four factors: Relational Aggression,
Direct-Physical Aggression, Direct-Verbal Aggression, and Social Withdrawal,
whereby the direct aggression factor was differentiated into direct-physical and direct-
verbal. The lack of factor structure replication between the two samples may be due to
the different ages of the students, with the younger students not being able to
differentiate as well as older students. However, this may not be the case for the
sample who participated. The instruments provided to each sample were not
37
consistently used between these cohorts. For example, the 8-year-old cohort was
provided with 12 items, while the 15-year-old cohort was provided with 18 items, of
which only eight items were used in both the 8-year-old and 15-year-old cohorts.
Moreover, the psychometric structure could have been tested with confirmatory factor
analysis, which is a far more rigorous technique to uncover underlying a priori factors
than exploratory factor analysis.
In an alternative factor analysis attempting to differentiate between indirect
and direct forms of bullying, Lagerspetz, Bjrkqvist, and Peltonen (1988) found three
factors with pre-adolescent students: indirect, direct, and peaceful forms. Although
factor loadings within scales were reasonable, three items cross-loaded on both the
indirect and direct methods. The authors stated that two of these cross-loading items
were deleted. However, they did not mention what was done to the third (abuses). It
is unclear whether they left this item within the scale or whether it was also deleted.
Furthermore, if the item was retained, it is unclear which scale this item was added to
or whether it was used in both. While there have been attempts to uncover the
multidimensional factor structure for bullying, the methodological and analytical tools
to measure the forms of bullying appear to have been inconsistently used.
The Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument (APRI; Parada, 2000). More
recently, the Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument is the only (Parada, 2000; in so far
as I am aware), measure which has reached a harmony in terms of assessing both the
global involvement in bullying as well as the different forms with the use of the same
multiple-item and multidimensional behavioural measures (Marsh et al., 2004;
Parada, 2006). Marsh et al. (2004) used a confirmatory factor analysis to test the
hypothesised structure of the Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument (APRI, Parada,
2000) with secondary students. They confirmed three a priori factors for bullying:
38
physical, verbal, and social types (reliabilities between .82 and .92) and three a priori
factors for being bullied: physical, verbal, and social types (reliabilities ranging from
.87 to .93). In addition, all items loaded highly on those factors they were designed to
measure. Two second-order factors Global Bully and Global Target - were
hypothesised to contain the three first-order factors of the forms of bullying and target
experiences. The second-order model was found to have a good fit (TLI = .98;
RMSEA = .05) with the distinct factors of physical, verbal, and social forms.
Moreover, Paradas (2006) factorial invariance testing showed that the APRI was
invariant for male and female adolescent students, revealing the measure was valid, as
well as held the same meaning for male and female groups. Given that the APRI
overcomes many of the previous limitations of bullying instruments, the APRI will be
used for the purposes of this study.
Summary of the use of single-item scales in bullying research. Bullying
research began with an investigation of survey scales created on single-item measures,
and has progressed gradually into multiple item scales, to match multidimensional
conceptions of school bullying. However, many researchers continue to use
problematic single-item measures (e.g., Baldry & Farrington, 2004; Sapouna, 2008).
What is further concerning are the transformations made prior to analyses, including
dichotomisation discussed in the next section, which are developed as an outcome to
these single-item measures.
Analysis of Dichotomous Variables Using Continuous Data
The bulk of bullying research is made up of continuous and quantitative
variables which use measures of self-, peer-, and teacher-report data (e.g., Ahmed &
Braithwaite, 2004; Solberg & Olweus, 2003; Roland & Galloway, 2002; Stevens et
al., 2000). Espelage et al. (2001) are among the growing body of bullying researchers
39
(e.g., Marsh et al., 2004) who advocate bullying to be measured and analysed along a
continuum. However, the typical method of analysing the data is made up of
categorisation through dichotomisation of data. That is, the majority of school
bullying researchers tend to measure bullying behaviours on some scale and then
arbitrarily (see below) split that scale into separate categories like bully, victim, bully-
victim and uninvolved. They later use these categories to understand bullies and
targets, and link typical behaviours, cognitions, personality factors, peer relations, and
family background to generalised bully, target, and bully-victim groups (e.g.,
Ahmed & Braithwaite, 2004; Roland & Galloway, 2002; Solberg & Olweus, 2003).
Techniques used to dichotomise data. The typical method for attaining bully,
target, and bully-victim categories is to dichotomise a continuous variable at an
explicit point. This point may be cut at the midpoint, one standard deviation above the
mean, or another point decided by the researcher so that all participants below the
designated point represent one group (e.g., non-bullies, non-targets) while all
participants above the designated point represent a separate group (e.g., bully or
target). Often researchers attempt to cut a bully scale at a point befitting the definition
of bullying such as a point which represents more than once or twice to signify the
repetitious nature of bullying (Solberg & Olweus, 2003). However, this inadvertently
creates categories which represent bullying that happens on multiple occasions, as
opposed to more than once, as the word repeated would suggest. When this occurs, a
participant is given a score, usually a score of 1 to signify a bully and a score of 0 to
represent a non-bully, a score of 1 for a target and a score of 0 for a non-target,
creating the categorical variable which is to be analysed.
40
Problems of misclassification with the use of dichotomisation.
Dichotomisation of data to create role categories requires scores to be cut. However,
even those researchers who advocate the use of dichotomisation are not in agreement
over cut-off points. For example, cut-off scores have been used differently by
researchers using the same questionnaire (e.g., Ahmed & Braithwaite, 2004). Solberg
and Olweus (2003) contend that cut-off points have not been well documented in the
literature, and thus attempted to determine the optimum cut-off point by categorising
each set of scores into not only the bully and non-bully groups, but into 4 separate
groups: Group 0 (not been bullied/ not bullying); Group 1 (only once or twice);
Group 2 (2 or 3 times a month); and Group 3 (about once a week or more often).
They contended that these groups were distinct in that:
results show that the psychosocial adjustment of students who admitted to

having been bullied/ bullied other students only once or twice (Group 1),
were on average clearly different from that of students who had not been
bullied/ not bullied (Group 0) other students at all. (p. 261; italics in brackets
entered for clarification by the author of the present investigation)
Solberg and Olweus concluded that the choice of cut-off point most appropriate for
dichotomisation was the choice of 2 or 3 times a month (Group 2), as this cut-off
point seemed to them to be more reflective of the definition of bullying in regards to
the repetitive nature, even though the cut-off points below (only once or twice: Group
1) were found to be distinct from others below it (Group 0: not been bullied/ not
bullying).
Misclassification of scores is problematic whereby after a cut-off score has
been decided by a researcher and dichotomisation complete, some participants may
fall into more than 1 category. For example, in a study by Salmivalli et al. (1998),
participants scores on each Participant Role (Bully, Assisting Bully, Reinforcing
Bully, Defending Victim, and Staying Outside), were standardised by class so that
41
each participant was allocated a score on each Participant Role. Participants were
considered to be of a particular Participant Role when they scored above the mean of
0. However, some children were above the mean on more than 1 Participant Role, and
thus the highest standardised score was taken if the difference between their highest
and second highest scores was less than 0.1. The researchers realised that
misclassification was an issue and thus when participants were classified into more
than 1 category (a difference of less than 0.1 between their highest and lowest scores),
these participants were regarded as not having a clearly definable participant role
(p. 210). However, other participants scoring close to but not above the cut-off point
were also considered as not having a participant role. It appears then that participants
scoring under the cut-off point, and those who fit into more than 1 category (e.g.,
Bully and Reinforces Bully), were considered as equal and non-involved, and thus
together constituted the controls. This is problematic when comparing groups.
According to Preacher, Rucker, MacCallum, and Nicewander (2005),
misclassification represents a source of error above and beyond the usual
measurement error assumed under classical test theory (p. 187).
The fallacies of dichotomisation. MacCallum, Zhang, Preacher, and Rucker
(2002) have identified the fallacies associated with dichotomising variables. Although
dichotomisation is considered to be acceptable when continuous data are highly
skewed (MacCallum et al., 2002; Preacher et al., 2005), as is the case of bullying,
dichotomisation in bullying research presents a myriad of problems. When extreme
groups are analyzed, standardized effect size tends to be inflated dramatically
which in turn is associated with increased power (Preacher et al., 2005, p. 182).
Preacher et al. suggest that this anticipated increased power may be one reason why
many researchers persist in using this method of analysis. However, Babyak (2004)
42
suggests that when two independent variables are dichotomised and used to analyse
data using an ANOVA, dichotomisation may lead to an unacceptable Type I error
rate (p. 417).
Moreover, the action of creating the distinct groups for comparison, including
the bully-victim group, results in two potential hazards: (1) it does not take
individual differences into account; and (2) it leads to a loss of information
(MacCallum et al., 2002). To avoid any of these hazards, it is possible to explore the
relation and association between bullying and being bullied without the use of
dichotomisation. Analysing data in terms of continuous variables can help researchers
to explore the relations of bullying and target experiences with a range of
psychosocial factors (e.g., self-concept, family background, and peer relations).
In a comprehensive analysis of dichotomisation, MacCallum et al. (2002)
demonstrate how dichotomisation of continuous and quantitative variables can lead
to: (a) loss of effect size and statistical significance; (b) distortion of effects; (c) the
potential of researchers to overlook non-linear relationships; and (d) differences
between variables that existed prior to dichotomisation to be considered as equal
when dichotomised. With these inherent methodological weaknesses of
dichotomisation, MacCallum et al. concluded that these methods should not be
practiced unless vigorously justified (p. 22). In the case of bullying research,
vigorous justification has not been the case. When data analysing bullying and target
experiences are dichotomised, children are unavoidably categorised into bully, target,
and non-involved groups. However, a bully is not a special kind of person with some
kind of pathology inside... Any child can be a bully, and, for that matter, a victim
(Rogers, 1991, p. 6). Moreover, it is not possible to detect subtle changes when
participants are classified into involved and non-involved groups. All issues of
43
dichotomous variables are threatened even more when dichotomisation is done with
the use of already problematic single-item measures.
The underlying assumption behind dichotomisation. Categorising
participants into involved and non-involved groups assumes that it is the students, not
the behaviours, which make up bullying. The appropriateness of dichotomisation is
for this reason, questionable. The underlying concept of these categories places the
child, as opposed to the behaviour, into a stigmatic group of bully, target, or non-
involved students, and assumes that problem behaviours will always be problem
behaviours for those children (Conway, 2001). However, bullying is a complex
human phenomenon that cannot simply be analysed using classification methods.
Examining extreme groups may be beneficial when working with individual therapy
for those who use extreme bullying behaviours, or for those who are severely
victimised. Categorising assumes bullying to be an exclusive behaviour that is used
only by certain individuals. However, in the context of a whole-school approach,
which most researchers advocate (e.g., Salmivalli, 2001), categorisation seems less
appropriate. Instead, bullying can be perceived as a behaviour that every individual
can potentially engage in.
Summary of the use of dichotomisation in bullying research.
Dichotomisation of bullying measures to create categories of involved and
non-involved groups have far dire practical and statistical consequences than the
advantages provided in comparing such groups. Although many areas of research in
educational psychology have learnt about the issues dichotomisation causes, bullying
research has continued to exploit this method to analyse results.
44
Summary of Methodological Issues: Validity
Bullying research has been hampered by methodological issues which have
remained relatively unchanged since school bullying research began in 1972 (Olweus,
1972). The current study is the first primary schools study (of which I am aware) to
adopt the pioneering analytical methods used to investigate secondary school bullying
(e.g., Griezel, 2007; Marsh et al., 2004; Parada, 2006; Parada et al., 2008). This
includes an investigation of continuous variables using a multidimensional approach
with validated multidimensional measures.
Chapter Summary
Bullying can result in long-term consequences for those involved. Impacts can
range from mental health issues to wider school issues. These consequences coupled
with high prevalence rates illustrate how important preventing bullying is, particularly
in the primary years before the cumulative effects emerge. This chapter has outlined
the operational definition to be used in this study, the consequences of bullying, and
the methodological issues inherent in bullying research. The next chapter will
highlight the sources of bullying based on social identity theory and self-concept
Theory within a social-ecological model of bullying prevention, as well as examine
previous empirical studies on the prevention of bullying using a whole-school
approach. The theoretical underpinning discussed in the next chapter represents the
underlying framework for the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program, important
for the development of an effective primary schools intervention.
45
CHAPTER 3
Risk Factors to Involvement in Bullying, and Strengthening Whole-
School Research Approaches
The major goals of the intervention program are to reduce as much as
possible ideally to eliminate completely existing bully/victim
problems in and out of the school setting and to prevent the development
of new problems.
Olweus (1993a, p. 65).
Introduction
Chapter 3 presents the theoretical framework underpinning this study, and the
Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program. Four key areas within this chapter are
used to discuss: (a) how Social Identity Theory can be used to explain the influence of
the peer group on involvement in bullying; (b) how Self-Concept Theory further
explicates our understanding of how bullying develops; (c) how school bullying can
be prevented under a whole-school framework; and (d) the effectiveness of
whole-school approaches thus far. Firstly, it is proposed that Social Interaction Model,
46
desensitisation, and Social Norms Theory all subsets of Social Identity Theory can
enhance our understanding of the role of the peer group in the onset of bullying, and
the failure of peers to prevent bullying. Secondly, accounting for multiple constructs
of self-concept can improve our understanding of bullying, and enhance our
understanding of the reciprocal nature of bullying and target experiences. Thirdly, the
diverse areas of prevention under a whole-school approach are considered, including
how peers, self-concept, the reciprocal nature of bullying, school, and parental
relations can be drawn upon to reduce school bullying behaviours. Lastly, the final
section discusses the effectiveness of whole-school approaches to-date, and examines
how these can be strengthened for effective primary school bullying prevention.
Social Identity Theory
Much of the research conducted to ascertain risk factors in relation to bullying
can be understood through a Social Identity Theory (SIT) framework. In order to
avoid reductionist accounts of behaviour and better explain the complexity of
behaviour, Tajfel and Turner (1979) developed a theory that integrates different yet
interrelated influences of behaviour. Social Identity Theory is a model used to explain
behaviour in relation to the interplay of social, environmental, and personal
contributors. There are four underlying assumptions to social identity theory
(Vaughan & Hogg, 1998): (1) there is a distinction between interpersonal and group
behaviour; (2) cognition plays a vital role in simplifying how a person perceives the
social world (this is assumed to be in a socially adaptive way); (3) society is made-up
of hierarchically-based social groups; and (4) people need positive self-esteem. Social
Identity Theory has been used in bullying research to illustrate the influence of the
peer group to situations of school bullying (Craven & Parada, 2002).
47
Social Identity Theory states that by categorising oneself as belonging to a
certain group, an individual internalises qualities of that group as their own.
An individual may then compare their group qualities and themselves to other groups,
and use these comparisons to discern their own positions within the social hierarchy,
based on those qualities. Students may use this form of categorisation to find out their
own position within the peer hierarchy, and may use bullying as a means to further
their own position within the hierarchy.
Power, status, and the social hierarchy: peer influence in shaping bullying
Bullying is said to be a function of peer group processes (Lagerspetz,
Bjrkqvist, Berts, & King, 1982; Sutton & Smith, 1999), often involving a sense of
enjoyment by the perpetrators, and also by their peers (Boulton & Flemington, 1996;
Salmivalli, Lagerspetz, Bjrkqvist, sterman, & Kaukiainen, 1996). Bullying usually
involves most peers in the class or peer group who are either actively involved,
or passively aware of the bullying process. Peers encourage the bullying, ignore the
bullying incident, help the target, or fail to discourage the bullying behaviour. For
example, observational research by Atlas and Pepler (1998) explored the prevalence
of peer involvement in bullying. In a video-based analysis, Atlas and Pepler
monitored primary school students in classroom and playground settings, and found
that 85% of bullying incidents occurred with the involvement of peers. They found
that bullying behaviour was reinforced and escaped punishment from the peer group,
who encouraged or failed to discourage the bullying behaviours. Craven and Parada
(2002) suggest that bullies may continue bullying in an attempt to gain further
reinforcement or non-punishment from their peers. This represents what was later
stated by Macklem (2003), that once bullying begins, it is maintained by the system
(p. 85). An extension to Social Identity Theory, Social Interaction Model offers
48
further insights into the link between social contextual factors, and school bullying
behaviours.
Social Interaction Model
Social Interaction Model is a subset of Social Identity Theory and allows
researchers to study complex systems of behaviour, such as antisocial behaviour
(e.g., Poulin, Dishion, & Haas, 1999), and bullying (Craven & Parada, 2002). Social
interaction has been defined as a situation where the behaviours of one actor are
consciously reorganized by, and influence the behaviors of, another actor, and vice
versa (Turner, 1988, p. 13-14). Children are at a stage in their lives wherein they are
finding out who they are, and where they fit in within the school social hierarchy. The
behaviour of peer groups then has important influences to childrens behaviour.
Together with the notion of comparison within Social Identity Theory, it can be
hypothesised that bullying may be more prevalent when it is a positively reinforced
quality within a peer group; it is perceived by individuals to improve their position in
the school social hierarchy; and categorises their group (and hence the individual
members) into a group that is of higher status, popular and exclusive. This has been
supported by research conducted by Crick and Dodge (1994), who concluded that
desirable outcomes of aggressive behaviour were expected by those who tended to use
aggressive behaviours.
It is probable then that other students who witness bullying may perceive the
high social pay-offs for bullying and may mimic this behaviour for personal gains in
social standing and power within the school social system (Craven & Parada, 2002).
Behaviour will be continued, mimicked, or modelled, if reinforced, or if behaviour
escapes punishment (Bandura, 1973). Bandura proposes that a significant risk factor
to aggressive behaviour, is an individuals prior experience with aggressive
49
behaviour, whether their behaviour in the past has been reinforced or evaded
punishment, whether they are likely to be reinforced or punished in the future for
similarly aggressive actions, as well as a complex interplay of situational factors.
Because bullying occurs most often in a social environment among peers (Salmivalli
et al., 1996), and children have a need to achieve and maintain positive relations with
their peers, where they may seek self-enhancement and dominance (Salmivalli,
Kaukiainen, & Lagerspetz, 1998; Pellegrini, 2002), students may use bullying
behaviours as a way of acquiring dominance, status, and popularity in their peer group
(Ingram, 2000; Salmivalli et al., 1998).
The Reluctance of Peers in Assisting the Target
A further hypothesis which can be linked to aggressive behaviour is known as
desensitisation (Watson & Rayner, 1920). An individual is said to become
desensitised to a stimulus which would normally evoke a behavioural, cognitive, or
emotional response (e.g., shock, laughter, fear, anger), but evokes less and less of a
response the more that an individual is exposed to the stimulus (Rule & Ferguson,
1986). With each exposure comes a lesser biopsychophysical reaction. It is possible
that students who witness bullying, may become indifferent to it, or engage in it
themselves. That is, students who witness bullying may become less responsive to
situations of bullying and the targets dilemma, the more that they see it happen.
It is possible that a desensitisation effect can be magnified when the reaction
of others is also taken into account. Normalisation of behaviour, which is influenced
by the social group, relates to Social Norms Theory (Berkowitz, 2003). According to
Social Norms Theory, if a stimulus does not evoke a response from others, or is
consistently produced within the peer group without an aversive response, then it may
be considered to be normal. For example, if aggressive behaviour appears to be a
50
normal trait of an individuals social group, then this behaviour will be more likely to
be carried out by that individual who identifies with that group.
Both desensitisation and group norms imply that a social behavioural
mechanism occurs, wherein students are not only likely to model aggressive
behaviour, but may also be more likely to think it is acceptable, to reinforce the
bullying, to have less empathy for the target, and to blame the target for the bullying.
Peers are often reluctant to help. Inaction on the part of preventing bullying is an
important issue considering the serious consequences of involvement in school
bullying. Due to the large influence of the peer group in situations of bullying, the
reaction of peers is integral to being able to cease bullying behaviours. Jeffrey, Miller,
and Linn (2001) suggest that over time, students learn to ignore the bullying, the
distress of the target, and become indifferent to situation of bullying in order to help
themselves feel safe.
Backing the bully would be preferable to protecting the target, not as a desire
to become a bully, but so that they do not become bullied themselves. A further
important contribution of why peers fail to assist the target, may be due to fear or
anxiety.
Fear is the motivation associated with a number of behaviors that normally

occur on exposure to clearly threatening stimuli. Anxiety is the motivation
associated with behaviors that occur to potential, signaled, or ambiguous
threat (Blanchard, Blanchard, Griebel, & Nutt, 2008).
For example, if students perceive that they will be targeted if they report the
bullying behaviour, or try to stop the bullying, they may be scared or anxious about
preventing bullying. Jeffrey et al., further suggest that students may fail to prevent
bullying because they are scared to be picked on next, they are unsure of how to help,
their focus may be elsewhere at the time (e.g., on class activities), they may not be
51
confident that the teacher will support them, and they fear retaliation. This is one of
the potential reasons for why bullying may increase over the school years. That is,
students who witness bullying may fear, or be anxious about being targeted
themselves. They do little to prevent bullying; and hence bullying can then potentially
worsen for those involved. This has been supported by empirical research that has
shown outcomes to worsen if nothing is done to prevent bullying (Parada, 2006).
Summary of Social Identity Theory
Social Identity Theory, Social Interaction Model, desensitisation, Social
Norms Theory, and fear all contribute to our understanding of how bullying develops
among the peer group. Social Identity Theory does not only offer theories on how
bullying behaviours commence, but on how bullying is maintained by the system,
how bullying potentially worsens or increases in frequency as time goes on, and it
also provides a potential explanation for why peers fail to prevent it. The next section
will discuss the role of self-concept theory and how this too can offer further
explanations of the determinants to school bullying behaviours.
Self-Concept Theory
Baumeister (1986) states that a childs identity is shaped by experiences they
have with both their family and their school life. This is linked to Social Identity
Theory in that students seek to identify and gain access to groups higher in the social
hierarchy. Baumeister stipulates that a sense of identity furnishes one with a sense of
strength and resilience, so that the impact of a specific misfortune or setback is
diminished (p. 19). An individuals social roles and reputation make up that persons
social identity (Baumeister, 1986). Group norms and identification with particular
groups further develop that persons social identity.
52
Hinkley, Marsh, Craven, McInerney, and Parada (2002) state that an
individuals social identity is an integral and important part of that persons
self-concept. In broad terms, self-concept has been defined as an organised schema
that contains episodic and semantic memories about the self and controls the
processing of the self-relevant information (Campbell & Lavallee, 1993, p. 4).
Epstein (1973) proposes that self-beliefs (self-concept) arise from experiences and
interactions with others, including relations with significant others. Additionally,
Shavelson, Hubner, and Stanton (1976) suggest that self-concept is important and
useful in explaining and predicting how one acts (p. 411), and hence this includes
aggressive behaviours involved in bullying.
Multidimensional Conceptualisations of Self-Concept
Shavelson et al. (1976) proposed a model of self-concept beliefs that range
from academic competence to non-academic measures that are hierarchically
organised. According to Shavelson et al. (1976) there are seven key distinctions of
self-concept. Self-concept is: (1) structured into categories much like the way the
human mind categorises key elements in life (e.g., family, school friends);
(2) multifaceted, such that there is more than one facet to represent the important
categories of life for an individual, (e.g., for a school student these may be academic,
social, and family oriented concepts); (3) hierarchical, such that a general overarching
factor is a function of the factors below it, e.g., General Self-Concept supersedes
Academic and Non-Academic domains; (4) the General self at the top of the hierarchy
is stable, yet the factors at the base will be variable, e.g., changes in one construct at
the base will have only a minor (insignificant) effect on the overall total of General
Self-Concept; (5) developmentally diverse such that young children tend to have more
global concrete self-concepts that are undifferentiated and situation specific, whereas
53
this becomes more distinguished as children get older; (6) evaluative such as when a
person develops a description of themselves in a particular area, they also form an
evaluation of themselves within that arena (e.g., a child may view themselves as
competent or incompetent in academic arenas); and (7) differentiable, in that
self-concept is separate to other constructs it is related to, e.g., when psychometrically
tested, items on self-concept factors do not load onto factors of other constructs
(e.g., bullying), nor do items from these other related constructs load onto
self-concept factors.
The Connection between Self-Concept Theory and Bullying Behaviours
But how do self-concept domains relate to bullying behaviour? If self-concept
is considered to arise from an individuals experiences, it seems logical then to
consider peer reinforcement of bullying behaviours as having an effect and being
related to an individuals self-concept (Craven & Parada, 2002). Individuals may
begin, or increase their use of bullying because they believe these behaviours are
acceptable in their peer group. When they bully others they may expect positive social
outcomes, which may thus lead them to feel good about themselves.
A recent debate within research on bullying is whether people who use
bullying behaviours have positive self-esteem or positive perceptions of themselves
(Hay, 2000). While empirical studies clearly and consistently show that targets have
low self-concepts (e.g., Marsh, Parada, Yeung, & Healey, 2001; Olweus, 1993c;
OMoore & Kirkham, 2001), this may not be true for those who are perpetrators of
bullying. Randall (1996) states that bullies have high opinions of themselves. A high
self-esteem or positive self-concept was once thought to be an optimal attribute to
strive for, to combat aggressive behaviour, and to maintain socially desirable
behaviour. Baumeister, Smart, and Boden (1996), theorise that these high self-esteem
54
and self-perceptions have a dark-side. Yet, empirical findings to support the theory
that bullies have positive perceptions of themselves have been inconsistent, wherein
more aggressive individuals have been found to display either high or low
self-concepts (Kernis, 1993). For example, Salmivalli, Kaukiainen, Kaistaniemi, and
Lagerspetz (1999) measured peer and self-evaluated self-esteem among 14 to
15-year-old adolescents and found no evidence to suggest that bullies had anything
other than slightly above average self-esteems, combined with narcissistic and
self-grandiose tendencies. Salmivalli et al. however, used a uni-dimensional measure
of self-concept as opposed to a well supported multidimensional conception.
When measured multidimensionally, Johnson and Lewis (1999) found bullies
to have significantly above average self-concepts in the social domain and in a global
measure of self-esteem. Furthermore, Salmivalli (1998) found adolescent bullies to
have typically high social and physical self-concepts, yet were low on all other
domains. More specifically Hay (2000), found adolescents whose persistent behaviour
problems led to them being suspended from school, had average physical appearance,
opposite-sex relations, and honesty/trustworthiness self-concept scores, and low
parental relations, general self-esteem, and general school self-concepts. Although
Hay did not compare these scores to students who had not been suspended, the study
does suggest low peer, parental, and academic self-concepts were associated with
negative educational outcomes. By accounting for the multidimensionality of the
self-concept construct, research has shown bullies do not have overall low
self-concepts as once believed, but rather, levels of specific domains of self-concept
are both high and low. Empirical research (e.g., Hay, 2000; Salmivalli, 1998), which
has addressed the multidimensional nature of self-concept, shows clearer and more
consistent findings in relation to the self-concepts of bullies. These studies suggest
55
that bullies tend to think they are popular, physically attractive, physically stronger,
and less anxious than others. However, causal inferences cannot be validly made from
a single wave of data. That is, these research findings are based on cross-sectional
research. Longitudinal research designs that examine the determinants or outcomes of
bullying would be superior to cross-sectional research in predicting outcomes to
self-concept.
A longitudinal approach has been suggested by Edens (1999) as essential to
providing more accurate findings of the actual causes and outcomes of bullying. For
example, Marsh et al. (2001) used the National (United States) Education
Longitudinal Study archival data of 1988, to examine records of self-concept and
aggressive troublemaker measures. These measures were collected at three time points
when students were in Year 8 (Wave 1; W1), Year 10 (Wave 2; W2), and Year 12
(Wave 3; W3). Using structural equation modeling in relation to school aggression,
Marsh et al. (2001) found significant effects of W1 aggressive troublemaking to
significant positive W2 self-concept factors (specifically opposite-sex peer relations),
suggesting aggressive school troublemakers used troublemaking as a means of
increasing or maintaining already high self-concepts, particularly in relation to
opposite-sex relations. Additionally they found peer related areas of self-concept
(opposite-sex and same-sex peer relations) decreases over time. In particular, negative
same-sex path coefficients were especially large (-.35). This indicated that following
victimisation (measured after 2 years), students felt particularly not well liked by their
same sex peers, possibly because same-sex students were more likely to have been
aggressive toward them. However, limitations of the study included: not having an
adequate measure of bullying and target experiences, self-concept scores were only
collected at one time (W2 at Year 10), the study was not based on an Australian
56
sample (conducted in America), and data for the study was collected over 10 years
ago (1988), making inferences to modern day difficult. However, the findings did
show support for the theory that those who were aggressive had dimensions of their
self-concepts that were high.
In accordance to the need for increased methodological rigour in bullying
research, Australian research by Marsh, Parada, Craven, and Finger (2004), using a
longitudinal design, and longitudinal structural equation models found that bullying
others at one time led to lower general self-esteem, same-sex relations,
honesty/trustworthiness, and academic self-concepts (math, verbal, and school), and a
higher emotional stability self-concept at a later stage. However, non-significant
findings resulted for opposite-sex relations, physical ability, and physical appearance
self-concepts. For those who were bullied by others, Marsh et al. (2004) found that
while bullying others tended to have negative causal outcomes on particular aspects of
self-concept, being targeted was consistently negatively related to all 11 areas of
self-concept (p. 93). More specifically, important negative outcomes included lower
same-sex relations and emotional stability self-concepts. Furthermore, these effects
lasted following W1 and W2 outcomes. Effects beyond W2 led to further negative
effects and declines in self-concept factors. This has important implications for those
who are bullied. Once bullied, empirical support suggests impacts only worsen for
those involved if nothing is done to prevent bullying, or at the very least to prevent
the negative effects (Parada, 2006). Conversely and more importantly, overall high
self-concept patterns prevented students becoming involved as either a bully or a
target, revealing the significant impact of self-concept as a protective factor for
involvement in bullying. This section discussed the influence of bullying on
self-concept for those who engage in bullying others and those who experience being
57
bullied. The next section explores the reciprocal relations between bullying and target
experiences, revealing that bullying and target experiences are often more alike than
different. This has been supported by self-concept research.
Bullying and being bullied: reciprocal relations
Bullying and target experiences are often viewed in bullying literature as
separate and stable entities which students are either involved or not involved in.
However, self-concept research has recently discovered similarities between
self-concept outcomes for both those who bully and those who are bullied. This led to
support for the reciprocal nature of bullying (e.g., Ma, 2001; Marsh et al., 2004),
wherein engagement in bullying and being targeted may be more similar than
dissimilar.
It is tempting to assume that a limited repertoire of social skills is partly

responsible for rejection by peers, it is possible that such rejection and
subsequent low rates of social interaction might have restricted the development
of the individuals social skills. (Frude, 1993, p. 76)
Things such as wearing glasses, weighing more than their peers, coming from
another country, or having a disability have been mentioned as some of the potential
reasons for being bullied (Frude, 1993). However, how much of this equates to myth?
Involvement in bullying and experiences of being targeted may be more similar than
different. This has been shown thorough self-concept research.
Recent research by Marsh et al. (2001) shows this to be the case for aggressive
troublemakers. They found that relations existed between those who were aggressive
troublemakers and those who were victimised, the implication being that distinct
groups of aggressors and targets did not exist, and that many troublemakers were also
targets. This was consistent over time, where using aggressive troublemaker
behaviours at W1 contributed to being victimised at W2, with only moderate stability
58
of involvement revealed in these behaviours over time. Furthermore, later research by
Marsh et al. (2004) showed that bullying and being bullied were also mutually
reinforcing over time. Not surprisingly, there were obvious differences found between
bullying and being bullied; however, what was more striking in this research were the
similarities between bullying and target experiences on a wide variety of
psychological constructs (attitudes toward bullying, roles taken when confronted with
a bullying situation, strategies for coping, inability to control anger, depression, life
event stress, and importantly low self-concept on most of the different areas of
self-concept measured, and self esteem).
Bullying and target experiences are considered to be reciprocal in nature,
where involvement in bullying contributes to being bullied, and where being a target
of bullying contributes to later using bullying behaviours (Finger, 2002; Marsh et al.,
2004). Importantly, at any one period a student may be both being bullied and
bullying others. This interrelation of bullying and target experiences is not new and
has often been recognized in categorisation research with the classification of a child
into the bully-victim group (e.g., Solberg & Olweus, 2003). However, the processes
of bullying and target experiences are more complex than a bully-victim category can
describe. For example, problems and discrepancies of methods in which to create
bully-victim categories underestimate the reciprocal relation between bullying and
target experiences (see Chapter 2).
Summary of Self-Concept Theory
Important outcomes of self-concept are detrimental for those who either
engage in bullying others or who experience being targeted. That is, a students sense
of self can be greatly diminished by involvement in bullying, and similar outcomes in
self-concept can be found for both targets and those who bully. Positive
59
self-perceptions, in contrast, provide a strategic approach to developing psychological
tools and resiliency which protect students from becoming targets as well as bullies.
Moreover, self-concept research has offered important contributions to the way bullies
and targets are conceptualised. That is, the self-concept outcomes of bullying and
target experiences have been shown to be more similar than dissimilar. In terms of
intervention, increasing childrens self-concept is a necessary and logical step for a
successful intervention approach to childrens welfare and self-perceptions.
School Bullying Prevention within a Whole-School Framework
Although a number of theoretical standpoints can explain why bullying occurs,
Orpinas and Horne (2006) offer important considerations when exploring the causes
of behaviour. They suggest causes are not causes in themselves, but risk factors to
being involved, or protective factors for not being involved. They suggest no single
identified cause will lead a student to bully. Instead, there may be a higher chance that
a student will be involved in the presence of a so called risk factor. Although they
propose that one risk factor alone may influence a person to be involved, they indicate
that bullying is a complex process, in that it may be the accumulation of various
risk factors, which may be are stronger predictors to outcome behaviours. This is
also known as equifinality (Bertalanffy, 1968). When used as a psychological term,
this refers to one phenomenon (e.g., aggression) that has a multiple of possible
determinants (e.g., family, peers). The principles of equifinality and multifinality (that
one source can contribute to numerous outcomes) were derived from General Systems
Theory. In bullying research, equifinality can refer to the multiple sources of bullying,
such as the influence of the peer group, family system, and schooling structure on the
commencement and maintenance of bullying behaviours.
60
Alsaker (1995) theorises that bullying is caused by an interaction between
individual factors, the social context, and cultural values (p. 427). These risk factors
to involvement exist at all school levels. Since Orpinas and Horne suggest risk factors
are based on the accumulation of risks, it is possible to draw on all sources of bullying
in order to prevent bullying effectively. The next section looks at prevention of
bullying within a whole-school approach. Bronfenbrenner (1979) developed the
social-ecological perspective from which whole-school approaches are based. This
theory applied to school bullying is founded on the complex interplay of risk factors
of bullying. This includes the influence of the peer group, family life, school, and
individual factors. Prevention of bullying then is best managed with some of these
risk and protective factors in mind.
Impacting on the Peer System to Prevent School Bullying
Interventions that impact at the peer group level focus on creating and
maintaining positive peer relations (e.g., Salmivalli, Kaukiainen, & Voeten, 2005).
To effectively prevent bullying among the peer group, students can become
responsible for changing the ways in which they reinforce bullying. Peers do not only
play an important role in creating bullying situations, but can also play an important
role in protecting those who are targeted (Atlas & Pepler, 1998; Hodges & Perry,
1999; Schwartz, Dodge, Pettit, Bates, & The Conduct Problems Prevention Research
Group, 2000). An examination of the relation of peer mediation on peer rejection,
child emotion, and academic adjustment by Buhs and Ladd (2001), with a cohort of
399 Kindergarten children, showed that rejected children were more likely to
experience negative peer treatment, more likely to show decreases in classroom
participation, and more likely to report loneliness (p. 550). Hence peer mediation and
befriending activities may be useful to include during intervention.
61
In an evaluation of a befriending intervention, Menesini, Codecasa, Benelli,
and Cowie (2003) introduced a whole-class initiative where targets were paired with
trained peer supporters (befrienders of the target). Peer supporters were trained in
listening and communication skills, and met once a week or once every two weeks
with a trained supervising teacher. Once paired, classes determined the tasks for the
targets. Peer supporters were trained to teach non-trained classmates in helping roles
(e.g., advocating for the target), and how to become a prosocial supporter. Marginal
positive effects were experienced by those groups who had supporters. It appeared
that the positive peer relations (possibly coupled with the teacher supervision)
contributed to these effects. In another evaluation of an anti-bullying intervention,
Peterson and Rigby (1999) found the largest reduction in victimisation (as an outcome
to their anti-bullying intervention), was with Year 7 students, in comparison to Year 8
to 10 students. A Peer Support Program was introduced to Year 7 students at the same
time the whole-school intervention was implemented. Peterson and Rigby concluded
that a decrease in bullying for Year 7 students was also probably due to the effects of
the peer support system, demonstrating the importance of the peer group in the
prevention of bullying.
Students have the capacity to learn new reinforcement behaviours in place of
encouraging, ignoring, or failing to discourage the behaviour. Peer group training,
discussion, and role-playing help students understand and learn from their role as a
reinforcer to bullying. This can help students to manage their own behaviours when
they see bullying, and can also help them to positively reinforce the peers who attempt
to stop bullying (Stevens, Van Oost, & De Bourdeaudhuij, 2000). In addition,
strategies can be provided to students to help them to reinforce prosocial behaviour, to
stop reinforcing inappropriate behaviour, and to support the person targeted.
62
Peer mediation is an important component to preventing bullying, because it is within
the peer group, and via peer reinforcement, that bullying thrives.
How Reciprocity Impacts on the Prevention of Bullying
Preventing bullying at both the bullying and target level has implications to
preventing the cycle of bullying at large. This can be achieved with a
curriculum-based design. Andreou, Didaskalou, & Vlachou (2007) used a curriculum-
based intervention designed for all students to be involved in the prevention of
bullying. With a sample of 454 primary school students from Years 4-6 in Greece,
Andreou et al. found that although there was a slight decrease, no significant
reduction of bullying and target experiences were found for the experimental group.
Yet positive effects were experienced for outsider behaviour and self-efficacy, in
terms of intervening. This study revealed only marginal results. However, it is
possible that curriculum-based programs can be effective not as an isolated
intervention, but rather when integrated into a whole-school approach. For example,
Stevens et al. (2000) found positive effects with the inclusion of curriculum-based
activities used within a school-wide approach (see later discussion).
Prevention of Bullying Using Self-Concept Theory
Enhancing self-concept has continually been a goal for schools internationally,
and has been demonstrated to causally impact on a range of desirable educational
outcomes. Activities which enhance positive and realistic self-concept goals, which
teach children to control their own behaviour and which teach others how to
effectively reinforce desirable and non-desirable behaviour, should be included in
intervention to help reduce bullying in schools (Craven & Parada, 2002).
Interventions can be effective when they strive to enhance self-concept. Teachers use
of positive reinforcement for appropriate social behaviours enhances a students self
63
worth in the peer group, and further enhances student abilities to control their
behaviour. Craven and Parada (2002) suggest enhancement of student self-concept
can be achieved via increasing teachers capacity to use internally focused,
attributional, and corrective feedback. These strategies have been demonstrated by
tangible research evidence which has resulted in enhancing multiple dimensions of
student self-concept (see Craven, Marsh, & Debus, 1991).
Craven and Parada (2002) further advocate individuals involved in bullying
should gain specific help with peer relational difficulties. They suggest this can be
achieved by developing behavioural contracts and behavioural and emotional
control training with the students involved. Educating students about their individual
role is an important attribute to the prevention of school bullying. Bullies should be
shown the consequences of their actions, and be responsible for their own behaviours,
while targets of bullying should be trained in target resilience and seeking assistance.
Prevention of Bullying at the School Level
Schools are institutions in which shared norms, beliefs, and values can be
widespread. A review of Japanese bullying literature indicated that a significant share
of school bullying was due to the responsibility of the school climate and the way
teachers manage their classrooms (Yoneyama & Naito, 2003). Yoneyama and Naito
suggested that schools were created as socialising and educating institutions which are
based on hierarchical and authoritarian relations much like prisons and the defence
forces. They suggested the use of power-dominating relations, alienating modes of
learning, high levels of rejection, dehumanising methods of discipline, and highly
interventionist human relationships, all contribute to creating and maintaining
bullying in the school environment. Although this review was based on studies from
schools in Japan, where bullying occurs more in the classroom than outside the
64
classroom (whereas in Australia bullying occurs more often on the playground than in
the classroom), Yoneyama and Naito raise some important concerns regarding
authoritarian relations which create hostile environments.
Similarly, Roland and Galloway (2002) stressed that it is the work of
classroom management and social structure together, that contribute significantly to
school bullying and that these issues need to be addressed clearly within a
whole-school approach for anti-bullying intervention to be effective. In an English
study of 99 teachers and 2002 students, they found that classroom management had a
direct impact on the prevalence of bullying, as well as an indirect impact via social
structure on the prevalence of bullying, demonstrating the important and influential
role of the teacher for the management of student social dynamics.
Furthermore, Craig and Pepler (1995) highlight the importance of teacher
impact on bullying by suggesting that one of the reasons bullying survives may be due
to incidents of bullying being removed from the eyes of adults (e.g., teachers).
Empirical research by Craig and Pepler documented that approximately 17% of
incidents occur with teacher knowledge. Moreover, in those instances which teachers
were aware of the bullying, only 23% were met with teacher intervention. Overall
teachers intervened in 3.9% of bullying situations observed by the researchers. What
makes teacher awareness difficult is that students who bully others do not want to get
into trouble, and students who are bullied by others, or who see it happen, do not want
the bullying to worsen (a likely outcome) if they report the bullying.
In terms of prevention at the school level, Baldry (2003) postulates that
schools are equipped to provide a supportive environment, which helps children to
manage their behaviour as well as learn new behaviours during peer interaction. Two
important school processes can be implemented. These include: (1) the establishment
65
of a school-wide anti-bullying policy (Peterson & Rigby, 1999) which is formally
integrated into the school curriculum, with student involvement during the curriculum
transition; and (2) the creation and ability to provide a safe school environment
(Wilson, 2004), which can be achieved by conducting building safety audits
(Lake, 2004), that identify bully-prone zones and areas where adult monitoring is
difficult, and then using active supervision (not necessarily more supervision) in these
areas.
In relation to strategies at the teacher level, Robinson and Clay (2005) suggest
there are two distinct factors which determine whether identification of bullying
behaviours renders attention by teachers (including subtle behaviours): (1) knowledge
that bullying has pervasive consequences for those involved, what bullying is, what
causes bullying, and how to stop bullying; and (2) time to watch over all students as
well as to intervene. They suggest that knowledge of what signs to look for would
increase the correct identification of bullying behaviours by teachers, leading more
teachers to accurately decipher the social relations among their students.
Concurrent with these proposals, Parada, Craven, and Marsh (2003) suggest
five target areas for how teachers can be better equipped to deal with bullying
effectively: (1) raising awareness with students by teaching them about what bullying
is and is not, the consequences to involvement in bullying, that bullying is not cool, to
use self-control strategies, resiliency skills, and positive peer social skills;
(2) formally increase the capacity of teachers to identify and deal with bullying, and
improve classroom interrelationships via effective teacher training; (3) encourage
students to build relationships by establishing expectations, modelling, paying
attention to positive behaviours, giving students descriptive feedback, enhancing
feedback, using corrective feedback, and employing structured conversations;
66
(4) revisiting behaviour management skills such as micro-techniques, maintaining
focus, expectation discussion, redirection, shared control and referral to deal with
bullying and misbehaviour; and (5) exercising personal coping strategies such as
recognising negative teacher self-talk, and cognitive-behavioural skills for emotional
arousal (see Chapter 4).
The processes described by Parada et al., (2003) are based on changing the
school climate, and reinforcing positive behaviours. There is evidence to suggest that
those intervention programs which foster punishment or expulsion are ineffective in
reducing bullying rates in schools (Casella, 2003; Morrison, Redding, Fisher, &
Peterson, 2006). Alternatively, prevention programs based on reinforcing prosocial
behaviours which foster enhancements to self-concept have shown otherwise. A
recent primary schools prevention program based on altering the school climate by
Orpinas, Horne, and Staniszewski, (2003), provided specific teacher training, and
encouraged teachers to reinforce prosocial behaviours. Statistically significant
reductions were found in self-reported aggressive behaviours (e.g., teasing, pushing,
name-calling, and physical threats) for Kindergarten to Year 2 students, but not for
Year 3-5 students. In addition, statistically significant reductions were found for
self-reported target experiences with all years. These are promising results that are
based on a program of reinforcing positive behaviours and changing the school
climate.
Family Influence on Bullying and how the Family Implications in its Prevention
Parents have the ability to effectively help their children to control anti-social
behaviours, help their children to perceive bullying as inappropriate, help their
children to acquire positive peer interactions skills, and to encourage their children to
assist the school in addressing bullying (Craven & Parada, 2002). The home
67
environment, like the school environment may also foster aggressive styles that
contribute to bullying. In general, studies which explore the nature of family relations
and its relation to bullying tend to focus on perceptions of family functioning, parental
styles and parent-child relations, usually from the childs point of view (e.g., Connolly
& OMoore, 2003; Stevens, De Bourdeaudhuij, & Van Oost, 2002). For example
Connolly and OMoore (2003) used the Family Relations Test (a measure of
childrens perceptions of family closeness and power relations) to examine bully and
control groups of 228 six to sixteen-year-olds perceived relations to their siblings,
mother, and father. Findings suggested bullies (n=115) tended to have a more
ambivalent perception of their relationship with family members, whereas controls
(n=113) displayed positive relations with family members.
In a study examining child and parental perceptions of family functioning and
child-rearing practices, Stevens et al. (2002) found children who were classified as
bullies, perceived significantly less family cohesiveness, expressiveness, organisation,
control, social orientation and personal relationship, and more conflict in the family,
than children classified as targets, bully/targets, and those not involved. No parental
ratings of family functioning was found to be significant between parents of these
classified groups; however, parents whose children were classified as bullies were
found to be significantly higher on punishment compared to parents of other
categories.
Prevention at the family level should include education for parents, which
provides them with information on what bullying is, the causes, the consequences, the
need for whole-school policy to address bullying, how to contact the school if their
child is involved in bullying, and how to support their child in dealing with school
bullying (Craven & Parada, 2002). Parents have the opportunity to be involved
68
directly or indirectly. Direct education may include parent-teacher nights, while
indirect means can be accomplished by raising awareness using pamphlets,
newsletters, and take-home material. Turning education into gaining support from
parents requires positive school-parent and teacher-parent relations. Parental support
does not stop at the school. It is crucial that parents also be aware and give their child
appropriate support in dealing with bullying.
In general, studies using a whole-school approach have included aspects of
parental education and involvement (e.g., Munthe 1989; Olweus, 1993a; Peterson &
Rigby, 1999). It is important to note that appropriate parental involvement should be
established within any program. Elliot (1991) provided an example in which primary
school bullying was prevented by a parent who went beyond the school, to prevent
their child being continually bullied. This example stated that the parent of the
targeted child approached the children who were bullying their child, and said,
I dont care if you dont like my daughter thats your right. But heaven help you if
I find that you go near her or talk to her or even look at her. Is that clear? (p. 12),
after which the parent then made it her business to be around for a week after that
(p. 12). The use of but heaven help you if... is a threat used on the accused children
who engaged in bullying. Although the children stopped bullying the target after the
parent spoke to the alleged bullies, the bullies then found a different target to bully.
The author acknowledges that not everyone would agree with the approach that
parents should get involved, however states that this solved the problem. Yet, the
reasoning behind this conclusion is contradictory. It may have solved the problem for
one child; however, it created further problems for other students. It is a fundamental
issue of whole-school programs to prevent bullying for all students, not just those who
are being bullied at one time. In this case, the problem was not solved. It would have
69
been more appropriate for the school to deal with these issues, not for parents to take
it upon themselves to intervene, or worse still, to threaten, intimidate, or use
anti-social behaviours themselves on alleged bullies.
Smith, Schneider, Smith, and Ananiadou, (2004) have lamented that many
research studies have failed to provide adequate descriptions or evaluations of their
programs. This makes it difficult to determine whether parental information and
support has direct impacts on the reduction of bullying and target experiences. It is
possible that the inclusion or exclusion of some factors important to particular age
groups, for example, the exclusion of parental involvement for primary aged children,
may have led to the only marginal positive effects of whole-school approaches
demonstrated thus far. The impact of parental involvement is unclear in research, yet
is an important consideration for any whole-school framework.
The amount of family involvement within an anti-bullying school program
should differ according to the intensity of influence the family has on children at
different developmental levels. Intervention with the family may be more meaningful
for children who are still highly influenced by their parents. Families tend to be more
involved in the lives of younger children (particularly Primary School and younger as
opposed to teenage children) and thus it may be more meaningful for greater parental
participation when children are young. In relation to the family, Elias et al. (2002)
compiled a table to reflect the differing family influence for three developmental
stages of children. They suggested that lower/middle primary aged children begin to
internalise values of the family and develop an understanding of different family
structures, that upper primary aged children value family rituals and begin to
recognise tension between the values of their parents and the values of their friends,
and that adolescents are becoming independent from their family. The diverse range
70
of parental influence on school bullying should allow a diverse range of parental
involvement in anti-bullying interventions for children of different ages. In particular,
primary aged children (where the influence of the family is still important) should
include a large amount of family involvement.
Summary of Preventing Bullying Within a Whole-School Framework
This section outlined techniques for prevention of bullying within a whole-
school approach at the student, school, teacher, and parent levels. At the student level,
the school curriculum can be used to educate students, and provide them with
strategies to prevent bullying at the peer level, and prevent the reinforcement of
bullying and related behaviours. At the school level, a whole-school policy can be
implemented, and schools can act to provide students with a safe environment
(e.g., with active supervision). Teachers can be specifically trained with strategies that
reinforce prosocial student behaviours, and enhance student self-concept. And lastly,
parental education can inform parents on what they can do, how they can support their
child, and how they can support the school in the prevention of school bullying. The
next section examines the effectiveness of anti-bullying programs thus far, and how
primary school bullying prevention research can be strengthened.
Anti-Bullying Programs Implemented within Real Schools: How Effective Have
They Been?
The underlying aim of any anti-bullying intervention is to reduce bullying and
target experiences. However, to-date, anti-bullying programs have not consistently
resulted in reductions in bullying (Salmivalli et al., 1998). For example, in a review
by Elliott (1999), of 400 American aggression programs based in schools, only 10 met
the criteria of being scientifically evaluated, had lasting impacts, and were beneficial
in at least one school. It is not clear why some programs fail to reduce incidents of
71
bullying while others observe significant reductions (Merrell, Gueldner, Ross, &
Isava, 2008; Smith et al., 2004).
The most effective programs are based on a whole-school approach
(Salmivalli, 2001). There have been a number of assertions as to why even
whole-school programs fail to reduce bullying. This includes: (a) a lack of teacher or
school enthusiasm; (b) a lack of support from the research team; (c) the time
constraints of teachers that prevent them from implementing the programs effectively;
(d) inadequate or inconsistent implementation of the whole-school approach;
(e) inadequate reporting of evaluative practices used; and (f) the increase in student
knowledge about bullying that leads to increased reporting about bullying and target
experiences (Roland & Galloway, 2002; Ryan & Smith, 2009; Sharp & Thompson,
1994). While there are many anti-bullying programs currently available, the next
section will examine the impact of well known anti-bullying programs that
specifically adopt a whole-school approach, and those that use a more comprehensive
evaluative approach. The anti-bullying program evaluations examined in the next
section, were predominantly those from the primary school years.
What is a Whole-School Approach?
The prevention of bullying using a whole-school approach was first researched
by Olweus (1991, 1992). At the time of the Olweus study the whole-school approach
was innovative and aimed to reduce bullying by way of directing intervention
strategies at all school levels (e.g., student, teacher, and family). The key components
to a whole-school approach included specific teacher training about the program,
parental information and involvement, classroom activities, and specific actions at the
bully and target level. Later initiatives saw the inclusion of integral whole-school
practices that have since been incorporated into many whole-school interventions.
72
This includes the use of a whole-school anti-bullying policy, structured curriculum-
based classroom activities for all students, as well as explicit techniques in behaviour
management and bullying prevention (Craven & Parada, 2002; Pepler, Craig, Ziegler,
& Charach, 1993; Whitney, Rivers, Smith, & Sharp, 1994).
Strengths and Limitations of Whole-School Based Programs
Prior to examining the impact of whole-school approaches, it is important to
present a short summary on intervention theory and how this implicates on the
strengths and shortcomings of bullying prevention in schools. Mrazek and Haggerty
(1994) reveal that while there are three key intervention approaches currently
available (prevention, treatment, and maintenance), these can often be
indistinguishable when put into practice. A definition of prevention research was first
developed by the U.S. Public Health Service (Mrazek & Haggerty, 1994), and later
updated by the Prevention Research Coordinating Committee (2007) to propose:
prevention research encompasses research designed to yield results directly

applicable to identifying and assessing risk, and to developing interventions for
preventing or ameliorating high-risk behaviors and exposures, the occurrence of
disease/disorder/injury, or the progression of detectable but asymptomatic
disease. Prevention research also includes research studies to develop and
evaluate disease prevention and health promotion recommendations and public
health programs (Prevention Research Coordinating Committee, 2007,
http://prevention.nih.gov/research.aspx)
However, the U.S. Public Health Services definition, recognised that this type
of definition was too vague and allowed many types of intervention strategies to be
used loosely, making prevention, treatment, and maintenance indistinguishable
(Mrazek & Haggerty, 1994). Thus, when developing the initial definition of
prevention research, the U.S. Public Health Service recommended that prevention
research can include only those strategies that can be further categorised into
universal, selective, and indicated types (Mrazek & Haggerty, 1994).
73
Universal approaches included those developed for and beneficial for
populations or large groups of people. For example, a whole-school anti-bullying
approach is recognised as a means in which prevention can be targeted at a whole-
school population, whereby intervention is directed at all levels of the school system.
Selective approaches include those targeted at groups of high risk individuals based
on their vulnerability to certain risk factors. Whole-school anti-bullying approaches
can also be classified as selective whereby students who are considered to be
susceptible to possible risk factors (this can include the school climate, family
relations, and the reinforcing behaviours of the peer system), target students who are
at risk. Finally, indicated approaches can be incorporated when early symptoms are
evident with an individual, and individualised programs are developed to prevent the
onset of full-blown manifestations (Mrazek & Haggerty, 1994, p. 29). Indicated
prevention is a form of early intervention and treatment. However, this is not usually
the key focus of whole-school bullying prevention programs. Whole-school
approaches are generally considered to be universal prevention programs as opposed
to an indicated approach, or an early intervention approach.
Whole-school bullying prevention approaches have many benefits including:
(a) low cost; (b) targeted towards large populations; (c) can be efficiently
implemented within a whole-school system; (d) aimed to target bullying prior to its
onset and is therefore used to prevent bullying from occurring; and (e) can be useful
for whole populations of students at risk. However, preventive and selective
approaches used in bullying prevention across a school-wide context may have
drawbacks related to those individuals who manifest early or more extreme
behavioural symptoms. For example, whole-school approaches may not prevent the
full-blown manifestations of bullying behaviours, or target experiences when
74
prevention is aimed at a whole population. While bullying school-wide may be
reduced, little is done to deal with select or extreme cases. This may be because little
is known about how best to manage these behaviours. However, failing to intervene
with individuals who manifest behavioural symptoms, may cause their behavioural
symptoms to worsen. In some cases of whole-school approaches, researchers have
attempted to include more indicated strategies aimed at individuals who are showing
behavioural symptoms (e.g., with the inclusion of behavioural contracts for more
severe offenders). However, this is not a key area of the whole-school approach, it
does not tap students who have mild symptoms, and may be one of the reasons for the
inconsistent findings of the success of whole-school approaches within schools.
Although, whole-school bullying prevention programs are not centred around
indicated approaches, whole-school approaches have been shown to be beneficial for
the larger population, and are considered to be the most effective approaches for
preventing bullying in schools (Salmivalli, 2001).
The Bergen Study: Olweus (1993)
The first research to investigate a whole-school anti-bullying program was by
Olweus (1991, 1992). This was a large-scale study involving 42 schools, with 2500
students from Years 4 to 7. The measurement of bullying was taken four months prior
to implementation of the program (May 1983), followed by two post-test data sets
over two consecutive years (May 1984 & 1985), during the same time of year as that
of the first data collection. Findings suggested that involvement in bullying and
experiences of being bullied were reduced by 50% or more (1993, p. 113), and that
changes in bullying behaviour were more prominent at the first post-test phase than
the second post-test phase.
75
An investigation of the long-term effects analysed by Roland (1993), found
that the short-term effects initially found by Olweus (1991, 1992), were not
long-lasting. It was concluded that the program was effective when it was used
(Roland, 1993). However, a later comparison of the Roland (1993) and Olweus
(1991) studies revealed that the two studies differed in terms of the region each study
was conducted, the measurement occasion, data quality, and how involved the
researcher worked with the schools (Olweus, 1999). Hence, the outcomes of both
studies were not comparable. Since the Olweus study (1991), no evaluative study of a
whole-school anti-bullying intervention has had such significant reductions in
bullying (Smith et al., 2004), even with marked improvements to the whole-school
design (e.g., the inclusion of a whole-school anti-bullying policy). Although
suggestions have been made about the high quality of teaching in Scandinavian
schools, and the urgency and seriousness of school bullying issues across Scandinavia
(Smith et al., 2004), it is not evident why this study is the first and only published
study to have resulted in such stark reductions in bullying. Later investigations using
whole-school designs have resulted in only marginal results (Merrell et al., 2008;
Smith et al., 2004).
Sheffield Study (England): Whitney, Rivers, Smith, and Sharp (1994)
In an attempt to replicate the findings by Olweus; Whitney et al. (1994) used a
whole-school anti-bullying intervention to evaluate the Sheffield Project in 23 English
schools. Students from both primary and secondary schools participated. That is, 2212
students from 16 primary schools, and 4256 students from seven secondary schools
took part. Findings showed that engagement in bullying and target experiences
decreased significantly. However, findings suggested that more positive results were
experienced within the primary than the secondary schools.
76
The program provided innovations to the whole-school program with the
inclusion of a school-wide anti-bullying policy. The anti-bullying policy was used as
a control measure, wherein schools who implemented the program were able to
choose other areas of intervention. For example, some schools incorporated a video,
while others used peer counselling methods, the Pikas method of Shared Concern,
school tribunals, Neti Neti, Quality Circles, or assertiveness training (see Whitney et
al., 1994). However, this resulted in the project being inconsistently implemented
across the 23 schools. The lack of consistency between the schools involved in the
Sheffield Project made it difficult to reliably support the impact of the school-wide
anti-bullying policy. In addition, it was unclear which areas of the prevention program
may have been most effective to the prevention of school bullying for the primary or
the secondary school years.
Irish Nationwide Anti-Bullying Program: OMoore and Minton (2005)
In a recent replication of the Olweus project within primary schools, OMoore
and Minton (2005) used a whole-school approach that incorporated: (1) specific and
intensive teacher training that included information about the program, warning signs
for students involved, the consequences of bullying, and dealing with parents;
(2) classroom management; (3) parent resources; and (4) altering the school climate in
the prevention of bullying. There were 22 primary schools from Ireland involved in
the study, with a mean of 92 students from each school. Important statistically
significant reductions in target experiences were found overall, with a reduction in
19.6 per cent of target experiences, and a reduction from 7.2 per cent to 3.6 per cent of
students who reported being bullied on a frequent basis. Reductions of self-reported
engagement in bullying others were also found. While the reductions were significant,
it is not clear whether these reductions would still be significant with the use of more
77
rigorous measurement and statistical tools. For example, this study, like many other
anti-bullying program evaluations (e.g., Olweus, 1991; Slee & Mohyla, 2007),
consisted of a single-item measure of bullying (see Chapter 2), and also used omnibus
F-tests (see later discussion, Strengthening School Bullying Prevention Research).
Further support for the program, with the use of a validated multidimensional measure
of bullying and more rigorous statistical procedures would be beneficial.
Finnish Anti-Bullying Intervention: Salmivalli, Kaukiainen, And Voeten (2005)
The Finnish anti-bullying intervention by Salmivalli et al. (2005) was based on
a whole-school policy. This study introduced participant role education, and also
allowed schools to choose which underlying intervention was to be conducted at the
student level (e.g., Pikas method of shared concern, no blame approach; see
Salmivalli et al, 2005). The control condition within the study was the whole-school
approach, coupled with the implementation of student education, discussion, and role-
playing regarding participant roles.
Sixteen schools, 48 classes, and 1220 students from Year 4, Year 5, and Year
6 took part in the program. Salmivalli et al. found that the intervention effects for
self-reported bullying and target experiences were statistically significant in the
correct direction (e.g., reduction in bullying), for the Year 4 cohort only. Many
secondary impacts also showed positive results for all cohorts (e.g., attitudes). The
authors suggested the lack of replication of the reduction in bullying and target
experiences across all year groups, may have been due to the higher anti-bullying
attitudes and group norms within the younger years, even though there was only one
year of difference between this group and the Year 5 cohort. However, the flexibility
provided to teachers in being able to choose which intervention to implement at the
student level, similar to the procedures used in the evaluation of the Sheffield Project,
78
makes interpretation between schools problematical. It is difficult to identify which
method (e.g., Pikas method of shared concern), if any, was more successful with
Years 5 and Year 6 students, when combined with the participant role education. This
remains unknown.
Steps to Respect Project: Frey, Hirschstein, Snell, Edstrom, MacKenzie, &
Broderick (2005)
The Steps to Respect intervention is a whole-school approach with a focus on
anti-bullying policy and curriculum-based activities for students. This intervention
was developed to create a consistent approach to the prevention of bullying among
adults, to foster prosocial attitudes and peer behaviour among students, and to provide
students with assertiveness skills to help them to deal with bullying. Frey et al. (2005)
used a multi-informant approach within a randomised control study that included
observational, teacher-rated, and self-report strategies. Six schools with approximately
1023 students in Years 3-6 participated in the Steps to Respect project. The general
findings showed that self-report and observational ratings of target experiences
decreased, but this was not significant. In addition, no significant differences were
found for student engagement in bullying others. Although this study used a
comprehensive means of investigating the impact of the Steps to Respect intervention,
with the inclusion of multilevel analyses, it is unclear why this intervention was
unsuccessful in significantly reducing bullying and target experiences. It is possible
that some aspects of the intervention, such as the lack of parental involvement for the
primary aged students, may have impacted on the unfavourable results. Alternatively,
it is also possible that the significant impacts were not as strong as previous research
has shown (e.g., Olweus, 1991), due to the comprehensive methodological approach
used by Frey et al. For example, multiple-item scales were used to measure bullying,
79
hierarchical modeling techniques were used to analyse program impacts. These
techniques may not have shown successful impacts because these research practices
do not capitalise on error. The non-significant outcomes may have been reflective of
more accurate results within whole-school anti-bullying interventions; whereby
previous successful reductions that have used single-item measures, and less rigorous
statistical practices, may have been significant due to the increased probability of
Type I error (e.g., showing significant outcomes when there were none). Further
empirical evidence using more comprehensive research designs, methodologies, and
analysis techniques within primary schools is needed to clarify this issue.
Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program (Australia): Craven & Parada
(2002); Parada (2006); Parada, Craven, & Marsh (2008)
The Beyond Bullying Program is the only bullying prevention program in
Australia, and one of only few programs world-wide (e.g., Olweus, 1991), to observe
a large significant reduction in bullying behaviours as a direct result of a whole-school
anti-bullying program within secondary schools. Bullying was measured with a new
multiple-item, multidimensional scale (APRI; Parada, 2000) on six occasions within
the Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program: three were collected during the
baseline-control year, and three were collected during the experimental year. Using
advanced multilevel modeling analytical methods, Parada (2006) found a significant
reduction in total bullying behaviours and target experiences, as well as in physical,
verbal, and social forms of bullying and target experiences. In addition, a number of
secondary impacts on psychosocial outcomes were evident. This included reductions
in students use of passive reinforcer roles, a greater willingness to advocate for the
target, increased school belonging (e.g., rule acceptance, perceived support received
80
from school, and attachment to school), and an improvement in students use of
positive coping strategies (e.g., support seeking strategies).
Unlike the study by Frey et al. (2005), where reductions of bullying and target
experiences were not significant when measured comprehensively; the study by
Parada and colleagues (2008; Craven & Parada, 2002; Parada, 2006), which also
employed rigorous methodological advances, found statistically significant
reductions. What makes the Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program innovative,
are the additional attributes of: (a) teacher training with specific strategies focused on
behaviour management, increasing student self-concept, and the reinforcement of
prosocial student behaviour; (b) an emphasis on prevention; and (c) creating a
teacher-driven program which empowers teachers to take responsibility for managing
student behaviour, and encouraging students to take responsibility for their own
behaviour and prevention of bullying. The intervention used within the present
investigation, termed the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program, is based on the
principles of the secondary program (Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program).
Strengthening School Bullying Prevention Research
It is not evident why some anti-bullying programs fare better than others.
We believe that the limited rigor of evaluation studies on antibullying

programs conducted to date may constitute an obstacle to making
conclusive statements about the effectiveness of bully prevention programs
deployed in many schools today (Ryan & Smith, 2009).
For example, rigorous analytical tools to measure the impact of anti-bullying
programs have been largely ignored. The inclusion of multilevel models is one of
these methodological practices that have often been disregarded. Yet, schools are
institutions that are hierarchically structured. Schools have classrooms, and
classrooms have students within them. Hence, schools contain multiple levels.
81
However, only few studies within the literature of school bullying, have accounted for
these multilevel impacts (e.g., Leadbeater, Hoglund, & Woods, 2003; Fekkes, Pijpers,
& Verloove-Vanhorick, 2006; Parada, Craven, & Marsh, 2008). Hierarchical
structures within schools are important. For example, Rowe (2005) suggests that
students are more similar to other students from their own school, than to other
students who come from different schools. Not only is multilevel modeling important
for school-based research (to account for the hierarchical structure within schools),
Parada (2006) further advises that multilevel analyses are particularly important for
population-based intervention research, such as the evaluation of bullying prevention
programs within schools.
There are many advantages to using multilevel modeling over traditional
omnibus F-tests. This includes having a more powerful analytical method, the ability
to measure outcomes with unbalanced data sets, and the ability to evaluate
interventions with more rigour. Firstly, multilevel modeling is a more powerful
analytical technique that is able to account for hierarchical structures. Traditional
single level analyses (e.g., multiple regression, ANOVA) ignore hierarchical
structures. However, this consequently violates one key assumption of single level
analyses; that is, that observations are independent (Seaton, 2008), resulting in serious
problems such as: (a) increased type I error (where results are shown to be significant
when they are not); (b) aggregation bias (not accounting for the different levels when
the effects vary across levels); and (c) undetected heterogeneity of regression (when
the relations between variables vary across groups; Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002).
Secondly, multilevel modeling is beneficial because it is able to function with
unbalanced data. This is particularly important for longitudinal research designs,
whereby data collected at different times, may contain participant rates that vary
82
across the waves. When conducting multilevel modeling, a full data set is not required
to obtain estimates. This is due to the use of maximum likelihood, or iterative
generalised least squares (as opposed to least squares method), which do not require
the full data set over different data collection periods (see Goldstein, 1995;
Raudenbush & Chan, 1993).
Lastly, multilevel modeling is particularly important for the evaluation of
population-based intervention studies. Evaluation studies of anti-bullying programs
within schools are most often measured with longitudinal research (Rigby, Smith, &
Pepler, 2004); however, these programs are rarely assessed using robust multilevel
modeling techniques. For research designs with three or more waves of data,
multilevel modeling can account for growth curves that can detect changes in
treatment over time across individuals. Moreover, repeated measures can be
accounted for, as each hierarchical level can be fixed or randomised (see Chapter 6).
This is currently the strongest method for testing the impact of interventions set
within a hierarchical structure, such as anti-bullying programs within schools.
In addition, Ryan and Smith (2009), confirmed that multilevel modeling is
seldom conducted within anti-bullying research. In a review of evaluative practices
that have been used in 31 bullying prevention studies, Ryan and Smith documented
further limitations to anti-bullying research (e.g., the lack of sophisticated
experimental designs). This led them to conclude with seven recommendations for
future anti-bullying research: (1) use of randomised-control designs (or at least
quasi-experimental) to evaluate intervention impacts; (2) the collection of baseline
data prior to, plus an outcome measure at least six months following implementation
of the intervention; (3) multiple methods and multiple informants to assess program
impacts; (4) reporting sound psychometric properties of instruments used (i.e.,
83
reliability and validity); (5) the collection of qualitative data to supplement
quantitative results; (6) monitoring of program integrity and implementation; and
(7) the use of multilevel statistical modeling to analyse the data.
The objective of the evaluation conducted within this study follows a similar
comprehensive line of research as recommended by Ryan and Smith (2009). This
study consists of a multi-cohort, multi-occasion advanced baseline-control design,
conducted over a two year period (see Chapter 6). In addition, the measurement
procedures conducted within this research consist of psychometrically sound,
multiple-item and multidimensional scales (see Chapter 7). The instruments used in
this study test the impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program on
self-report bullying behaviour; target experiences; participant roles; a myriad of
psychosocial correlates to bullying; and how well the program was implemented
within schools, with a measure of fidelity (see Chapter 6 and Chapter 8). Hence, the
present investigation aimed to meet five of the seven recommendations for
comprehensively evaluating bullying prevention programs, as proposed by Ryan and
Smith (i.e., recommendations one, two, four, six, and seven).
Summary of Whole-School Bullying Prevention Programs
Research on school bullying prevention has progressed in terms of whole-
school strategies and methodological design since the first Olweus project. For
example, whole-school programs have advanced with the inclusion of school-wide
anti-bullying policy (e.g., Whitney et al., 1994), intensive teacher training (e.g.,
OMoore & Minton, 2005), empowering peers to prevent bullying (e.g., Salmivalli et
al., 2005), and the inclusion of curriculum-based activities (e.g., Frey et al., 2005).
Moreover, methodological practices have improved from the use of single-item
measures to multiple-item scales, and from omnibus F-tests to hierarchical modeling.
84
Although there is still a great deal to be gained from bullying prevention research, a
whole-school approach is considered to be the most effective program to-date
(Salmivalli et al., 1998).
Chapter Summary
This chapter outlined the theoretical underpinning of bullying behaviours, and
the risk factors to involvement in bullying based on Social Identity Theory and
Self-Concept Theory. These theories are intertwined in bullying research. The
theoretical underpinnings discussed in this chapter represent the underlying
framework for the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program, important for the
development of an effective primary schools intervention. The present chapter also
examined the effectiveness of previous bullying prevention programs, and how
bullying prevention research can be strengthened from past limitations. The next
chapter provides a detailed overview of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools
Program, used to prevent bullying within the upper primary years.
85
CHAPTER 4
The Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program
Resources are based on a whole-school approach to addressing bullying
such that teachers, parents, and students all have vital roles in the
implementation of the program... Specific strategies and activities are
organised for these groups in order to achieve a maximum of impact.
Craven & Parada (2002, p. 24)
Introduction
This chapter provides an overview of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools
Program (BB; Finger, Craven, Parada, & Yeung, 2007; Craven, Finger, & Yeung,
2007). This program was implemented and evaluated as a core component of this
investigation. In this chapter, a description of the program is provided, followed by an
explanation of the role of the school in creating an anti-bullying school climate, and
the role of key stakeholders within the school (e.g., teachers, students, and parents) in
the prevention of bullying within a whole-school framework.
86
The Beyond Bullying Primary Program
The Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program (BB) is based on the
principles of the successful Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program (Parada,
Craven, & Marsh, 2008). BB intervention resources and practical strategies are based
on a whole-school ecological model designed to assist primary school children,
schools, and parents, to prevent, address, and manage school bullying and associated
behaviours. The upper primary age group was chosen for the current investigation for
two reasons: (1) to prevent bullying before the peak that occurs during the secondary
years (Marsh, Parada, Craven, & Finger, 2004; Parada, 2006); and (2) it is during
these years that children have the ability to appreciate, understand, and empathise
with individuals in a group context, more so than younger children (see Chapter 2).
This program takes into account specific actions for school culture, effective
policy, teacher management, student action, and parental involvement. Key features
of BB (Craven & Parada, 2002; Parada, 2006) include: developing a whole-school
anti-bullying policy; training teachers to use specialised feedback, behaviour
management, and intervention strategies; teacher reinforcement of prosocial
behaviours; an emphasis on prevention; and educating parents, and all students about
the nature of bullying and what they can do to prevent and address it.
While all core elements of the secondary program were incorporated, the new
primary schools program offers important innovations to anti-bullying interventions.
Advancements include the introduction of three theoretically grounded simple student
techniques to deal with bullying, and the use of new, age-appropriate activities and
resources for upper primary students and their parents (Finger, Craven, Parada et al.,
2007). Figure 4.1 illustrates the key features of BB, which are discussed further in the
following sections.
87
Theoretical
Framework
Genuine
Commitment
Teacher Training
Measures and
Analysis
Role of the Role of Teachers Role of Students Role of Parents

School
Anti-Bullying Safe Environment Classroom Implement Stop, Help, Tell Education

Policy Management Curriculum
Integrate into Reinforce Positive Manage Bullying Coping Strategies Support and
Curriculum Peer Relations Behaviours Involvement
Figure 4.1. Beyond Bullying Primary Model
88
Theoretical Framework
The first step involved is the development of an intervention based on sound
theory and research. BB is based on an ecological model whereby all members within
the school community are involved in the prevention of bullying (see Chapter 3). BB
capitalises on recent research which has hypothesised bullying as a multidimensional
construct that incorporates physical, verbal, and social forms (see Chapter 2). As such,
curriculum-based activities for students, parental education, and the measurement of
bullying, all account for the multidimensional structure of the bullying construct. BB
also capitalises on advances in self-concept theory and research (see Chapter 3),
wherein prosocial behaviours are reinforced and undesirable behaviours are
addressed.
Genuine Commitment
Bullying is an ongoing issue that needs ongoing efforts in order to prevent it.
Arguably, the most important factor (for the whole-school approach) is the extent to
which schools take ownership of the anti-bullying work, whatever form it takes, and
push it forward effectively and persistently (Smith, 2004, p. 101). Hence, BB
involves a genuine commitment by schools to implement the program.
Teacher Training
Rigby, Smith, and Pepler (2004) propose that teacher training prior to
implementation of an anti-bullying program is essential, as teachers are likely to have
previously received little if any training specifically on bullying issues. Moreover,
Parada (2006) recommends the use of specific teacher training for three key reasons:
(1) some teachers may use bullying behaviours with their students; (2) the way in
which teachers manage their classrooms is linked to student issues of bullying; and
89
(3) teacher training in classroom management is a key area lacking within Australian
schools. An important step for this research therefore was to ensure all schools were
provided with specific BB teacher training.
All Year 5 and Year 6 teachers involved in the project attended a one day
training program. Teachers were informed of the program and its aims, what the
program entailed, specific details of the behaviour management procedures, and how
these could be implemented. Schools were further encouraged to provide the
behaviour management training to all teachers within the school, so that the behaviour
management strategies could be used school wide. The teacher training day was
designed to increase the capacity of teachers to manage bullying behaviours and
motivate teachers to use a proactive approach. Information was delivered verbally,
visually, in writing, and via discussion of information. Key content provided to
teachers during the training day included: (a) a detailed overview of BB and its
resources; (b) education on bullying; (c) how to implement self-concept enhancement
strategies; (d) how to implement behaviour management strategies; (e) methods in
providing active supervision to students; and (f) exercising positive coping strategies.
Overview of BB and its resources. Teachers were provided with an overview
of BB, the theory driving the program, the key topics to be covered in the student
curriculum activities (see later section: Key Topics), and all of the resources for
conducting BB. The main resource for teachers was the BB Teachers Manual (see
Appendix 1; Finger, Craven, Parada et al., 2007), which incorporates all information
covered on the BB Training Day.
Teachers were encouraged to present the activities and resources
enthusiastically to students to ensure that students would be engaged and keen to
learn. Promotion of the material by teachers was vital for student interest and learning.
90
Teachers were encouraged to modify the activities or resources to suit the needs of
their students. This approach is consistent with Galloway and Rolands (2004)
suggestion that interventions should focus on quality teaching and social
relationships, as opposed to adhering strictly to the activity protocol. One school for
example, created an excursion for students to go to the movies and watch a childrens
film. Although the film was not purely about issues of bullying, there were scenarios
of bullying within the film that students could relate bullying to. After the film,
students discussed the types of bullying they saw and how they could tell it was
bullying and not other childhood behaviours.
Teachers were encouraged not only to implement the activities with
enthusiasm, but also to reinforce the content of BB in other curriculum areas, and in
real life situations both inside and outside of the classroom. The BB activities were
designed so that activities could be used in a wide array of curriculum areas (see later
discussion, Curriculum Activities).
Education on bullying. As part of the BB Training Day, teachers were
instructed on how they could identify bullying. This included education on what
bullying is and is not, and two techniques that may help teachers to further identify
bullying accurately: (1) the use of just and only statements (Frost, 1991); and
(2) determining harm (see Chapter 2; Orpinas & Horne, 2006). Teachers were
encouraged to practice identifying bullying within the school environment in order to
accurately assess a situation and deal with it appropriately. Increasing knowledge
about what bullying is and is not, allows teachers to identify bullying more accurately
(Finger, Craven, & Yeung, 2007), and importantly, to instruct students more precisely
about what it is, how to identify it, and how to prevent and address it.
91
Self-concept enhancement strategies. The BB self-concept enhancement and
behaviour management strategies are tactics of which teachers are already aware, but
were reinforced to ensure strategies were consistently used as part of BB. Each
strategy was supplemented with easy to follow steps and examples, to ensure that
teachers were comfortable using it. These strategies could be used for all types of
student behaviours, not just bullying, and teachers were encouraged to use these as
part of enhancing students self-concept, and generally in managing undesirable
behaviours. During the implementation of the self-concept enhancement and
behaviour management strategies teachers were encouraged to praise in public and
correct in private (Parada, 2006). Schools were also encouraged to remind all
teachers within their school of these strategies during school meetings, to ensure that
across the schools, teachers were consistent in their use of the strategies with students
from all years when managing bullying behaviours.
Techniques to enhance individual student self-concept and peer relations were
designed to create a positive school and classroom environment. These strategies
allow students who bully to find alternative behaviours without bullying, and for
students who are bullied to feel good about themselves. Teachers were taught to
utilise three specific self-concept enhancement techniques: (1) Internally Focused
Feedback; (2) Attributional Feedback; and (3) Corrective Feedback (see Craven,
Marsh, & Burnett, 2003; Craven, Marsh, & Debus, 1991). The first two were
important for teachers to use frequently, while the latter was important for correcting
undesirable behaviour.
Internally Focused Feedback is a technique used to assist students to
internalise feedback from teachers. With regard to this strategy, students are praised
with reference to specific behaviour, and encouraged to internalise the behaviour so
92
that they will use this appropriate behaviour again in the future. There are five steps to
using this technique: gaining the students attention, praising the specific behaviour in
public, generalising the behaviour beyond the situation, encouraging internalisation,
and modelling this internalisation.
Attributional Feedback involves allowing students to attribute success to
effort, ability, or using the right strategy.
When children do achieve success from legitimate efforts, a teachers praise and
recognition that the success resulted from the students efforts, even if the task
was small, will increase the childs propensity to be optimistic and to expect
success in the next task. (Orpinas & Horne, 2006, p. 119)
Specific reference to behaviour is reinforced and students are encouraged to think
about how their work led to their achievements. Three steps are involved with this
technique: gaining the students attention, praising the specific behaviour in public,
and then attributing success to ability, effort, or strategies used.
Corrective Feedback is used to correct undesirable behaviour by reinforcing
appropriate behaviour. Behaviour correction always begins with talking privately with
the student, such as taking them aside (i.e., praise in public, correct in private). This
ensures that the student is not being ridiculed in front of their peers. This further
enables the childs sense of self worth to remain intact while at the same time they are
encouraged to adopt appropriate behaviour. Five steps are involved: taking the student
aside, bringing the students attention to their specific behaviour, acknowledging that
the child has the appropriate skill to perform the prosocial behaviour, linking the
appropriate behaviour to using the correct skill, and following through with the
consequence.
Behaviour management strategies. Given that inappropriate behaviour
appears in varying degrees of severity and frequency, it is essential that behaviour be
93
managed aptly and immediately. The behaviour management techniques were
designed for use with all students and for the management of different types of
behavioural issues (e.g., ranging from class disruptions to violent offences). Teachers
were encouraged to utilise eight classroom management techniques: Establishing
Clear Expectations, Modelling, Attention to Positive Behaviours, Descriptive
Feedback, Structured Educational Conversations, Maintaining Focus, Micro-
Techniques, Talking with Students one-to-one, and Behaviour Swapping.
Establishing Clear Expectations involves establishing three to five
expectations or rules governing student behaviour. These expectations are clear, easy
to remember, and easy to follow (e.g., we help others). As part of BB, a set of core
expectations for school behaviour is reinforced in the classroom via discussion and
presentation of expectations (e.g., displayed on a classroom wall), and used to
maintain appropriate classroom behaviour. This technique can be effective in
increasing student capacity to use prosocial behaviours and to actively prevent
bullying. Moreover, having written expectations for ready reference enables teachers
to refer back to these expectations when transgressions occur.
Modelling is a process whereby students learn to relate to their peers. Students
learn by modelling what they have observed. For some students, teachers represent
the only positive adult role models from whom they can learn. As part of BB, teachers
were encouraged to model prosocial behaviour including: conflict resolution,
managing student misbehaviour, encouraging and empowering students, motivating
students, and initiating events.
Attention to Positive Behaviours involves paying attention to desirable
behaviours in order to increase those behaviours. Negative behaviours, emotions, and
cognitions tend to be remembered more quickly and with more intensity than positive
94
ones. When a focus on bullying arises, negative behaviours are sought and dealt with;
however, the numerous occurrences of positive behaviours may be overlooked.
Paying attention to positive behaviours can increase the use of these positive
behaviours by students and the value students place on them. As part of BB, teachers
were encouraged to: look out for positive gestures, discussion, interactions and
conflict resolution styles; use general comments or small non-threatening gestures to
let students know they have the teachers attention; look for positive behaviours that
occur naturally; make attending to positive behaviour a part of their everyday routine;
provide attention to a student who uses positive behaviour even if that student had
used unacceptable forms of behaviour that day or previously; and to use a personal
cue to remind them to pay attention to positive behaviour.
Descriptive Feedback provides a more structured form of paying attention to
positive behaviours within BB, and is used with individuals or groups of students.
Descriptive Feedback is a short and specific form of verbal comment used when
teachers want to give students feedback about something they have done well. It is
based on the premise that students are more likely to behave in a particular way if
they are informed about what they do well. There are three steps to providing
descriptive feedback: gaining students attention, providing clear feedback that
describes the specific actions the student used, and providing praise for the behaviour.
Structured Educational Conversations are planned discussions, with the aim of
introducing specific educational outcomes. These discussions differ to normal lessons
in that they are student focused. Teachers prepare the discussion by choosing specific
questions that the student is expected to respond to. The role of the teacher is to
provide a safe environment for the conversation and to provide structure by keeping
the conversation focused on the aims. Minimal prompts therefore are used by the
95
teacher. Structured Educational Conversation is used in BB to alert students
effectively as to what bullying is, the consequences of being involved in bullying, and
how to stop it. Students share ideas and discuss important issues in a safe environment
under the guidance of the teacher. This can be achieved on an individual, small group,
or class level.
Maintaining Focus involves two techniques: the Broken Record Technique
and Refocus. These are used as part of BB when students resist, ignore teacher
requests, or talk back to teachers when they provide corrective behaviour strategies
(e.g., Corrective Feedback). Students use tactics to divert attention away from their
previous behaviour and try to avoid punishment for the behaviour. The Broken
Record Technique involves repeating the instruction in a calm and consistent manner
while ignoring the new behaviour. Refocus works by letting the student know what
they are doing is sidetracking the discussion, and refocusing their attention back to the
initial instruction, which is repeated.
Five Micro-Techniques are used in BB to prevent bullying behaviour: (1)
Vicinity; (2) Inclusion; (3) Secret Signal; (4) Private Choice; and (5) Adjacent
Student. Vicinity refers to the actual space between the teacher and student. When an
unacceptable behaviour is seen, the teacher works to locate themself closer to the
student so that the student knows the teacher is supervising them. Inclusion involves
the teacher giving the student a special job in which they have responsibility for
implementing a task. This keeps them occupied with their new role. Secret Signals is
used to guide students back to their work or to more acceptable behaviour. Private
Choice refers to giving students a private choice of what to do. This helps students to
identify why they may be acting a certain way and provides them with a choice to use
an alternative, appropriate prosocial behaviour. The Adjacent Student technique
96
requires little effort, yet effectively encourages students to concentrate. It involves
calling on the student who is next to the student whose behaviour has caught the
teachers attention. This captures the neighbouring students attention and brings their
attention back to the task at hand.
Talking with Students One-to-One involves three strategies: Expectation
Discussion, Redirection, and Shared Control. The strategy chosen is determined by
how the student responds to the teachers requests. The purpose of Expectation
Discussion is to remind the student of the expectations regarding the treatment of
other students. It can be used for minor violations of these expectations and is a
positive strategy that allows the student to internalise the expectations and correct
their own behaviour with minimal intervention. There are four steps involved in
Expectation Discussion: gain the students attention, prompt the expectation in focus,
request that the student follow the classroom expectation, and praise co-operation by
the student. Redirection involves a teacher stepping in to have the student redirect
their own behaviour. This is used when the student is aware that their own behaviour
was unacceptable. There are five steps to redirecting behaviour: approaching the
student about a specific behaviour and allowing the student to consider what
behaviour should be used; asking the student What are you doing?, followed by
asking the student What should you be doing?, asking the student to redirect their
behaviour to the appropriate one they chose, and praising co-operation. Shared control
is similar to Redirection, but is teacher-directed. The teacher provides an alternative
behaviour and the behaviour is chosen by the students so that they make a conscious
decision on how to behave. The aim is for the teacher to clearly present the
consequences to behaviour so that the student is aware of what will happen with each
behavioural choice. Shared Control allows students to change their behaviour and
97
receive positive attention for doing so. There are six steps involved in Shared Control:
approaching the student about a specific behaviour and considering what behaviour
should be used; bringing a students attention to a specific behaviour of theirs; giving
the student two choices, with the consequences explained for each; letting the student
know they are expected to choose the appropriate behaviour; providing students with
time to choose the correct behaviour; and praising co-operation.
The final behaviour management technique is Behaviour Swapping. This was
designed to assist students to swap undesirable behaviour with more appropriate
behaviour. Students are not simply asked to stop what they are doing but are taught
which behaviours are not accepted and are encouraged to use alternative behaviours.
To ensure students use the appropriate behaviour, teachers were instructed to: ensure
that students knew which prosocial behaviours they could swap to; encourage
non-bullying behaviours so that students independently swap to these appropriate
behaviours; and make prosocial behaviours valued whilst simultaneously devaluing
anti-social behaviours.
Active supervision. Research has shown that in Australian schools, bullying
happens most frequently in the playground (Slee, 1995). In Australia, lunch time and
recess is a time when teachers are required to supervise children in the playground.
Active supervision involves teachers actively interacting with students on a
day-to-day basis outside the classroom. Interacting with students refers to initiating
small talk with students and getting to know them (Colvin, Sugai, Good, & Lee, 1997;
Smith & Sprague, 2001). Positive contact with students for example, has been shown
to reduce undesirable behaviour in up to 90% of students (Smith & Sprague, 2002).
As teachers increasingly use this method, students become accustomed to discussing
school issues with them, and teachers become aware of situations and of the
98
behaviour of students that precede antisocial behaviour. This can alert teachers to
potential issues of bullying and peer conflict, before the issues become inflamed.
Using time effectively by interacting with students, allows teachers to gain the trust of
students (or at least some students) who would be willing to help the teacher, or who
would be willing to find out what is happening. Active supervision also involves
seriously addressing all reports of bullying in the playground. All schools were
encouraged to use these approaches to effectively prevent bullying.
Coping Strategies. Teachers were taught to utilise a number of coping
strategies, grounded upon a cognitive approach, whereby teachers were encouraged to
transform negative or unconstructive thoughts into positive ones (see Teacher Manual,
Appendix 1). These strategies enable teachers to remain calm, in control, and
comfortable about intervening in a bullying situation, and increase their capacity to
understand: (a) how thoughts affect and inhibit behaviour; (b) how thoughts affect
those involved in bullying; and (c) how to use positive coping strategies.
Overview Teacher Training Day. The BB Training Day focused on providing
teachers with the resources, skills, and knowledge necessary to identify and prevent
bullying most effectively within their school. Teachers were provided with:
(a) a detailed overview of BB and its resources; (b) teacher education on the nature
and consequences of bullying; (c) training to implement self-concept enhancement
strategies; (d) an overview of behaviour management strategies; (e) methods for
actively supervising students; and (f) strategies for exercising positive coping
strategies. These strategies were designed to work in congruence with one another in
order for schools to prevent bullying within a whole-school approach.
99
Measurement and Analysis
BB also involves measuring and analysing the extent of bullying, to determine
how a school can create a more individualised program (Rigby et al., 2004). Bullying
was measured with single-item measures that related to where bullying was happening
and how often (see Appendix 2). Single-item measures were chosen as they could be
quickly administered, coded, entered, and analysed in time for the program. All
schools were supplied with two reports. This included an individual school report (see
Appendix 3 for an example) and a combined report with the total data from all schools
(see Appendix 4). This was supplemented with a presentation of individual school
findings to each school, where findings were compared to the total data set from all
schools (see Appendix 5 for an example). Data for these reports were collected in the
middle of 2006 as part of wave 2 (W2) data collection (see Chapter 6). The report and
presentation included information about where bullying happens, why students bully,
how much students bully and are bullied, the longest period of time students have
been bullied, the types of bullying that occur, whether students believe their school is
safe, and who they think should be responsible for preventing bullying. Individual
school reports were identified with a number provided by the researcher; only the
school and the researcher knew this number.
Summary of the Beyond Bullying Overview
This section has described the first four steps of BB, based on its key features
(see Figure 4.1) in creating a whole-school approach within the BB schools. This
included having a theoretical framework, eliciting a genuine commitment from the
school, providing specific teacher training, and the measurement and analysis of
bullying issues to create a more tailored program for each school. The next section
details the role of the school in the prevention of bullying.
100
The Role of the School: Creating an Anti-Bullying School Climate
The development of a school policy, in collaboration with all members of the
school is an important step to creating an anti-bullying school climate (Sharp &
Thompson, 1994). In Australia, schools are legally liable to protect children under the
age of 16 from harassment and discrimination (Kids Help Line, 2003). The specific
procedures of BB are set out in a school anti-bullying policy for students, parents, and
staff so that all members of the school community can actively prevent and address
bullying within the school.
School Policy
A well planned anti-bullying school policy underlies the commitment,
expectations, consistency, and actions that are taken at all school levels to prevent
bullying (Sharp & Thompson, 1994). Schools should work towards writing their own
school policy in order to take ownership of their responsibilities and make a
commitment to the prevention of bullying in their school (Berne, 1999; Rigby, 2007;
Sharp & Thompson, 1994; Suckling & Temple, 2001). However, it may be difficult
for schools to create a school anti-bullying policy due to time constraints, an already
intense workload, a lack of enthusiasm by some members, and insufficient knowledge
of what to include (Sharp & Thompson, 1994). Ultimately, often it is only a handful
of school members who take responsibility for creating the anti-bullying policy
(Rigby, 2007). Although a thorough policy is ideal, schools are busy, and the creation
of a detailed school policy may not be practical for all schools.
Schools were provided with a template of a school policy (see Appendix 6)
and given guidance on how they could adapt this for their school. As such, all core
elements of a school anti-bullying policy were included, and schools could modify
this template to suit their individual needs. Schools were advised to establish a Policy
101
Development Team involving parents, students, teachers, and the Principal, such that
representatives of all school groups were involved in the modification of the policy to
suit school needs. The policy template was developed by Craven and Parada (2002) in
collaboration with Catholic Education, Diocese of Parramatta as part of the Beyond
Bullying Secondary Schools Program.
For a school policy to be consistently actioned within a school, to ensure the
widespread transfer of the school policy, and in turn to show that the school is serious
about preventing bullying, the school policy should be communicated to all school
members (Sharp & Thompson, 1994). Once each school had modified the policy,
schools were encouraged to disseminate the information to all school members, to
increase awareness and accessibility. Dissemination could happen in many ways, such
as communicating expectations for student behaviour to students in the classroom,
sending newsletters to parents with information about the policy, and providing a
copy of the policy on the schools webpage.
Most of the extant literature on anti-bullying policies suggest the following
topics should be included in the policy (Rigby, 2001, 2007; Sharp & Thompson,
1994; Suckling & Temple, 2001): school commitment, a definition of bullying, how
bullying affects students and the wider school community, how the school and other
school members are responsible for preventing bullying, and how the school will
manage bullying and adhere to procedures.
School commitment. An important component of the school policy proposed
by Rigby (2007) is the use of a strong statement that indicates abhorrence to
bullying felt by the school. This helps to demonstrate that the school is serious about
managing bullying, and can assist schools in gaining support from members of the
school community. Moreover, Rigby states, a school anti-bullying policy should
102
contain details of the rights of students within the school to be safe from harm, as the
main aim for schools is to ensure that students are safe.
Thus, the BB school policy begins with a statement expressing a clear
indication of the schools commitment to preventing bullying and the procedures they
will adhere to in order to do so. The template supplied to schools contains a genuine
statement of abhorrence towards bullying, and of the schools dedication to
providing students with a safe environment. In addition, the template provides details
of each students rights to be safe at school and the expectations of school members to
ensure that students are safe when they go to school:
X Primary School actively seeks to provide students with a stimulating

learning environment that is safe. It is a fundamental right of everyone in our
school community to feel safe. It is the right of everyone to be able to come to
our school each day without fear of being intimidated, humiliated or threatened
verbally or physically with harm. Bullying denies this right to members of our
school community and as such bullying is not accepted in our school.
X Primary School holds the following expectations of all members of our

school community This policy outlines the responsibilities of all staff and
students and how parents can assist, to ensure that our school is beyond
bullying and safe for everyone.
(BB Policy Template; see Appendix 6)
Definition of bullying. The definition provided to schools, teachers, students,
and parents in the school policy is vital in laying the foundations for identifying
bullying correctly (Suckling & Temple, 2001). Although operational definitions are
often not useful in practical settings, such as within schools (see Parada, 2006), a
more appropriate behavioural definition should be provided in the school policy. For
example, the template provided to schools states:
Bullying is made up of behaviours intended to deliberately hurt, threaten,

frighten or exclude someone by physical and non-physical means over
extended periods of time. An individual or group may direct these behaviours
towards another individual or group.
Someone is bullying another person when:
103
They repeatedly verbally abuse a person or group by calling them
unpleasant names, by writing them nasty notes and/or messages or
They repeatedly physically harm a person or group or physically

by using unpleasant gestures.
intimidate them by threatening physical harm or by
They repeatedly encourage their friends or people they know to

destroying/taking their belongings without permission.
verbally, physically threaten a person or group; or ask them to

harass, embarrass, ignore or exclude that person or group from
activities.
Bullying may take one, two or all of these forms. Repeatedly means that they
do these things to that person or group the majority of the time they talk about
them, see them, or spend time around them.
(BB Policy Template; see Appendix 6)
How bullying affects students and the wider school community. A brief
overview of the consequences of bullying is also included in the policy, to dispel
myths about bullying, to motivate action, and to change attitudes towards bullying
(Sharp & Thompson, 1994). This statement expresses concern and the awareness that
doing nothing to prevent bullying can lead to those consequences; hence, this section
provides the school community with a rationale for preventing and addressing
bullying.
How the school and school members are responsible for preventing bullying.
Literature on anti-bullying policies advocates the inclusion of key roles for teachers,
students, and parents to prevent bullying (Rigby, 2007; Sharp & Thompson, 1994,
Suckling & Temple, 2001). However, Rigby (2007) adds caution to this area,
proposing for example that students may not wish to be involved, and that
involvement in preventing bullying may put their own safety at risk. It is important
thus, that schools work to ensure that the safety of school members is maintained at
all times, and that appropriate procedures and roles be established.
Within the BB policy is an account of the role of all school members,
including staff, students, and parents. For example, staff are responsible for modelling
104
positive relationships and reinforcing positive student behaviour; students are
encouraged to report bullying, and parents are asked to contact the school regarding
issues of bullying as well as to allow the school to manage these behaviours. It is
important that roles for all members be detailed thoroughly, allowing each member to
ascertain their role and their responsibilities only in respect of those roles that they are
required to take. For example, it is the schools responsibility to deal with incidents of
bullying. It would not be helpful if parents were to approach possible bullies or the
parents of those students themselves. When each member is educated in their role,
they are able to manage these roles more productively, and work harmoniously with
other members of the school community in preventing bullying.
How the school will manage bullying and adhere to procedures. As per the
role of each member within the school, the school is responsible for dealing with
issues of bullying, and must clarify its own role in how bullying will be managed (see
Figure 4.2). This helps to ensure that staff members deal with bullying in a consistent
manner and that students, teachers, and parents are all aware of the procedures for and
consequences of, anti-social behaviour within the school. Sharp & Cowie (1994)
further suggest bullying should be responded to immediately with a clear and direct
approach, students should be given the opportunity to resolve issues, incidents should
be recorded, and meetings with family members should be made when necessary
(e.g., with persistence of bullying behaviours). In addition, this should detail that all
incidents, no matter how minor, are to be responded to.
Within BB, specific behaviour management procedures for dealing with
bullying are outlined. Figure 4.2 shows that when a student, staff member, or parent
identifies a bullying episode or incident, the first step requires the response to be
appropriate according to the seriousness of the offence. For example, if a minor first
105
offence has occurred, strategies such as Micro-Techniques, Expectation Discussion,
or Redirection can be used to address the situation. If this is a reported bullying
incident or relates to a case that is already familiar, steps may include: an
investigation of facts, interviewing students separately, making a decision about what
needs to be done, informing students of the decision, asking students to report back
after two weeks (with a follow-up review ready), and sending an incident report form
to higher authorities (i.e., Year Co-ordinator, Associate Principal). If the offence is
serious or if the student fails to respond to a teachers attempts to resolve the issue,
teachers are encouraged to create an incident report, and the student is referred on to
higher authorities. If the teacher believes the student needs further help, they can refer
that student to appropriate personnel (e.g., school counsellor).
The second half of the diagram also shows what would occur after a referral
has been made. Year Co-ordinators or appointed staff members would assess what
steps should be taken next, depending on the seriousness of the issue and what has
previously been done. For example, a structured interview with the student may take
place (see Appendix 7). The box at the bottom left hand corner of Figure 4.2 shows a
series of steps that can be taken. For most incidents of bullying a student will progress
in a sequential order through these steps. Thinking Time (see Appendix 7) is a
structured lunch time detention in which a student is asked to go through a sequence
of structured exercises that eventually become their behavioural agreement.
106
Provide Behaviour
INCIDENT OF BULLYING
BROUGHT TO YOUR
Fill out incident report;
Correction technique;
Investigate Facts by
ATTENTION
interviewing students
Make a decision about what

individually;
Inform students;
happens;
Provide warning and
Behaviour Correction Make note in students diary
IS THIS A 1ST
Ask stu dents to report back
for parents to sign;
Carry out Behaviour
technique; and YES NO
MINOR OFFENCE? other
Management technique if minor to you in two weeks for a
Make a note in your diary

required. offences review;
Send incident report form to

for this review; and
NO other Appointed Staff Member.

major
offences
WAS THERE A NO Ensure incident report NO WAS THERE A

Refer to school counsellor or
RESOLUTION? completed; and RESOLUTION?
YES Appointed Staff Member. YES
Praise student for taking control Praise student for taking control
and following through and following through
Interview students using

Set up interview with
Prepare Behaviour
IS THERE A Structured Interview form;
Follow throu gh with
parents; and
YES PREVIOUS BEHAVIOUR NO
Outline consequences for

Agreement;
consequences at appropriate CONTRACT?
step.
Have agreements signed by
breaking agreement;
Review in two weeks.

parents and stu dents; and
POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES
Step 1: Thinking Time Lunch

Step 2: Thinking Time Lunch + No tify Parents
Step 3: Thinking Time Lunch + Interview NO WAS TH ERE A
Parents RESOLUTION?
Step 4: Helping Myself 1 Day Internal +
Interview Parents YES
Step 5: 1 Day Thinking Time + Interview Parents
Step 6: Interview Pa rents. Referral to MEC or
other profes sional for educational, behavioural Praise student for taking control
and emotional asses sment to be considered. and following through
Figure 4.2. Procedures for managing bullying behaviours
107
Curriculum Activities
Overview. BB is consistent with research that suggests anti-bullying programs
should be invested into classroom curriculums (Cowie & Sharp, 1994). Cowie and
Sharp (1994) assert that the introduction of an anti-bullying program into the
curriculum can have two important implications: (1) raising awareness of bullying
and the whole-school anti-bullying policy; and (2) challenging student attitudes to
bullying, which in turn creates a more positive school culture. Age-appropriate
activities and material were integrated into the school curriculum (see Appendix 8).
Although the program was designed to operate within the Physical Health,
Development, and Physical Education (PHDPE) curriculum (DET, 2007), activities
could also be incorporated into a wider range of curriculum courses, including
English, Music, and Science and Technology. Teachers were able to select and use
those activities most appropriate to the needs of their students and to adapt these to
suit their students needs.
Key Topics. The topics chosen within the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools
Program are vital themes in understanding bullying and doing something about it.
Table 4.1 summarises each topic and how these themes are valuable as part of
anti-bullying education.
108
Table 4.1.
Key Topics, Descriptions, and Value of the Topics Raised in the Beyond Bullying
Upper Primary Schools Program
Topic Description Value
What is Provides general As Parada (2006) suggests (see
bullying information about bullying, Chapter 2), it is not practical to
such as that bullying is done provide students and teachers with
on purpose, and it can be operational definitions used by
done by a group or researchers. These could cause more
individual. In addition, confusion in real-life situations. The
examples of what bullying definition of bullying is kept simple
is and is not are given. for Year 5 and Year 6 students, and
does not include controversial
definitional issues such as the power
differential and the issue of
repetitious behaviour.
Types of Students are provided with These four types are the basis of what
bullying behavioural examples of make up bullying (see Chapter 2),
four types of bullying: and are easy identifiers for students
physical, verbal, social, and seeking to understand the kinds of
cyber. bullying which occur.
Differences This topic provides students Bullying can often be mistaken for
between with examples of what other childhood behaviours. In order
bullying and could be mistaken for to help distinguish bullying from
teasing bullying. these behaviours, it is necessary to
point out not only what bullying is,
but what bullying is not. This helps
students to identify bullying more
readily in order to prevent it (see
Chapter 2).
School anti- Students are provided with Cowie and Sharp (1994) assert that
bullying details of the school policy, educating students about the school
policy including the procedures policy through the curriculum can be
used within the school when important in challenging student
incidents of bullying happen beliefs about bullying. Educating
and how they are students on the school policy can
responsible for preventing ensure that students are aware of
bullying. what bullying is, the procedures the
school uses when incidents of
bullying happen, and their own role
in preventing bullying. This helps
students understand that they have a
role in preventing bullying, even if
they are not directly involved.
109
Table 4.1. continued
Topic Description Value

Consequences Students are provided with Understanding the consequences of
an overview of the bullying is important to gaining an
consequences of bullying awareness of why it is important to
apparent for not only those prevent bullying, and what can
involved, but the wider happen if bullying continues. This
school community. can help to motivate students into
doing something about it.
Myths and Students are introduced to Generalisations about bullying are

facts about false generalisations of often normalised across communities
bullying bullying that are often stated and prevent people from doing
or assumed within society. anything to stop bullying. They are
Students are trained in often fuelled with a victim-blame
detecting these undertone. Changing these beliefs,
generalisations and and helping students to understand
debunking them. why these beliefs are false, enables
students to address misconceptions
and motivates students to prevent
bullying.
What children This topic teaches students It is important not only to help those
can do to help how to be proactive in who are being bullied, but also those
people feel helping those who are who are bullying others as well. This
good about involved in bullying. section is vital for helping students to
themselves understand that they can do
something.
Three simple Students are provided with These strategies are simple, easy to
strategies: three simple strategies to remember, and can be used by all
STOP, HELP, preventing bullying if it students. For example, these
TELL happens: Stop, Help, and strategies can be used if students are
Tell. being bullied, are bullying others, or
if they see it happen to others.
What else can The last topic allows It is useful for students to come up
we do to stop students to suggest new with their own ways of preventing
bullying? ways of sharing their bullying. Students are encouraged to
knowledge about bullying, be creative and to present their
including but not limited to finished product to others.
making a board game, play,
story, song, or new video.
This encourages other
students to prevent bullying
as well.
110
Age-appropriate activities. Schools were provided with a diverse range of
age-appropriate activities (see Appendix 8). Activities ranged from reading, to
creating posters, role-playing, and playing flash-card games. In addition, students
were given their own activity book with all the activities from which to work.
Activities were developed specifically on the basis of theoretical and evidence-based
teaching practices of the IODE model (see Craven, 1999). Activities were designed
with the intention of providing effective student learning that are based upon the
processes of: Intake, Organise, Demonstrate, and Express. Intake activities involved
presenting students with new information. Organisation activities involved the
students in sorting the new information they had learned. Demonstrate activities
involved students showing their understanding of the activities. Expressive activities
involved students applying their knowledge in new and creative ways.
Age-appropriate material. In addition to effective classroom management and
a positive school climate, it is crucial that schools provide students with
age-appropriate material (Dusenbury, Falco, Lake, Brannigan, & Bosworth, 1997).
For example, Shulman (1996) advises that intervention for younger children should
include more visual aids and concrete activities as they are predominantly visual
learners, whereas older children should receive more discussion time, role-playing,
and perspective taking tasks that practise higher order abilities. Activities and
curriculum that target attitude and behavioural change should be developmentally
specific and account for cognitive, emotional, behavioural, academic, and social
factors. Classroom based activities should allow students to discuss their views on
bullying and educate them about the consequences of bullying from a target-centred
perspective (Craven & Parada, 2002).
111
The BB resources were specifically designed for primary students. New
age-appropriate resources developed specifically for the program included the
creation of a new animated anti-bullying DVD (see Appendix 9; Finger, Parada,
Craven, & Marsh, 2007), music related to peer relationship issues, parent as well as
parent-child brochures (see Appendix 10 and 11), flash-cards (see Appendix 12),
posters (see Appendix 13), and student curriculum-based activities (see Appendix 8).
For example, a new anti-bullying DVD was segmented into specific topics, which
allowed it to be viewed as a whole, or as part of a particular BB topic being studied
(e.g., myths about bullying). The new DVD features two animated characters (Lia and
Ty) who host the program, as well as a number of animated animal characters who
represent visual (non-violent) illustrations of the issues raised. Two media identities
(Pip and Dan) from a popular Australian television program (Toasted tv) particularly
aimed at the upper primary age group, were also involved in the DVD, talking about
bullying, and helping empower students to prevent it. In particular, these media role
models were chosen as they represented non-aggressive media identities whom
primary school students could relate to. Music featured on the DVD relates to student
peer issues. In addition, unprompted vox-pops (interviews on film) with Year 6
students who used typical phrases of this age group were included so that students
watching the DVD could relate to the issues being raised.
Furthermore, existing age-appropriate resources (books, anti-bullying videos;
see Appendix 14) were integrated into the program. Books, videos, and additional
resources (e.g., poems, song lyrics) included stories about situations of school
bullying, how students were affected, and how these situations were resolved. These
resources presented scenarios with similarly aged students. Teachers were provided
with copies of all the resources in order to implement the program.
112
Providing A Safe Environment
Providing schools with a safe environment reinforces to students, teachers, and
parents that the school is serious and active in its prevention of bullying. Schools were
encouraged to provide a safe environment for students, using a number of strategies.
This included consistently following the school policy, using the individually tailored
school reports to alter the school environment, and providing active supervision.
Consistency in policy implementation. Having a well planned school policy
will fail to be effective if the procedures within it are not actively pursued, or are not
followed through in a consistent manner. The importance of consistency within a
school was stressed to all participating schools. Active pursuit of consistency included
ensuring all members of the school community were aware of and had access to the
school policy, adhered to the anti-bullying protocols, and that teachers, students, and
parents were aware of their roles when bullying happens.
Altering the school environment. Schools were encouraged to use their
individualised school report and presentation (see former discussion: Measurement
and Analysis) to create a more individualised program for their school.
Recommendations were made to schools based on the findings of the report (e.g.,
active supervision was recommended to counteract high incident rates in the
playground) and provided schools with an opportunity to make additional changes
specific to their school. The use of individual reports and presentations helped schools
to identify potential risk areas and issues of bullying related to their school. Schools
were encouraged to use these reports actively to improve the safety of the school
environment for students. For example, one school identified that bullying occurred in
a particular area when students were walking home from school. As such, one area
around the school was deemed unsafe, and students were no longer allowed to take
113
that particular route when walking home. Other schools changed their school
timetables and introduced lunch time activities as students tended to use more
anti-social behaviours when they were bored.
Summary of the Role of the School
This section has detailed the role of the school within the BB framework. This
included the establishment of a personalised school policy in managing bullying
behaviours, implementing age-appropriate activities and resources for students, and
providing students with a safe learning environment. The next section details the
specific roles of key stakeholders within the school environment; that is, teachers,
students, and parents.
The Role of Stakeholders
The Role of the Teacher
Each teacher plays a key role in the implementation of BB in their school.
Teachers are responsible not only for conducting the curriculum activities within their
classrooms, but also for the management of anti-social student behaviour. Studies
have shown that the great majority of bullying is not reported to teachers or is not
noticed by them (e.g., Atlas & Pepler, 1998), and thus a further aim of BB was to
empower teachers to recognise, and then effectively intervene in bullying episodes
(see former section: Teacher Training).
The Role of Students
Peers play an integral part in the onset and maintenance of bullying.
Preventing bullying requires active involvement from all school community members,
including students. While peers play an important role in stopping bullying and in
supporting those who are bullied, individuals are also responsible for their own
114
behaviour (Salmivalli, Lagerspetz, Bjrkqvist, sterman, & Kaukiainen, 1996).
Students were encouraged to take part in classroom activities that work toward
transforming beliefs about bullying, and actively work towards preventing and
addressing bullying in their school.
Peers were encouraged to help by not reinforcing behaviours, as well as by
actively stopping bullying. While many anti-bullying programs employ student
training in assertiveness, anger management, and changing peer behaviour in
reinforcing bullying (Rigby, 2003), these strategies often do little to help students deal
actively and safely with situations of bullying they see on a day-to-day basis at
school, and are seldom grounded on theory and empirical research. BB was developed
with an innovative and theoretically grounded safe skills base for increasing the
capacity of students to prevent bullying. Three simple and successive BB strategies
enable students to address bullying if they are being bullied, if they see bullying
happen to others, or find themselves bullying others. These are, to Stop, Help, and
Tell.
Stop. The first aim to doing something about bullying when it happens is to
make sure it stops, and to ensure the person being bullied is safe. In BB, students who
are being bullied are encouraged to say Stop to the person bullying and walk away;
students who see bullying happen are encouraged to say Stop to the person bullying
and work together with others to stop the situation, while students bullying others are
encouraged to realise what they are doing is hurtful and to stop bullying others.
Help. The second step students are encouraged to do after attempting to stop
the situation, is to help. That is, students who are being bullied are encouraged to seek
help from other students or teachers, to ensure that they are safe and remain safe.
Students who see bullying happen are encouraged to help by supporting the person
115
being bullied, and by empowering the person bullying to use other methods of gaining
peer attention other than bullying or harming others. Students who bully others are
also encouraged to help by realising what they are doing, and to become role models
by conveying to others that bullying is not acceptable.
Tell. Bullying thrives in secrecy, particularly among peers. One goal in
preventing bullying is to ensure that students trust that telling someone will make a
difference. Every effort is made within the school to ensure that students can feel
comfortable to tell someone. They can tell a teacher, another student, their parents, or
another staff member. While teachers are encouraged to deal with bullying
immediately, students are assured that telling will make a difference, and that telling
will not come with repercussions for the student. Students who are being bullied, who
see bullying happen, or who are bullying others, are encouraged to tell someone about
it, to stop the bullying continuing.
Summary of the Stop, Help, Tell procedures. Students are active agents
within the school social system, and they influence the likelihood and maintenance of
bullying through secrecy. Providing students with appropriate skills to prevent
bullying, skills that also keep them safe, are essential to preventing bullying at the
student level. Students have the ability to use these skills, particularly as they are easy
to remember, and trouble-free for them to use. All of the techniques in BB are
designed to address multiple student roles in the bullying equation: those who are
targeted, those who bully others, and all others who take on one of four participant
roles (see Chapter 2). That is, students who are being bullied have the skills to make it
stop, students who are bullying others have the skills to use alternative prosocial
behaviours, and students who see bullying happen know that they can feel safe to do
something about it. Empowering students to stop the bullying, to help others out, and
116
to talk about it makes preventing bullying more accessible to students and motivates
them to become proactive in their approach when situations of bullying arise.
Moreover, having parental support can empower student action, as is discussed in the
next section.
The Role of Parents
Gaining parental involvement is an often challenging effort for schools in their
attempts to prevent bullying, yet parents can play a key role. Parents are able to
influence and support their children and school towards the aims of BB. As part of
BB, schools were encouraged to provide parents with education about what bullying
is, to advise parents of the school policy procedures in dealing with bullying, and to
inform parents how they can help to prevent bullying in their childs school. Schools
were also encouraged to empower parents to support the aims of BB, and to be
proactively involved in the prevention of bullying within their school.
The methods for educating parents were based on informing parents of the
aims, procedures, and their involvement in BB. Parent education was provided in a
way which would cause the least disruption to families. Parent education included:
10 articles which schools published in their weekly newsletter over 10 weeks
(see Appendix 15), raising awareness with the use of parent brochures (see Appendix
10), a parent-child booklet to help parents reinforce the aims of BB with their children
(see Appendix 11), and attending parent information nights at their childs school.
Craven and Parada (2002) suggest parent education should include information on:
what is bullying, the causes, the consequences, the need for whole-school policy to
address bullying, and how to contact the school if their child is involved in bullying.
Parent education was based on the key topics that were covered with students in the
curriculum activities (see Key Topics section).
117
Parents have the ability to help their children to manage anti-social behaviours
effectively, help their children perceive bullying as inappropriate, help their children
acquire positive peer interactions skills, and encourage their children to assist the
school in addressing bullying (Craven & Parada, 2002). Gaining support from parents
requires positive school-parent and teacher-parent relations. Initially, support was
gained using consent forms for childrens participation in the research for the
program. Parents were also provided with information on how they could be aware of
their childs possible involvement in bullying, how they could provide their child with
appropriate support in dealing with bullying, and how they could assist their childs
school in working through issues of bullying. Parents were advised to: support and
encourage their child to become positive peer bystanders, support the aims of the
program and the initiatives of the school (e.g., discuss issues with their childs school,
participate in the information evening, and share the resources they received from the
school with their child), increase their own understanding of what constitutes bullying
behaviours, and increase their understanding of the consequences of bullying.
Without parental support and co-operation for the program, schools cannot
achieve the most effective anti-bullying prevention outcomes for their school.
Providing parents with information and knowledge on how they could support the
aims of the program, support their school, and support their child was integral to
parental education in and involvement with BB.
Summary of the Role of the Stakeholders
This section has described the role of teachers, students and parents in the
prevention of school bullying. Key features include the role of teachers in managing
student behaviours, the role of students in using three simple and easy to remember
118
strategies (Stop, Help, Tell), and the role of parents in supporting the schools BB
aims, as well as supporting their child.
Chapter Summary
This chapter has provided an overview of the nature of and procedures for
implementing BB. It has been shown that BB is a whole-school program based upon
teachers, students, and parents working together to prevent and address bullying. BB
is a comprehensive 10 week program with actions at the school level including the
establishment and widespread communication of the anti-bullying school policy,
modifying the program in order to improve individual school needs based on the
report and presentation provided to schools, and implementing a curriculum-based
anti-bullying program for student learning. The school policy contains information on
what bullying is, how the school will ensure students are safe, expectations for student
behaviour, school procedures for managing bullying and related behaviours, and the
role of school community members in the prevention of bullying. In addition, efforts
at the individual school level help to achieve maximum results for schools, while
student learning through curriculum-based activities benefits schools by ensuring all
students are involved and meet specific educational requirements. While this program
is based on the Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program, important innovations
to this program help to make it age-appropriate, and provide students with the skills to
prevent bullying proactively. In the next chapter the aims, hypotheses, research
questions, and the rationale, are presented for the current investigation. The aims
include an empirical investigation of the impact of BB.
119
CHAPTER 5
Aims, Hypotheses, Research Questions, and Their Rationale
Evaluation is central to good practice and ensuring an evidence-based
approach to school safety.
Student Learning and Support Services Taskforce (2003, p. 11)
Introduction
The present investigation comprises two interrelated studies. The purpose of
Study 1 was to assess the psychometric properties of the instruments used to measure:
bullying; being bullied; and the psychosocial correlates of bullying. The purpose of
Study 2 was, using strong statistical analyses, to evaluate empirically the effectiveness
of the newly developed anti-bullying intervention for upper primary school students.
The purpose of this chapter is to present the aims, hypotheses, research questions, and
rationale, for each of the two studies. For each study the aims, hypotheses, research
questions and their rationales are numbered, so that each related aim, hypothesis, and
rationale can be easily recognised within each study. For example Hypothesis 1.1.1
refers to Study 1, aim 1, and Hypothesis 1; Hypothesis 2.1.2 refers to Study 2, aim 1,
120
and Hypothesis 2. Hypotheses are posed when specific predictions are possible based
upon previous research. Research questions are posed when clear directions cannot be
ascertained from previous research.
Study 1: Psychometric Assessment of Instrumentation
The Problem
Are the instruments used in the present investigation psychometrically sound,
reliable, and valid for upper primary students, males and females, and across Year 5
and Year 6? These instruments were designed to measure: involvement in bullying;
the psychosocial correlates to involvement in bullying; and the impact of the
intervention.
Aims
Study 1 aims to demonstrate that each of the instruments used in the present
investigation is a psychometrically sound, valid, and robust measure of the latent
constructs under investigation. More specifically Study 1 aims to test the
psychometric properties of the:
1. Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument Bully/Target (APRI-BT) as a

measure of six distinct scales three forms of bullying (physical, verbal,
social relational) and three target experiences (physical, verbal, and social
relational bullying) for upper primary students;
2. Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument Participant Roles (APRI-PR) as a
measure of four forms of participant roles (active reinforcer, passive
reinforcer, ignore/disregard, and advocate) for upper primary students;
3. Self-Description Questionnaire I Extended (SDQI-E) as a measure of 12
facets of pre-adolescent self-concept (physical appearance, physical
ability, peer relations, parent relations, mathematics ability, verbal ability,
general schooling ability, general self-esteem, opposite-sex peer relations,
same-sex peer relations, emotional stability, honesty/trustworthiness) for
upper primary students;
4. Adolescent Coping Strategy Indicator (ACSI) as a measure of three coping
strategies used by upper primary students when faced with difficulties
(problem solving, avoidance, support seeking);
121
5. Pre-adolescent School Belonging Scales (pASBS) as a measure of three
aspects of school belonging (attachment, support, and rule acceptance);
6. Child Depression Inventory - Short Form (CDI-10) as a unidimensional
measure of upper primary childrens depressive symptoms;
7. Beyond Bullying Program Scale (BBPS) as a two factor measure of
preadolescent student knowledge about bullying and action to prevent
bullying pre and post intervention;
8. T1 measurement battery in terms of the factorial integrity and the between
network relations of the latent constructs of the separate scales when
grouped together in a single battery; and
grouped together in a single battery.
Hypotheses and research questions related to the aims, centre around
estimating the following psychometric properties:
1. reliability (Cronbachs alpha estimates for corresponding factors);

2. construct validity (factor structure including first-order factor structure for
all instruments, and second-order factor structure for the APRI-BT and
pASBS);
3. criterion related validity (convergent and discriminant validity will be
assessed using correlation coefficients); and
4. invariance of the factor structure across critical groups: male vs. female,
Year 5 vs. Year 6, as well as across critical groups (i.e., male Year 5,
female Year 5, male Year 6, and female Year 6).
Statement of Hypotheses and Research Questions
Hypothesis 1.1.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of APRI-BT. The
first-order a priori six factor (Bullying Physical, Bullying Verbal, Bullying Social,
Target Physical, Target Verbal, and Target Social) and second-order two factor
structure (Total Bullying, Total Target) of the APRI-BT will be demonstrated with
acceptable reliability estimates of each factor for the total sample, as well as for
critical groups.
122
Order APRI-BT with Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The a priori six factor
first-order and a priori two factor second-order structure (see Figure 5.1) of the
APRI-BT will demonstrate acceptable overall model fit using confirmatory factor
analysis.
1 1
Physical 1
1 1
Bully Verbal 1
1 1
1
Social 1
1 1
1
Physical 1
1 1
1
Target Verbal 1
1 1
Social 1

Instrument Bully/Target
Hypothesis 1.1.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the First and
Second-Order APRI-BT with Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Latent factor
correlation coefficients within and between factors will demonstrate the APRI-BT six
first-order scales and the two second-order scales as convergent among bully and
target factors, and discriminant between bully and target factors.
123
Hypothesis 1.1.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of APRI-BT for Year,
Gender, and Year by Gender Groups. The a priori six factor first-order, and the a
priori two factor second-order structure of the APRI-BT will be invariant for males
and females, Year 5 and Year 6, and across the interaction of these critical groups
(male Year 5, female Year 5, male Year 6, and female Year 6).
Hypothesis 1.2.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of APRI-PR. The a
priori four factor structure of the APRI-PR (Advocate, Ignore, Passive Reinforcer, and
Active Reinforcer) will be demonstrated with acceptable reliability estimates for each
factor across the total sample, as well as across critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.2.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the APRI-PR with
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The a priori four factor structure (see Figure 5.2) of
the APRI-PR will be demonstrated by acceptable overall model fit using confirmatory
factor analysis.
1 1
ARein 1
1 1
PRein 1
1 1
1
Ignore 1
1 1
1
Advocate 1

Instrument Participant Roles. Note. ARein=Active Reinforcer, PRein=Passive
Reinforcer, Ignore=Ignore/Disregard, Advocate=Advocate for the target.
124
Hypothesis 1.2.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the APRI-PR
with Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Latent factor correlation coefficients within and
between factors will demonstrate the four APRI-PR scales as logically convergent and
discriminant correlations between participant role factors: Advocate as discriminant
with all other factors; and Ignore, Passive Reinforcer, and Active Reinforcer as
convergent.
Hypothesis 1.2.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of APRI-PR for Year,
Gender, and Year by Gender Groups. The a priori four factor structure of the
APRI-PR will be invariant for males and females, Year 5 and Year 6, and across the
interaction of critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.3.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of the SDQI-E. The
a priori 12 factor structure of the SDQI-E (Physical Ability, Appearance, Opposite-
Sex Relations, Same-Sex Relations, Peer Relations, Parental Relations, Honesty,
Emotional Stability, Math Ability, English Ability, General Schooling Ability, and
General Self) will be demonstrated with acceptable reliability estimates of each factor
for the total sample, as well as for critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.3.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the SDQI-E with
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The a priori 12 factor structure (see Figure 5.3) of the
SDQI-E will be demonstrated by acceptable overall model fit using confirmatory
factor analysis.
125
1
1
1
1
AP 1
1
1
1
AB 1
1
1
1
PR 1
1
1
1
PT 1
1
1
1
MT 1
1
1
1
EN 1
1
1
1
SL 1
1
1
1
GS 1
1
OS 1
1 1
SS 1
1 1
1
ES 1
1
1
1
1
HN 1
Figure 5.3. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Self Description Questionnaire

I Extended. Note. AP=Physical Appearance, AB=Physical Ability, PR=Peer Relations, PT=Parent
Relations, MT=Math, EN=Verbal, SL=General Schooling, GS=General Self-Esteem, OS=Opposite-
Sex Relations, SS=Same-Sex Relations, ES=Emotional Stability, HN=Honesty/Trustworthiness.
126
Hypothesis 1.3.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the SDQI-E
between factors will demonstrate the SDQI-E a priori 12 scales as convergent and
discriminant with appropriate factors (convergent among the school factors, as well as
between General Self-Esteem with most other factors).
Hypothesis 1.3.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of SDQI-E for Year, Gender,
and Year by Gender Groups. The a priori 12 factor structure of the SDQI-E will be
invariant for males and females, Year 5 and Year 6, and across the interaction of
critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.4.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of ACSI. The a
priori three factor structure of the ACSI (Avoidance, Problem Solving, Support
Seeking) will be demonstrated with acceptable reliability estimates of each factor for
the total sample, as well as for critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.4.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the ACSI with
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The a priori three factor structure (see Figure 5.4) of
the ACSI will be demonstrated by acceptable overall model fit using confirmatory
factor analysis.
1
1
1
1
Avoid
1
1 1
1
PSolv 1
1
Seek
1
Figure 5.4. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Adolescent Coping Strategies

Indicator. Note. Avoid=Avoidance, PSolv=Problem Solving, Seek=Support Seeking.
127
Hypothesis 1.4.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the ACSI with
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Latent factor correlation coefficients within and
between factors for the ACSI will be shown to be convergent among the positive
(Problem Solving, Seeking Support) coping strategies, and discriminant between the
positive and negative coping strategy factors (between Problem Solving and Support
Seeking with Avoidance).
Hypothesis 1.4.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of ACSI for Year, Gender,
and Year by Gender Groups. The a priori three factor structure of the ACSI will be
critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.5.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of pASBS. The a
priori three factor structure of the pASBS (Attachment, Support, and Rule
Acceptance) will be demonstrated with acceptable reliability estimates of each factor
for the total sample, as well as for critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.5.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the First and
Second-Order pASBS with Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The a priori first-order
three factor and second-order one factor structure (see Figure 5.5) of the pASBS will
be demonstrated by acceptable overall model fit using confirmatory factor analysis.
1
Attach 1
1
Belong Sup 1
1
Rule 1
Figure 5.5. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Pre-Adolescent School

Belonging Scale. Note. Belong=School Belonging, Attach=Attachment, Sup=Support,
Rule=Rule Acceptance.
128
Hypothesis 1.5.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the pASBS
between factors of the successful factor structure (from Hypotheses 1.5.2) will be
demonstrated as convergent.
Hypothesis 1.5.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of pASBS for Year, Gender,
and Year by Gender Groups. The a priori three factor structure of the pASBS will be
critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.6.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of CDI-10. The a
priori one factor structure of the CDI-10 will be demonstrated with acceptable
reliability estimates of each factor for the total sample, as well as for critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.6.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the CDI-10 with
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The a priori one factor structure (see Figure 5.6) of
the CDI-10 will be demonstrated by acceptable overall model fit using confirmatory
factor analysis.
1
Depression
1
Figure 5.6. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Child Depression Index 10

item scale.
129
Hypothesis 1.6.3: Factorial Invariance Testing of CDI-10 for Year, Gender,
and Year by Gender Groups. The a priori one factor structure of the
CDI-10 will be invariant for males and females, Year 5 and Year 6, and across the
interaction of these critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.7.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of BBPS. The a
priori two factor structure of the BBPS (Knowledge, Action) will be demonstrated
with acceptable reliability estimates of each factor for the total sample, as well as
across critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.7.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of the BBPS with
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The a priori two factor structure (see Figure 5.7) of
the BBPS will be demonstrated by acceptable overall model fit using confirmatory
factor analysis.
1 1
1
Knowledge 1
1 1
1
Action 1
Figure 5.7. Hypothesised Hierarchical Structure of the Beyond Bullying Program

Scale.
Hypothesis 1.7.3: Assessment of Criterion-Related Validity of the BBPS with
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Latent factor correlation coefficients between factors
will demonstrate that the two BBPS scales are convergent.
130
Hypothesis 1.7.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of BBPS for Year, Gender,
and Year by Gender Groups. The a priori two factor model of the BBPS will be
invariant for males and females, Year 5 and Year 6 students, and across the
interaction of these critical groups.
Research Question 1.8.1: Structural integrity of the T1 assessment battery.
When all of the instruments are combined into one assessment battery during T1 data
collection, which is given simultaneously to students, is the factorial structural
integrity of the individual instruments maintained when measured using confirmatory
factor analysis?
Research Question 1.8.2: Between network relations of the assessment
battery latent constructs at T1. When examining the Adolescent Peer Relation
Instrument scales, are their relations with other constructs logically and theoretically
consistent, so that similar constructs have stronger relations to each other than with
dissimilar ones at T1?
Research Question 1.9.1: Structural integrity of the T3 assessment battery.
When all of the instruments are combined into one assessment battery during T3 data
collection, which is given simultaneously to students, is the factorial structural
integrity of the individual instruments maintained when measured with confirmatory
factor analysis?
Research Question 1.9.2: Between network relations of the assessment
battery latent constructs at T3. When examining the Adolescent Peer Relation
Instrument scales, are their relations with other constructs logically and theoretically
consistent, so that similar constructs have stronger relations to each other than with
dissimilar ones at T3?
131
Rationale for the Hypotheses and Research Questions
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.1.1 1.1.4: Psychometric Testing of APRI-BT.
Students have the potential to bully and be bullied in different ways. While bullying
can take the form of either direct or indirect means (Bjrkqvist, Lagerspetz, &
Kaukiainen, 1992), a more detailed description of behaviours has been explained with
the establishment of three specific forms of bullying: Physical, Verbal, and Social
(Crick et al., 2001; Lowenstein, 1977). Many studies support the existence of these
three types of bullying and target experiences (e.g., Bjrkqvist et al., 1992; Crick et
al., 2001; Rigby & Slee, 1999; Salmivalli, Kaukiainen, & Lagerspetz, 2000), yet few
studies have attempted to demonstrate the specific three factor structure.
A study by Marsh, Parada, Craven, and Finger (2004) provides support for the
three bullying constructs for secondary students. Using the Adolescent Peer Relations
Instrument, Marsh et al. extracted three factors for bullying (reliabilities between .82
and .92) and three factors for being bullied (reliabilities ranging from .87 to .93). A
confirmatory factor analysis found that items loaded onto only those factors they were
designed to measure. In addition, two second-order factors Bullying and Target
were hypothesised to contain the three first-order factors of the types of bullying.
While Marsh et al. paved the way for a more rigorous scrutiny of instruments that
measure bullying in secondary schools, as far as the author is aware no study outside
of her own pilot research (Finger, Craven, & Dowson, 2006), has confirmed the three
factor structure for primary students. Within that pilot study, invariance was also
found between year levels.
Given the Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument (APRI-BT; Parada, 2000) has
sound psychometric properties for secondary and primary students, as evinced with
the pilot testing (Finger, Craven et al., 2006), it is hypothesised that this instrument,
132
when used with the current upper primary sample, will have similarly sound
psychometric properties. In addition, it is expected that the underlying factor structure
for upper primary students will hold the same meaning for students in Year 5 or Year
6, and between males and females. That is, it is hypothesised that the factor structure
will be invariant across year and gender, as well as year by gender groups.
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.2.1 1.2.4: Psychometric testing of APRI-PR.
Observational research by Atlas and Pepler (1998) shows that approximately 85% of
bullying incidents occur with the involvement of peers. Peers may not be directly
involved, but instead act in ways that reinforce the bullying behaviour of others.
Lagerspetz, Bjrkqvist, Bert, and King (1982) first discovered that researchers can
theoretically capture the behaviours of bystanders in terms of the roles they take
when bullying incidents occur. Salmivalli, Lagerspetz, Bjrkqvist, sterman, and
Kaukiainen (1996) further proposed these roles as: Reinforcer of the bully
(e.g., cheers the bully on or says something to support the bullying behaviour, but
does not directly bully others themselves); Assistant of the bully (e.g., directly helps
the bully in bullying another student); Defender of the victim (e.g., stands up for the
victim or goes to get help for the person being bullied); and Outsider (e.g., watches
without saying or doing anything, or ignores the situation completely).
The Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument was extended to incorporate
Participant Roles (Parada, 2000), based on the participant roles coined by Salmivalli
and colleagues (1996). The APRI-PR was developed on a sound theoretical base, to
measure distinct behavioural actions by students who observe bullying. While
Salmivalli et al. have demonstrated sound reliability estimates for these factors within
their Participant Roles questionnaire, a new instrument to measure participant roles
(APRI-PR) has been further supported to have clear psychometric properties (Parada,
133
2006) with four distinct constructs that define the student participant roles they were
designed to measure (Passive Reinforcer, Active Reinforcer, Advocate, and
Ignore/ Disregard). In addition, this instrument was found to be a highly reliable
measure, and invariant across critical groups with secondary students.
Given this instrument has not been tested for primary aged students, it is
important to replicate the four factor structure of the instrument for upper primary-
aged school children. It is expected that the APRI-PR will have similarly strong
psychometric properties for upper primary students as for the secondary cohort.
Hence, it is hypothesised that support will be demonstrated for the validity of the a
priori four factor structure, with acceptable reliability estimates. In addition, although
it is not clear whether the constructs hold the same meaning over critical groups for
upper primary students, it is expected that the constructs will be invariant across
critical groups, and as such it is hypothesised that the structural integrity for different
years, between gender, as well as by year and gender, will be similar across groups.
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.3.1 1.3.4: Psychometric testing of SDQI-E. The
role of self-concept in bullying is of notable importance. Self-concept cannot only
help to elucidate student involvement in bullying, but can also assist in clarifying the
roles of those students who witness bullying. Self-concept is now widely accepted as
multidimensional, even for preadolescent students who have mild-intellectual
disabilities (Marsh, Tracey, & Craven, 2006). While a number of different
self-concept questionnaires have been developed, the most widely used and validated
measures of self-concept, based on strong theoretical underpinnings are:
SDQI (child measure), SDQII (adolescent measure), and SDQIII (adult measure),
developed by Marsh (1988, 1990a, 1990b). In the present study student self-concept
was measured using the eight constructs of the SDQI. In addition, four important
134
constructs for understanding bullying were included from the SDQII (adolescent
measure): Opposite-Sex Peers, Same-Sex Peers, Honesty/Trustworthiness, and
Emotional Stability (Marsh et al., 2004). The SDQ instruments are based on a sound
theoretical model of self-concept (Marsh, Byrne, & Shavelson, 1988, Marsh &
Shavelson, 1985) and their psychometric properties have been rigorously evaluated.
While the SDQI has been shown to be one of the best available measures for primary
schools, the additional four scales have been shown to be significantly related to
bullying, as evidenced in a study with a secondary school sample by Marsh et al.,
(2004). Hence, it is hypothesised that the extended instrument will replicate similar
psychometric support as the SDQ-I scales with primary students, comprising the a
priori 12 factor structure. In addition, each scale will have acceptable reliability
estimates and the same structure will be invariant across year, gender, and across year
and gender.
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.4.1 1.4.4: Psychometric testing of ACSI. How
individuals cope with stress can contribute to the severity of consequences for those
students who are targeted. Coping can be: positive (e.g., problem solving, seeking
support) where an individual seeks to change their situation and help themselves; or
negative (e.g., avoidant) where an individual may use destructive behaviours to
escape a stressful situation (Berman, Kurtines, Silverman, & Serafini, 1996). The
ACSI is a measure specifically designed to investigate both positive (problem solving,
seeking support) and negative (avoidance) coping strategies.
The ACSI (Parada, 2006) is a 15 item adolescent measure originally
empirically derived from the adult 33 item version of the Coping Strategy Indicator
(CSI; Amirkhan, 1990). Both the ACSI and the CSI have previously been shown to
have strong psychometric properties and coherent theoretical underpinnings. For
135
example, Parada used confirmatory factor analysis and found that the three factors
(problem solving, seeking support, and avoidance) were all salient and distinctive
factors of coping strategies. These factors were also reliable measures invariant across
gender. The three factor ACSI structure has not previously been assessed with an
upper primary cohort, but it is anticipated that the a priori three factor structure will be
demonstrated considering its strong theoretical grounding, with each scale having
acceptable reliability estimates, and a factor structure that is invariant across year and
gender.
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.5.1 1.5.4: Psychometric testing of SBS. For
children, a sense of belonging to their school plays an important role in how they
experience the school academic sphere, their peer relations, and the problems they
face at school (Anderman, 2002; Snchez, Coln, & Esparza, 2005). While a
unidimensional measure of school belonging with satisfactory factor loadings and
reliability was developed by Anderman (2002) and Goodenow (1993), the creation of
a unidimensional measure does not allow for more in-depth investigation into the
nature of school belonging. Previous studies on school belonging have measured
belonging in terms of: (a) feelings of belonging to school; (b) connection with
teachers; (c) trust of the school rules; (d) perceived support received from the school;
and (e) how important education is (Anderman, 2002; Blum, 2005; Heinrich,
Brookmeyer, & Shahar, 2005). In the present study those issues particularly salient to
the school in general (a, c, and d) and which have previously been linked to
aggression at school (Jenkins, 1997) were analysed. These can also help to provide an
understanding of the school culture, crucial for predicting student involvement in
bullying (Yoneyama & Naito, 2003).
136
Hence, the SBS (Parada & Richards, 2002) was developed to assess feelings of
belonging (Attachment), trust of the school rules (Rule Acceptance), and perceived
support from the school (Support). Parada (2006) demonstrated this factor structure
for secondary students by confirmatory factor analysis and also found that the SBS
was invariant across secondary males and females. Given psychometric support for
the SBS has been demonstrated for secondary students (Parada & Richards, 2002;
Parada, 2006), it is hypothesised that the revised primary version (pASBS) will also
display strong psychometric properties for upper primary students.
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.6.1 1.6.4: Psychometric testing of CDI-10. One
of the unfortunate outcomes of involvement in bullying is its link to depression
(e.g., Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpela, Rantanen, & Rimpela, 2000; Rigby, 1998). Kovacs
(1992) developed the 27-item Child Depression Inventory (CDI), and subsequently a
10-item unidimensional measure (CDI-10) used as a screening tool for depression in
children. Although many authors have replicated the factor structure of the CDI
(e.g., Charman & Pervova, 2001), including in non-English languages (e.g., Davanzo
et al., 2004), rarely have authors attempted to replicate the unidimensional structure of
the shortened CDI-10. Parada (2006) administered the shortened CDI-10 to groups of
adolescent students and demonstrated the instrument had an acceptable
unidimensional factor structure, with good reliability estimates, and factor structure
invariant across gender. Although the unidimensional factor structure of the CDI-10
has not been replicated in a pre-adolescent cohort when group administered, it is
hypothesised that the outcomes will be similar to the adolescent study in that the
reliability of the CDI-10 scale will demonstrate acceptable estimates, the a priori
unidimensional factor structure will be supported, and this structure will be invariant
across year and gender.
137
Rationale for Hypotheses 1.7.1 1.7.4: Psychometric testing of BBPS. The
Beyond Bullying Program Scale was developed to measure student knowledge about
bullying, and the actions students take to prevent bullying. This was used as a
measure of fidelity regarding the implementation of BB. Items relate to specific facets
and topics of BB. This measure has not previously been tested, but it is expected that
it will tap student knowledge about bullying, and student action to prevent bullying,
as taught in BB. It is further expected that this measure will display strong
psychometric properties for upper primary students.
Rationale for Research Questions 1.8.1 - 1.9.2: Structural integrity and
between network relations of the T1 and T3 assessment battery. Above and beyond
the analysis of individual instruments are the checks for distinct variables. Parada
(2006) advises that for any analysis of relations between variables, it is essential that
all variables that are measured are able to show distinctiveness in scale in the context
of all those measured together, especially those which were administered with a single
battery of tests. Although the factor structures can be supported for individual
questionnaires, Marsh (1994a) suggests this may not be the same when questionnaires
are measured together. It is an aim of this investigation for this reason to ensure that
all instruments are made up of distinct factors, which measure exactly what they were
intended to measure, without measuring the constructs of other instruments. This will
be tested in the current investigation by: (1) conducting confirmatory factorial
analysis to ensure items load onto their corresponding scales and not onto scales of
other constructs; and (2) conducting convergent validity checks with correlational
analyses between variables such that relations among variables should not possess
multicollinearity (e.g., correlations over .90 are deemed multicollinear such that they
are not distinct enough; Hills, 2008) and factors within instruments should correlate
138
(or have appropriate discriminant validity) more with other factors within the same
instrument (as opposed to correlating with factors from other instruments). However,
one concern develops as a function of the first examination: item distinction becomes
more challenging, the more factors that are added into one analysis (Marsh, Craven,
Hinkley, & Debus, 2003). For example, some scales used within this study are very
similar. For this reason, a research question was posed to explore these issues.
Study 2: Impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program
The Problem
What effect will the newly developed Beyond Bullying Primary Schools
Program (BB) have on primary school student-ratings of: (a) the frequency of
bullying and target experiences; (b) the frequency of actions by students to prevent
bullying; (c) psychosocial outcomes of bullying, including self-concept, coping
strategies, school belonging, and depression; and (d) student knowledge about
bullying and their actions to prevent it?
Aims
Using advanced multilevel modeling analysis techniques, the aims for Study 2
are to test the impact of BB on:
1. reducing the overall rates of bullying behaviours and target experiences, as

well as the three forms of bullying and target experiences: physical, verbal,
and social;
2. reducing participants roles in reinforcing, assisting, and ignoring bullying
incidents, as well as increasing rates of advocacy for the target;
3. enhancing flow-on impacts on psychosocial outcomes that include
improving students self-concept, school belonging, , use of positive
coping strategies and reducing mental health issues (e.g., use of avoidance
strategies to cope); and
4. enhancing student knowledge of bullying, and increasing their actions to
prevent it.
139
Statement of Hypotheses and Research Questions
Hypothesis 2.1.1: Impact of BB on total bullying (APRI-BT). Students who
participated in the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program during the
experimental condition, will report significantly lower engagement in total bullying in
comparison to the control condition.
Hypothesis 2.1.2: Impact of BB on total bullying (APRI-BT) used by critical
groups. Male and female Year 5 and Year 6 students, who participated in the Beyond
Bullying Primary Schools Program during the experimental condition, will report
significantly lower engagement in total bullying in comparison to the control
condition.
bullying (APRI-BT). Male and female Year 5 and Year 6 students, who participated
in the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program during the experimental condition,
will report significantly lower engagement in physical, verbal, and social forms of
bullying in comparison to the control condition.
bullying (APRI-BT) used by critical groups. Students who participated in the Beyond
Bullying Primary Schools Program during the experimental condition will report
significantly lower engagement in physical, verbal, and social forms of bullying in
Hypothesis 2.2.1: Impact of BB on total target experiences (APRI-BT).
Students who participated in the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program during
the experimental condition will report significantly lower total target experiences in
140
Hypothesis 2.2.2: Impact of BB on total target experiences (APRI-BT)
experienced by critical groups. Male and female Year 5 and Year 6 students, who
experimental condition, will report significantly lower total target experiences in
target experiences (APRI-BT). Students who participated in the Beyond Bullying
Primary Schools Program during the experimental condition will report significantly
lower physical, verbal, and social forms of target experiences in comparison to the
control condition.
target experiences (APRI-BT) experienced by critical groups. Male and female Year
5 and Year 6 students, who participated in the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools
Program during the experimental condition, will report significantly lower physical,
verbal, and social forms of target experiences in comparison to the control condition.
Hypothesis 2.3.1: Impact of BB on participant roles (APRI-PR). Students
who participated in the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program during the
experimental condition will report significantly lower rates of actively reinforcing,
passively reinforcing, or ignoring the bullying, and significantly higher rates of
advocating for the target than the control condition.
Hypothesis 2.3.2: Impact of BB on participant roles (APRI-PR) used by
critical groups. Male and female Year 5 and Year 6 students, who participated in the
Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program during the experimental condition, will
report significantly lower rates of actively and passively reinforcing, or ignoring
141
bullying, and significantly higher rates of advocating for the target than the control
condition.
Hypothesis 2.4.1: Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E). Students who
experimental condition will report significantly higher self-concepts in relation to the
domains related to protecting students from being involved in bullying (i.e., peer
related self-concepts including peer, opposite-sex, and same-sex relations; and general
self-esteem) than the control condition.
Hypothesis 2.4.2: Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E) for critical
significantly higher self-concepts in relation to the domains related to protecting
students from being involved in bullying (i.e., peer related self-concepts including
peer, opposite-sex, and same-sex relations; and general self-esteem) than the control
condition.
Research Question 2.4.3: Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E). What
impact does the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program have on other facets of
self-concept (i.e., physical appearance; physical ability; parent relations; maths,
verbal, and general schooling; emotional stability; and honesty/trustworthiness) in
comparison to the baseline control group?
Research Question 2.4.4: Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E) for critical
groups. What impact does the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program have on
male and female Year 5 and Year 6 students self-concept (i.e., physical appearance;
142
physical ability; parent relations; maths, verbal, and general schooling; emotional
stability; and honesty/trustworthiness) in comparison to the baseline control group?
Hypothesis 2.5.1: Impact of BB on coping strategies (ACSI). Students who
experimental condition will report significantly lower rates of avoidance coping
strategies, and significantly higher rates of problem solving and support seeking
coping strategies than the control condition.
Hypothesis 2.5.2: Impact of BB on coping strategies (ACSI) of critical
significantly lower rates of avoidance coping strategies, and significantly higher rates
of problem solving and support seeking coping strategies than the control condition.
Hypothesis 2.6.1: Impact of BB on total school belonging (pASBS). Students
who participated in the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program during the
experimental condition will report significantly higher rates of total school belonging
in comparison to the control condition.
Hypothesis 2.6.2: Impact of BB on total school belonging (pASBS) of
critical groups. Male and female Year 5 and Year 6 students, who participated in the
Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program during the experimental condition, will
report significantly higher rates of total school belonging in comparison to the control
condition.
school belonging factors (pASBS). Students who participated in the Beyond Bullying
Primary Schools Program during the experimental condition will report significantly
143
higher rates of perceived school support, acceptance of school rules, and attachment
to the school in comparison to the control condition.
school belonging factors (pASBS) of critical groups. Male and female Year 5 and
Year 6 students, who participated in the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program
during the experimental condition, will report significantly higher rates of perceived
school support, acceptance of school rules, and attachment to the school in
Hypothesis 2.7.1: Impact of BB on depression (CDI-10). Students who
experimental condition will report significantly lower rates of depression in
Hypothesis 2.7.2: Impact of BB on depression (CDI-10) by critical groups.
Male and female Year 5 and Year 6 students, who participated in the Beyond Bullying
Primary Schools Program during the experimental condition, will report significantly
lower rates of depression in comparison to the control condition.
prevent bullying (BBPS). Students who participated in the Beyond Bullying Primary
Schools Program during the experimental condition will report significantly higher
levels of knowledge about bullying and significantly higher actions to prevent it in
prevent bullying (BBPS) for critical groups. Male and female Year 5 and Year 6
students, who participated in the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program during
144
the experimental condition, will report significantly higher levels of knowledge about
bullying and significantly higher actions to prevent it in comparison to the control
condition.
Rationale for the Hypotheses and Research Questions
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.1.1 to 2.2.4: Impact of BB on bullying
behaviours and target experiences (APRI-BT). While only marginal to moderate
reductions in bullying have been experienced using whole-school approaches
(e.g., Baldry & Farrington, 2004; Stevens, Van Oost, & De Bourdeaudhuij, 2000), the
whole-school approach is still considered the most effective means of decreasing
bullying and target experiences within schools (Salmivalli, 2001). The BB program
employs a whole-school approach, but for the purposes of this investigation was
delivered to only Year 5 and Year 6 students. In addition, specialised teacher training
is included in the program to increase the capacity of teachers to detect and manage
bullying behaviours, and also to enhance the self-concept of students by encouraging
and paying attention to prosocial behaviours. On the basis of the intervention being
grounded in an effective method for decreasing bullying and target experiences within
schools, and upon the successful BB secondary program, it is hypothesised that BB
will significantly reduce bullying and target experiences.
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.3.1 to 2.3.2, and Hypotheses 2.5.1 to 2.5.2:
Impact of BB on participant roles (APRI-PR) and coping strategies (ACSI). In an
effort to train students who witness bullying to manage peer reinforcement of bullying
behaviours, students involved in BB were given three important strategies to prevent
bullying: Stop, Help, and Tell (see Chapter 4). Students were further given positive
feedback by teachers for assisting in preventing bullying and acting in a prosocial
manner. Due to the specialised strategies within BB (i.e., Stop, Help, and Tell;
145
see Chapter 4) encouraging students to prevent bullying, it is expected that this would
be reflected in the participant roles and coping strategies used by students. Hence, it
was hypothesised that those behaviours which assist the bully (e.g., actively or
passively reinforcing the bullying; and ignoring the bullying; and the use of avoidance
coping strategies) would decrease as an outcome to BB, while those behaviours that
advocate for the person being bullied and positive coping strategies (i.e., problem
solving and support seeking) would increase.
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.4.1 to 2.4.2 and Research Questions 2.4.3 to
2.4.4: Impact of BB on self-concept (SDQI-E). The relation of engagement in
bullying, and self-concept is an important one. Specific factors of self-concept can be
enhanced with the use of established techniques of verbal performance feedback, such
as attributional feedback and internally focused feedback (Craven, 1999; Craven,
Marsh, & Burnett, 2003; Craven, Marsh, & Debus, 1991). These techniques were
introduced as part of BB to enhance the self-concept of students via positive feedback
for prosocial behaviours, providing corrective feedback for inappropriate behaviours,
and increasing the social skills of students in a developmentally supportive
environment. It was expected that peer relations would be enhanced as an outcome of
BB, and that a students general self-esteem would also increase overall. For this
reason positive impacts were expected for the peer related and general self-esteem
self-concept factors (i.e., peer relations, opposite-sex relations, same-sex relations
self-concept; and general self-esteem). For the additional self-concept factors, a
research question was posed to explore whether the intervention had any impact on
these non-target facets of self-concept.
146
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.6.1 and 2.6.2: Impact of BB on school belonging
(pASBS). By reducing bullying, it is possible that further school related outcomes
would improve. The Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program, the intervention
in which the program of the present investigation is based, has shown such relations
to occur as an outcome within secondary schools (Parada, 2006). For example, as an
outcome to reducing school bullying, students felt a closer connection to their school,
reflecting they felt safer and more supported at their school than the control group.
Given the BB primary program is based on the successful secondary program it was
hypothesised that primary school students would feel like they belong to their school
more after experiencing the intervention, in comparison to the control group.
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.7.1 and 2.7.2: Impact of BB on mental health
(CDI-10). The relations of bullying and mental health have important implications to
how bullying affects those who are involved in bullying. Although rarely investigated
in bullying research, it is expected that reductions in bullying will have secondary
effects related to improved student well-being and reduced levels of depression. It is
expected that BB will significantly decrease depression.
Rationale for Hypotheses 2.8.1 and 2.8.2: Impact of BB on Knowledge and
Action (BBPS). BB was specifically designed to educate students on issues of school
bullying, and provide them with strategies to effectively prevent bullying. Students
involved in BB were provided with curriculum activities that included education on
what bullying is, the myths about bullying, and the consequences involved. Students
were provided with three important strategies to prevent bullying: Stop, Help, and
Tell (see Chapter 4). Due to the educational component and strategies provided to
students, it was hypothesised that student knowledge about bullying, and the actions
they take to prevent it would increase as an outcome of BB.
147
Chapter Summary
The two interrelated studies of the present investigation were designed to
frame a thorough investigation of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program.
Study 1 was developed to ensure the questionnaires used within the study were valid
and reliable measures for the Year 5 and Year 6 cohorts. Study 2 consisted of a
thorough evaluation of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program in terms of
quantitative outcomes. The aims, hypotheses, research questions, and rationales were
presented in this chapter and relate to the analyses presented in Chapters 7 and 8
respectively. Both studies will capitalise upon advanced statistical tools (see Chapter
6) to conduct a thorough evaluation of a new anti-bullying intervention: Beyond
Bullying Primary Schools Program.
148
CHAPTER 6
Methodology
Many traditional longitudinal approaches, such as repeated-measures
MANOVA, are unable to easily handle longitudinal data that are
unbalanced, have missing data, or have uneven time points. Multilevel
modeling, on the other hand, is much more flexible and efficient. It will
use whatever data are available, and it can model change patterns even
for data that are collected at varying time points.
Luke (2004, p. 64)
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to detail the samples, measurements, procedures,
and statistical analyses for each of the two studies within this investigation (Study 1:
Psychometric Assessment of Measures; and Study 2: Impact of the Beyond Bullying
Primary Schools Program). The methodology described corresponds to the specific
aims, hypotheses, and research questions posed in Chapter 5. Firstly, an overview of
the recruitment process and research design is presented. This outlines the procedures
used to recruit school participation, how instruments were derived, and how the data
149
collection periods correspond to the two studies. Next, the methodology pertaining to
each of the two studies within this investigation is presented.
Overview of the Recruitment Process and Research Design
For each study, participants were drawn from primary schools affiliated with
Catholic Education, Diocese of Parramatta (CEO). This organisation was partner with
the Centre for Educational Research (University of Western Sydney) in gaining an
Australian Research Council linkage grant (Project ID: LP0667928).
Schools were invited to participate on a voluntary basis. Potential schools were
contacted by the researcher via letter, and interested schools were further contacted by
a representative from CEO. Following this, the researcher together with a
representative from CEO, met with the Principals of all interested schools to discuss
the research design and the Beyond Bullying Program (BB) in more detail. Schools
were informed about what involvement would entail, and the potential benefits for
their school. The school Principal made the final decision as to whether the school
would participate. In total, nine schools participated; eight in the two studies within
this investigation, and the ninth in a pilot study. In addition, approximately 82% of
Year 5 and 6 students from the involved schools had parental permission and
participated in the study.
Many of the instruments used to measure bullying and its psychological
correlates were derived from adolescent measures. Thus, it was necessary to conduct a
pilot study to ensure the instruments were suitable for primary aged students.
Approximately 200 Year 5 and Year 6 students from one of the nine schools involved,
participated in the pilot study. An assessment of the psychometric properties of the
instruments was conducted for this age group (e.g., Finger, Craven, & Dowson,
2006). The measures deemed appropriate were then used in Studies 1 and 2with
150
students from the remaining eight schools. Data was collected on five waves over two
years (see Figure 6.1): Wave 1 (W1), Wave 2 (W2), Wave 3 (W3), Wave 4 (W4), and
Wave 5 (W5). Study 1 consists of data collected during W1 (with the exception of the
Beyond Bullying Program Scale BBPS which was administered at W3), while
Study 2 is made up of data collected from W1 to W5.
Figure 6.1. Timeline of data collection across each study.
Study 1: Psychometric Assessment of Instrumentation
Literature on school bullying tends to rely strongly on questionnaire-based
methodological practices, largely due to the inherent difficulty of measuring
psychological concepts and behaviour (e.g., Rigby, 2004). With the use of surveys to
measure abstract constructs however, it becomes crucial for measures employed
within any study to undergo rigorous preliminary research analysis. Testing should
begin with a thorough investigation of psychometric properties, particularly if new
measures are used, or if the measures used have not previously been supported in the
literature as psychometrically sound for a particular group of participants (Hinkin,
1998), such as primary aged students. The three forms of psychometric testing which
are assessed within the current investigation include checks of: reliability, construct
validity, and invariance (Hinkin, 1998; Cortina, 1993; Jreskog & Srbom, 1996).
Participants
151
Student participants at W1 (NW1=894; nmale=438; nYear5=440) and T3
(NW3=850; nmale=435; nYear5=407) in Year 5 and Year 6 were recruited from eight
Catholic primary schools within the Central and Northern Western Sydney regions, as
well as the Central Northern Sydney region (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2008).
Students with parental permission participated in Study 1 at W1 and W3. Students
came from mixed socio-economic, cultural, and geographic regions (see Table 6.1).
While most students (42%) at W1 considered themselves to be Australian, many
students considered themselves to be both Australian and from another culture (38%),
with 20% of students responding that they were from a culture different to Australia.
At W3, 43% considered themselves to be Australian, 41% considered themselves to
be both Australian and from another culture, and 16% responded that they were from
a culture different to Australia.
Table 6.1
Participant Sample Sizes for Critical Groups and Culture
Total Gender Culture
Year Male Female Au Au + Non-Au
N % N % N % N % N % N %
W1 data
Year 5 440 49 223 25 217 24 197 22 177 20 66 7
Year 6 454 51 215 24 239 27 177 20 164 18 113 13
Total 894 438 49 456 51 374 42 341 38 179 20
W3 data
Year 5 407 48 212 25 195 23 182 21 150 18 75 9
Year 6 443 52 223 26 220 26 187 22 196 23 59 7
Total 850 435 51 415 49 369 43 346 41 134 16
Note. Total=Total Sample, Au=Consider themselves to be Australian,
Au +=Consider themselves to be Australian, as well as from another culture
(e.g., Greek-Australian), Non-Au=Do not consider themselves to be Australian
(e.g., Greek).
Instruments
The instruments used in the present investigation were adapted for upper
primary students from the Secondary Schools Beyond Bullying Project (Parada,
152
2006). This suite of instruments contains multidimensional measures that assess
prosocial and antisocial behaviours, mental health, wellbeing, and school
connectedness. The following instruments were administered to student participants.
Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument-Bully/Target (APRI-BT; Parada,
2000). This six factor 36-item instrument measures three types of behaviours used to
bully others (Bully Physical, Bully Verbal, and Bully Social) as well as three
experiences of being targeted (Target Physical, Target Verbal, and Target Social; see
Appendix 16 for an overview of each scale and its corresponding items). The items
corresponding to bullying others were administered with Part A (before recess), and
items corresponding to being bullied were administered with Part B (after recess).
When each item was placed in the questionnaire, items were not listed according to
their corresponding factors (e.g., physical bully items followed by verbal bully items),
but were randomly placed with other items from the APRI-B or APRI-T.
The APRI-BT was developed by Parada (2000) and designed for adolescent
students. It is the only existing instrument to have demonstrated strong psychometric
qualities in measuring the three forms of bullying, as well as a global measure of
bullying and target experiences for adolescent students (Marsh, Parada, Craven, &
Finger, 2004; Parada, 2006). Although four forms of bullying were identified in
Chapter 2 (including cyber bullying), for primary schools, the main forms during the
time of investigation (as per discussion with school professionals) were physical,
verbal, and social forms. Hence, only physical, verbal, and social forms were
assessed. Students were not allowed to have mobile phones at school, or to use certain
Internet sites at school or home (e.g., MySpace). At this time, cyber bullying was
scarce within primary schools, although as time progressed more stories of cyber
bullying were reported (e.g., deleting important work off computer). Although it is
153
possible that some students did use mobile phones and the Internet to harm others, the
use of this cyber bullying at the time of this investigation would have been minimal,
and would have led to largely erroneous research outcomes due to the potential lack
of variability in the sample. For this reason, only the three forms of bullying
(physical, verbal, and social) were investigated.
Students responded to how often they were involved in these behaviours along
a six-point Likert scale (1=Never to 6=Everyday). Responses closer to 1 represent
small amounts of bullying or being bullied, whereas scores closer to 6 represent
frequent amounts of bullying or being bullied. In addition this measure has been
shown to have excellent reliability estimates for adolescent students, with Cronbachs
alpha estimates ranging from .82 to .92, and .76 to .89 when assessed by gender
groups (Parada, 2006). Two key words within the instrument were modified to
accommodate upper primary school aged students. These were: (1) remark modified
to comment; and (2) ridiculed modified to embarrassed (refer to Appendix 16
for items used).
Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument-Participant Roles (APRI-PR; Parada,
2000). This instrument contains four scales (Advocate, Ignore, Passive Reinforcer,
and Active Reinforcer) which measure the role of the observer during incidents of
bullying (see Appendix 16 for an overview of each scale and its corresponding items).
The items corresponding to participant roles were administered with Part A (before
recess). When each item was placed in the questionnaire, items were not listed
according to their corresponding factors, but were randomly placed with other items
from the APRI-PR.
This scale contains 24 items and was developed by Parada (2000) as part of
the Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program. Students respond to whether they
154
have been involved in a series of behaviours along a six-point Likert scale (1=False to
6=True). A high score suggests high involvement in the corresponding role when
witnessing bullying (e.g., Advocate), whereas a low score relates to low involvement
in the corresponding role when bullying occurs.
Items from the APRI-PR were not modified for the primary school cohort as
all items were deemed to be age-appropriate during the pilot testing phase. This
instrument has been shown to have strong psychometric properties with an adolescent
sample in measuring four roles when students witness bullying (Parada, 2006). In
addition this measure has been shown to have excellent reliability estimates for
adolescent students, with Cronbachs alpha estimates ranging from .78 to .89, and .70
to .89 when assessed by gender groups (Parada, 2006).
Self-Description Questionnaire I-Extended (SDQI-E; Marsh, 1990b; Marsh,
Ellis, Parada, Richards, & Huebeck, 2005). This scale measures 12 self-concept
domains (Physical Ability, Physical Appearance, Opposite-Sex Relations, Same-Sex
Relations, Social Relations, Parental Relations, Honesty/Trustworthiness, Emotional
Stability, General Self, Math Ability, Verbal/English Ability, General Schooling
Ability; see Appendix 16 for overview of each scale and its corresponding items). The
items corresponding to self-concept were administered with Part A (before recess).
When each item was placed in the questionnaire, items were not listed according to
their corresponding factors, but were randomly placed with other items from the
SDQI-E.
The instrument utilised is based on two Self Description Questionnaires
(SDQs): the SDQI (Marsh, 1990c) and SDQII-S (Marsh, Ellis, Parada, Richards, &
Huebeck, 2005). SDQI is a multidimensional measure of self-concept for primary
aged students, while SDQII-S is used with adolescent students. The SDQII-S is made
155
up of 11 factors and contains four important factors related to bullying that the SDQI
does not contain (Opposite-Sex Relations, Same-Sex Relations,
Honesty/Trustworthiness, Emotional Stability). For this reason, the four SDQII-S
factors were added to the SDQI. The SDQII-S has been shown to have excellent
reliability estimates for adolescent students, with Cronbachs alpha estimates ranging
from .79 to .89, and .78 to .89 when assessed by gender groups (Parada, 2006).
In total, 102 items make up the SDQI-E. All SDQ measures have undergone
rigorous scrutinisation of their factor structure and have been shown to have strong
psychometric properties with either primary or secondary cohorts (Marsh, 1990b;
Marsh et al., 2005). The SDQI-E is made of a six-point Likert scale (1=False to
6=True) in order to ascertain how students perceive themselves on a variety of
domains. High scores represent high self-concept in the corresponding domain, and
low scores indicate low self-concept in the corresponding domain.
A total of 13 items from the SDQI were negatively worded and subsequently
deleted (see Appendix 16; Marsh, 1990b; Marsh et al., 2005). Fourteen items from the
SDQII-S factors were also negatively worded, but these were retained because many
items from the SDQII-S factors were negatively worded. Four items from the
SDQII-S also have gender specific codes, such that responses for males and females
would be used to create different factors (see Appendix 16; Opposite and Same-Sex
Peer Relations). The necessary transformations were made for these gender specific
items. In total, 84 items were used in the SDQI-E.
Adolescent Coping Strategies Index (ACSI; Parada, 2006). This instrument
(ACSI) was initially used to measure three coping strategies (Avoidance, Problem
Solving, Support Seeking). The ACSI was administered in Part B of the
questionnaire. When each item was placed in the questionnaire, items were not listed
156
according to their corresponding factors, but were randomly placed with other items
from the ACSI.
The ACSI is an adolescent measure made up of 15 items. The Adolescent
Coping Strategies Index was used in the Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools
Program (Parada, 2006), and originated as the 36 item Coping Strategy Indicator
(Amirkhan, 1990). The original ACSI has been shown to be a psychometrically sound
instrument for adolescent students (Parada, 2006), and in addition has been shown to
have excellent reliability estimates between .75 and .90 for each scale across the total
sample, and ranging from .75 to .89 across gender (Parada, 2006).
Responses are measured along a six-point Likert scale (1=Never to 6=Always)
and examine what students do when they are faced with a problem. High scores here
represent that students use those coping strategies a great deal, while low score
indicate they rarely use that coping strategy when they have a problem.
Pre-Adolescent School Belonging Scale (pASBS; Parada & Richards, 2002).
A students feeling of belonging to their school was measured in relation to: (1) how
attached they feel to their school; (2) how much support they perceive themselves to
receive from their school; and (3) how much they accept their schools rules
(Attachment, Support, and Rule Acceptance; see Appendix 16 for overview of each
scale and its corresponding items). The items corresponding to school belonging were
administered with Part A (before recess). When each item was placed in the
questionnaire, items were not listed according to their corresponding factors, but were
randomly placed with other items from the pASBS.
This instrument is a modified version of the School Belonging Scale, which
contains 12 items and was used with adolescent students (Parada & Richards, 2002).
The original measure has been shown to have excellent reliability estimates for
157
adolescent students, with Cronbachs alpha estimates ranging from .87 to .88, and .86
to .88 when assessed by gender groups (Parada, 2006).
Five of the 12 items were modified for the pre-adolescent cohort (refer to
Appendix 16 for items modified). The revised primary student version was measured
on a six-point Likert scale (1=Disagree to 6=Agree). High scores indicate that
students feel they are either well supported, feel attached, or accept the rules of their
school. Low scores in contrast suggest students do not feel supported, attached, or
accept the rules of their school.
Child Depression Inventory-10 (CDI-10; Kovacs, 1981). This one-factor 10
item measure was designed to assess depressive symptoms of primary students
(Kovacs, 1981; see Appendix 16 for overview of each scale and its corresponding
items). The items corresponding to depression were administered with Part B (after
recess). There was only one factor for this instrument, and so items were listed
together.
The Child Depression Inventory has previously been shown to have acceptable
psychometric properties with adolescent students (Parada, 2006). In addition this
measure has been shown to have excellent reliability estimates for adolescent
students, with a Cronbachs alpha estimate of .76 for the total sample, and with .74
and .76 respectively for male and female students (Parada, 2006). High scores are
suggestive of high depressive symptoms, with low scores indicating low depressive
symptoms.
Beyond Bullying Program Scale (BBPS; Finger, 2006). This new instrument
is a two factor scale with 12 items. It was designed to measure what preadolescent
students had learnt about bullying in class, and what they had done to prevent
bullying before and after the BB Program was implemented (Knowledge, Action; see
158
Appendix 16 for overview of each scale and its corresponding items). No
psychometric properties had been assessed previously. The items were administered
with Part B (after recess). When each item was placed in the questionnaire, items
were not listed according to their corresponding factors, but were randomly placed
with other items from the BBPS.
This instrument is measured on a six-point Likert scale (1=Disagree to
6=Agree). High scores on the Knowledge factor indicate that students have learnt a lot
about bullying in class, while low scores indicate students have not learnt much about
bullying in class. In relation to the Action factor, high scores suggest students have
tried to prevent bullying in their school, while low scores suggest students have not
tried to prevent bullying within their school. To date, no reliability estimation or
validity evaluation has been conducted because the BBPS is a new measure.
Research Design
Students completed the APRI-BT, APRI-PR, SDQI-E, ACSI, pASBS, and
CDI-10 questionnaires at the beginning of the school year (W1). For the BBPS, data
was collected at the beginning of the next school year (W3). W1 and W3 form part of
a greater set of data collection periods (ranging from W1 to W5) which were
conducted over two successive years (see Figure 6.1).
Due to the longitudinal research design of the project, student names were
added to both Part A and Part B of the surveys in order to track students accurately
over time. Following participation, student questionnaires were issued with codes to
ensure student confidentiality. Students with parental permission, but who were away
on the day of survey administration were given the opportunity to participate at a later
date (within two weeks of the initial testing). This follow-up of students who were
away was carried out by a trained researcher.
159
Procedure for Administering Questionnaire. During data collection with each
school, the survey was conducted in two parts: Part A and Part B. One and a half
hours was allocated for completion of both parts. The scheduled class time was
negotiated with the school and coincided with two 45 minute sessions, one before and
one after recess. Part A was administered before recess, and Part B was administered
after recess. A recess break was provided to ensure that primary aged students
received an adequate break midway through the administration of the surveys.
Although each part required 30 minutes to complete, 45 minutes was assigned for
each part to ensure students were settled, provided with adequate instruction, able to
ask questions, and respond to questions at a steady pace.
The surveys were conducted in classrooms. Students with parental permission
to participate in the study were informed about the purpose of the study by trained
researchers and were invited to participate, based on informed consent. The
questionnaire was read aloud to students and students were asked to follow along at
the same pace. The regular (or a casual) teacher was also present in the classroom to
assist when needed. Having the teacher available, working in classrooms, and reading
the questionnaire aloud was designed to create minimal disruption for students, and
overcome any reading or language difficulties some students may have. This also
ensured that students were able to complete the questionnaire within the given time
frame. Students were further provided with puzzles at the completion of Part B,
allowing students to have a break when finished. At the end of the administration
session, questionnaires were collected by the research assistant.
Ethical Considerations. Ethics approval was sought and approved by one
government and one independent organisation: (1) University of Western Sydney
Ethics Review Committee (Human Subjects); and (2) Catholic Education, Diocese of
160
Parramatta. In addition, each school Principal gave approval for the project to be
conducted in their school. Parental consent was actively sought, and only students
with signed parental permission were allowed to participate. All consent and
information sheets were printed with a standard UWS Complaint Clause, which
informed parents complaints regarding the project could be sent straight to the UWS
Human Ethics committee.
The study was not designed to exclude any potential participants, but to
include all those students in Year 5 and Year 6 who volunteered to participate. It was
made clear that no disadvantages, reprimands, or negative consequences would occur
as a result of not participating, or of withdrawing from the research. Furthermore,
consent was not subject to coercion or any inducement or influence that could impair
its voluntary character. In addition, because students were asked to include their name
on the questionnaire, students and schools were informed that students privacy
would be protected, that no-one other than the researcher would see their survey, and
that any publication of results would be at the school level only (such that no school,
class, or individuals would be or could be identified).
The Centre for Educational Research has data storage and maintenance
policies and procedures that are strictly adhered to within the centre. These
procedures were adhered to during the progression of the current study. Furthermore,
data was stored and managed according to the policies and regulations set by UWS
and by the NSW Government State Records Authority. The only persons having
access to individual surveys are appropriate research members of the centre who are
aware of their responsibilities pertaining to confidentiality issues. Research assistants
were required to undergo criminal record checks by the University of Western
Sydney, and Catholic Education, Diocese of Parramatta.
161
Statistical Analyses
Six instruments used within this investigation are existing measures, with
demonstrated sound psychometric properties for adolescent students. However, the
psychometric properties for these instruments and the instruments which were
modified, or newly developed, are unknown when used with upper primary students.
The primary purpose of Study 1 (see Chapter 5) is to test the psychometric properties
of instrumentation employed in the current sample.
In order to rigorously test the psychometric structure of the instruments,
Hinkin (1998) suggests an analysis of the validity and reliability of the factors. Hinkin
contends this should involve an assessment of construct validity, criterion-related
validity (such as convergent validity), and an estimate of internal consistency
reliability to determine whether the constructs measured, do measure what they were
intended to measure. In addition, Marsh (1993) and Byrne and Shavelson (1987)
advocate that the assessment of invariance across critical groups should be conducted
to ensure that the constructs measured hold the same meaning for each group tested
(e.g., males and females, and across age and/or year groups), particularly when group
differences are to be analysed in later investigations (e.g., differences between males
and females on the types of bullying they employ). These preliminary analyses help to
demonstrate that the questionnaires used to measure the constructs are valid and
reliable measures for those constructs, as well as for the critical groups under
examination (e.g., males and females, and Year 5 and Year 6). Although a detailed
description of each statistical technique is beyond the scope of the current
investigation, an overview of statistical procedures to be employed in Study 1 is
presented below.
162
Statistical Software. Data screening and Cronbachs alpha reliability estimates
were achieved using SPSS 15.0. Confirmatory factor analysis and invariance testing
were conducted with LISREL 8.72.
Data Screening. While the use of advanced statistical procedures is
advantageous in research aiming to decrease the likelihood of Type I and II errors
(among other benefits), it is important that rigorous data screening be conducted prior
to analysis. A number of preliminary analyses were conducted with W1 and W3 data
using SPSS 15.0. The first step involved data screening for misleading response
biases and systematic missing data, followed by dealing with missing values,
univariate, and multivariate outliers, and finally checking for assumptions of
normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity (Hills, 2008; Tabachnik & Fidell, 2007). In
relation to the patterned scores, each completed survey was checked by hand for
misleading response bias. That is, responses were checked for patterned and abnormal
data (including extreme scores) that were deemed to be unusual responses for those
corresponding items. Any survey that was considered to be patterned, unusual,
misleading, or to have extreme scores was deleted from the analysis, using listwise
deletion. In addition, any survey that contained evidence of non-random (systematic)
missing data was also treated with listwise deletion.
Deletion of cases due to misleading response bias and systematic missing data,
was followed by a missing values analysis for those data missing at random within the
894 cases. Missing data should be expected with large-scale studies; however, this
presents problems, especially when using advanced statistical packages (e.g., LISREL
8.72). Traditional methods of dealing with missing values such as pairwise deletion,
listwise deletion, and mean substitution (which is undertaken based on the assumption
that data is missing completely at random) are considered to be outdated methods
163
for a number of reasons including that data are rarely missing completely at random
(Brown, 1994; Gold & Bentler, 2000; Graham & Hofer, 2000). More recently, the
Expectation Maximization (EM) algorithm (Schafer & Graham, 2002) has been
deemed effective for dealing with missing values. EM estimation uses an iterative
process based on means, correlations, and covariances of available cases to input
missing values. This estimation method is practical and can deal with missing data
when it constitutes less than 5% of participant responses missing for any one item
(Schafer & Graham, 2002). The present investigation had < 1% (W1=.33%,
W3=.27%) missing values, with the greatest number of missing cases for any one
variable being approximately 2%. Thus, the EM algorithm was suitable for use within
the present investigation.
A further analysis of extreme scores was then conducted with an investigation
of univariate and multivariate outliers. These outliers pose potential threats to results,
particularly those involving statistical analyses using structural equation modeling
techniques (Tabachnik & Fidell, 2007). A process recommended by Tabachnik and
Fidell was used. Initially, raw scores were converted into standardised scores
(z-scores) to identify extreme scores. Raw scores were modified based on z-score
values. Raw scores which had a z-score value greater than 3.29 were modified.
Modification involved transforming the raw score to one unit more extreme than the
next most extreme score. In addition, multivariate outliers (observed with large
Mahalanobis distance score) were deleted using listwise deletion, as per
recommendations by Hills (2008). Multivariate outliers pose greater detrimental
effects than univariate outliers, and therefore must be deleted in a listwise fashion.
Following data screening for misleading response bias and systematic missing
data, dealing with missing values, univariate, and multivariate outliers, and finally
164
checking for assumptions of normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity, a total of
4.5% (n=42) of cases were deleted from the total sample at W1, and 4.2% (n=37)
deleted from the total sample at from W3. The analyses to be conducted in Study 1
thus were based on a total sample of 894 participants at W1, and 850 participants at
W3.
Reliability. Internal consistency reliability was estimated using Cronbachs
alpha as it is the most widely used and accepted measure of consistency within an
instrument (Cortina, 1993). The reliability estimate is an analysis of how well the
items within a factor consistently measure that factor which they were designed to
measure. Reliability estimates range from 0 to 1. The higher the estimate, the more
reliable a factor is considered to be. While it is not clear what value constitutes an
acceptable reliability, Hills (2008) recommends a Cronbachs alpha greater than .70 as
acceptable. Anastasi and Urbina (1997) suggest they should be above .70 or .80, while
Nunnelly (1978) maintains that alphas above .60 are acceptable in exploratory
research. Considering that this investigation is of an exploratory kind with instruments
not yet tested with pre-adolescent students, those reliability estimates greater than .90
will be considered excellent, above .80 good, above .70 acceptable, and above .60
reasonable but needing to be interpreted with caution. Cronbachs alpha was tested
with the total sample as well as between critical groups (e.g., Year 5 data) prior to the
confirmation and validation of the a priori factor structure for the upper primary
cohort. SPSS 15.0 was used to conduct reliability measures for factors confirmed for
each instrument used.
Assessment of Construct and Convergent Validity (Factor Structure).
Construct validity was measured using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; Palmieri,
Weathers, Difede, & King, 2007). Although exploratory factor analysis can help to
165
uncover underlying factors, CFA is far more rigorous when examining a priori factor
structures. CFAs of the instruments were conducted with LISREL 8.72 (Jreskog &
Srbom, 1996) using maximum likelihood estimation (Byrne, 1998) and listwise
deletion. Simultaneously, convergent validity (a measure of criterion-related validity)
can be statistically measured with the scrutinisation of correlation matrices, to identify
how specific questionnaire items relate to each other within a scale they were
designed to measure, as well as in their relation to other scales. In addition, correlation
matrices show how certain scales relate to other scales that they are expected to be
similar with, and dissimilar to those they are not expected to relate to.
For each instrument used within the present investigation, an a priori
theoretical model was postulated, in order to test particular psychological constructs
of interest (see Chapter 5). Each instrument was assessed with a CFA to identify
whether the questionnaire items (observed indicators) used within that instrument
were accurate representations of the (unobserved) psychological constructs (latent
factors; e.g., bullying, depression) analysed. For example, Figure 6.2 is an illustration
of the factor structure of the APRI-B/T. This shows that there were 36 observed
indicators (shown in rectangles), which were used to measure six latent factors (as
pictured in ellipses, e.g., Physical Bullying, Verbal Bullying). Marsh, Byrne, and
Yeung (1999) advise that psychometrically sound factors within an a priori model
should at minimum consist of three measurement items. Within this investigation,
four to six measurement items were used with each factor pertaining to the
instruments used with pre-adolescent students.
166
x1
x2
x3
PHYSICAL x4
x5
x6
x7
x8
x9
VERBAL x10
x11
x12
x13
x14
x15
SOCIAL x16
x17
x18
x19
x20
x21
PHYSICAL x22
x23
x24
x25
x26
x27
VERBAL x28
x29
x30
x31
x32
x33
SOCIAL x34
x35
x36
Figure 6.2. Hypothesised First-Order Factor Structure of the Adolescent Peer
Relations Instrument-Bully/Target.
When conducting a CFA, the researcher is able to select which observed
indicators represent which latent factors (Fleishman & Benson, 1987;
e.g., questionnaire items x1 to x6 load onto the latent factor of Physical Bullying).
The CFA also takes into account the measurement error of each observed indicator
(represented by the small round circles in Figure 6.2). For the CFA, a very restrictive
a priori model was tested in which each variable for each instrument was constrained
to load on only the one factor that it was intended to measure, while all other loadings
were forced to be zero. Goodness of fit (Marsh, Balla, & Hau, 1996; Marsh, Balla, &
167
McDonald, 1988) were tested using the non-normed fit index (NNFI), the
comparative fit index (CFI), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA),
and chi-square (2).
It is possible to create a better fitting model based on only a selection of fit
indices, because each is measured differently. Therefore, as a minimum, it is
necessary to report goodness of fit estimates together. For instance, the CFI favours
more complex models comparing the hypothesised model to a null model, and could
be improved with the addition of parameter estimates (Parada, 2006). However, NNFI
and RMSEA do not favour more complex models, causing penalties instead for
additional parameter estimates. It is only when all goodness of fit indices are included
that they represent a balanced observation of how well the model fits the data. These
test how well the observed indicators reflect the latent factors being tested (e.g., that
the questionnaire items measure what they were intended to measure, and that these
items do not measure other latent factors which they were not intended to measure),
and how well these latent factors and indicators together measure the psychological
construct (e.g., bullying) it was designed to measure.
The NNFI and CFI should vary along a 0-to-1 continuum to explain the
percentage of covariance that can be elucidated among the variables, showing
acceptable fit when greater than .90, and excellent fit when greater than .95 (Bentler,
1990; Browne & Cudeck, 1993; Marsh, Balla et al., 1996). The RMSEA should be
less than .05 to indicate close fit, and less than .08 to reflect reasonable fit (Marsh,
Balla et al., 1996). Although the chi-square (2) statistic is said to assist in
determining model fit, models tend to be rejected when large sample sizes are used
(Bentler & Bonett, 1980). Given the total sample sizes within this investigation were
large (i.e. NW1=894, NW3=850), the chi-square was not used as an assessment of model
168
fit, but was provided. In addition, parameter estimates and correlations between scales
complement goodness of fit indices to confirm strong independent factor structures.
Hills (2008) suggests that factor loadings are considered acceptable when above .30.
Moreover, when two models are tested together for a particular factor structure,
Holmes-Smith (2008) suggests that the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the
Consistent Akaike Information Criterion (CAIC) can assist in determining which
model is more appropriate. That is, the model with a smaller AIC and CAIC is
considered to be the more suitable model, as it is the most parsimonious fitting model.
These were included when a comparison of two models from the same instrument
were made. Marsh (2007) suggests goodness of fit values should not be used literally,
but instead used as guidelines when evaluating a model as acceptable or not. Marsh
further stipulates that a researchers professional consideration should be used when
accepting or rejecting such models.
Additionally, parameter estimates and correlations (criterion-related validity)
between variables complement goodness of fit indices to confirm strong independent
factor structures. This was assessed among the correlations between scales from the
CFA and was necessary to determine whether the factors within an instrument are
clearly differentiated from other factors. For example, the curved line from one latent
factor to another in Figure 6.2 represents the correlation between these factors. These
factors should be distinct enough to ensure that they represent different factors
(e.g., physical, verbal, and social types of bullying) within the same psychological
construct (e.g., bullying or being targeted). Convergent validity can be observed with
moderate correlations between factors that measure similar but distinct constructs. For
example, the correlations between physical, verbal, and social bullying were expected
to be high, as they measure similar constructs (bullying), yet distinct enough that they
169
measure different types of the same underlying construct. Discriminant validity works
in the same way but was determined by low correlations between factors. That is,
factors within a scale were expected to be discriminant (lowly correlated) with those
they were dissimilar to.
A CFA of each student instrument was first scrutinised separately. In addition,
since all instruments were given to students as a battery, a CFA with all instruments
together was also conducted across each time wave. This was an important step to
ensure that when the instruments were located together within a battery at each time
point, the separate instruments still: (a) upheld their psychometric structure;
(b) represented valid measures of the hypothesised constructs; and (c) were not
impacted by suppression or multicollinearity effects.
Factorial invariance across and between critical groups (Year by Gender).
Rigorous psychometric testing does not stop at an acceptable model fit from the CFA,
nor with satisfactory reliability estimates. Further assessment should be conducted if
group comparisons are to be carried out in later analyses. Factorial invariance should
be carried out to compare how well the specified CFA model fits to the data of each
group (e.g., males, females); that is, do the questionnaire items mean the same thing
for all groups within a given sample (Byrne & Shavelson, 1987; Marsh, 1993)? This
assesses differential item functioning over critical groups. The main critical groups
within this investigation are Year (Year 5 and Year 6), and gender (male and female).
For each instrument used, invariance testing was conducted using confirmatory factor
analysis methods. Recent advances in invariance testing by Marsh (1993, 1994b)
suggest that invariance testing should accommodate testing between critical groups
(e.g., males vs. females), and should also incorporate tests of the interaction between
those critical groups (e.g., male Year 5 vs. female Year 5 vs. male Year 6 vs. female
170
Year 6), particularly if interactions and main effects of these groups will be analysed
in later investigations (e.g., analyses using ANOVA, MIMIC). It is not valid to
measure the differences between groups (including interactions between groups) if the
groups hold different meanings for the constructs measured. The invariance testing
performed accounted for the main critical groups (male vs. female, and Year 5 vs.
Year 6), as well as the interactions between those critical groups (e.g., male Year 5,
female Year 5, male Year 6, female Year 6).
Factorial invariance across groups was conducted using LISREL 8.72. Firstly,
each critical group (e.g., Year 5), as well as the interaction between each critical
group (e.g., male Year 5) should show acceptable fits to the a priori CFA model (that
is, an acceptable CFA for each group is necessary; Marsh, 1993). Following this,
comparisons between critical groups were made based on five models of testing for a
first-order CFA model, and eight models of testing for a second-order CFA model.
These stages are based on logical order (Byrne, 1998). As models progress, restraints
are progressively applied to the CFA model until all parameters are restricted to be
equal across groups (e.g., no free parameters; Byrne, 1998). In a first-order CFA
model, the first of five models consists of no parameter constraints, such that all
parameter estimates are held free across groups (e.g., factor loadings, factor
correlations, and uniqueness are all free between Years 5 and 6). The second model
consists of holding factor loadings invariant. The third model holds factor loadings
and factor correlations invariant, the fourth holds factor loadings and uniquenesses
invariant, while the final model holds all parameters invariant (factor loadings, factor
correlations, and uniqueness).
Assessment of factorial invariance meets satisfactory requirements when
minimal to no change is evident in terms of the goodness of fit indices (NNFI, CFI)
171
between the first free model, and the later progressive models of invariance (Byrne,
1998; Cheung & Rensvold, 2002). Cheung and Rensvold (2002) advise that a
difference between the CFI of each progressive model (from the first to the last)
should not exceed .01. However, Byrne (1998) suggests that with increasing
restriction, uniqueness and factor and variainces/covariances in particular are overly
restrictive, and at minimum, factor loadings (as well as beta loadings within a second-
order model) are restrictive enough to satisfy factorial invariance across groups.
Summary of Study 1 Methodology
Study 1 consists of a rigorous assessment of the psychometric properties of
questionnaires administered to Year 5 and Year 6 student participants (NW1=894;
NW3=850) from eight Central/Northern Western and Central Northern Sydney regional
Catholic schools. This was conducted in February year 1 (W1) with the exception of
BBPS, which was administered in February year 2 (W3). The procedures and ethical
considerations of this study have been outlined in this chapter.
Prior to psychometric testing, thorough data screening was conducted.
Psychometric analysis consisted of an evaluation of validity, reliability, and
invariance with the use of confirmatory factor analysis, Cronbachs alpha reliability
estimates, and factorial invariance.
Study 2: Impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program
The most important component to any program (including anti-bullying
interventions), is a comprehensive evaluation of its effect. This study was primarily
designed to evaluate the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program. This was
achieved using state-of-the-art statistical analyses of multilevel modeling which are
able to show school, individual, and time effects relating to the outcomes of the
intervention.
172
Participants
Students from six of the eight schools involved in Study 1, took part in Study
2. All original eight schools were provided with the BB program. However, feedback
from teachers to assess how well BB was implemented within schools, midway
through implementation of the program, revealed that BB was inconsistently
implemented within two of those schools. For the first omitted school, when asked
about the BB behaviour management and self-concept enhancement strategies they
had been using, it became clear that teachers were not consistently using the BB
strategies with students, or not using them at all. This was the first sign that BB was
not correctly implemented. In addition, all schools were encouraged to change the
program to meet the needs of their students, which many of them did (see Chapter 4).
When asked about their thoughts on how BB could be improved for their students,
teachers from the first omitted school suggested a myriad of ideas which would make
the program stronger for their upper primary student cohort (e.g., they named specific
stories that would work better with their students); yet, when asked about what
changes they had made to the program to accommodate for their students, it became
apparent that they had not implemented any changes. Due to the lack and inconsistent
use of the BB behavioural and self-concept enhancing strategies by teachers, and the
failure of teachers to create a stronger program specific to their students (in the face of
having some important ideas which would have been beneficial for their students), the
first omitted school was deemed to have implemented BB inadequately within their
school. Due to insufficient implementation of BB in the school, the first omitted
school was not included in the analyses.
173
For the second omitted school, teacher feedback was positive midway through
the program. However, towards the end of the program, the school executive who was
responsible for managing the program within their school, was absent from the school
for over three months. Yet, the three months at the conclusion of the program (from
the first post-test at W4) to the second post-testing phase (at W5) is crucial for
maintaining positive impacts. Preliminary evidence for the trend in bullying within
that school showed that there was a decrease in bullying from W3 to W4; however, a
stark increase in bullying thereafter, due to the absence of the school executive
responsible for the program. In addition, the researchers were not informed that the
school executive responsible for the program was absent from the school for over
three months. For this reason, while BB was initially correctly implemented, due to
the absence of the school executive (who was responsible for the program) for over
three months at the conclusion of the program, the impacts, consequences, and student
behaviour were not attended to consistently after the program finished. That is, the
implementation of BB was not adequately maintained following the program. Hence,
the second school was omitted from the analyses.
For those six schools who were included, participants were from similarly
mixed socio-economic, racial, and cultural backgrounds as in Study 1. Students from
each school were involved in Study 2 on five occasions (W1, W2, W3, W4, and W5;
refer to Figure 6.1) over a period of two years. Sample sizes varied with each data
collection time, with sample sizes of participants taking part in W1 to W5 shown in
Table 6.2.
174
Table 6.2
Student Participant Sample Sizes for Critical Groups and Culture
Total Gender Culture
Year Male Female Au Au + Non-Au
N % N % N % N % N % N %
W1 data
Year 5 336 49 175 25 161 23 152 22 137 20 47 7
Year 6 354 51 176 26 178 26 139 20 125 18 90 13
Total 690 351 51 339 49 291 42 262 38 137 20
W2 data
Year 5 335 50 176 26 159 24 137 20 150 22 48 7
Year 6 339 50 174 26 165 24 119 17 146 21 74 11
Total 674 350 52 324 48 256 37 296 43 122 18
W3 data
Year 5 329 48 172 25 157 23 144 21 124 18 61 9
Year 6 352 52 184 27 168 25 148 22 157 23 47 7
Total 681 356 52 325 48 292 43 281 41 109 16
W4 data
Year 5 327 48 171 25 156 23 132 19 125 18 70 10
Year 6 358 52 186 27 172 25 121 18 156 23 81 12
Total 685 357 52 328 48 253 37 281 41 151 21
W5 data
Year 5 332 49 170 25 162 24 124 18 132 19 76 11
Year 6 341 51 176 26 165 25 125 19 151 22 65 10
Total 673 346 51 327 49 249 37 283 42 141 21
TOTAL 3403 1760 52 1643 48 1341 39 1403 41 659 20
Note. Total=Total Sample, Au=Consider themselves to be Australian,
Au +=Consider themselves to be Australian, as well as from another culture
(e.g., Greek-Australian), Non-Au=Do not consider themselves to be Australian
(e.g., Greek).
The study was carried out over two years. Thus, students who were in Year 5
during year 1 (Baseline condition), were in Year 6 in year 2 (Experimental condition).
Students who were in Year 6 during the Baseline condition no longer took part in the
Experimental condition (due to their entry into secondary school). A new cohort of
Year 5 students participated in the Experimental condition. These students were not
involved in the Baseline condition as they were in Year 4 at the time. This is
represented pictorially in Figure 6.3, the shaded areas showing participation, and the
non-shaded areas showing when students did not participate.
175
W3 W5: 2007
W1 W2: 2006 (Experimental
(Baseline condition) condition)
Year 4 Year 5
Year 5 Year 6
Year 6 Year 7
Figure 6.3. Student Cohorts Involved in Study 2.
Instruments
The same battery of instruments as used in Study 1, were used in Study 2.
Refer to Study 1 for an overview of the student instruments used.
Research Design
Student questionnaires were completed on five occasions over the Baseline
and Experimental conditions. Students took part during the beginning (W1: February)
and middle (W2: August) of the school year during the Baseline condition, and during
the beginning (W3: February), middle (W4: August), and end of the school year (W5:
November) in the Experimental condition.
Study 1 highlights the procedures used to administer the questionnaire to
students on each occasion, and provides an outline of the ethical considerations that
were taken into account as part of this project.
The Control group. The control group for Hypotheses and Research Questions
2.1.1-2.7.2 consists of the baseline condition collected during W1 and W2 from
students in the same schools involved in the experimental condition. This represents a
time when no confounding changes were made to participating schools (no
176
intervention), such that student behaviour was managed under the usual school
policies. Experimental condition data was collected before and after the BB program,
from W3 to W5.
For Hypotheses 2.8.1 and 2.8.2, data were collected from W3 to W5 only. The
control group therefore consisted of the pre-test data (W3), and the experimental
condition consisted of the two post-test data sets (W4 and W5).
Statistical Analyses
Statistical Software. Data screening was achieved using SPSS 15.0, while
multilevel modeling was conducted with MLwiN (v2.02).
Data Screening. Refer to Study 1 for an overview of the data screening
conducted at W1. The same procedure was also conducted separately with W2, W4,
and W5 data. The imputation of missing data (EM) was conducted for each wave as
the percentage of missing data for each wave was less than 5% (W2=.37%;W4=.31%;
and W5=.29%). Following data screening for misleading response bias and systematic
missing data, dealing with missing values, univariate, and multivariate outliers, and
finally checking for assumptions of normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity, 4.2%
(n=39) of cases were deleted from the total sample at W2, 4.9% (n=44) of cases were
deleted from the total sample at W4, and 4.3% (n=37) deleted from the total sample at
W5 (refer to Study 1 for W1 and W3 deleted cases). The analyses conducted in Study
2 thus were based on a total sample of 884 participants at W2, 860 participants at W4,
and 833 participants at W5.
Multilevel modeling. Individuals do not live in a vacuum. They belong to
families, work with others, belong to social and recreational groups, and are part of
larger communities (Seaton, 2008, p. 119). Multilevel analyses have typically been
177
ignored in school bullying research. However, schools by their very nature contain
hierarchical levels, which cannot simply be ignored. For example, Rowe (2005)
suggests that students within a given school are, on average, more similar to each
other, than they are to students outside their school. Students are nested within
classrooms, and further nested within schools. Accounting for the hierarchical
structure of students within schools, is necessary for any school bullying research.
Moreover, for studies that are designed to evaluate interventions, multilevel modeling
presents a powerful method for assessing impact (OConnell & McCoach, 2004). This
is because they allow for growth curve modeling techniques that can account for
treatment over time. Parada (2006) states that this is particularly important for
population-based intervention research, which examines school bullying issues.
Multilevel modeling is a type of regression model that accounts for the
hierarchical structure within data. It consists of two components: the fixed effects, and
the random effects; which can be fixed or randomised depending on the purpose of
the investigation. Multilevel modeling procedures produce parameter estimates and
standard errors that are used to assess variance explained. It is a model-building
process that often begins with an analysis of the simple null-model, known as the
variance components model (Rasbash, Browne, Healy, Cameron, & Charlton, 2005).
The variance components model is used to determine the amount of variance
that can be attributed to each hierarchical level (e.g., student level, school level). The
amount of variance attributed to each level of the outcome variable is assessed with
the Wald statistic: z=(estimate/standard error); which when greater than 1.96
represents significance at the .05 level (Goldstein, 1995). The percentage of variance
explained by each level can then be calculated by: (1) adding the parameters of each
level; (2) then dividing the parameter for each level by the total score of parameters;
178
followed by (3) multiplying by 100 (see Chapter 8). Subsequent to an examination of
the variance components model, the model can then be extended with one or more
explanatory variables; and furthermore, this second model can be extended again with
additional explanatory variables. The Wald statistic is again used in the second and
subsequent models to assess whether the explanatory variables (e.g., treatment
condition), statistically significantly predict the outcome variable (e.g., engagement in
bullying behaviours).
Data preparation for multilevel modeling. Two transformations were made to
the data prior to conducting the multilevel analyses: (1) weights and
(2) standardisation. The first transformation consisted of weighting the scale scores.
This involved proportionally weighting a scale score, based on the factor-score
regression coefficients of each item obtained from a one-factor congeneric model
(Rowe, 2005). Furthermore, this enables the resultant factors to be used as continuous
variables (Simpson, 2007). The second transformation involved standardising each
variable (z-score) to have a mean of zero, and standard deviation of one, across the
total sample (see Aiken & West, 1991; Marsh & Rowe, 1996). The standardisation
was conducted in relation to the mean and standard deviation across the averages of
W1 and W2 data. That is, each variable was standardised by the mean and standard
deviation of each variable at C1 (mean and standard deviation of W1 and W2
together). This method of standardisations followed recommendations by Marsh and
Rowe (1996), to ensure that changes over time from C1 to C2 for the growth curve
modeling were not lost.
Orthogonal contrasts for Hypotheses and Research Questions 2.1.1-2.7.2.
The current study consisted of three levels: time within student within school.
Orthogonal contrasts were structured around the baseline versus control conditions.
179
Three models were tested for each outcome: (1) variance components (null) model;
(2) BB intervention effects model; and (3) year and gender interaction effects model.
The variance components model, Model 1 was used to determine how much of the
total variance was portioned into variance components associated with school,
student, and time. The BB intervention effects model (Model 2) contained three new
terms (orthogonal contrasts): C1vC2; T1vT2T3; and C1vC2.T1vT2T3. Together,
these terms assessed the direct impact of BB on outcome variables. The first term was
a main effect of condition (Condition 1 versus Condition 2: C1vC2), and represented
a comparison between the baseline-control condition (C1) and the experimental
condition (C2) as outlined in Figure 6.4. This figure shows that the average score of
the combined baseline control data (W1 and W2) constitute C1, while the average
score of the combined experimental condition data (W3, W4, and W5) constitute C2.
C1 was assigned an orthogonal contrast of -1, and C2 was assigned an orthogonal
contrast of +1. The second term was a main effect over time (Time 1 versus the
average across Time 2 and Time 3: T1vT2T3), and represents a comparison between
the average score across conditions at the beginning of the school year (T1: W1 and
W3), to the average score across condition during the middle and end of the school
year (T2 and T3: W2, W4, and W5). That is, the average score of the combined T1
scores from the control and experimental condition were compared to the average
score of the combined T2 and T3 data. T1 at C1 was assigned an orthogonal contrast
of -2, and T2 at C1 was assigned an orthogonal contrast of +2, while T1 at C2 was
assigned an orthogonal contrast of -2, and T2 and T3 at C2 were each assigned
orthogonal contrasts of +1. The third term was an interaction of the first and second
main effects (C1vC2.T1vT2T3) which were used to test whether condition varied as a
function of time. This interaction directly tested the impact of BB.
180
The final model (Model 3) contained the same variables as Model 2 with the
addition of year and gender terms. Year and gender interactions with the intervention
effects were used to discern any further impacts of year and gender, over and above
the original impacts found for Model 2. Dummy contrast codes were assigned to year
and gender cohorts. Year 5 was assigned -1, while Year 6 was assigned +1. Females
were assigned -1, and males were assigned +1. Twelve additional terms were added to
Model 3: (1) Year (Year); (2) Gender (Gender); (3) Year by Gender (Year.Gender);
(4) Year by condition (Year.C1vC2); (5) Gender by condition (Gender.C1vC2);
(6) Year and Gender by condition (Year.Gender.C1vC2); (7) Year by time
(Year.T1vT2T3); (8) Gender by time (Gender.T1vT2T3); (9) Year and Gender by
time (Year.Gender.T1vT2T3); (10) Year by condition by time
(Year.C1vC2.T1vT2T3); (11) Gender by condition by time
(Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3); and (12) Year and Gender by condition by time
(Year.Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3).
While the results for the main effect of condition, and the main effect of time
will be presented with Model 2 of the Study 2 results (see Chapter 8), the interaction
181
of gender, year, and gender by year by time, and the interaction of gender, year, and
gender by year by condition, will only be presented in the tables within Chapter 8.
That is, the main effects of condition and time with year and gender cohorts will be
presented, but will not be discussed. The details that are most important for examining
the impact of BB with year, gender, and year by gender groups, are the interactions of
year, gender, and year by gender by the interaction of condition by time. It is these
interactions of condition by time with year and gender cohorts that help to answer the
Hypotheses and Research Questions posed. The main effects of condition and time
will be presented within Model 2 analyses only.
Orthogonal contrasts for Hypotheses 2.8.1-2.8.2. The final outcome measure
(BBPS: Knowledge and Action) was not administered during C1. That is, data was
collected during C2 (W3 to W5). For this reason alternative analyses were conducted
for these Hypotheses only. Three models were tested for each outcome. These were:
(1) variance components (null) model; (2) BB intervention effects model; and
(3) year and gender interaction effects model.
The variance components model, Model 1 was used to determine how much of
the total variance was portioned into variance components associated with school,
student, and time. The BB intervention effects model (Model 2) contained two new
terms (orthogonal contrasts): T1vT2T3; and T2vT3. Together, these terms assessed
the direct impact of BB on outcome variables. The first term was a main effect of
Time A (Time 1 versus the average across Time 2 and Time 3: T1vT2T3), and
represents a comparison of the pre-test at beginning of the school year (T1: W3), to
the average across the two post-tests at middle and end of the school year (T2 and T3:
W4, and W5). T1 was assigned an orthogonal contrast of -2, and T2 and T3 were each
assigned orthogonal contrasts of +1. The second term was a main effect of Time B
182
(Time 2 versus Time 3: T2vT3), and represents a comparison of the first post-test
(T2) to the second post-test (T3), to identify if scores changed or were maintained
between the first and second post-test. T1 was assigned an orthogonal contrast of 0,
T2 was assigned an orthogonal contrast of -1, and T3 was assigned an orthogonal
contrast of +1.
Summary of Study 2 Methodology
Study 2 is the core feature of this investigation, taking a comprehensive
approach to evaluating the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program. Evaluations in
this study focus on school, individual, and time effects upon behavioural and
psychological outcomes. Students completed a questionnaire on five occasions
(W1-W5): two administered during the Baseline condition, and three administered
during the Experimental condition. Following comprehensive data screening of each
wave of date, multilevel modeling was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of BB.
Chapter Summary
This chapter was designed to outline the methodology used in Studies 1 and 2.
Included were the: (a) methods of recruitment of student participation; (b) research
design, which includes data collected on five occasions; (c) instrumentation used to
measure bullying and related psychosocial constructs; and the (d) statistical analysis
and data screening procedures used within each study. Together, the assessment of
psychometric properties, and a thorough evaluation of the BB Program contribute to a
more comprehensive understanding of how to prevent bullying effectively in primary
schools. The next chapter is the first results chapter and was designed to assess the
reliability and validity of each instrument used with the primary student sample at W1
and W3.
183
CHAPTER 7
Study 1 Results: Psychometric Assessment of Instrumentation
Program evaluators and prevention scientists have a critical and
pressing role to provide a clear and accurate information to inform
public policy on bullying prevention in schools. To this end, we
encourage evaluators and researchers to... report evidence of reliability
and validity for instruments used.
Ryan and Smith (2009)
Introduction
This chapter presents the results for Study 1. Consistent with new
methodological pathways in secondary school bullying research (see Marsh, Parada,
Craven, & Finger, 2004; Parada, 2000, 2006), this study includes an investigation of
the reliability, psychometric structure, and validity of the upper primary student
instruments used to measure involvement in bullying, experiences of being bullied,
participant roles, and various psychosocial correlates to bullying (i.e., self-concept,
depression, coping strategies, and school belonging). This chapter begins with an
184
outline of the analyses conducted in Study 1. This is followed by the testing of
specific hypotheses that correspond to the aims, hypotheses, Research Questions, and
rationales posed in Chapter 5.
Overview of Analyses
The instruments used within this investigation were originally designed for
and administered to secondary students (with the exception of revised, or new
instrumentation including the pASBS, and BBPS). However, it was not evident how
well these instruments could be employed with students from the upper primary
school years. Hence, psychometric testing of instrumentation was necessary.
The psychometric properties of the following instruments were assessed at W1
(refer to Chapter 6): (a) APRI-BT; (b) APRI-PR; (c) SDQI-E; (d) ACSI; (e) SBS; and
(f) CDI-10. Students (N = 894) from Years 5 and 6 (n = 440, and n = 454
respectively) participated. In addition, the psychometric properties of the BBPS was
assessed for W3 data (N = 850, nYear5 = 407, and nYear6 = 443).
Psychometric properties were tested with three sequential approaches:
(1) internal consistency was estimated with Cronbachs alpha; (2) construct and
criterion-related validity were tested with the use of confirmatory factor analysis; and
(3) structural integrity between critical groups was tested using factorial invariance
testing. An alpha level of .05 was used for all statistical tests.
Reliability
An estimation of internal consistency was analysed with Cronbachs alpha
using SPSS 15.0 (Hills, 2008). Reliability was used to examine how well items within
each factor consistently measured the same constructs they were designed to measure.
Estimates were made for the total sample as well as for critical groups for each factor
within each instrument. Estimates ranged from 0-to-1. Those above .60 were
185
considered reasonable, above .70 acceptable, above .80 good, and above .90 excellent
(see Chapter 6).
Confirmatory Factor Analysis
The a priori factor structure of each measure was assessed with a confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) using LISREL 8.72 (Jreskog & Srbom, 1996) maximum
likelihood estimation (Byrne, 1998). CFA allows for the examination of two types of
validity: (1) construct validity; and (2) criterion-related validity. Construct validity
was carried out to identify the factor structure of an instrument and to determine
whether survey items were specified to load onto only those factors they were
designed to measure, while criterion-related validity was carried out to identify how
specific questionnaire items within a scale relate to each other.
To determine factor structure, a very restrictive a priori model was tested.
Each survey item was constrained to load on only the one factor it was intended to
measure, while all other loadings were forced to be zero. Model fit was examined
with goodness of fit indices (Marsh, Balla, & Hau, 1996; Marsh, Balla, & McDonald,
1988), using the Non-Normed Fit index (NNFI), the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and
the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA). Although the chi-square
(2) statistic is said to assist in determining model fit, models tend to be rejected when
large sample sizes are used (Bentler & Bonett, 1980). The chi-square was not used as
an assessment of model fit, but was provided. Parameter estimates and correlations
between scales complement goodness of fit indices to confirm strong independent
factor structures, and were also provided. Moreover, the AIC and CAIC were included
as part of the results when comparisons were made between two models measuring
the same instrument (Holmes-Smith, 2008). Finally, while each instrument was first
186
scrutinised separately, a CFA with all instruments together was also conducted across
each time wave because all instruments were given to students as a battery.
Invariance Testing
In order to examine differences between groups in later analyses, it was
important that the measures were comparable across groups within a sample (Marsh,
1994a; Marsh, Tracey, & Craven, 2006). Factorial invariance testing (conducted with
LISREL 8.72) allows for the investigation of how well the structural integrity of each
instrument holds for each group. This was conducted using CFA methods across
critical groups.
Following the CFA conducted for each group, the second step involved
conducting invariance testing to compare the structural integrity of the CFA for each
group using a sequential logical order of models (Byrne, 1998). Five models were
tested for the first-order models, and eight models were tested for the second-order
model (see Chapter 6). As models progressed, restraints were progressively applied to
the CFA model until all parameters were restricted to be equal across groups
(e.g., from fully free to no free parameters; Byrne, 1998). To determine factorial
invariance, Byrne (1998) suggests as a minimum requirement for invariance, the
structural components of the model should be invariant (e.g., parameter estimates, and
factor variances and covariances). Later models are considered too restrictive. In
particular, Cheung and Rensvold (2002) recommend that invariance should be
examined by the changes in CFI. That is, CFI should not deviate by more than .01
between the fully free and progressive structural models in order for invariance to be
met. Although all model fit indices are provided, it is the CFI which is of most interest
for equality of variance.
187
Hypotheses 1.1.1 1.1.4: Psychometric Assessment of APRI-BT
The Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument-Bully/Target was originally
designed to measure adolescent involvement in three types of bullying and
experiences of being bullied (Parada, 2000): Bully Physical, Bully Verbal, Bully
Social, Target Physical, Target Verbal, and Target Social. However, it is not clear
how well this measure would be conducted with pre-adolescent students. The
following Hypotheses 1.1.1 1.1.4 were designed to assess the overall psychometric
standing of the APRI-BT for upper primary aged students. The following results
relate to checks of reliability, validity, and invariance across critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.1.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of APRI-BT
Overview. Hypothesis 1.1.1 proposed that the first-order a priori six factor and
second-order two-factor structure of the APRI-BT would be demonstrated with
acceptable reliability estimates of each factor for the total sample, as well as by
critical groups.
Results of internal consistency for the APRI-BT. Reliability estimates of the
first-order a priori six factor model were conducted (see Table 7.1). Factors reached
good levels of internal consistency with the total sample (alpha coefficients ranging
from = .81 to .90, median = .87). When reliability estimates were conducted
across groups, all alpha coefficients ranged from reasonable to excellent levels
( = .66 to .92, median = .87), with females generally having slightly lower
estimates across the bully scales. These results are consistent with research conducted
in secondary schools (Marsh et al., 2004; Parada, 2006). The lowest estimate was
found for female Year 6 students ( = .66) on the Bully Physical scale. Although
estimates were satisfactory, it is possible that female students were not as honest in
terms of their own involvement in bullying others, or that the variability amongst the
188
female data was not as broad as that from the male data (i.e., females did not
participate in physical forms of bullying behaviour as much as males).
Excellent internal consistency was also found with the two second-order
factors (Total Bullying, Total Target) with alpha coefficients at = .93 and .94 for the
total sample. Reliability estimates for the year, gender, and year by gender groups
started at = .82, and were as high as = .95 (median = .94). The estimates from
the female groups were lower than males, particularly in the Year 6 female group.
Table 7.1
Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the First and Second-Order
APRI-BT Factors Assessed Across the Total Sample as well as by Gender, Year, and
Gender by Year Groups of the Upper Primary Participants
Coefficient Alpha () No. of
ALL M F 5 6 M5 M6 F5 F6 Items
BPhys .82 .81 .74 .83 .81 .81 .81 .80 .66 6
BVerb .89 .90 .86 .89 .89 .89 .90 .87 .85 6
BSoc .81 .83 .76 .82 .80 .84 .82 .77 .76 6
TPhys .85 .86 .82 .87 .82 .88 .84 .85 .78 6
TVerb .90 .89 .90 .89 .90 .90 .89 .89 .92 6
TSoc .89 .89 .89 .90 .89 .89 .89 .90 .88 6
TOTB .93 .93 .90 .93 .82 .93 .93 .92 .89 18
TOTT .94 .95 .94 .95 .94 .95 .94 .95 .94 18
Mean and Median Coefficient alpha for First-order Scales
Median .87 .88 .84 .88 .86 .89 .87 .86 .82
Mean .86 .86 .83 .87 .85 .87 .86 .85 .81
Note. BPhys=Bully Physical; BVerb=Bully Verbal; BSoc=Bully Social;
TPhys=Target Physical; TVerb=Target Verbal; TSoc=Target Social; TOTB=Total
Bullying; TOTT=Total Target; ALL=Total Sample; M=male sample; F=female
sample; 5=Year 5 sample; 6=Year 6 sample, M5=Year 5 male sample; M6=Year 6
male sample; F5=Year 5 female sample; F6=Year 6 female sample.
Summary. Hypothesis 1.1.1 was supported with internal consistency for the
total upper primary student sample, as well as by critical groups (e.g., males, Year 5
males, Year 6). This result confirms that the APRI-BT is a reliable measure of the
different types, as well as total experiences of bullying, for use with pre-adolescent
students.
189
the First and Second-Order APRI-BT with CFA
Overview. Hypothesis 1.1.2 posited that the a priori six factor first-order and
a priori two factor second-order structure of the APRI-BT would be demonstrated to
acceptable overall model fits using CFA. Furthermore, Hypothesis 1.1.3 proposed that
latent factor correlation coefficients within and between factors of the factor structures
would be demonstrated as convergent among bully and target factors, and
discriminant between bully and target factors.
Results of construct and convergent validity of the APRI-BT. A CFA of the
first-order six factor scale APRI-BT was conducted. Analysis of the thirty-six
variables (APRI-B = 18 items, APRI-T = 18 items) and corresponding six factors
resulted in an excellent fit to the data with NNFI = .98, and CFI = .99 (refer to Table
7.2). This suggests that over 98% of the covariance can be explained among the
variables. Further indication of an excellent fit was found with the low errors in
approximation of the population (RMSEA = .043, AIC = 1716.46, CAIC = 2220.69).
This CFA also demonstrated statistically significant factor loadings (p < .05)
of all variables onto their corresponding factors, ranging from =.56 to .83 and with a
median =.71 (Table 7.2). As expected, correlations among the bully scales (ranging
from =.78 to .88, p < .05) and among the target scales (ranging from =.79 to .84,
p < .05) were high. This is suggestive of appropriate convergent validity with
correlations distinct enough to maintain separate factors, and also supports the
possibility of a second-order factor structure of Total Bullying and Total Target.
However, those correlation coefficients between the bully scales and the target scales
were low (ranging from =.24 to .39, p < .05) suggestive of appropriate discriminant
validity. The positive and significant correlations between bully and target scales, also
190
support the reciprocal model posited by Marsh et al. (2004), in that being involved in
bullying can be related to being bullied (Finger, 2002; Ma, 2001; Parada, 2006). The
excellent model fits and the pattern of correlations between factors are consistent with
research conducted in secondary schools by Marsh et al. (2004), and Parada (2006).
Table 7.2
Parameter Estimates including Item Factor Loadings, Latent Factor Correlations,
and Model Fit for the First and Second-Order APRI-BT
Bullying Target
Physical Verbal Social Physical Verbal Social
First-Order Parameter Estimates ()
Item 1 .66 .71 .56 .71 .78 .74
Item 2 .66 .80 .69 .65 .80 .75
Item 3 .65 .74 .71 .69 .76 .81
Item 4 .64 .70 .64 .67 .77 .76
Item 5 .63 .83 .61 .72 .71 .82
Item 6 .67 .80 .66 .76 .80 .68
Second-Order Parameter Estimates ()
TOTB .94 .93 .84
TOTT .89 .94 .89
Factors Correlations of First-Order a Priori Factors ()
BPhys --
BVerb .88 --
BSoc .80 .78 --
TPhys .39 .35 .28 --
TVerb .30 .33 .24 .83 --
TSoc .24 .24 .28 .79 .84 --
Correlations of Second-Order a Priori Factors ()
TOTB TOTT
TOTB --
TOTT .36 --
Model Fit
N 2 df NNFI CFI RMSEA
st
1 894 1542.46 579 .98 .99 .043
2nd 894 1619.83 587 .98 .99 .044
Note. Items 1-6=Instrument items corresponding to factors; BPhys=Bully Physical;
BVerb=Bully Verbal; BSoc=Bully Social; TPhys=Target Physical; TVerb=Target
Verbal; TSoc=Target Social; TOTB=Total Bullying; TOTT=Total Target; 1st=First-
order Model; 2nd=Second-order Model; N=total number of participants in sample;
2=Chi-square; df=degrees of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index;
CFI=Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA=Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.
191
In a follow-up analysis, a CFA for a second-order factor structure was
conducted. Thirty-six items comprising the APRI-B and T, with the second-order
model positing two second-order factors: (1) Total Bullying (defined by first-order
Bully Physical, Bully Verbal, Bully Social); and (2) Total Target (defined by
first-order Target Physical, Target Verbal, Target Social). The two second-order
factors resulted in a positive model fit (NNFI = .98, CFI = .99, RMSEA = .044;
see Table 7.2).
The parameter estimates demonstrated a well defined factor structure, with the
first-order factors loading significantly (p < .05) onto the two second-order factors
ranging from = .84 to .94 (see Table 7.2). The correlation between Total Bullying
and Total Target shows that the two factors, although positively and significantly
correlated, were deemed distinct factors ( = .36). Again, the positive and significant
correlation found between the first-order bully and target scales were replicated in the
second-order model.
The second-order model was slightly weaker than the first-order model as
observed with the larger AIC = 1777.83, and CAIC = 2235.69, than the original
model. Converging multidimensional scales into second-order factors is considered to
result in a loss of information, and a less accurate account of the constructs under
scrutiny. However, the second-order model found in this study showed an excellent
fit to the data, and may offer important insights into overall outcomes of bullying, as
well as prevent suppression effects in later analyses. The use of both the first and
second-order model in later evaluations is designed for complementary results, in
order to grasp an overall conception of bullying outcomes; hence, both models were
retained.
192
Summary. Hypotheses 1.1.2 and 1.1.3 were supported. The thirty-six item first
and second-order CFA of the APRI-BT was found to have an excellent model fit with
distinct factors for upper primary aged student data. Convergent and discriminant
validity was demonstrated, with high correlations within and low but positive and
significant correlations between, the corresponding bully and target factors. The high
correlations within the corresponding bully and target scales lead to follow-up
analysis of a second-order CFA comprised of Total Bullying and Total Target factors.
This was a logical and practical progression and supports the APRI-BT as a valid
multidimensional measure of bullying for use with pre-adolescent students.
Hypothesis 1.1.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of APRI-BT for Year, Gender, and
Year by Gender Groups
Overview. Hypothesis 1.1.4 proposed that the a priori six factor first-order, and
the a priori two factor second-order structure of the APRI-BT would be invariant for
males and females, Year 5 and Year 6 students, and across the interactions of these
critical groups.
Results of factorial invariance of the APRI-BT. Factorial invariance was first
assessed for the first-order six factor APRI-BT model. Prior to testing of factorial
invariance, a CFA model for each group was conducted. As can be seen in Table 7.3,
each group had acceptable model fits with the RMSEA (ranging from RMSEA = .045
to .070), NNFI (ranging from NNFI = .98 to .94), and CFI (ranging from CFI = .95 to
.99).
In addition, the pattern of factor loadings and correlations for each group was
consistent with those found in the initial CFA with the total sample (see Appendix 17
for example). Following the acceptable model fits for each group, the APRI-BT was
193
assessed for invariance across Year, then gender, and subsequently Year by gender on
the first-order model (Table 7.3). Parameters commenced as free models (no = no
invariance) between the groups, with parameters progressively becoming invariant
until all parameters were invariant across groups. There were five models tested here.
While the RMSEA increasingly deteriorated across all group invariance tests, model
fits were consistently acceptable for all models. For the Year comparisons, the
RMSEA ranged from .050 to .052, the gender comparison ranged from .052 to .067,
and the Year by gender comparison ranged from .064 to .078 across the fully free to
fully invariant models respectively.
The difference between each group comparison was minimal, particularly for
the Year invariance testing where the CFI did not change from the fully free to the
fully invariant model (CFI = .98). Each group comparison satisfied the minimal fit
requirement of structural integrity (CFI changes no greater than .01 from the fully free
to the factor loadings and factor variances/covariances model) satisfying the fit
requirement of CFI changes no greater than .01 (see Chapter 6). The CFI from the
fully free to the factor variances/covariances model ranged from CFI = .98 to .97
across the gender models, and remained at CFI = .96 across the Year by gender
models. In addition, the overall model fit remained acceptable.
Invariance testing of the second-order two-factor APRI-BT model followed
invariance testing of the first-order model. Prior to testing factorial invariance a
second-order CFA model for each group was conducted. Table 7.4 shows each group
had acceptable CFA models with an RMSEA ranging from .046 to .070, NNFI
ranging from .94 to .98, and CFI ranging from .95 to .98. In addition, the pattern of
factor loadings and correlations for each group was consistent with that found in the
initial second-order CFA with the total sample (see Appendix 17 for example).
194
Table 7.3
CFA with Model Fit Across Critical Groups and Factorial Invariant Testing of Year,
Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the First-Order APRI-BT
Model Fit 2 df NNFI CFI RMSEA
First-Order Model Fit by Group
All Data 1542.46 579 .98 .99 .043
Year 5 Data 1328.49 579 .98 .98 .054
Year 6 Data 1120.71 579 .98 .98 .045
Male Data 1335.43 579 .98 .98 .055
Female Data 1234.67 579 .97 .97 .050
Year 5 Male Data 1200.19 579 .96 .97 .070
Year 6 Male Data 989.21 579 .97 .97 .058
Year 5 Female Data 1024.75 579 .96 .97 .060
Year 6 Female Data 1189.23 579 .94 .95 .067
Factorial Invariance of First-Order Model

Year (Invariant; n5 = 440; n6 = 454)
no 2449.20 1158 .98 .98 .050
FL 2551.13 1188 .98 .98 .051
FL + FV/C 2642.96 1209 .98 .98 .052
FL + U 2664.15 1224 .98 .98 .051
FL + FV/C + U 2754.40 1245 .98 .98 .052
Gender (Invariant; nm = 438; nf = 456)
no 2570.10 1158 .97 .98 .052
FL 2693.33 1188 .97 .98 .053
FL + FV/C 2902.79 1209 .97 .97 .056
FL + U 3380.15 1224 .96 .96 .063
FL + FV/C + U 3700.91 1245 .96 .96 .067
Year by Gender (Invariant; n5m = 223; n6m = 215; n5f = 217; n6f = 239)
no 4403.38 2316 .96 .96 .064
FL 4722.32 2406 .96 .96 .066
FL + FV/C 5047.39 2469 .96 .96 .069
FL + U 5584.31 2514 .95 .95 .071
FL + FV/C + U 6037.89 2577 .94 .94 .078
Note. no=no invariance; FL=Factor Loadings invariant; FV/C=Factor Variances and
Covariances invariant; U=Uniqueness invariant; n5=number of Year 5 participants in
sample; n6=number of Year 6 participants in sample; nm=number of male participants
in sample; nf=number of female participants in sample; n5m=number of Year 5 male
participants in sample; n6m=number of Year 6 male participants in sample;
n5f=number of Year 5 female participants in sample; n6f=number of Year 6 female
participants in sample; 2=Chi-square; df=degrees of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed
Fit Index; CFI=Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA=Root Mean Square Error of
Approximation.
195
Following the acceptable model fits for each group, the APRI-BT was
assessed for invariance across year, then gender, and subsequently year by gender on
the second-order model (Table 7.4). The second-order test of invariance required
additional model restrictions to the first-order model, with the inclusion of the Beta
parameter. Eight models were tested for each group comparison, from the fully free to
the fully invariant model (refer to Chapter 6). Although the RMSEA deteriorated with
each progressive model for all group comparisons, model fits were consistently
acceptable for all models. RMSEA for the year invariance testing ranged from .051 to
.053, the gender invariance testing ranged from .053 to .067, and the year by gender
invariance testing ranged from .064 to .078, from the fully free to the fully invariant
model.
Consistent with the first-order invariance models, the CFI of the second-order
invariance models showed acceptable fits to the data, with ranges remaining within
the minimal variation of fit requirements (CFI changes no more than .01; Cheung &
Rensvold, 2002) for the structural models (beta, factor loadings, and factor
variances/covariances) of each group comparison. Invariance testing across year
resulted in no change in the CFI (CFI = .98); across gender the CFI ranged from .98 to
.97, and across the year by gender interaction the CFI ranged from .96 to .95 from the
fully free to the structurally invariant models (beta, factor loadings, and factor
variances /covariances). In addition, the overall model fit remained acceptable.
196
Table 7.4
Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the Second-Order APRI-BT
Second-Order Model Fit by Group
All Data 1619.83 587 .98 .99 .044
Year 5 Data 1361.16 587 .98 .98 .055
Year 6 Data 1155.76 587 .98 .98 .046
Male Data 1372.24 587 .98 .98 .055
Female Data 1268.92 587 .97 .97 .051
Year 5 Male Data 1216.54 587 .96 .97 .070
Year 6 Male Data 1004.55 587 .97 .97 .058
Year 5 Female Data 1042.38 587 .96 .97 .060
Year 6 Female Data 1214.08 587 .94 .95 .067
Factorial Invariance of Second-Order Model

no 2516.92 1174 .98 .98 .051
FL 2624.27 1204 .98 .98 .051
FL + FC 2664.48 1213 .98 .98 .052
FL + U 2735.57 1240 .98 .98 .052
FL + BE 2667.07 1208 .98 .98 .052
FL + BE + FC 2717.77 1217 .98 .98 .054
FL + BE + U 2783.13 1244 .98 .98 .053
FL + BE + FC + U 2829.84 1253 .98 .98 .053
no 2641.16 1174 .97 .98 .053
FL 2764.85 1204 .97 .97 .054
FL + FC 2938.03 1213 .97 .97 .057
FL + U 3454.79 1240 .96 .96 .063
FL + BE 2790.77 1208 .97 .97 .054
FL + BE + FC 2958.34 1217 .97 .97 .057
FL + BE + U 3479.81 1244 .96 .96 .064
FL + BE + FC + U 3756.04 1253 .96 .96 .067
no 4477.54 2348 .96 .96 .064
FL 4502.28 2438 .96 .96 .066
FL + FC 5005.73 2465 .96 .96 .068
FL + U 5662.43 2546 .95 .95 .074
FL + BE 4897.12 2450 .96 .96 .067
FL + BE + FC 5097.16 2477 .96 .96 .069
FL + BE + U 5751.81 2558 .95 .95 .075
FL + BE + FC + U 6083.32 2585 .94 .94 .078
Note. no=no invariance; FL=Factor Loadings invariant; FV/C=Factor Variances and Covariances
invariant; U=Uniqueness invariant; BE=Beta coefficients invariant; n5=number of Year 5 participants
in sample; n6=number of Year 6 participants in sample; nm=number of male participants in sample;
nf=number of female participants in sample; n5m=number of Year 5 male participants in sample;
n6m=number of Year 6 male participants in sample; n5f=number of Year 5 female participants in
sample; n6f=number of Year 6 female participants in sample; 2=Chi-square; df=degrees of freedom;
NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index; CFI=Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA=Root Mean Square Error of
Approximation.
197
Summary. Hypothesis 1.1.4 was supported. The differences in fit indices were
minimal across year, gender, and year by gender models as parameters were
increasingly restricted. This supports the structural integrity of the first and
second-order APRI-BT models as invariant across critical groups, whereby this
instrument can be used as a measure of the different types, as well as total effects of
bullying and experiences of being bullied with males and females from both Year 5
and Year 6 cohorts. Furthermore, these results support the use of comparisons
between groups in later analyses (see Chapter 8).
Summary of Hypotheses 1.1.1 1.1.4
The APR-BT was found to have strong psychometric qualities in its a priori
six first-order and two second-order factors for Year 5 and Year 6 children. All
a priori item-to-factor loadings were significant, all item-to-factor loadings were
above the minimum level of acceptability for any factor loading (Hills, 2007),
reliability estimates were acceptable, and the APRI-BT was found to be invariant
across year, gender, and year by gender groups, suggesting results are comparable
across these critical groups. These findings are made valuable by the contributions to
complex analysis with rigorous psychometric testing, the resultant
multidimensionality of bullying demonstrated for the cohort, and the support of a
valid and reliable measure of involvement in bullying for upper primary aged
students. These results demonstrate support for the APRI-BT as an appropriate and
useful instrument to measure the different types of bullying, as well as total
(second-order) bullying experiences with upper primary students.
198
Hypotheses 1.2.1 1.2.4: Psychometric Assessment of APRI-PR
The Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument-Participant Roles contains four
factors (Active Reinforcer, Passive Reinforcer, Ignore/Disregard, Advocate) and was
originally designed to measure adolescent participation in bullying in terms of
reinforcing and ignoring the bullying, as well as advocating for the person being
targeted (Parada, 2006). However, it is not clear how well this measure would be
conducted with upper primary aged students. The following Hypotheses 1.2.1 1.2.4
were designed to assess the overall psychometric standing of the APRI-PR for
pre-adolescent students. The following results relate to checks of reliability, validity,
and invariance across critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.2.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of APRI-PR
Overview. Hypothesis 1.2.1 proposed that the a priori four factor structure of
the APRI-PR would be demonstrated with acceptable reliability estimates for each
factor across the total sample, as well as across critical groups.
Results of internal consistency for the APRI-PR. The reliability of each
a priori four factor scale was estimated (see Table 7.5). Factors reached good levels of
internal consistency with the total sample (alpha coefficients ranging from = .79 to
.86, median = .83). These good levels of internal consistency are consistent with
research conducted in secondary schools (Parada, 2006). Reliability estimates also
ranged from acceptable to good across critical groups (alpha coefficients ranging from
= .73 to .88, median = .83), with female Year 6 students having the lowest
reliability estimate for Active Reinforcer ( = .73). Reliability was deemed
acceptable.
199
Table 7.5
Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the Four APRI-PR Factors
Assessed Across the Total Sample as well as by Gender, Year, and Gender by Year
Groups of the Upper Primary Participants
AReinf .79 .79 .77 .81 .78 .79 .79 .82 .73 6
PReinf .86 .87 .85 .84 .88 .86 .88 .80 .87 6
Ignore .84 .84 .84 .83 .85 .84 .85 .82 .86 6
Advoc .82 .83 .79 .82 .81 .86 .80 .78 .80 6
Mean and Median Coefficient alpha for Scales
Median .83 .84 .82 .83 .83 .85 .83 .81 .83
Mean .83 .83 .81 .83 .83 .84 .83 .81 .82
Note. AReinf=Active Reinforcer; PReinf=Passive Reinforcer; Ignore=Ignore
Bullying; Advoc=Advocate for Target; ALL=Total Sample; M=male sample;
F=female sample; 5=Year 5 sample; 6=Year 6 sample, M5=Year 5 male sample;
M6=Year 6 male sample; F5=Year 5 female sample; F6=Year 6 female sample.
Summary. Hypothesis 1.2.1 was supported with internal consistency estimates
for the total sample, as well as by critical groups. This result confirms that the
APRI-PR is a reliable measure of participant roles for use with pre-adolescent
students.
the APRI-PR with CFA
Overview. Hypothesis 1.2.2 posited that the a priori four factor structure of the
APRI-PR would be demonstrated to acceptable overall model fit using CFA. In
addition, Hypothesis 1.2.3 proposed that latent factor correlation coefficients within
and between factors of the factor structure would be demonstrated as convergent or
discriminant where appropriate.
Results of construct and convergent validity of the APRI-PR. A first-order
CFA of the four factor twenty-four item APRI-PR was conducted. This resulted in a
good fit to the data with a NNFI = .96, and CFI = .96 (refer to Table 7.6), suggesting
200
approximately 96% of the covariance can be explained among the variables. Further
indication of an acceptable fit was found with the errors in approximation of the
population (RMSEA = .054).
Factor loadings (p < .05) were deemed satisfactory. All variables loaded onto
their corresponding factors and ranged from = .50 to .77 (Table 7.6). In addition,
correlations were positive and high in relation to those aimed at reinforcing the
bullying ( = .68, p < .05), and negative between active and passive reinforcing with
that of advocating for the target ( = -.48 and -.54 respectively for actively and
passively reinforcing bullying, p < .05). Although it was expected that the Ignore
scale would not be significantly related to reinforcing bullying, results here suggest
ignoring the bullying was positively related to passively reinforcing the bullying
( = .17, p < .05). These results suggest that although students may report ignoring
bullying, they may also report passively reinforcing bullying. The weakness of this
correlation though, does not necessarily conflict with the research of Parada (2006),
who found a zero-order correlation between these variables. It may not be until the
secondary years that students either ignore or passively reinforce bullying. However,
this is unclear. All other convergent and discriminant validity from these results were
similar to those found with secondary students (Parada, 2006).
Summary. Hypotheses 1.2.2 and 1.2.3 were supported. A CFA conducted on
the APRI-PR demonstrated this instrument to have moderate loadings but distinct
factors, and an acceptable model fit from the upper primary student data. Convergent
and discriminant validity was shown with logically positive and negative correlations
between participant role factors. These results support the APRI-PR as a valid
measure of participant roles for use with pre-adolescent students.
201
Table 7.6
and Model Fit for the APRI-PR
AReinf. PReinf. Ignore Advoc
Parameter Estimates ()
Item 1 .56 .71 .54 .56
Item 2 .58 .69 .56 .66
Item 3 .66 .74 .72 .67
Item 4 .67 .69 .77 .66
Item 5 .76 .68 .74 .63
Item 6 .50 .77 .76 .72
Factors Correlations ()
AReinf --
PReinf .68 --
Ignore .08 .17 --
Advoc -.48 -.54 -.17 --
Model Fit
N 2
df NNFI CFI RMSEA
894 883.30 246 .96 .96 .054
Note. Items 1-6=Instrument items corresponding to factors; AReinf=Active
Reinforcer; PReinf=Passive Reinforcer; Ignore=Ignore Bullying; Advoc=Advocate for
Target; N=total number of participants in sample; 2=Chi-square; df=degrees of
freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index; CFI=Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA=Root
Mean Square Error of Approximation.
Hypothesis 1.2.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of APRI-PR for Year, Gender, and
Overview. Hypothesis 1.2.4 proposed that the a priori four factor structure of
the APRI-PR would be invariant for males and females, Year 5 and Year 6 students,
and across the interactions of these critical groups.
Results of factorial invariance of the APRI-PR. Prior to testing of factorial
invariance, a CFA model for each group was conducted. As can be seen in Table 7.7
.96). In addition, the pattern of factor loadings and correlations for each group was
202
consistent with that found in the initial CFA with the total sample (see Appendix 17
for example).
Following the acceptable model fits for each group, the APRI-PR was assessed
for invariance across year, followed by gender, and then year by gender (Table 7.7).
Five models were tested, with parameters commencing as free models between the
groups, and becoming progressively restricted until all parameters were invariant
across groups. As can be seen in Table 7.7, the RMSEA deteriorated across all group
invariance tests as models became increasingly restricted. For invariance across year,
RMSEA ranged from .057 to .059; for gender these ranged from .054 to .071, and for
the year by gender group RMSEA ranged from .063 to .081 from the fully free to the
fully invariant model. Although the RMSEA (.081) was not acceptable in the final
year by gender model, what is more important for structural invariance to be met is
the difference in equality between each progressive model across the CFI.
The CFI difference between each group comparison was minimal, particularly
for year, where the CFI decreased by less than .01 from the fully free to the fully
invariant model (CFI = .96 to .95). Each group comparison satisfied the minimal fit
requirement of structural integrity (CFI changes no greater than .01 from the fully free
to the factor loadings and factor variances/covariances model; Cheung & Rensvold,
2002). The CFI from the fully free to the factor variances/covariances model remained
at CFI = .96 across the year and gender models, and ranged from CFI = .95 to .94
across the year by gender models. In addition, the overall model fit remained
acceptable.
203
Table 7.7
Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the APRI-PR
Model Fit by Group
All Data 883.30 246 .96 .96 .054
Year 5 Data 610.37 246 .95 .96 .058
Year 6 Data 616.03 246 .96 .96 .058
Male Data 627.89 246 .96 .96 .060
Female Data 510.64 246 .96 .96 .049
Year 5 Male Data 526.46 246 .93 .94 .072
Year 6 Male Data 467.03 246 .95 .95 .065
Year 5 Female Data 400.91 246 .94 .95 .054
Year 6 Female Data 460.60 246 .93 .94 .061

No 1227.00 492 .95 .96 .058
FL 1252.10 512 .95 .96 .057
FL + FV/C 1270.78 522 .96 .96 .057
FL + U 1376.73 536 .95 .95 .059
FL + FV/C + U 1396.74 546 .95 .95 .059
No 1138.53 492 .96 .96 .054
FL 1185.99 512 .96 .96 .054
FL + FV/C 1293.65 522 .95 .96 .058
FL + U 1629.18 536 .94 .94 .068
FL + FV/C + U 1769.23 546 .93 .93 .071
No 1855.00 984 .94 .95 .063
FL 1961.75 1044 .94 .94 .063
FL + FV/C 2085.13 1074 .94 .94 .065
FL + U 2656.57 1116 .91 .91 .079
FL + FV/C + U 2826.53 1146 .91 .90 .081
Approximation.
204
increasingly restricted. This supports the structural integrity of the APRI-PR as
invariant across critical groups, whereby this instrument can be used as a measure of
participant roles with males and females in both Year 5 and Year 6 cohorts.
Furthermore, these results support the use of comparisons between groups in later
analyses (see Chapter 8).
The APR-PR was found to have strong psychometric qualities in its a priori
four factor model for Year 5 and Year 6 children. All a priori item-to-factor loadings
were significant, all item-to-factor loadings were above the minimum level of
acceptability for any factor loading (Hills, 2008), reliability estimates were
acceptable, and the APRI-PR was found to be invariant across year, gender, and year
by gender groups, suggesting results are comparable across these critical groups.
These results demonstrate support for the APRI-PR as an appropriate and useful
instrument to measure the different bullying participant roles with upper primary
students.
Hypotheses 1.3.1 1.3.4: Psychometric Assessment of SDQI-E
The Self Description Questionnaire I-Extended (SDQI-E) is an extended
version of the Self Description Questionnaire I with factors from the Self Description
Questionnaire II (see Chapter 6). This measure contains twelve scales, eight from the
SDQI (Physical Appearance, Physical Ability, Peer Relations, Parent Relations,
Mathematics Ability, Verbal Ability, General Schooling Ability, General
Self-Esteem) , and four from the SDQII (Opposite-Sex Peer Relations, Same-Sex Peer
Relations, Emotional Stability, Honesty/Trustworthiness). It is not clear how well the
205
SDQI-E would be conducted with upper primary aged students. The following
Hypotheses 1.3.1 1.3.4 were designed to assess the overall psychometric standing of
the SDQI-E for pre-adolescent students. The following results relate to checks of
reliability, validity, and invariance across critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.3.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of SDQI-E
Overview. Hypothesis 1.3.1 proposed that the a priori twelve factor structure
of the SDQI-E would be demonstrated with acceptable reliability estimates of each
factor for the total sample, as well as by critical groups.
Results of internal consistency for the SDQI-E. Reliability estimates of the
a priori twelve factor model were conducted (see Table 7.8). Each factor was found to
reach acceptable to excellent levels of internal consistency with the total sample
(alpha coefficients ranging from = .75 to .95, median = .83), and reasonable to
excellent levels across each group (alpha coefficients ranging from = .69 to .97,
median = .85). These results are consistent with research conducted to
psychometrically test the SDQI and SDQII instruments with primary and secondary
students (e.g., Byrne & Worth Gavin, 1996; Marsh & Shavelson, 1985; Parada, 2006).
Those factors from the original SDQII were slightly lower (alpha coefficients ranging
from = .69 to .85, median = .79) than those scales from the original SDQI measure
(alpha coefficients ranging from = .81 to .97, median = 90). Although estimates
were good, it is possible that upper primary students were not able to respond as
accurately to the items from the four SDQII factors as to those from the original SDQI
because these factors included some negatively worded items (see Chapter 6).
206
Table 7.8
Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the Twelve SDQI-E Factors
Assessed Across the Total Sample as well as by Gender, Year, and Gender by Year
Groups of the Upper Primary Participants
AP .90 .91 .90 .91 .90 .90 .91 .91 .90 8
AB .86 .85 .86 .85 .87 .84 .84 .84 .87 8
PR .87 .88 .87 .86 .89 .85 .90 .87 .88 8
PT .86 .86 .86 .84 .88 .85 .88 .84 .88 8
MT .95 .96 .94 .96 .95 .97 .95 .94 .94 8
EN .94 .94 .93 .94 .94 .95 .94 .93 .94 8
SL .91 .92 .90 .92 .90 .93 .90 .90 .90 8
GS .82 .83 .82 .83 .81 .84 .82 .82 .81 8
OS .81 .80 .82 .79 .83 .78 .81 .80 .85 4
SS .75 .75 .75 .69 .80 .70 .80 .69 .80 5
ES .75 .74 .76 .77 .74 .74 .74 .79 .73 5
HN .81 .81 .79 .79 .82 .77 .84 .79 .79 6
Median .86 .86 .86 .85 .88 .85 .86 .84 .88
Mean .85 .85 .85 .85 .86 .84 .86 .84 .86
Note. AP=Physical Appearance; AB=Physical Ability; PR=Peer Relations; PT=Parent
Relations; MT=Math; EN=Verbal; SL=General Schooling; GS=General Self-Esteem;
OS=Opposite-Sex Relations; SS=Same-Sex Relations; ES=Emotional Stability;
HN=Honesty/Trustworthiness; ALL=Total Sample; M=male sample; F=female
total pre-adolescent sample, as well as in the separate groups. This result confirms that
the twelve factor SDQI-E is a reliable measure of self-concept for use with pre-
adolescent students.
the SDQI-E with CFA
Overview. Hypothesis 1.3.2 proposed that the original a priori eight factor
SDQI with four additional SDQII factors would be demonstrated here to an
acceptable overall model fit using CFA. In addition, Hypothesis 1.3.3 proposed that
207
convergent or discriminant validity would be shown with appropriate latent factor
correlation coefficients within and between factors.
Results of construct and convergent validity of the SDQI-E. CFA of the 12
factor, ninety-six item SDQI-E was conducted. A good fit to the data (refer to Table
7.9) was found, with approximately 95% of the covariance explained among the
variables (NNFI = .95, CFI = .95). Further indication of an acceptable fit was found
with the errors in approximation of the population (RMSEA = .065).
Items were specified to load onto those factors they were designed to measure
(see Table 7.9). While most factor loadings were high (maximum = .92), some were
particularly small (e.g., < .50) but deemed satisfactory. Correlations were consistent
with previous research in primary and secondary schools (e.g., Byrne & Worth Gavin,
1996; Marsh & Shavelson, 1985; Parada, 2006), with positive and high correlations
between General Schooling and specific schooling subjects (e.g., mathematics,
English), and General Self-Esteem with most other factors. This is suggestive of
appropriate convergent and discriminant validity.
Summary. Hypotheses 1.3.2 and 1.3.3 were supported. The 96 item SDQI-E
was found to have an acceptable model fit with moderate loadings but distinct factors
for upper primary aged student data. Convergent and discriminant validity was shown
with high correlations among the school factors, and between General Self-Esteem
and most other factors. These results support the SDQI-E as a valid measure of
self-concept for use with pre-adolescent students.
208
Table 7.9
and Model Fit for the SDQI-E
ORIGINAL SDQI ORIGINAL SDQII
AP AB PR PT MT EN SL GS OS SS ES HN
Item 1 .81 .76 .64 .67 .72 .66 .69 .46 .47 .47 .67 .62
Item 2 .74 .61 .71 .58 .85 .86 .75 .50 .88 .74 .56 .67
Item 3 .83 .58 .67 .53 .76 .76 .70 .61 .81 .55 .51 .62
Item 4 .80 .50 .63 .53 .90 .89 .60 .64 .74 .61 .52 .75
Item 5 .64 .84 .71 .68 .81 .87 .86 .61 .69 .84 .49
Item 6 .74 .72 .67 .74 .90 .76 .81 .73 .69
Item 7 .62 .84 .65 .84 .84 .88 .70 .69
Item 8 .70 .42 .79 .74 .92 .76 .84 .66
AP
AB .39
PR .57 .50
PT .29 .24 .28
MT .14 .20 .17 .20
EN .15 -.02 .09 .19 .29
SL .26 .18 .24 .33 .65 .62
GS .64 .40 .63 .45 .35 .40 .58
OS .34 .33 .55 .06 -.01 -.03 .10 .26
SS .37 .37 .83 .34 .10 .10 .17 .49 .36
ES .21 .23 .28 .16 .14 .00 .10 .24 .18 .33
HN .15 .69 .14 .31 .27 .28 .37 .39 -.03 .15 .19
Model Fit
894 16001.61 3336 .95 .95 .065
Note. Item 1-8=Instrument items corresponding to factors; AP=Physical Appearance;
AB=Physical Ability; PR=Peer Relations; PT=Parent Relations; MT=Math;
EN=Verbal; SL=General Schooling; GS=General Self-Esteem; OS=Opposite-Sex
Relations; SS=Same-Sex Relations; ES=Emotional Stability;
HN=Honesty/Trustworthiness; N=total number of participants in sample; 2=Chi-
square; df=degrees of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index; CFI=Comparative Fit
Index; RMSEA=Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.
209
Hypothesis 1.3.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of SDQI-E for Year, Gender, and
Overview. Hypothesis 1.3.4 proposed that the a priori twelve factor structure
of the SDQI-E would be invariant for males and females, Year 5 and Year 6 students,
and across the interactions of these critical groups.
Results of factorial invariance of the SDQI-E. With ninety-six items and
twelve factors to estimate, it is important that enough data be available with which to
estimate all parameters. To compensate for low sample sizes many researchers
advocate the use of item parcelling (see Appendix 18). This was conducted with the
invariance tests for the SDQI-E to ensure more data was available for parameter
estimation. Items were randomly paired with other items within the same factor (such
that two or three items made up one new item parcel). This resulted in two to three
item parcels per factor (see Appendix 18). Prior to testing of factorial invariance, a
CFA model for each group was conducted. As can be seen in Table 7.10 each group
had acceptable model fits with the RMSEA (ranging from RMSEA = .045 to .061),
NNFI (ranging from NNFI = .95 to .98), and CFI (ranging from CFI = .96 to .98)
estimates. In addition, the pattern of factor loadings and correlations for each group
was consistent with that found in the initial CFA with the total sample (see Appendix
17 for example).
210
Table 7.10
Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the SDQI-E
Model Fit by Group
All Data 1122.23 398 .98 .98 .045
Year 5 Data 751.32 398 .98 .98 .045
Year 6 Data 905.08 398 .97 .98 .053
Male Data 840.336 398 .97 .98 .050
Female Data 775.75 398 .98 .98 .046
Year 5 Male Data 661.09 398 .97 .97 .055
Year 6 Male Data 717.24 398 .95 .96 .061
Year 5 Female Data 638.69 398 .97 .97 .053
Year 6 Female Data 675.40 398 .97 .97 .054

No 1656.40 796 .97 .98 .049
FL 1706.17 816 .97 .98 .050
FL + FV/C 1871.76 894 .97 .98 .050
FL + U 1794.04 848 .97 .98 .050
FL + FV/C + U 1954.93 926 .97 .98 .050
No 1616.08 796 .98 .98 .048
FL 1649.41 816 .98 .98 .048
FL + FV/C 1824.33 894 .98 .98 .048
FL + U 1716.06 848 .98 .98 .048
FL + FV/C + U 1901.89 926 .98 .98 .049
No 2692.41 1592 .96 .97 .056
FL 2793.18 1652 .96 .97 .056
FL + FV/C 3258.69 1886 .96 .97 .057
FL + U 3038.73 1748 .96 .97 .058
FL + FV/C + U 3499.99 1982 .96 .96 .059
Approximation.
211
Following the acceptable model fits for each group, the SDQI-E was assessed
for invariance across year, followed by gender, and then year by gender (Table 7.10).
invariance tests as models became increasingly restricted. However, these were
considered acceptable. For invariance across year, RMSEA ranged from .049 to .50,
for gender these ranged from .048 to .049, and for the year by gender groups RMSEA
ranged from .056 to .059 from the fully free to the fully invariant model.
for year, where the CFI remained the same from the fully free to the fully invariant
model (CFI = .98). Each group comparison satisfied the assumptions of invariance
across all models (CFI changes no greater than .01 from the fully free to the fully
invariant model). The CFI from the fully free to the fully invariant model remained at
CFI = .98 across the gender models, and ranged from CFI = .97 to .96 across the year
by gender models. In addition, the overall model fit remained acceptable.
increasingly restricted. This supports the structural integrity of the SDQI-E as
invariant across critical groups, whereby this instrument can be used as a measure of
self-concept with males and females in both Year 5 and Year 6 cohorts. Furthermore,
these results support the use of comparisons between groups in later analyses (see
Chapter 8).
212
The SDQI-E was found to have strong psychometric qualities in its a priori
twelve factor model for Year 5 and Year 6 children. All a priori item-to-factor
loadings were significant, all item-to-factor loadings were above the minimum level
of acceptability for any factor loading (Hills, 2008), reliability estimates were
acceptable, and the SDQI-E was found to be invariant across year, gender, and year
by gender groups, suggesting results are comparable across critical groups. These
results demonstrate support for the SDQI-E as an appropriate and useful instrument to
measure multiple self-concept domains with upper primary students.
Hypotheses 1.4.1 1.4.4: Psychometric Assessment of ACSI
The Adolescent Coping Strategies Indicator was originally designed to
measure adolescent use of coping strategies in terms of two positive (Problem Solving
and Support Seeking) and one negative (Avoidance) coping strategy (Parada, 2006).
However, it is not clear how well this measure would be conducted with upper
primary aged students. The following Hypotheses 1.4.1 1.4.4 were designed to
assess the overall psychometric standing of the ACSI for pre-adolescent students. The
following results relate to checks of reliability, validity, and invariance across critical
groups.
Hypothesis 1.4.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of ACSI
Overview. Hypothesis 1.4.1 posited that the a priori three and a priori five
factor structure of the ACSI would be demonstrated, with acceptable reliability
estimates of each factor for the total sample, as well as in critical groups.
Results of internal consistency for the ACSI. An estimation of the reliability
of each scale from the ACSI was conducted using Cronbachs alpha (see Table 7.11).
213
All factors contained reasonable levels of internal consistency across the total sample
(alpha coefficients ranging from = .65 to .83, median = .83), with the Avoidance
factor containing a slightly smaller estimate than the Problem Solving and Support
Seeking factors. This is consistent with research conducted in secondary schools,
where the Avoidance coping strategy factor was demonstrated with acceptable
although lower reliability estimates than the positive coping strategies (Parada, 2006).
Table 7.11
Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the Three ACSI Factors Assessed
Across the Total Sample as well as by Gender, Year, and Gender by Year Groups of
the Upper Primary Participants
Avoidance .65 .63 .68 .68 .62 .68 .57 .69 .67 6
Solving .83 .84 .82 .83 .83 .84 .85 .82 .82 5
Support .83 .83 .82 .82 .85 .83 .82 .79 .84 4
Median .83 .83 .82 .82 .83 .83 .82 .79 .82
Mean .77 .77 .77 .78 .77 .78 .75 .77 .78
Note. Avoidance=Avoidance; Solving=Problem Solving; Support=Support Seeking;
ALL=Total Sample; M=male sample; F=female sample; 5=Year 5 sample; 6=Year 6
sample, M5=Year 5 male sample; M6=Year 6 male sample; F5=Year 5 female sample;
F6=Year 6 female sample.
A similar pattern of results was found across critical groups, with good levels
of internal consistency for the Problem Solving and Support Seeking factors (alpha
coefficients ranging from = .79 to .85, median = .83). Reliability estimates from
the Avoidance factor again were deemed reasonable across the critical groups (alpha
coefficients ranging from = .57 to .69, median = .68), yet did not reach reasonable
levels for the Year 6 male data set ( = .57). It is possible that this adolescent scale
was difficult for primary students to respond to accurately to, that it led to a response
bias where students were not as honest in their use of negative coping strategies, or
alternatively that the variability amongst the Avoidance scale was not as broad as the
214
variability from the other scales. In any case, the low reliability estimates suggest that
caution should be used when interpreting data from the Avoidance factor on the
ACSI, particularly across year and gender groups. Moreover, interpretation of the data
across year by gender groups should be treated with considerable caution.
Summary. Hypothesis 1.4.1 was supported, with internal consistency of the
ACSI for the total, year, gender, and year by gender samples. However, an exception
is the Avoidance factor from the ACSI, which was not supported with internal
consistency across the year by gender samples. Higher alpha coefficients were found
with all groups for the positive coping strategy factors (Support Seeking and Problem
Solving), while the Avoidance factor was found to contain the lowest reliability
estimates, particularly for the ACSI. These results confirm that the ACSI is a reliable
measure of positive coping strategies for use with pre-adolescent students, but do not
support the Avoidance coping strategy as a reliable measure to be used with upper
primary students.
the ACSI with CFA
Overview. Hypothesis 1.4.2 was designed to test the a priori three factor
structure of the ACSI. This Hypothesis posited that the factor structure of both
instruments would be demonstrated with acceptable model fits using CFA. Moreover,
Hypothesis 1.4.3 proposed that latent factor correlation coefficients within and
between factors of the factor structure for the ACSI would be demonstrated, with
convergence among the positive (Problem Solving and Support Seeking) coping
strategies and discriminance between the positive and negative coping strategy
factors.
215
Results of construct and convergent validity of the ACSI. A first-order CFA
of the three factor fifteen item ACSI was conducted. A good fit to the data was found
with NNFI = .96, and CFI = .97 (Table 7.12), suggesting that approximately 96% of
the covariance can be explained among the variables. An acceptable fit was further
evinced with the acceptable RMSEA = .052 (df = 87).
Table 7.12
and Model Fit for the ACSI
Avoidance Solving Support
Item 1 .43 .72 .73
Item 2 .39 .62 .76
Item 3 .41 .78 .72
Item 4 .36 .72 .76
Item 5 .60 .68
Item 6 .72
Avoidance --
Solving .03 --
Support -.02 .49 --
Model Fit
894 296.69 87 .96 .97 .052
Note. Items 1-6=Instrument items corresponding to factors; Avoidance=Avoidance;
Solving=Problem Solving; Support= Support Seeking; N=total number of participants in
sample; 2=Chi-square; df=degrees of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index;
Although factor loadings were lower for the Avoidance scale (ranging from
= .36 to .72, p < .05), these factor loadings were deemed satisfactory (Hills, 2008).
The low factor loadings found in this study are consistent with the low reliability
estimates found for the Avoidance factor in Hypothesis 1.4.1. All variables loaded
onto their corresponding factors and ranged from = .36 to .78 (Table 7.12).
Moreover, correlations were as expected, positive and high relations were found
between the positive coping strategies ( = .49, p < .05), and null relations between
216
the positive and negative coping strategies (ranging from = -.02 to .03, p > .05).
These results are suggestive of appropriate convergent and discriminant validity,
similar to that found by Parada (2006) with secondary students.
Summary. Hypotheses 1.4.2 and 1.4.3 were supported. The CFA conducted on
the ACSI demonstrated the instrument as having moderate loadings but distinct
factors, and an acceptable model fit for upper primary aged students. Appropriate
convergent and discriminant validity were found also. These results support the ACSI
as a valid measure of coping strategies for use with pre-adolescent students.
Hypothesis 1.4.4: Invariance testing of ACSI for Year, Gender, and Year by Gender
Groups
Overview. Hypothesis 1.4.4 proposed that the a priori three factor model of the
ACSI would be invariant for males and females, Year 5 and Year 6 students, and
across the interaction of these critical groups.
Results of factorial invariance of the ACSI. Factorial invariance was first
assessed for the ACSI. Prior to testing of factorial invariance, a CFA model for each
group was conducted. As can be seen in Table 7.13, each group had acceptable model
fits with the RMSEA (ranging from RMSEA = .047 to .064), NNFI (ranging from
NNFI = .94 to .96), and CFI (ranging from CFI = .95 to .97). In addition, the pattern
of factor loadings and correlations for each group was consistent with that found in
the initial CFA with the total sample (see Appendix 17 for example).
217
Table 7.13
Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the Three Factor ACSI
Model Fit by Group
All Data 296.69 87 .96 .97 .052
Year 5 Data 211.03 87 .95 .96 .057
Year 6 Data 185.84 87 .96 .97 .050
Male Data 202.48 87 .96 .97 .055
Female Data 183.68 87 .96 .97 .049
Year 5 Male Data 138.62 87 .96 .97 .052
Year 6 Male Data 163.05 87 .94 .95 .064
Year 5 Female Data 142.22 87 .95 .96 .054
Year 6 Female Data 132.66 87 .96 .97 .047

no 396.86 174 .96 .97 .054
FL 406.04 186 .96 .97 .052
FL + FV/C 414.72 192 .96 .97 .051
FL + U 433.85 201 .96 .96 .057
FL + FV/C + U 441.15 207 .96 .96 .050
no 386.17 174 .96 .97 .052
FL 414.66 186 .96 .96 .053
FL + FV/C 430.75 192 .96 .96 .053
FL + U 461.40 201 .96 .96 .054
FL + FV/C + U 478.50 207 .96 .96 .054
no 576.55 348 .95 .96 .054
FL 627.56 384 .96 .96 .053
FL + FV/C 656.79 402 .96 .96 .053
FL + U 710.34 429 .95 .95 .054
FL + FV/C + U 737.40 447 .96 .95 .054
Approximation.
218
Following the acceptable model fits for each group, the ACSI was assessed for
invariance across Year, followed by gender, and then Year by gender (Table 7.13).
across groups. As can be seen in Table 7.13., the RMSEA deteriorated across all
group invariance tests as models became increasingly restricted; however, these were
considered acceptable. For invariance across Year, RMSEA ranged from .054 to .050,
for gender it ranged from .052 to .054, and for the Year by gender groups RMSEA
ranged from .053 to .054 from the fully free to the fully invariant model.
The CFI difference between each group comparison was minimal. Each group
comparison satisfied the minimal fit requirement of structural integrity (CFI changes
no greater than .01 from the fully free to the factor loadings and factor
variances/covariances model; Cheung & Rensvold, 2002). The CFI across the Year
models from the fully free to the fully invariant ranged from CFI = .97 to .96, across
the gender models these ranged from CFI = .97 to .96, and across the Year by gender
models these ranged from CFI = .96 to .95. In addition, the overall model fit remained
acceptable.
minimal across Year, gender, and Year by gender models as parameters were
increasingly restricted. This supports the structural integrity of the ACSI as invariant
across critical groups whereby these instruments can be used to measure coping
strategies with males and females from both Year 5 and Year 6 cohorts. Furthermore,
these results support the use of comparisons between groups in later analyses (see
Chapter 8).
219
The ACSI was found to have strong psychometric qualities in its a priori three
factor model for Year 5 and Year 6 children. All a priori item-to-factor loadings were
significant, all item-to-factor loadings were above the minimum level of acceptability
for any factor loading (Hills, 2008), reliability estimates were reasonable, and the
ACSI was found to be invariant across Year, gender, and Year by gender groups,
suggesting results are comparable across critical groups. Caution however had to be
taken during later analysis with the Avoidance factor, particularly when investigating
across critical groups as reliabilities were low for Year 5 students. These results
demonstrate support for the ACSI as an appropriate and useful instrument for this
investigation to measure different coping strategies in upper primary students.
Hypotheses 1.5.1 1.5.4: Psychometric Assessment of pASBS
The School Belonging Scale (SBS) was originally designed to measure
adolescent feelings of school connectedness with regard to perceived Support, Rule
Acceptance, and Attachment to their school (Parada, 2006). However, it is not clear
how well an adapted (pASBS) measure of this instrument would be conducted with
upper primary aged students. The following Hypotheses 1.5.1 1.5.4 were designed
to assess the overall psychometric standing of the pASBS for pre-adolescent students.
The following results relate to checks of reliability, validity, and invariance across
critical groups.
220
Hypothesis 1.5.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of pASBS
Overview. Hypothesis 1.5.1 proposed that the a priori first-order three factor
and second-order one factor structure of the pASBS would be demonstrated with
acceptable reliability estimates for the total sample, as well as by critical groups.
Results of internal consistency for the pASBS. Reliability estimates of the
a priori three factor first-order model are presented in Table 7.14. Good levels of
internal consistency were found within each first-order factor (alpha coefficients
ranging from = .80 to .86, median = .84) for the total sample. In addition, positive
alpha coefficients were found across the critical groups (alpha coefficients ranging
from = .76 to .88, median = .84), The alpha coefficients found in this study are
consistent with research conducted in secondary schools (Parada, 2006).
Table 7.14
Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the First and Second-Order
pASBS Factors Assessed Across the Total Sample as well as by Gender, Year, and
Gender by Year Groups of the Upper Primary Participants
Support .86 .86 .86 .85 .87 .86 .86 .84 .88 4
Acceptance .80 .81 .77 .82 .78 .83 .78 .79 .76 4
Attachment .84 .83 .85 .84 .84 .83 .83 .85 .85 4
BELONG .91 .91 .90 .92 .90 .92 .89 .90 .91 12
Mean and Median Coefficient alpha for First-Order Scales
Median .84 .83 .85 .84 .84 .83 .83 .84 .81
Mean .83 .83 .83 .84 .83 .84 .82 .83 .81
Note. BELONG=Total Belonging; ALL=Total Sample; M=male sample; F=female
Excellent internal consistency was also found for the one factor second-order
model (Total School Belonging) with an alpha coefficient of = .91 for the total
sample. Reliability estimates for the Year, gender, and Year by gender groups started
at = .89, and were as high as = .92, with a median = .91. Each group was found
221
to have equally high alpha coefficients estimated across each factor from the first and
second-order models. All estimates were deemed to be at acceptable, good, or
excellent levels.
total upper primary sample, as well as by critical groups. This is consistent with
research conducted in secondary schools (Parada, 2006). This result confirms that the
pASBS is a reliable measure of overall school belonging, as well as three areas of
belonging, for use with pre-adolescent students.
the First and Second-Order pASBS with CFA
Overview. Hypothesis 1.5.2 was designed to assess the first-order a priori three
factor and a priori one factor second-order structure of the pASBS. This Hypothesis
posited that the a priori factor structure would be demonstrated with acceptable
overall model fits using CFA. In addition, Hypothesis 1.5.3 proposed that latent factor
correlation coefficients within and between factors of the factor structure would be
Results of construct and convergent validity of the pASBS. The CFA of the
three factor pASBS was conducted. Analysis of the twelve variables and their
corresponding three factor structure resulted in an excellent fit to the data according to
the NNFI = .98, and CFI = .99 (see Table 7.15), suggesting approximately 98% of the
covariance can be explained among the variables. Further indication of an acceptable
fit was found with the errors of approximation of the population (RMSEA = .065,
AIC = 297.20, CAIC = 453.68).
222
The CFA of the pASBS also demonstrated positive factor loadings of all
variables onto their corresponding factors, ranging from .68 to .80 (refer to Table
7.15; p < .05). As expected, correlations among the school belonging variables
(ranging from .66 to .87) were positive and high, suggesting factors converged
appropriately. This may also be suggestive of a second-order one factor scale.
Table 7.15
and Model Fit for the First and Second-Order pASBS
Support Acceptance Attachment
Item 1 .77 .71 .79
Item 2 .77 .68 .69
Item 3 .79 .74 .78
Item 4 .80 .71 .75
Second-Order Parameter Estimates ()
BELONG .93 .71 .93
Factors Correlations of First-Order a Priori Factors ()
Support --
Acceptance .66 --
Attachment .87 .66 --
Model Fit
N 2
df NNFI CFI RMSEA
1st and 2nd 894 243.20 51 .98 .99 .065
Note. Item 1-4=Instrument items corresponding to factors; BELONG=Total School
Belonging; Acceptance=Rule Acceptance; N=total number of participants in sample;
2=Chi-square; df=degrees of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index; CFI=Comparative
Fit Index; RMSEA=Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.
Due to the high correlations between the Support and Attachment scales a
follow-up analysis was conducted. A CFA was conducted with a second-order, one
factor model (Total School Belonging) defined by Support, Rule Acceptance, and
Attachment. This resulted in the same model fit (due to all factors loading onto the
same factor) with parameter estimates loading significantly onto the Total School
Belonging factor (ranging from = .71 to .93, p < .05). This second-order model may
offer important insight into the overall impact of school belonging, with the first-order
223
model also offering important contributions to specific areas of school belonging;
hence both models were retained.
Summary. Hypotheses 1.5.2 and 1.5.3 were supported. The twelve item first
and second-order CFA of the pASBS was found to have an excellent model fit, with
distinct factors for upper primary aged students. The CFA demonstrated positive
factor loadings and appropriate convergent and discriminant validity. These results
supported the pASBS as a valid instrument of total school bullying, and the different
areas of school bullying for pre-adolescent students.
Hypothesis 1.5.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of pASBS for Year, Gender, and
Overview. Hypothesis 1.5.4 proposed that the a priori three factor first-order
and one factor second-order pASBS would be invariant for males and females, Year 5
and Year 6 students, and across the interaction of these critical groups.
Results of factorial invariance of the pASBS. Prior to testing of factorial
invariance, a CFA model for each group was conducted. It should be noted that only
the invariance testing across the first-order model was conducted as the second-order
model contains only one factor and would result in the same fit indices. As can be
seen in Table 7.16 each group had satisfactory first-order CFA models with RMSEA
ranging from .065 to .082, NNFI ranging from .99 to .97, and CFI ranging from .99 to
.98. However, although other fit statistics were excellent, the Year 6 data resulted in a
high RMSEA = .082. This suggests comparisons should be made with caution
between Year by gender groups when inferring results to the population, particularly
with the Year 6 group. The pattern of factor loadings and correlations for each group
224
was consistent with that found in the initial CFA with the total sample (see Appendix
17 for example).
Following the acceptable model fits for each group, the pASBS was assessed
for invariance across Year, followed by gender, and then Year by gender (Table 7.16).
across groups. As can be seen in Table 7.16., the RMSEA deteriorated across all
group invariance tests as models became increasingly restricted. However, the gender
and Year models were considered acceptable. For invariance across Year, RMSEA
ranged from .070 to .068, and for gender these ranged from .065 to .077 from the fully
free to the fully invariant model. The Year by gender RMSEA was unacceptable
ranging from .075 to .085 from the fully free to the fully invariant model, again
suggesting that caution should be taken when interpreting results. However, what is
more important for structural invariance to be met is the difference in equality
between each model across the CFI.
for Year, where the CFI did not change from the fully free to the fully invariant model
(CFI = .98). In addition, each group comparison satisfied the minimal fit requirement
of structural integrity (CFI changes no greater than .01 from the fully free to the factor
loadings and factor variances/covariances model; Cheung & Rensvold, 2002). The
CFI from the fully free to the factor variances/covariances model ranged from CFI =
.99 to .98 across the gender models, and from CFI = .98 to .97 across the Year by
gender models. In addition, the overall model fit remained acceptable.
225
Table 7.16
Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the First-Order pASBS
Model Fit by Group
All Data 243.20 51 .98 .99 .065
Year 5 Data 148.72 51 .98 .99 .066
Year 6 Data 176.51 51 .98 .98 .074
Male Data 139.38 51 .98 .99 .063
Female Data 157.34 51 .98 .98 .068
Year 5 Male Data 103.38 51 .98 .98 .068
Year 6 Male Data 106.71 51 .97 .98 .071
Year 5 Female Data 114.16 51 .98 .98 .076
Year 6 Female Data 133.51 51 .97 .98 .082

no 325.23 102 .98 .98 .070
FL 340.95 111 .98 .98 .068
FL + FV/C 369.62 117 .98 .98 .070
FL + U 367.81 123 .98 .98 .067
FL + FV/C + U 395.49 129 .98 .98 .068
no 296.73 102 .98 .99 .065
FL 292.23 111 .98 .99 .063
FL + FV/C 341.17 117 .98 .98 .066
FL + U 409.42 123 .98 .98 .072
FL + FV/C + U 469.00 129 .97 .97 .077
no 457.75 204 .97 .98 .075
FL 503.18 231 .98 .98 .073
FL + FV/C 580.61 249 .97 .97 .078
FL + U 646.57 267 .97 .97 .080
FL + FV/C + U 740.78 285 .97 .96 .085
Approximation.
226
increasingly restricted. This supports the structural integrity of the first-order and
second-order pASBS as invariant across critical groups. Overall, this instrument can
be used as a measure of perceived school belonging with males and females in both
Year 5 and Year 6 cohorts.
The pASBS was found to have strong psychometric qualities in its a priori
three first-order and one second-order factors for Year 5 and Year 6 children. All
a priori item-to-factor loadings were significant, all item-to-factor loadings were
above the minimum level of acceptability for any factor loading (Hills, 2008), and
reliability estimates were found acceptable. The pASBS was found to be invariant
across year and gender groups according to the minimal variation in the CFI, as
stressed by Cheung and Rensvold (2002); however, some caution may be taken with
comparisons across year by gender groups due to the unacceptable RMSEA indices
for the most restrictive models. These results demonstrate support for the pASBS as
an appropriate and useful instrument to measure the different areas of school
belonging, as well as a total conception of school belonging with upper primary
students.
Hypotheses 1.6.1 1.6.4: Psychometric Assessment of CDI-10
The 10 item Child Depression Inventory was originally designed as a clinical
measure of depression to be used with children (Kovacs, 1981). One factor of
depression was proposed. Although this measure was designed to be administered
one-to-one with potentially clinically depressed students, the CDI-10 was
administered in this study to all students taking part in the study and was administered
227
as part of a series of combined questionnaires read aloud to students (see Chapter 6).
The CDI-10 has been found to have acceptable psychometric qualities with adolescent
students when similar data collection methods are used (Parada, 2006). However, it is
not clear how well this measure would be conducted with a range of non-clinically
depressed pre-adolescent students who completed the survey independently. The
following Hypotheses 1.6.1 1.6.4 were designed to assess the overall psychometric
standing of the CDI-10 for pre-adolescent students. The following results relate to
checks of reliability, validity, and invariance across critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.6.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of CDI-10
Overview. Hypothesis 1.6.1 posited that the a priori one factor structure of the
CDI-10 would be demonstrated, to acceptable reliability estimates of each factor for
the total sample, as well as in critical groups.
Results of internal consistency for CDI-10. Reliability estimates of the
a priori one factor model were conducted (see Table 7.17). Good levels of internal
consistency with the depression factor was found for the total sample ( = .80), and
acceptable to good levels of internal consistency were found across data for the
critical groups (alpha coefficients ranging from = .79 to .81, median = .80).
Table 7.17
Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the One Factor CDI-10 Assessed
the Upper Primary Participants
CDI .80 .80 .80 .81 .79 .80 .79 .81 .79 10
Note. CDI=Child Depression Inventory Scale; ALL=Total Sample; M=male sample;
F=female sample; 5=Year 5 sample; 6=Year 6 sample, M5=Year 5 male sample;
M6=Year 6 male sample; F5=Year 5 female sample; F6=Year 6 female sample.
228
total upper primary sample, as well as by critical groups. These results confirm that
the CDI-10 is a reliable measure of depression for use with pre-adolescent students.
Hypothesis 1.6.2: Assessment of Construct Validity of CDI-10 with CFA
Overview. Hypothesis 1.6.2 was designed to assess the a priori one factor
structure of the CDI-10. This Hypothesis posited that the a priori factor structure
would be demonstrated with acceptable overall model fits using CFA.
Results of construct validity of CDI-10. The CFA of the one factor CDI-10
was conducted. Analysis of the ten variables resulted in an acceptable fit to the data
with NNFI = .92, and CFI = .94 (see Table 7.18), suggesting that approximately 93%
of the covariance can be explained among the variables.
Table 7.18
Parameter Estimates, Uniqueness, Correlations and Model Fit for First- and Second-
Order CFA of CDI-10 Item Loadings to their A Priori Factors for W1 Participants
Model 1
CDI
Item 1 .50
Item 2 .51
Item 3 .50
Item 4 .72
Item 5 .55
Item 6 .56
Item 7 .51
Item 8 .61
Item 9 .40
Item 10 .45
Model Fit
N 2
df NNFI CFI RMSEA
894 268.85 35 .92 .94 .087
Note. Item 1-10=Instrument items corresponding to factors; CDI=Child Depression
Inventory Scale; N=total number of participants in sample; 2=Chi-square; df=degrees
of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index; CFI=Comparative Fit Index;
RMSEA=Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.
229
The CFA of the CDI-10 also demonstrated moderate factor loadings (p < .05)
of all variables onto their corresponding factors, ranging from = .40 to .72 (refer to
Table 7.18). The moderate factor loadings are similar, yet slightly smaller than those
found in previous research conducted with secondary students (Parada, 2006).
However, an acceptable fit was not found with the errors of approximation of the
population (RMSEA = .087, AIC = 308.85, CAIC = 424.76).
Table 7.19
Parameter Estimates, Uniqueness, Correlations and Model Fit for First- and Second-
Order CFA of CDI-10 Item Loadings to their A Priori Factors for W1 Participants
Model 2
CDI
Item 1 .46
Item 2 .52
Item 3 .51
Item 4 .73
Item 5 .52
Item 6 .46
Item 7 .53
Item 8 .61
Item 9 .40
Item 10 .46
Model Fit
894 198.81 34 .94 .95 .074
Note. Item 1-10=Instrument items corresponding to factors; CDI=Child Depression
Inventory Scale; N=total number of participants in sample; 2=Chi-square; df=degrees
of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index; CFI=Comparative Fit Index;
RMSEA=Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.
Due to the unacceptable RMSEA that resulted, an alternative model was
posited. Two items from the CDI-10 were very similar (I am sad and I feel like
crying), so a correlated uniqueness between these items was conducted for Model 2.
The resultant CFA was an improvement to the CDI-10, showing a smaller AIC and
CAIC than the original model (AIC = 240.81, CAIC = 362.52). In addition, a good fit
to the data was found with NNFI = .94, and CFI = .95 (see Table 7.19), suggesting
230
approximately 94% of the covariance can be explained among the variables. Further
indication of an acceptable fit was found with the errors of approximation of the
population (RMSEA = .074), and significant factor loadings.
Summary. Hypothesis 1.6.2 was supported. The 10 item CFA of the CDI-10
was found to have an acceptable model fit with moderate factor loadings for upper
primary aged students. Results support the CDI-10 as a valid instrument to measure
depression for use with pre-adolescent students.
Hypothesis 1.6.3: Factorial Invariance Testing of CDI-10 for Year, Gender, and
Overview. Hypothesis 1.6.3 proposed that the a priori one factor model of the
CDI-10 would be invariant for males and females, Year 5 and Year 6 students, and
Results of factorial invariance of CDI-10. Prior to testing of factorial
invariance, a CFA model was conducted for each group. The goodness of fit indices
of each groups CFA model can be seen in Table 7.20. RMSEA ranged from .074 to
.089, NNFI ranged from .90 to .94, and CFI ranged from .93 to .95. The unacceptable
RMSEA from four groups (RMSEAYear6 = .080; RMSEAYear5 males = .083;
RMSEAYear6 males = .089; RMSEAYear6 females = .089) suggests comparisons should be
made with caution between Year, and Year by gender groups, particularly when
inferring results to the population. The pattern of factor loadings and correlations for
each group was consistent with that found in the initial CFA with the total sample
(see Appendix 17 for example).
231
Table 7.20
Invariant Testing of Year and Gender with Chi-Square, Degrees of Freedom and Fit
Indices of the CDI-10
Model Fit by Group
All Data 198.81 34 .94 .95 .074
Year 5 Data 115.80 34 .94 .95 .074
Year 6 Data 131.54 34 .92 .94 .080
Male Data 117.57 34 .93 .95 .075
Female Data 114.38 34 .94 .95 .075
Year 5 Male Data 86.32 34 .92 .94 .083
Year 6 Male Data 91.05 34 .91 .93 .089
Year 5 Female Data 79.62 34 .94 .95 .079
Year 6 Female Data 97.32 34 .90 .93 .089

no 247.34 68 .93 .95 .077
FL 263.85 77 .94 .95 .074
FL + U 282.74 88 .94 .94 .070
no 238.11 68 .94 .95 .075
FL 260.79 77 .94 .95 .073
FL + U 349.06 88 .92 .93 .082
no 354.31 136 .92 .94 .085
FL 407.18 163 .92 .93 .082
FL + U 520.93 196 .91 .90 .086
Approximation.
Following the acceptable model fits for each group, the CDI-10 was assessed
Three models were tested with parameters commencing as free models between the
across groups. Three models were tested due to the CDI-10 containing one factor. No
factor variances/covariances could be tested. As can be seen in Table 7.20., the
232
RMSEA deteriorated across all group invariance tests as models became increasingly
restricted. However, the Year models were considered acceptable. For invariance
across Year, RMSEA ranged from .077 to .070 from the fully free to the fully
invariant model. The gender and Year by gender RMSEA models were unacceptable
ranging from .075 to .082 for the gender models, and from .085 to .086 for the Year
by gender models. This again suggests caution should be taken when interpreting the
results across groups. Although the RMSEA was not acceptable in the gender and
Year by gender models, what is more important for structural invariance to be met is
the difference in equality between each group across the CFI.
The CFI difference between each group comparison was minimal from the
fully free to the required structural integrity of the model (CFI changes no greater than
.01 from the fully free to the invariant factor loadings model). The CFI did not change
for the Year and gender models (CFI=.95), and the CFI changed by no more than .01
for the Year by gender models (ranging from CFI = .94 to .93) from the fully free to
the invariant factor loadings model. In addition, the overall model fit remained
acceptable.
Summary. Hypothesis 1.6.3 was partially supported. The differences in fit
indices were minimal across Year, gender, and Year by gender models as parameters
were increasingly restricted from the fully free to the invariant factor loadings model.
However, issues surrounding the original CFA models conducted for each group show
that four of the groups contained unacceptable RMSEA indices. While support for the
structural integrity of the CDI-10 will be accepted as part of this study, caution will be
taken when making comparisons between groups, and caution should be taken when
inferring results to alternative samples based on the results in this study. These results
233
support the cautious use of comparisons in depression between groups in later
analyses of this study.
The CDI-10 was found to have adequate psychometric qualities in its a priori
one factor model for Year 5 and Year 6 children. All a priori item-to-factor loadings
were significant, all item-to-factor loadings were above the minimum level of
acceptability for any factor loading (Hills, 2008), and reliability estimates were
acceptable. The CDI-10 was found to be invariant across Year and gender; however,
caution should be taken with comparisons across Year by gender groups. These
results demonstrate support for the CDI-10 as an appropriate and useful instrument for
this investigation to measure depression with upper primary students.
Hypotheses 1.7.1 1.7.4: Psychometric Assessment of BBPS
The Beyond Bullying Program Scale is a new instrument designed to measure
preadolescent student knowledge about bullying and action to prevent bullying pre
and post intervention. It is not clear how well this two factor measure (Knowledge,
Action) would be conducted with upper primary aged students. The following
Hypotheses 1.8.1 1.8.4 were designed to assess the overall psychometric standing of
the BBPS for pre-adolescent students. The following results relate to checks of
reliability, validity, and invariance across critical groups.
Hypothesis 1.7.1: Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Estimate of BBPS
Overview. Hypothesis 1.7.1 proposed that the a priori two factor structure of
the BBPS would be demonstrated with acceptable reliability estimates of each factor
for the total sample, as well as across critical groups.
234
Results of internal consistency for the BBPS. Reliability estimates of the
a priori two factor model were conducted (see Table 7.21). Factors reached good
levels of internal consistency with the total sample (alpha coefficients ranging from
= .80 to .88), and acceptable to good levels also across each critical group (alpha
coefficients ranging from = .76 to .89, median = .84), with each group containing
similar estimates across factors. Each factor was deemed to have acceptable or good
levels of internal consistency across all samples.
Table 7.21
Coefficient Alpha Estimates and Number of Items of the Two BBPS Factors Assessed
the Upper Primary Participants at W3
Knowledge .80 .79 .81 .79 .80 .76 .82 .82 .77
Action .88 .88 .87 .86 .88 .87 .89 .86 .88
Median .84 .84 .84 .83 .84 .82 .86 .84 .83
Mean .84 .84 .84 .83 .84 .82 .86 .84 .83
Note. ALL=Total Sample; M=male sample; F=female sample; 5=Year 5 sample; 6=Year
6 sample, M5=Year 5 male sample; M6=Year 6 male sample; F5=Year 5 female sample;
F6=Year 6 female sample.
total sample, as well as in critical groups. This result confirms that the BBPS is a
reliable measure of knowledge of bullying, and of action to prevent bullying to be
used with pre-adolescent students before and after the BB program.
the BBPS with CFA
Overview. Hypothesis 1.7.2 was designed to test the a priori two factor
structure of the BBPS. This Hypothesis posited that the factor structure would be
demonstrated with acceptable model fits with CFA. Moreover, Hypothesis 1.7.3
235
proposed that latent factor correlation coefficients between two factors would be
Results of construct and convergent validity of the BBPS. A first-order CFA
of the two factor twelve item BBPS was conducted. An excellent fit to the data was
found with a NNFI = .99, and CFI = .99 (Table 7.22), suggesting that approximately
99% of the covariance can be explained among the variables. An acceptable fit was
also found with the RMSEA= .046 (df = 53).
All variables loaded onto their designated factors (see Table 7.22), ranging
from =.55 to .82, with a median = .69, and consisted of statistically significant
factor loadings (p < .05). Moreover, the correlation between the two factors was as
expected, positive and high ( = .57, p < .05), suggesting that the higher the
knowledge a student has about bullying, the more likely they are to take action to
prevent it.
Table 7.22
and Model Fit for the BBPS at W3
Knowledge Action
Item 1 .55 .66
Item 2 .54 .75
Item 3 .64 .80
Item 4 .64 .82
Item 5 .68 .69
Item 6 .72 .70
Knowledge --
Action .57 --
Model Fit
N 2
df NNFI CFI RMSEA
850 146.88 53 .99 .99 .046
Note. Items 1-6=Instrument items corresponding to factors; N=total number of participants
in sample; 2=Chi-square; df=degrees of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index;
236
Summary. Hypotheses 1.7.2 and 1.7.3 were supported. The twelve item, two-
factor CFA conducted on the BBPS was found to have an excellent model fit with
positive and distinct factors for the upper primary aged student data. In addition,
appropriate convergent validity was found, with positive and significant correlation
between the two factors Knowledge and Action. These results support the BBPS as a
valid measure of knowledge about bullying and action to prevent it, with
pre-adolescent students before and after the BB program.
Hypothesis 1.7.4: Factorial Invariance Testing of BBPS for Year, Gender, and Year
by Gender Groups
Overview. Hypothesis 1.7.4 proposed that the a priori two factor model of the
BBPS would be invariant for males and females, Year 5 and Year 6 students, and
Results of factorial invariance of the BBPS. Prior to testing of factorial
invariance, a CFA model for each group was conducted. As can be seen in Table 7.23
.99). In addition, the pattern of factor loadings and correlations for each group was
consistent with that found in the initial CFA with the total sample (see Appendix 17
for example).
237
Table 7.23
Gender, and Year by Gender Models for the BBPS at W3
Model Fit by Group
All Data 146.88 53 .99 .99 .046
Year 5 Data 136.10 53 .98 .98 .062
Year 6 Data 93.44 53 .99 .99 .042
Male Data 123.71 53 .98 .98 .055
Female Data 106.14 53 .98 .99 .049
Year 5 Male Data 120.24 53 .96 .96 .078
Year 6 Male Data 81.87 53 .98 .99 .050
Year 5 Female Data 100.72 53 .97 .98 .068
Year 6 Female Data 85.86 53 .97 .98 .053

no 229.54 106 .98 .99 .052
FL 241.70 116 .98 .99 .051
FL + FV/C 250.02 119 .98 .98 .051
FL + U 385.64 128 .97 .97 .069
FL + FV/C + U 397.36 131 .97 .97 .069
no 229.85 106 .98 .99 .053
FL 246.96 116 .98 .98 .052
FL + FV/C 256.93 119 .98 .98 .052
FL + U 280.47 128 .98 .98 .053
FL + FV/C + U 289.65 131 .98 .98 .053
no 388.69 212 .97 .98 .063
FL 427.77 242 .94 .98 .060
FL + FV/C 460.15 251 .97 .97 .063
FL + U 638.64 278 .96 .95 .078
FL + FV/C + U 673.51 287 .95 .95 .080
Approximation.
238
Following the acceptable model fits for each group, the BBPS was assessed
invariance tests as models became increasingly restricted. However, these were
considered acceptable as the models did not breach the .80 level of acceptability. For
invariance across Year RMSEA ranged from .051 to .069, for gender these ranged
from .052 to .053, and for the Year by gender groups RMSEA ranged from .060 to
.080 from the fully free to the fully invariant model.
The CFI difference between each group comparison was minimal. Each group
comparison satisfied the minimal fit requirements of structural integrity (CFI changes
no greater than .01 from the fully free to the factor loadings and factor
variances/covariances model; Cheung & Rensvold, 2002). The CFI changes from the
fully free to the fully invariant models ranged from CFI = .99 to .98 across Year, from
CFI = .99 to .98 across gender, and from CFI = .98 to .97 across the Year by gender
models. In addition, the overall model fit remained acceptable.
increasingly restricted. This supports the structural integrity of the BBPS as invariant
across critical groups, whereby this instrument can be used as a measure of student
knowledge about bullying and action to prevent bullying with males and females in
both Year 5 and Year 6 cohorts. Furthermore, these results support the use of
comparisons between groups in later analyses (see Chapter 8).
239
The BBPS was found to have strong psychometric qualities in its a priori two
factor model for Year 5 and Year 6 children. All a priori item-to-factor loadings were
for any factor loading (Hills, 2008), reliability estimates were acceptable, and the
BBPS was found to be invariant across Year, gender, and Year by gender groups,
suggesting that results are comparable across critical groups. These results
demonstrate support for the BBPS as an appropriate and useful instrument to measure
what upper primary students have learnt about bullying and have done to prevent
bullying.
Research Questions 1.8.1 1.9.2: Psychometric Assessment of Instrument
Battery
All instruments used in this study were developed to measure involvement in
bullying and related psychosocial constructs. These were administered together with a
preadolescent sample. Although psychometric properties were assessed for each
survey, it is also important to understand whether the psychometric standing of all
instruments together is upheld when administered as a battery. To test the
psychometric properties of the battery, a CFA was conducted. However, due to the
large number of instruments administered at one time, an examination of the factor
structure may yield model fits that do not support the factor structure (see Chapter 6).
For this reason, an investigation of the pattern of results will be assessed as more
important than overall model fit. This provides evidence that the factors designed to
measure specific psychosocial concepts load onto only those concepts they were
designed to measure.
240
Prior to assessment of factor structure of the W1 and W3 instrument battery, it
was important that enough data be available from which to estimate all parameters. To
compensate for low sample sizes item parcelling was used (see Appendix 18). This
was conducted to ensure that more data was available to estimate each parameter.
Items were randomly paired with other items within the corresponding factor (such
that two or more items made up one item parcel). This resulted in two to three item
parcels per factor (see Appendix 18). The following CFA models relate to an
assessment of W1 and W3 instrument battery validity.
Research Questions 1.8.1 and 1.8.2: Assessment of W1 Instrument Battery Validity
Overview. Research Questions 1.8.1 and 1.8.2 were designed to test the factor
structure of all instruments measured together during W1. Research Question 1.8.1
asked to what extent the W1 constructs are distinct as demonstrated by model fit from
a CFA. Moreover, Research Question 1.8.2 asked to what extent the latent factor
correlation coefficients between the latent factors would show appropriate
discrimination and convergence to other latent factors within the same battery of
instruments.
Results of assessment of W1 instrument battery validity. A CFA of the
twenty-nine factor seventy-six item battery was conducted on the W1 data. An
excellent fit to the data was found, with a NNFI = .98, and CFI = .99 (Table 7.24),
suggesting that over 98% of the covariance can be explained among the variables. An
acceptable fit was also found with the RMSEA= .027 (df = 2519).
241
Table 7.24
Parameter Estimates including Item Factor Loadings, and Model Fit for the W1
Battery of Instruments
Item Parcel 1 Item Parcel 2 Item Parcel 3
Model 1 Parameter Estimates ()
APRI-BT
BPhys .79 .78 .77
BVerb .83 .88 .86
BSoc .75 .79 .80
TPhys .83 .79 .84
TVerb .89 .88 .87
TSoc .88 .87 .87
APRI-PR
AReinf .72 .82 .66
PReinf .80 .81 .83
Ignore .77 .82 .81
Advoc .74 .81 .78
SDQI-E
AP .89 .90 .88
AB .89 .78 .79
PR .85 .89 .80
PT .84 .79 .79
MT .95 .95 .94
EN .95 .95 .83
SL .78 .87 .91
GS .73 .84 .80
OS .85 .84
SS .76 .78
ES .75 .74
HN .87 .79
ACSI
Avoidance .54 .71 .76
Solving .85 .80
Support .88 .80
pASBS
Support .86 .89
Acceptance .72 .81
Attachment .89 .82
CDI
Depression .75 .78 .73
Model Fit
Model 1 894 4209.84 2519 .98 .99 .027
Note. BPhys=Bully Physical; BVerb=Bully Verbal; BSoc=Bully Social; TPhys=Target Physical;

TVerb=Target Verbal; TSoc=Target Social; AReinf=Active Reinforcer; PReinf=Passive Reinforcer;
Ignore=Ignore Bullying; Advoc=Advocate for Target; AP=Physical Appearance; AB=Physical Ability;
PR=Peer Relations; PT=Parent Relations; MT=Math; EN=Verbal; SL=General Schooling; GS=General
Self-Esteem; OS=Opposite-Sex Relations; SS=Same-Sex Relations; ES=Emotional Stability;
HN=Honesty/Trustworthiness; Avoidance=Avoidance; Solving=Problem Solving; Support=Support
Seeking; CDI=Child Depression Inventory Scale; N=total number of participants in sample; 2=Chi-square;
df=degrees of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index; CFI=Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA=Root Mean
Square Error of Approximation.
242
All variables loaded onto their corresponding factors (see Table 7.24), ranging
factor loadings (p < .05). Moreover, the pattern of correlations between the latent
factors (see Table 7.25) was similar to that found with the individual instrument CFAs
(ranging from = -.60 to .88, median = .06, p < .05).
Although no unusual correlations were found between latent factors, it is
important to note those that were high. For example, involvement in bullying others
was positively related to participant roles that reinforce bullying (e.g., Active
Reinforcer, Passive Reinforcer), and negatively related to school belonging, and
whether a student perceived themself to be honest (Honesty/Trustworthiness
self-concept domain). Moreover, being targeted was positively related to depression,
and negatively related to same-sex peer relations, problem avoidance, and attachment
to school. What was concerning, was the link between being targeted and depression.
These latent factors had similar patterns of relations with all other constructs, mainly
in negative directions (e.g., self-concept, school belonging). While being targeted
tended to have more negative relation with a myriad of psychosocial latent factors
than involvement in bullying others (e.g., self-concept domains), results from this
study seem consistent with the reciprocal relations model (Marsh et al., 2004), with
many patterns of relations between bully and target scales being in similar directions
(e.g., school belonging). These results are also consistent with relations found
between constructs with secondary students (Parada, 2006).
243
Table 7.25
Correlation Coefficients for W1 Latent Factors within the Battery of Instruments
Latent Factor Correlations ()
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
APRI-BT
1 BPhys --
2 BVerb .88 --
3 BSoc .80 .78 --
4 TPhys .38 .35 .28 --
5 TVerb .30 .33 .24 .83 --
6 TSoc .23 .23 .28 .79 .83 --
APRI-PR
7 AReinf .65 .62 .56 .25 .21 .19 --
8 PReinf .49 .51 .40 .14 .14 .07 .64 --
9 Ignore -.02 .02 .08 .04 .00 .08 .08 .16 --
10 Advoc -.33 -.38 -.33 -.01 -.01 -.00 -.49 -.54 -.16 --
SDQI-E
11 AP -.08 -.10 -.11 -.09 -.18 -.18 -.08 .03 .06 -.07 --
12 AB .08 -.01 -.11 -.04 -.13 -.15 .00 .05 .06 .06 .45 --
13 PR -.07 -.12 -.13 -.30 -.35 -.38 -.07 .06 .04 .06 .61 .51 --
14 PT -.24 -.25 -.25 -.19 -.21 -.21 -.19 -.16 .06 .13 .30 .26 .30 --
15 MT -.13 -.12 -.20 -.03 -.07 -.08 -.11 -.15 .02 .02 .16 .21 .19 .23 --
16 EN -.33 -.27 -.25 -.05 -.01 -.05 -.26 -.18 -.03 .18 .14 -.02 .10 .21 .29
17 SL -.35 -.29 -.31 -.06 -.06 -.05 -.25 -.21 .07 .15 .27 .19 .26 .36 .66
18 GS -.31 -.32 -.35 -.19 -.25 -.27 -.33 -.14 .02 .26 .66 .43 .64 .50 .36
19 OS .06 .07 .02 -.11 -.09 -.13 .02 .12 -.08 .01 .37 .36 .56 .07 .01
20 SS -.11 -.17 -.20 -.33 -.40 -.44 -.17 -.05 -.05 .04 .36 .38 .78 .34 .13
21 ES .04 -.04 -.11 -.19 -.27 -.24 .01 -.01 -.01 -.10 .23 .30 .31 .22 .17
22 HN -.60 -.59 -.55 -.21 -.16 -.16 -.43 -.39 -.03 .23 .12 .05 .11 .30 .29
ACSI
23 Avoid .20 .20 .28 .28 .25 .32 .14 .22 .22 .04 -.03 .07 -.07 -.18 -.13
24 Solving -.10 -.11 -.12 .08 .10 .10 -.16 -.13 .01 .29 .14 .07 .13 .27 .15
25 Support -.15 -.13 -.09 .10 .14 .14 -.16 -.11 .08 .28 .15 -.01 .18 .24 -.00
pASBS
26 Support -.27 -.28 -.22 -.32 -.28 -.28 -.23 -.24 .04 .19 .27 .21 .40 .44 .23
27 Accept -.41 -.34 -.28 -.22 -.12 -.15 -.30 -.30 .10 .24 .12 .08 .14 .37 .16
28 Attach -.34 -.31 -.30 -.36 -.33 -.33 -.28 -.21 .06 .15 .27 .20 .39 .45 .23
CDI
29 Dep .21 .18 .25 .46 .53 .55 .20 .10 -.01 -.06 -.48 -.34 -.52 -.54 -.26
PR=Peer Relations; PT=Parent Relations; MT=Math; EN=Verbal; SL=General Schooling; GS=General Self-
Esteem; OS=Opposite-Sex Relations; SS=Same-Sex Relations; ES=Emotional Stability;
HN=Honesty/Trustworthiness; Avoidance=Avoidance; Solving=Problem Solving; Support=Support Seeking;
CDI=Child Depression Inventory Scale.
244
Table 7.25 continued...
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
SDQI-E
16 EN --
17 SL .63 --
18 GS .42 .59 --
19 OS -.06 .09 .23 --
20 SS .11 .17 .48 .37 --
21 ES .02 .12 .27 .26 .43 --
22 HN .29 .38 .36 -.01 .16 .21 --
ACSI
23 Avoid -.16 -.13 -.15 .01 -.24 -.32 -.27 --
24 Solving .18 .24 .25 .02 .06 .05 .17 .05 --
25 Support .14 .18 .23 .13 .10 -.05 .13 -.02 .51 --
pASBS
26 Support .24 .38 .44 .07 .32 .14 .30 -.14 -.16 -.14 --
27 Accept .31 .41 .29 -.03 .16 .03 .35 .25 .19 .22 .70 --
28 Attach .29 .44 .44 .07 .31 .07 .28 .21 .21 .16 .86 .70 --
CDI
29 Dep -.22 -.32 -.59 -.21 -.50 -.50 -.23 .33 -.12 -.07 -.40 -.24 -.45 --
Note. EN=Verbal; SL=General Schooling; GS=General Self-Esteem; OS=Opposite-Sex Relations; SS=Same-
Sex Relations; ES=Emotional Stability; HN=Honesty/Trustworthiness; Avoidance=Avoidance;
Solving=Problem Solving; Support=Support Seeking; CDI=Child Depression Inventory Scale.
Summary. Research Question 1.8.1 supported the 29 factor 76 item W1
battery as having an excellent model fit, with positive and distinct factors in the upper
primary aged student data. In addition, appropriate convergent and discriminant
validity was found with Research Question 1.8.2. These results support the W1
battery as a valid measure of involvement in bullying and related psychosocial
constructs with pre-adolescent students.
Research Questions 1.9.1 and 1.9.2: Assessment of W3 Instrument Battery Validity
Overview. Research Questions 1.9.1 and 1.9.2 were designed to test the factor
structure of all instruments measured together at W3. Research Question 1.9.1 asked
to what extent the W3 constructs are distinct, as demonstrated with model fit from a
CFA. Moreover, Research Question 1.9.2 asked to what extent the latent factor
correlation coefficients between the latent factors would show appropriate
245
discrimination and convergence to other latent factors within the same battery of
instruments.
Results of assessment of W3 instrument battery validity. Due to the inclusion
of one new instrument at W3, one model was posited to test the W3 battery validity:
Model 1 was designed to test the factor structure and correlation coefficients between
both the original W1 and the introduced W3 instrument at W3. Presented in this
section are the results for Model 3.
A CFA of the 31 factor 88 item W3 battery was conducted. An excellent fit to
the data was found, with a NNFI = .98, and CFI = .99 (Table 7.26), suggesting that
approximately 98% of the covariance can be explained among the variables. An
acceptable fit was also found with the RMSEA= .028 (df = 2937).
All variables loaded onto their corresponding factors (see Table 7.26), ranging
factor loadings (p < .05). Moreover, the pattern of correlations between the latent
factors (see Table 7.27) was similar to that found with the individual instrument CFAs
(ranging from = -.63 to .88, median = .09, p < .05).
Similarly to the W1 data, no unusual correlations between latent factors were
found. For those relations which were high, the W3 data showed similar trends to
those from W1. That is, involvement in bullying others was positively related to
participant roles that reinforce bullying, and negatively related to school belonging,
honesty, and knowledge and action to prevent bullying.
246
Table 7.26
Parameter Estimates including Item Factor Loadings, and Model Fit for the W3
Battery of Instruments
Latent Factor 1 Latent Factor 2 Latent Factor 3
Model 3 Parameter Estimates ()
APRI-BT
BPhys .80 .78 .78
BVerb .80 .86 .81
BSoc .76 .79 .72
TPhys .83 .78 .85
TVerb .85 .88 .85
TSoc .87 .87 .89
APRI-PR
AReinf .78 .79 .68
PReinf .79 .82 .85
Ignore .86 .85 .84
Advoc .79 .86 .74
SDQI-E
AP .92 .92 .90
AB .90 .75 .79
PR .87 .89 .82
PT .85 .77 .80
MT .95 .95 .95
EN .95 .96 .84
SL .78 .89 .93
GS .77 .88 .80
OS .88 .87
SS .79 .78
ES .85 .74
HN .87 .83
ACSI
Avoidance .66 .77 .76
Solving .78 .85
Support .82 .87
pASBS
Support .89 .90
Acceptance .83 .79
Attachment .90 .84
CDI
Depression .79 .82 .78
BBPS
Knowledge .77 .75 .81
Action .86 .83 .83
Model Fit
Model 2 850 4944.60 2937 .98 .99 .028
Seeking ; CDI=Child Depression Inventory Scale; N=total number of participants in sample; 2=Chi-square;
df=degrees of freedom; NNFI=Non-Normed Fit Index; CFI=Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA=Root Mean
Square Error of Approximation.
247
Table 7.27
Correlation Coefficients for W1 Latent Factors within the Battery of Instruments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
APRI-BT
1 BPhys --
2 BVerb .88 --
3 BSoc .69 .68 --
4 TPhys .34 .29 .23 --
5 TVerb .24 .27 .23 .84 --
6 TSoc .18 .16 .25 .77 .82 --
APRI-PR
7 AReinf .60 .55 .45 .16 .14 .09 --
8 PReinf .49 .44 .35 .10 .07 .04 .65 --
9 Ignore -.07 -.02 .05 -.04 -.01 -.02 .03 .13 --
10 Advoc -.31 -.36 -.19 -.01 -.01 .03 -.39 -.46 -.17 --
SDQI-E
11 AP -.07 -.07 -.10 -.18 -.17 -.20 -.07 .04 -.01 .08 --
12 AB .09 -.02 -.05 .02 -.09 -.09 .05 .08 -.09 .09 .56 --
13 PR -.09 -.13 -.11 -.29 -.33 -.41 -.08 .02 .01 .13 .63 .58
14 PT -.25 -.25 -.23 -.24 -.21 -.22 -.18 -.13 .02 .21 .35 .29
15 MT -.12 -.08 -.14 -.04 -.01 -.08 -.05 -.13 -.03 .14 .17 .17
16 EN -.25 -.20 -.19 -.04 .06 .00 -.20 -.19 -.02 .13 .15 -.00
17 SL -.30 -.25 -.26 -.11 -.02 -.06 -.17 -.20 .03 .20 .26 .19
18 GS -.25 -.26 -.23 -.22 -.20 -.26 -.23 -.10 -.02 .25 .67 .48
19 OS .05 .02 -.05 -.08 -.07 -.11 -.00 .05 -.07 .06 .41 .43
20 SS -.07 -.11 -.13 -.30 -.39 -.44 -.13 -.04 -.04 .11 .38 .36
21 ES -.05 -.06 -.20 -.17 -.24 -.27 -.02 -.04 -.03 .02 .28 .32
22 HN -.52 -.52 -.48 -.18 -.14 -.11 -.29 -.33 .06 .24 .17 .08
ACSI
23 Avoid .18 .15 .32 .34 .31 .31 .14 .15 .14 .01 -.08 .03
24 Solving -.15 -.14 -.05 .02 .05 .08 -.10 -.14 .05 .35 .15 .16
25 Support -.12 -.17 .00 .02 .04 .08 -.08 -.11 .05 .31 .18 .12
pASBS
26 Support -.36 -.38 -.29 -.28 -.27 -.23 -.29 -.26 -.01 .35 .31 .28
27 Accept -.49 -.48 -.32 -.22 -.14 -.11 -.40 -.39 .04 .40 .13 .00
28 Attach -.40 -.37 -.27 -.26 -.26 -.19 -.31 -.23 .06 .28 .30 .20
CDI
29 Dep .15 .13 .19 .40 .46 .51 .09 .05 -.02 -.08 -.48 -.39
BBPS
30 Knowl -.26 -.24 -.20 -.08 -.05 .01 -.25 -.25 .00 .24 .13 .13
31 Action -.22 -.20 -.22 .07 .03 .05 -.23 -.30 -.18 .52 .09 .18
Seeking; CDI=Child Depression Inventory Scale; Knowl=Knowledge.
248
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
SDQI-E
13 PR --
14 PT .46 --
15 MT .20 .22 --
16 EN .11 .21 .29 --
17 SL .30 .35 .63 .61 --
18 GS .73 .59 .30 .32 .50 --
19 OS .49 .14 .04 .01 .13 .32 --
20 SS .78 .35 .16 .10 .19 .55 .29 --
21 ES .36 .24 .22 .06 .19 .29 .27 .47 --
22 HN .18 .28 .23 .29 .35 .36 .03 .17 .27 --
ACSI
23 Avoid -.14 -.20 -.12 -.14 -.18 -.16 -.11 -.26 -.41 -.25 --
24 Solving .18 .24 .22 .21 .23 .24 .04 .04 .04 .16 .06 --
25 Support .25 .21 .03 .17 .17 .25 .09 .16 -.00 .12 .07 .63
pASBS
26 Support .38 .47 .22 .21 .42 .43 .09 .25 .15 .26 -.14 .29
27 Accept .17 .37 .21 .37 .46 .30 -.02 .09 .02 .35 -.14 .28
28 Attach .38 .42 .23 .32 .50 .41 .05 .29 .13 .31 -.16 .28
CDI
29 Dep -.63 -.53 -.23 -.11 -.28 -.58 -.23 -.60 -.52 -.21 .36 -.17
BBPS
30 Knowl .22 .26 .13 .21 .25 .28 .11 .16 .12 .21 -.04 .30
31 Action .23 .18 .16 .13 .24 .23 .14 .18 .15 .26 -.08 .32
Note. PR=Peer Relations; PT=Parent Relations; MT=Math; EN=Verbal; SL=General Schooling;
GS=General Self-Esteem; OS=Opposite-Sex Relations; SS=Same-Sex Relations; ES=Emotional Stability;
Seeking; CDI=Child Depression Inventory Scale; Knowl=Knowledge.
Also, being targeted was positively related to depression, and negatively
related to same-sex peer relations, problem avoidance, and school belonging.
Moreover, the link between being targeted and depression was evident with a similar
negative patterns of relations to other latent factors (e.g., self-concept, school
belonging), and the link between involvement in bullying others and being targeted
was also observed, with a similar pattern of results. Similar results have been found
with secondary students (Parada, 2006).
Summary. Research Question 1.9.1 supported the 31 factor 88 item W3
battery as having an excellent model fit with distinct factors in the upper primary aged
student data. Results were parallel to those found with the W1 battery data. In
249
addition, appropriate convergent and discriminant validity was found for Research
Question 1.9.2. These results support the W3 battery as a valid measure of
involvement in bullying and related psychosocial constructs with pre-adolescent
students.

25 26 27 28 29 30 31
ACSI
25 Support --
pASBS
26 Support .27 --
27 Accept .20 .67 --
28 Attach .32 .86 .69 --
CDI
29 Dep -.19 -.37 -.17 -.40 --
BBPS
30 Knowl .23 .28 .22 .30 -.21 --
31 Action .26 .26 .26 .26 -.16 .56 --
Note. Support=Support Seeking; CDI=Child Depression Inventory Scale; Knowl=Knowledge.
Summary of Research Questions 1.8.1 1.9.2
The W1 and W3 battery of instruments was found to have strong psychometric
qualities for Year 5 and Year 6 children. All a priori item-to-factor loadings were
for any factor loading (Hills, 2008) and distinct factors were found among the scales.
These results demonstrate support for the W1 and W3 instrument batteries as
appropriate and useful instruments that measure involvement in bullying and related
psychosocial constructs with upper primary students.
250
Chapter Summary
Chapter 7 was designed to assess the reliability and validity of each instrument
used with pre-adolescent students within this study. All instruments were found to be
psychometrically sound and useful measures that can be used with Year 5 and Year 6
students within this investigation. The W1 and W3 battery of instruments, consisting
of the APRI-BT, APRI-PR, SDQI-E, ACSI, pASBS, CDI-10, and BBPS, were found
to be reliable and valid instruments of involvement in bullying and related
psychosocial constructs for use with upper primary aged students. What makes these
findings valuable is that a rigorous and complex set of statistical techniques were
utilised to ascertain the structural integrity of the measures across gender and Year
cohorts (including the interaction of these two cohorts). Thus, not only were the
measures valid across the total sample, but they were also conceptually equivalent
across the critical groups within this investigation. This allows for a much greater
level of confidence in the between group comparisons that are conducted in the
following chapter. For the purposes of this investigation, these instruments were
deemed appropriate and useful measures of bullying related constructs for Year 5 and
Year 6 male and female students. The next chapter is designed to evaluate the BB
Program comprehensively, using robust statistical procedures.
251
CHAPTER 8
Study 2 Results: Impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools
Program
Multilevel modeling... has important statistical, methodological, and
substantive implications for the analysis of large-scale psychological
interventions and in particular for bullying research.
Parada (2006, p. 214).
Introduction
This chapter presents the results for Study 2: the impact of the Beyond
Bullying Primary Schools Program (BB). This chapter begins with an outline of the
analyses conducted, and is followed by the results, which are presented for each
specific hypothesis that was posed in Chapter 5. In order to thoroughly evaluate BB,
this study comprises of an investigation of the longitudinal changes in reported
bullying behaviours, experiences of being bullied, self-concept, and various correlates
to involvement in bullying (e.g., depression, coping strategies, and school belonging),
as well as an examination of how the impact of BB differs for year, gender, and year
by gender groups.
252
Overview of Analyses
The BB program was evaluated with orthogonal contrasts (see Chapter 6) as
they provide greater power during tests of significance, and offer greater substantive
interpretation of the research results (Rosenthal, Rosnow, & Rubin, 2000, p. 4). The
use of orthogonal contrasts together with multilevel modeling of longitudinal and
unbalanced data, provide the most accurate and powerful analysis method currently
available for this research design.
The multilevel structure consisted of time, grouped within students (students
completed the instrument battery on five occasions), and students nested within
schools. Each lower level was nested, or grouped, within higher levels (see Chapter
6). MLwiN (v2.02) was used to test the impact of BB, with multilevel modeling
contrasts on the following student outcomes: (1) use of bullying behaviours (Total
Bullying, Bully Physical, Bully Verbal, Bully Social: APRI-BT); (2) experiences of
being bullied (Total Target, Target Physical, Target Verbal, Target Social: APRI-BT);
(3) participant roles (Active Reinforcer, Passive Reinforcer, Ignore/Disregard,
Advocate: APRI-PR); (4) self-concept (Physical Appearance, Physical Ability, Peer
Relations, Parent Relations, Math, Verbal, General Schooling, General Self-Esteem,
Opposite-Sex Relations, Same-Sex Relations, Emotional Stability,
Honesty/Trustworthiness: SDQI-E); (5) use of coping strategies (Avoidance, Problem
Solving, Support Seeking: ACSI); (6) school belonging (Total School Belonging,
Support, Rule Acceptance, Attachment: pASBS); (7) depression (CDI-10); and (8) an
evaluation of participation in BB (Knowledge, Action: BBPS).
There was one control condition used within this study for Hypotheses 2.1.1 to
2.7.2. The intervention was implemented between the third (W3) and fourth (W4) data
collection period (see Chapter 6). The control condition (C1) was measured in the
253
baseline year, and consists of W1 and W2 data at the beginning and middle of the
school year respectively. The experimental condition (C2) was measured during the
BB intervention year, and consists of W3, W4, and W5 data at the beginning, middle,
and end of the school year respectively. For ease of interpretation within this study,
data collected at the beginning of the school year (regardless of which condition) will
be known as Time 1 (T1), data collected during the middle of the school year
(regardless of which condition) will be known as Time 2 (T2), and data collected
during the end of the school year (regardless of which condition) will be known as
Time 3 (T3; see Figure 8.1). Students (N = 3403) from Years 5 (n = 1659) and 6 (n =
1744) took part from T1 to T3.
However it should be noted that data for the final outcome variable tested
(Knowledge and Action; measured with BBPS), was collected during the
experimental condition only. For this reason, an alternative control group was used.
Data were collected on the Knowledge and Action factors at T1, T2, and T3 of the
experimental condition (C2) only. The control condition for Hypotheses 2.8.1 and
254
2.8.2 was T1; constituting the pre-intervention test. The experimental condition
consisted of T2 (first post-test) and T3 (second post-test), post-intervention.
An alpha level of .05 will be used for all statistical tests. This will be measured
with the Wald statistic: z = (estimate/standard error); which when greater than 1.96
represents significance at the .05 level (Goldstein, 1995). The percentage of total
variance explained by the different school levels (e.g., school, student, time), will be
provided for the variance components model only. The total percentage of variance
accounted for by each level (e.g., school, student, and time) will be calculated by
summing the parameters for each level, then dividing the specific level parameter by
the sum of those parameters, and multiplying by 100 (e.g., from Table 8.1 the school
level equation for total variance explained is 0.024x100/[.024+.508+.320]). The
following section details the impact of BB on distinct behavioural and psychosocial
outcome variables (see Appendix 19 for means and standard deviations).
Hypotheses 2.1.1 2.3.2: Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program Outcomes
on Bullying Behaviours, Experiences of Being Bullied, and Participant Roles
BB was specifically designed to reduce school bullying behaviours,
experiences of bullying, and the reinforcement of bullying by students. The following
Hypotheses 2.1.1 2.3.2 were designed to evaluate the impact of BB on bullying
behaviours, target experiences, and participant roles as indicated by student responses
to the APRI-BT and APRI-PR.
Hypothesis 2.1.1: Impact of BB on Total Bullying Behaviours (APRI-BT)
Overview. Hypothesis 2.1.1 proposed that over five time waves (W1-W5)
students from the experimental condition would report significantly lower levels of
bullying behaviours, than students from the control condition. Two multilevel models
255
were used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on Total Bullying,
measured by the APRI-BT. These models were: (1) variance components (null)
model; and (2) BB intervention effects model.
Model 1: Variance components model. The variance components model,
Model 1 was used to determine how much of the total variance was portioned into
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for total bullying.
Results are presented in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Total Bullying
Parameter (Equation parameter) Total Bullying
Bullying
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.134(.067)
Random
2 : between school variance .024(.016)
u: between student variance
2
.508(.027)
2e: between occasion variance .320(.009)
Note. Standard errors are given in parentheses. Values in bold are statistically
significant, p<.05. Equation parameters are presented for reference purposes.
Results at the school level suggest that the variation in the amount of bullying
behaviours used by students, did not differ statistically significantly between schools
(20 = .024, SE = .016). The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the
school level is 2.8% in the total bullying score. At the student and time level,
differences were found to be statistically significant, suggesting individual students
differed in the amount of bullying they reported using (2u0 = .508, SE = .027), and
the amount of bullying used by students was found to be statistically significantly
different across time (2e0 = .320, SE = .009). The percentage of total variance that
can be attributed to the individual level is 59.6%, and to occasion level is 37.6%.
256
Model 2: BB effects model of Total Bullying. Model 2 was used to determine
how much of the reported total bullying scores in the experimental condition, changed
as a result of BB, in comparison to the control condition (see Table 8.2). Three new
terms (orthogonal contrasts) were added to the model: (1) condition; (2) time; and
(3) the interaction between condition and time.
Table 8.2
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Total Bullying
Bullying
Fixed
Main Effects
Condition (C1vC2ijk) -.129(.013)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.021(.006)
Interactions
Condition versus Time (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk) -.016(.006)
Random
2u: between student variance .492(.026)
e: between occasion variance
2
.309(.009)
Results indicate that the main effect of condition was statistically significant
for total bullying behaviours (C1vC2ijk = -.129, SE = .013). This was in a negative
direction, suggesting that bullying behaviours were statistically significantly lower
during the experimental condition than the control condition. The result of time was
also in a negative direction and statistically significant (T1vT2T3ijk = -.021, SE =
.006). This suggests that bullying behaviours at the middle and end of the school year
(the average across T2 and T3) were statistically significantly lower than that at the
beginning of the school year (T1). The interaction of Condition by Time was also
statistically significant in the expected direction (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.016, SE =
.006). As can be seen in Figure 8.2, when taking into account condition versus time,
bullying decreased more in the experimental condition than the control condition,
257
from T1 to the average of T2 and T3. That is, Total Bullying decreased statistically
significantly as an outcome of BB.
Figure 8.2. Predicted mean standardised Total Bullying based on the equation for
Model 2 of the analysis
Summary. Hypothesis 2.1.1 was supported. BB was shown to be effective in
reducing total bullying for the total sample, as observed with the statistically
significant Condition by Time interaction.
Hypothesis 2.1.2: Impact of BB on Total Bullying (APRI-BT) used by Critical
Groups
male and female Year 5 and 6 students from the experimental condition would report
significantly lower levels of bullying behaviours, than students from the control
condition. One multilevel model was used to evaluate the experimental versus control
conditions on Total Bullying, measured by the APRI-BT, for Year 5 and 6 male and
female students. This model, Model 3, was an extension of Model 2 from Hypothesis
2.1.1, and was the year and gender interaction effects model.
258
Model 3: Year and gender interaction effects model. Model 3 was used to
determine how much of the reported total bullying scores in the experimental
condition, changed as a result of BB, in comparison to the control condition for each
year (5 and 6) and gender (male and female; see Table 8.3). Twelve new terms
(orthogonal contrasts) were added to the model: year; gender; year by gender; and the
interactions of year, gender, and year by gender with condition, time, and condition by
time.
Table 8.3
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Total Bullying
Bullying
Fixed
Main Effects
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.021(.006)
Y (Yijk) .040(.016)
G (Gijk) .220(.023)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) -.015(.006)
YxG (Y.Gijk) .040(.016)
Interactions by Condition
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) -.019(.023)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) -.060(.016)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) -.005(.023)
Interactions by Time
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.004(.006)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) -.008(.006)
YxG (G.Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.002(.006)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) -.005(.006)
G (G.C.Tijk) .002(.006)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) .007(.006)
Random
2 : bet. school variance .026(.017)
u: bet. student variance
2
.435(.023)
2e: bet. occasion variance .308(.009)
bet=between. Y=Year. G=Gender. C.T=C1vC2.T1vT2T3. YxG=Year.Gender. Year:
Year 5=-1, Year 6=+1. Gender: female=-1, male=+1.
259
For the purposes of this study, only the main and interaction effects of year,
gender, and year by gender with Condition by Time interactions will be discussed (see
Chapter 6). All other results are presented in Table 8.3. The main effect of year was
statistically significant (Yearijk = .040, SE = .016). This revealed that Year 6 students
reported statistically significantly more engagement in bullying others than Year 5
students. The main effect of gender was also statistically significant
(Genderijk = .220, SE = .023). This revealed that males reported statistically
significantly more engagement in bullying others than females. When the interaction
of year by gender was taken into account, year by gender groups differed statistically
significantly in their overall use of total bullying behaviours (Year.Genderijk = .040,
SE = .016). As can be seen in Figure 8.3, male Year 6 students reported the most
frequent bullying behaviours while females in both years reported similarly low
engagement in bullying others.
Figure 8.3. Predicted mean standardised Total Bullying score for critical groups based
on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
260
Also of interest were the non-statistically significant year by Condition by
Time (Year.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.005, SE = .006), gender by Condition by Time
(Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .002, SE = .006), and year by gender by Condition by
Time interactions (Year.Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .007, SE = .006). Moreover, the
interaction of Condition by Time on the total bullying score was still statistically
significant (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.015, SE = .006), over and above the effects of
year, gender, and year by gender that were entered into the model (see Figure 8.2).
These results suggest that the statistically significant reduction effects of BB on total
bullying scores did not differ statistically significantly among the critical groups. That
is, BB was equally effective in reducing total bullying scores with all critical groups.
reducing total bullying, after year and gender effects were entered. Bullying was
shown to reduce statistically significantly as a direct outcome of BB, with no
statistically significant differences between year and gender groups found. This
revealed that BB was just as effective in reducing total bullying with all year, gender,
and year by gender cohorts.
Hypothesis 2.1.3: Impact of BB on Physical, Verbal, and Social Forms of Bullying
(APRI-BT)
physical, verbal, and social bullying, than students from the control condition. Two
multilevel models were used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on
the three forms of bullying, measured by the APRI-PR. These models were:
(1) variance components (null) model; and (2) BB intervention effects model.
261
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for physical, verbal,
and social forms of bullying. Results are presented in Table 8.4.
Table 8.4
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Physical, Verbal, and Social Forms of
Bullying
Parameter (Equation parameter) Bully Physical Bully Verbal Bully Social
Bullying
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.088(.058) -.120(.070) -.149(.051)
Random
2 : bet. school variance .016(.012) .025(.017) .012(.009)
2u: bet. student variance .521(.028) .482(.026) .360(.022)
e: bet. occasion variance
2
.347(.010) .339(.010) .437(.013)
bet.=between.
Results at the school level suggest that the variation in the amount of each
form of bullying used by students did not differ statistically significantly between
schools (Bully Physical: 20 = .016, SE = .012; Bully Verbal: 20 = .025, SE = .017;
and Bully Social: 20 = .012, SE = .009). The percentage of total variance that can be
attributed to the school level is 1.8% in the Bully Physical score, 3% in the Bully
Verbal score, and 1.5% in the Bully Social score. At the student and time level,
differences were found to be significant, suggesting individual students differed in the
amount of bullying they reported engaging in (Bully Physical: 2u0 = .521, SE = .028;
Bully Verbal: 2u0 = .482, SE = .026; and Bully Social: 2u0 = .360, SE = .022), and
engagement in different forms of bullying used by students differed statistically
significantly across time (Bully Physical: 2e0 = .347, SE = .010; Bully Verbal: 2e0 =
.339, SE = .010; and Bully Social: 2e0 = .437, SE = .013). The percentage of total
variance that can be attributed to the individual level is 58.9% in the Bully Physical
262
score, 57% in the Bully Verbal score, and 44.5% in the Bully Social score. The
percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the occasion level is 39.3% in the
Bully Physical score, 40.1% in the Bully Verbal score, and 54% in the Bully Social
score.
Model 2: BB effects model of physical, verbal, and social forms of bullying.
Model 2 was used to determine how much of the reported forms of bullying in the
experimental condition, changed as a result of BB, in comparison to the control
condition (see Table 8.5). Three new terms (orthogonal contrasts) were added to the
model: (1) condition; (2) time; and (3) the interaction between condition and time.
Table 8.5
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Physical, Verbal, and Social Forms of
Bullying
Bullying
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.080(.059) -.112(.070) -.136(.051)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) -.099(.013) -.109(.013) -.132(.014)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.012(.006) -.012(.006) -.032(.007)
Interactions
Condition versus Time
-.009(.006) -.008(.006) -.025(.007)
(C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk)
Random
2
.341(.010) .334(.010) .419(.012)
bet.=between.
for all forms of bullying (Bully Physical: C1vC2ijk = -.099, SE = .013; Bully Verbal:
C1vC2ijk = -.109, SE = .013; and Bully Social: C1vC2ijk = -.132, SE = .014). Physical,
verbal and social forms of bullying were all in negative directions, suggesting that all
forms of bullying were statistically significantly lower during the experimental
263
condition than the control condition. The result of time was also in a negative
direction and statistically significant for all forms of bullying (Bully Physical:
T1vT2T3ijk = -.012, SE = .006; Bully Verbal: T1vT2T3ijk = -.012, SE = .006; and
Bully Social: T1vT2T3ijk = -.032, SE = .007). This suggests that all forms of bullying
at the middle and end of the school year (the average across T2 and T3) were
statistically significantly lower than that at the beginning of the school year (T1). It is
important to note that the Condition by Time interaction for Bully Social was also
.007). As can be seen in Figure 8.4, when taking into account condition versus time,
social forms of bullying decreased more in the experimental condition than the control
condition, from T1 to the average of T2 and T3. That is, Bully Social decreased
statistically significantly as an outcome of BB. There was no statistically significant
Condition by Time interaction found for physical and verbal forms, suggesting these
forms of bullying did not decrease statistically significantly as a direct outcome of
BB.
Figure 8.4. Predicted mean standardised Bully Social score based on the equation for
264
Summary. Hypothesis 2.1.3 was supported for social forms of bullying, but
not physical or verbal forms of bullying. BB was shown to be effective in reducing
social forms of bullying as observed with the statistically significant Condition by
Time interaction.
Hypothesis 2.1.4: Impact of BB on Physical, Verbal, and Social Forms of Bullying
(APRI-BT) used by Critical Groups
significantly lower levels of physical, verbal, and social forms of bullying behaviours,
than students from the control condition. One multilevel model was used to evaluate
the experimental versus control conditions on three forms of bullying, measured by
the APRI-PR, for Year 5 and 6 male and female students. This model, Model 3, was
an extension of Model 2 from Hypothesis 2.1.3, and was the year and gender
interaction effects model.
determine how much of the reported forms of bullying in the experimental condition,
changed as a result of BB, in comparison to the control condition for each year
(5 and 6) and gender (male and female; see Table 8.6). Twelve new terms (orthogonal
contrasts) were added to the model: year; gender; year by gender; and the interactions
of year, gender, and year by gender with condition, time, and condition by time.
265
Table 8.6
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Physical, Verbal, and
Social Forms of Bullying
Bullying
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.091(.061) -.129(.072) -.138(.052)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.012(.006) -.012(.006) -.032(.007)
Y (Yijk) .023(.016) .077(.016) -.011(.016)
G (Gijk) .292(.023) .208(.022) .074(.022)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) -.008(.006) -.007(.006) .025(.007)
YxG (Y.Gijk) .033(.016) .045(.016) .024(.016)
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) -.004(.023) -.036(.022) -.003(.022)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) -.057(.016) -.066(.016) -.030(.016)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) .003(.023) -.017(.022) .007(.022)
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.002(.006) -.008(.006) .001(.007)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) .003(.006) -.012(.006) -.010(.007)
YxG (G.Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.004(.006) -.006(.006) .004(.007)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) -.011(.006) -.007(.006) .005(.007)
G (G.C.Tijk) .000(.006) .000(.006) .007(.007)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) .000(.006) .008(.006) .011(.007)
Random
2e: bet. occasion variance .340(.010) .332(.010) .418(.012)
statistically significant for Bully Verbal (Yearijk = .077, SE = .016), which revealed
that Year 6 students reported statistically significantly more engagement in verbally
bullying others, than Year 5 students. The main effect of gender was also statistically
266
significant for all forms of bullying (Bully Physical: Genderijk = .292,
SE = .023; Bully Verbal: Genderijk = .208, SE = .022; and Bully Social: Genderijk =
.074, SE = .022). This revealed that males reported statistically significantly more
engagement in physically, verbally, and socially bullying others, than females. The
interaction of year by gender was also statistically significant for Bully Physical
(Year.Genderijk = .033, SE = .016) and Bully Verbal (Year.Genderijk = .045, SE =
.016). As can be seen in Figures 8.5 and 8.6 respectively, male Year 6 students
reported the highest use of physical bullying, as well as the highest use of verbal
bullying forms, than all other critical groups.
It is important to note that the Condition by Time interaction for Bully Social
was also statistically significant in the expected direction (C1vC2.T1v2T3ijk = -.025,
SE = .007), over and above the effects of year, gender, and year by gender that were
entered into the model (see Figure 8.4). This suggests that when taking into account
condition versus time, social forms of bullying decreased more in the experimental
condition than the control condition, from T1 to the average of T2 and T3 (see Figure
8.4). That is, Bully Social decreased statistically significantly as an outcome of BB.
There was no statistically significant Condition by Time interaction found for
physical and verbal types, suggesting these forms of bullying did not decrease
statistically significantly as a direct outcome of BB. In addition, there were no year
and gender by Condition by Time interactions. These results suggest that the impacts
of BB on all forms of bullying did not statistically significantly differ among the
critical groups. That is, BB was equally effective in reducing social bullying scores
with all critical groups, and equally non-statistically significant in reducing physical
and verbal forms with all critical groups.
267
Figure 8.5. Predicted mean standardised Bully Physical score between Males and
Females in Years 5 and 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
Figure 8.6. Predicted mean standardised Bully Verbal score between Males and
Summary. Hypothesis 2.1.4 was supported for social forms of bullying, but
not for physical and verbal forms. BB was shown to be effective in reducing social
forms of bullying after year and gender effects were entered. Social bullying was
shown to be statistically significantly reduced as a direct outcome of BB, with no
statistically significant differences between year and gender groups found. This
268
revealed that BB was just as effective in reducing social bullying with all year,
gender, and year by gender cohorts. BB was not shown to be effective in reducing
physical or verbal forms of bullying for the total sample, or by year or gender cohorts.
Hypothesis 2.2.1: Impact of BB on Target Experiences (APRI-BT)
target experiences, than students from the control condition. Two multilevel models
were used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on Total Target,
measured by the APRI-BT. These models were: (1) variance components (null)
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for total target
experiences. Results are presented in Table 8.7.
Table 8.7
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Total Target
Parameter (Equation parameter) Total Target
Target
Fixed
Main Effects
Random
2
.447(.013)
269
Results at the school level suggest that the variation in the amount of student
target experiences, did not differ statistically significantly between schools (20 =
.010, SE = .008). The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the school
level is 1.1% in the total target score. At the student and time level, differences were
found to be statistically significant, suggesting individual students differed in their
amount of reported target experiences (2u0 = .493, SE = .028), and the amount of
target experiences statistically significantly differed across time (2e0 = .447, SE =
.013). The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the individual level is
51.9%, and to occasion level is 47.1%.
Model 2: BB effects model of Total Target experiences. Model 2 was used to
determine how much of the reported total target experiences in the experimental
condition, changed as a result of BB, in comparison to the control condition
(see Table 8.8). Three new terms (orthogonal contrasts) were added to the model:
(1) condition; (2) time; and (3) the interaction between condition and time.
Table 8.8
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Total Target
Target
Fixed
Main Effects
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.032(.007)
Interactions
Condition versus Time (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk) -.014(.007)
Random
270
for total target experiences (C1vC2ijk = -.138, SE = .015). This was in a negative
direction, suggesting that target experiences were statistically significantly lower
during the experimental condition than the control condition. The result of time was
also in a negative direction and statistically significant (T1vT2T3ijk = -.032, SE =
.007). This suggests that target experiences at the middle and end of the school year
beginning of the school year (T1). It is important to note that the interaction was also
.007). This suggests that when taking into account condition versus time, target
experiences decreased more in the experimental condition than the control condition,
from T1 to the average of T2 and T3. That is, as can be seen in Figure 8.7, Total
Target decreased statistically significantly as an outcome of BB.
Figure 8.7. Predicted mean standardised Total Target based on the equation for Model
2 of the analysis
271
reducing total target experiences for the total sample, as observed with the statistically
Hypothesis 2.2.2: Impact of BB on Total Target (APRI-BT) experienced by Critical
Groups
significantly lower levels of target experiences, than students from the control
conditions on Total Target, measured by the APRI-BT, for Year 5 and 6 males and
females. This model, Model 3, was an extension of Model 2 from Hypothesis 2.1.1,
and was the year and gender interaction effects model.
determine how much of the reported total target experiences in the experimental
time.
statistically significant (Yearijk = -.051, SE = .017). This revealed that Year 5 students
reported statistically significantly more experiences of being bullied than Year 6
272
students. The main effect of gender was also statistically significant
(Genderijk = .062, SE = .025). This revealed that males reported statistically
significantly more experiences of being bullied than females. When the interaction of
year by gender was taken into account, year by gender groups did not differ
statistically significantly in their overall target experiences (Year.Genderijk = .019, SE
= .017).
Table 8.9
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Total Target
Target
Fixed
Main Effects
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.032(.007)
Y (Yijk) -.051(.017)
G (Gijk) .062(.025)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) -.013(.007)
YxG (Y.Gijk) .019(.017)
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) -.004(.025)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) -.027(.017)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) -.005(.025)
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) .012(.007)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) -.011(.007)
YxG (G.Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.004(.007)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) .010(.007)
G (G.C.Tijk) -.007(.007)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) -.004(.007)
Random
2
.494(.028)
273
Time (Year.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .010, SE = .007), gender by Condition by Time
(Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.007, SE = .007), and year by gender by Condition by
Time interactions (Year.Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.004, SE = .007). The
interaction of Condition by Time on the total target score was also not statistically
significant (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.013, SE = .007), after the effects of year, gender,
and year by gender were entered into the model. These results suggest that the impact
of BB did not differ among the critical groups. In addition, the BB effects no longer
statistically significantly reduced total target experiences scores after year and gender
were entered.
Summary. Hypothesis 2.2.2 was not supported. BB was not shown to be
effective in reducing target experiences when year and gender were entered into the
model. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences between year and gender
groups were found. However, it should be noted that the result of Condition by Time
for Total Target was very close to significance (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.013, SE =
.007).
Hypothesis 2.2.3: Impact of BB on Physical, Verbal, and Social Target Experiences
(APRI-PR)
physical, verbal, and social forms of target experiences, than students from the control
condition. Two multilevel models were used to evaluate the experimental versus
control conditions on three target experiences, measured by the APRI-PR. These
models were: (1) variance components (null) model; and (2) BB intervention effects
model.
274
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for target experiences.
Table 8.10
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Physical, Verbal, and Social Forms of
Target Experiences
Parameter (Equation parameter) Target Physical Target Verbal Target Social
Target
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.074(.047) -.057(.049) -.081(.036)
Random
2
.450(.013) .466(.014) .529(.016)
bet.=between.
form of student target experiences, did not differ statistically significantly between
schools (Target Physical: 20 = .010, SE = .008; Target Verbal: 20 = .011, SE =
.008; and Target Social: 20 = .005, SE = .005). The percentage of total variance that
can be attributed to the school level is 1.1% in the Target Physical score, 1.1% in the
Target Verbal score, and .5% in the Target Social score. At the student and time level,
differences were found to be significant, suggesting individual students differed in
their amount of reported target experiences (Target Physical: 2u0 = .437, SE = .026;
Target Verbal: 2u0 = .481, SE = .028; and Target Social: 2u0 = .399, SE = .026), and
reported target experiences statistically significantly differed across time (Target
Physical: 2e0 = .450, SE = .013; Target Verbal: 2e0 = .466, SE = .014; and Target
Social: 2e0 = .529, SE = .016). The percentage of total variance that can be attributed
to the individual level is 48.7% in the Target Physical score, 50.2% in the Target
275
Verbal score, and 42.8% in the Target Social score. The percentage of total variance
that can be attributed to the occasion level is 50.2% in the Target Physical score,
48.6% in the Target Verbal score, and 56.7% in the Target Social score.
Model 2: BB effects model of physical, verbal, and social forms of target
experiences. Model 2 was used to determine how much of the how much of the
reported forms of target experiences in the experimental condition, changed as a result
of BB, in comparison to the control condition (see Table 8.11). Three new terms
(orthogonal contrasts) were added to the model: (1) condition; (2) time; and (3) the
interaction between condition and time.
Table 8.11
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Physical, Verbal, and Social Forms of Target
Experiences
Target
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.061(.048) -.047(.049) -.070(.036)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.026(.007) -.016(.007) -.049(.007)
Interactions
-.001(.007) -.011(.007) -.016(.007)
(C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk)
Random
2
.429(.013) .445(.014) .506(.015)
bet.=between.
for all forms of target experiences (Target Physical: C1vC2ijk = -.138, SE = .014;
Target Verbal: C1vC2ijk = -.108, SE = .015; and Target Social: C1vC2ijk = -.113, SE =
.015). Physical, verbal and social forms of target experiences were all in negative
directions, suggesting that all forms of target experiences were statistically
276
significantly lower during the experimental condition than the control condition. The
result of time was also in a negative direction and statistically significant for all forms
of target experiences (Target Physical: T1vT2T3ijk = -.026, SE = .007; Target Verbal:
T1vT2T3ijk = -.016, SE = .007; and Target Social: T1vT2T3ijk = -.049, SE = .007).
This suggests that all forms of target experiences at the middle and end of the school
year (the average across T2 and T3) were statistically significantly lower than that at
the beginning of the school year (T1). It is important to note that the Condition by
Time interaction for Target Social was also statistically significant in the expected
direction (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.016, SE = .007). As can be seen in Figure 8.8, when
taking into account condition versus time, social forms of target experiences
decreased more in the experimental condition than the control condition, from T1 to
the average of T2 and T3. That is Target Social decreased statistically significantly as
an outcome of BB. This was not statistically significant for physical and verbal types
suggesting these forms of target experiences did not decrease statistically significantly
as a direct outcome of BB.
Figure 8.8. Predicted mean standardised Target Social score based on the equation for
277
Summary. Hypothesis 2.2.3 was supported for social forms of target
experiences, but not physical or verbal forms of target experiences. BB was shown to
be effective in reducing social forms of target experiences as observed with the
statistically significant Condition by Time interaction.
Hypothesis 2.2.4: Impact of BB on Total Bullying (APRI-BT) experienced by
Critical Groups
significantly lower levels of physical, verbal, and social forms of target experiences,
than students from the control condition. One multilevel model was used to evaluate
the experimental versus control conditions on three forms of target experiences,
measured by the APRI-BT, for Year 5 and 6 males and females. This model, Model 3,
was an extension of Model 2 from Hypothesis 2.2.3, and was the year and gender
determine how much of the how much of the reported forms of target experiences in
the experimental condition, changed as a result of BB, in comparison to the control
condition for each year (5 and 6) and gender (male and female; see Table 8.12).
Twelve new terms (orthogonal contrasts) were added to the model: year; gender; year
by gender; and the interactions of year, gender, and year by gender with condition,
time, and condition by time.
278
Table 8.12
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Physical, Verbal, and
Social Forms of Target Experiences
Parameter (Equation parameter) Target Physical Target Verbal Target Social
Target
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.060(.048) -.053(.050) -.067(.037)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.026(.007) -.016(.007) -.049(.007)
Y (Yijk) -.050(.017) -.026(.018) -.068(.017)
G (Gijk) .170(.023) .033(.025) -.021(.024)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) -.009(.007) -.011(.007) -.016(.007)
YxG (Y.Gijk) .031(.017) .015(.018) .007(.017)
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) .024(.023) -.026(.025) -.002(.024)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) -.036(.017) -.033(.018) -.001(.017)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) .012(.023) -.008(.025) .010(.024)
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) .009(.007) -.006(.007) .018(.007)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) -.009(.007) -.009(.007) -.010(.007)
YxG (G.Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.007(.007) .000(.007) -.007(.007)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) .002(.007) .008(.007) .016(.007)
G (G.C.Tijk) -.002(.007) -.005(.007) -.012(.007)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) -.007(.007) .000(.007) -.007(.007)
Random
statistically significant for Target Physical (Yearijk = -.050, SE = .017) and Target
Social (Yearijk = -.068, SE = .017), which revealed that Year 5 students reported
statistically significantly more physical and social target experiences than Year 6
279
students. The main effect of gender was also statistically significant for physical
forms of target experiences (Target Physical: Genderijk = .170, SE = .023), revealing
that males reported statistically significantly more experiences of being bullied in
physical forms than females. No statistically significant year by gender interaction
was found for physical, verbal, or social forms. The interaction of Condition by Time
for Target Social was statistically significant in the expected direction
(C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.016, SE = .007), over and above the effects of year, gender,
and year by gender that were entered into the model (see Figure 8.8). This suggests
that when taking into account condition versus time, social target experiences
the average of T2 and T3. That is, social forms of target experiences decreased
statistically significantly as an outcome of BB. However, as can be seen in Figure 8.9,
this impact was greater for Year 5 students than Year 6 students
(Year.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .016, SE = .007). There were no statistically significant
interactions found for physical and verbal forms of target experiences, suggesting
these forms of target experiences did not decrease statistically significantly as a direct
outcome of BB. In addition, there were no gender and year by Condition by Time
interactions for physical and verbal forms. These results suggest that the impacts of
BB on physical and verbal forms of target experiences did not differ statistically
significantly among the critical groups.
Summary. Hypothesis 2.2.4 was supported for social forms of target
experiences for Year 5 students only. Hypothesis 2.2.4 was not supported for physical
or verbal forms of target experiences, nor for social forms of target experiences with
Year 6 students. BB was shown to be effective in reducing social forms of target
experiences even after year and gender effects were entered, but was not shown to be
280
effective in reducing physical or verbal forms of target experiences for the total
sample, or by year or gender cohorts.
Figure 8.9. Predicted mean standardised Target Social score for Year 5 and 6 Students
based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
Hypothesis 2.3.1: Impact of BB on Participant Roles (APRI-PR)
active or passive reinforcement of bullying, and ignoring bullying, as well as higher
levels of advocating for the target, than students from the control condition. Two
multilevel models were used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on
four types of participant roles (Active Reinforcer, Passive Reinforcer,
Ignore/Disregard, Advocate), measured by the APRI-PR. These models were:
(1) variance components (null) model; and (2) BB intervention effects model.
281
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for participant roles.
Table 8.13
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Participant Roles
Parameter (Equation parameter) Active Passive Ignore/ Advocate
Reinforcer Reinforcer Disregard for Target
Participant Roles
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.036(.043) -.116(.052) -.096(.064) .071(.056)
Random
2 : bet. school variance .008(.006) .012(.009) .021(.014) .014(.011)
2u: bet. student variance .425(.026) .531(.028) .480(.029) .553(.031)
e: bet. occasion variance .499(.015) .352(.010)
2
.544(.016) .457(.014)
bet.=between.
Results at the school level suggest that the variation in the amount of each type
of participant role students had engaged in, did not differ statistically significantly
between schools (Active Reinforcer: 20 = .008, SE = .006; Passive Reinforcer: 20 =
.012, SE = .009; Ignore/Disregard: 20 = .021, SE = .014; and Advocate: 20 = .014,
SE = .011). The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the school level
is .9% in the Active Reinforcer score, 1.3% in the Passive Reinforcer score, 2% in the
Ignore/Disregard score, and 1.4% in the Advocate score. At the student and time
level, differences were found to be significant, suggesting individual students differed
in their amount of reported engagement in participant roles (Active Reinforcer: 2u0 =
.425, SE = .026; Passive Reinforcer: 2u0 = .531, SE = .028; Ignore/Disregard: 2u0 =
.480, SE = .029; and Advocate: 2u0 = .553, SE = .031), and engagement in participant
roles statistically significantly differed across time (Active Reinforcer: 2e0 = .449,
SE = .015; Passive Reinforcer: 2e0 = .352, SE = .010; Ignore/Disregard: 2e0 = .544,
282
SE = .016; and Advocate: 2e0 = .457, SE = .014). The percentage of total variance
that can be attributed to the individual level is 45.6% in the Active Reinforcer score,
59.3% in the Passive Reinforcer score, 45.9% in the Ignore/Disregard score, and 54%
in the Advocate score. The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the
occasion level is 53.5% in the Active Reinforcer score, 39.3% in the Passive
Reinforcer score, 52.1% in the Ignore/Disregard score, and 44.6% in the Advocate
score.
Model 2: BB effects model of Participant Roles. Model 2 was used to
determine how much of the reported participant role scores in the experimental
Table 8.14
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Participant Roles
Participant Roles
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.032(.044) -.112(.053) -.086(.066) .070(.056)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) -.042(.015) -.057(.013) -.097(.016) .006(.015)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) .007(.007) -.017(.006) -.029(.008) -.037(.007)
Interactions
.002(.007) -.033(.006) -.051(.008) .030(.007)
(C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk)
Random
e: bet. occasion variance .499(.015) .347(.010)
2
.523(.015) .447(.013)
bet.=between.
283
for all participant roles except Advocate (Active Reinforcer: C1vC2ijk = -.042, SE =
.015; Passive Reinforcer: C1vC2ijk = -.057, SE = .013; Ignore/Disregard: C1vC2ijk =
-.097, SE = .016; and Advocate: C1vC2ijk = .06, SE = .015). Active Reinforcer,
Passive Reinforcer, and Ignore/Disregard were in negative directions, suggesting that
actively and passively reinforcing, as well as ignoring bullying were statistically
significantly lower during the experimental condition than the control condition. The
result of time was also in a negative direction and statistically significant for Passive
Reinforcer, Ignore/Disregard, and Advocate (Passive Reinforcer: T1vT2T3ijk = -.017,
SE = .006; Ignore/Disregard: T1vT2T3ijk = -.029, SE = .008; and Advocate:
T1vT2T3ijk = -.037, SE = .007). This suggests that passively reinforcing, ignoring the
bullying, and advocating for the target at the middle and end of the school year
beginning of the school year (T1). It is important to note that the Condition by Time
interactions for Passive Reinforcer, Ignore/Disregard, and Advocate were also
statistically significant in the expected directions (Passive Reinforcer:
C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.033, SE = .006; Ignore/Disregard: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.051,
SE = .008; and Advocate: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.030, SE = .007). As can be seen in
Figure 8.10 and 8.11 respectively, when taking into account condition versus time,
passive reinforcing (see Figure 8.10), and ignoring bullying (see Figure 8.11)
the average of T2 and T3. In addition, as can be seen in Figure 8.12, advocating for
the target increased more in the experimental condition than the control condition,
from T1 to the average of T2 and T3. That is, Passive Reinforcer and gnore/Disregard
decreased statistically significantly as an outcome of BB, while Advocate increased to
284
a greater degree in the experimental condition than the control condition as an
outcome of BB.
Summary. Hypothesis 2.3.1 was supported for Passive Reinforcer,
Ignore/Disregard, and Advocate, but not Active Reinforcer. BB was shown to be
effective in reducing passive reinforcement of bullying, and ignoring bullying, as well
as increasing student advocating for the target, as observed with the statistically
significant Condition by Time interactions.
Figure 8.10. Predicted mean standardised Passive Reinforcer score based on the
equation for Model 2 of the analysis
Figure 8.11. Predicted mean standardised Ignore/Disregard score based on the
285
Figure 8.12. Predicted mean standardised Advocate score based on the equation for
Hypothesis 2.3.2: Impact of BB on Participant Roles (APRI-PR) used by Critical
Groups
significantly lower levels of active or passive reinforcement of bullying, and ignoring
bullying, as well as higher levels of advocating for the target, than students from the
control condition. One multilevel model was used to evaluate the experimental versus
control conditions on four types of participant roles, measured by the APRI-PR, for
Year 5 and 6 males and females. This model, Model 3, was an extension of Model 2
from Hypothesis 2.3.1, and was the year and gender interaction effects model.
determine how much of the reported participant role scores in the experimental
286
time.
Table 8.15
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Participant Roles
Participant Roles
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.047(.043) -.125(.052) -.085(.067) .075(.058)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) -.051(.017) -.092(.017) -.071(.018) .061(.018)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) .006(.007) -.017(.006) -.030(.008) -.036(.007)
Y (Yijk) .025(.017) .058(.017) -.050(.018) -.095(.018)
G (Gijk) .163(.023) .116(.025) -.064(.025) -.102(.026)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) .002(.007) -.033(.006) -.052(.008) .030(.007)
YxG (Y.Gijk) .016(.017) .017(.017) .007(.018) -.060(.018)
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) -.045(.023) -.031(.024) -.014(.025) -.006(.026)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) -.042(.017) -.024(.017) -.016(.018) .008(.018)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) -.026(.023) -.010(.024) -.011(.025) -.002(.026)
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.005(.007) .011(.006) .018(.008) .002(.007)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) -.001(.007) -.007(.006) .011(.008) -.011(.007)
YxG (G.Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.010(.007) -.010(.006) .007(.008) .000(.007)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) -.001(.007) .000(.006) .007(.008) .012(.007)
G (G.C.Tijk) .016(.007) -.002(.006) .025(.008) -.005(.007)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) -.009(.007) -.005(.006) -.002(.008) -.008(.007)
Random
2
.391(.025) .504(.027) .481(.029) .527(.030)
2e: bet. occasion variance .496(.015) .345(.010) .518(.015) .443(.013)
statistically significant for Passive Reinforcer (Yearijk = .058, SE = .017),
Ignore/Disregard (Yearijk = -.050, SE = .018), and Advocate (Yearijk = -.095, SE =
287
.018). This revealed that Year 6 students reported statistically significantly more
involvement in passively reinforcing bullying than Year 5 students, and that Year 5
students reported statistically significantly more involvement in ignoring bullying,
and advocating for the target than Year 6 students. The main effect of gender was also
statistically significant for all participant roles (Active Reinforcer: Genderijk = .163,
SE = .023; Passive Reinforcer: Genderijk = .116, SE = .025; Ignore/Disregard:
Genderijk = -.064, SE = .025; and Advocate: Genderijk = -.102, SE = .026). This
revealed that males reported statistically significantly more involvement in actively
and passively reinforcing bullying than females, and that females reported statistically
significantly more involvement in ignoring and advocating for the target than males.
The interaction of year by gender was only statistically significant for Advocate
(Year.Genderijk = -.060, SE = .018). As can be seen in Figure 8.13, female Year 5
students reported the highest use of advocating for the target, while male Year 6
students reported the least amount of advocating for the target.
Figure 8.13. Predicted mean standardised Advocate score between Males and
288
Figure 8.14. Predicted mean standardised Active Reinforcer score for Males and
Females based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
Also of interest were the statistically significant gender by Condition by Time
interactions (Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk) found for actively reinforcing and ignoring
the bullying (Active Reinforcer = .016, SE = .007; and Ignore/Disregard = .025, SE =
.008). These results suggested that the effects of BB statistically significantly differed
among males and females. As can be seen in Figure 8.14, males increased their active
reinforcement of bullying, although this was not as high as that found in the control
group. The rate of active reinforcement of females decreased as an outcome of BB. In
relation to ignoring the bullying, Figure 8.15 shows that BB reduced actions of
ignoring bullying for both males and females, although this was more prevalent for
the female cohort. That is, BB reduced ignoring behaviours of students statistically
significantly more in females than males. No further year, gender, or year by gender
differences were found for the impact of BB.
Moreover, the interaction of Condition by Time for Passive Reinforcer
(C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.033, SE = .006), Ignore/Disregard (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk =
-.052, SE = .008), and Advocate participant roles (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.030, SE =
289
.007) were still statistically significant in the desired directions, over and above the
effects of year, gender, and year by gender that were entered.
Figure 8.15. Predicted mean standardised Ignore/Disregard score for Males and
Summary. Hypothesis 2.3.2 was supported for passively reinforcing and
ignoring the bullying, as well as advocating for the target, but not for actively
reinforcing the bullying. BB was shown to be effective in reducing passive
reinforcement and ignoring of bullying, as well as in increasing students advocating
for the target during incidents of bullying, after year and gender effects were entered.
Year and gender interactions revealed BB was more effective in reducing active
reinforcing and ignoring behaviours among females. No other year, gender, or year by
gender interactions were significant, suggesting BB was just as effective in reducing
passive reinforcement, and increasing advocating for the target with all year, gender,
and year by gender cohorts.
290
Hypotheses 2.4.1 2.7.2: Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program Outcomes
on Psychosocial Correlates to Bullying (Self-Concept, Coping Strategies, School
Belonging, and Depression)
While BB was specifically designed to reduce school bullying behaviours,
experiences of bullying, and the reinforcement of bullying amongst students, it was
also expected that secondary impacts on student psychosocial factors would be
affected. The following Hypotheses 2.4.1 2.7.2 were designed to evaluate the impact
of BB on self-concept, coping strategies, school belonging, and depression as
indicated by student responses to the SDQI-E, ACSI, pASBS, and CDI-10.
(SDQI-E)
students from the experimental condition would report higher statistically significant
self-concepts in the multiple domains of peer related factors (Peer Relations,
Opposite-Sex Relations, and Same-Sex Relations) and general self-esteem, than
students from the control condition. Furthermore, Research Question 2.4.3 asked what
impact BB would have on Physical Appearance, Physical Ability, Parent Relations,
Maths, Verbal, General Schooling, Emotional Stability, and Honesty/Trustworthiness
self-concept scores of students from the experimental conditions, in comparison to
the control condition. Two multilevel models were used to evaluate the experimental
versus control conditions on 12 self-concept factors, measure by the SDQI-E. These
models were: (1) variance components (null) model; and (2) BB intervention effects
model.
291
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for multiple
dimensions of self-concept. Results are presented in Table 8.16.
Table 8.16
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Self-Concept
Parameter (Equation parameter) Physical Physical Peer Parent
Appearance Ability Relations Relations
Self-Concept
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .127(.066) .045(.044) .092(.044) .048(.047)
Random
Maths Verbal General General

Schooling Self-Esteem
Self-Concept
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .033(.041) .063(.048) .045(.045) .101(.050)
Random
Opposite- Same-Sex Emotional Honesty

Sex Relations Stability
Relations
Self-Concept
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .127(.062) .060(.047) .077(.066) .066(.057)
Random
bet.=between.
292
domain of student self-concept, did not differ statistically significantly between
schools (Physical Appearance: 20 = .022, SE = .015; Physical Ability: 20 = .007,
SE = .007; Peer Relations: 20 = .007, SE = .007; Parent Relations: 20 = .009, SE =
.007; Maths: 20 = .006, SE = .006; Verbal: 20 = .009, SE = .008; General
Schooling: 20 = .007, SE = .007; General Self-Esteem: 20 = .011, SE = .009;
Opposite-Sex Relations: 20 = .018, SE = .013; Same-Sex Relations: 20 = .009, SE
= .007; Emotional Stability: 20 = .021, SE = .015; and Honesty/Trustworthiness: 20
= .015, SE = .011). The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the
school level is 2.3% in the Physical Appearance score, .7% in the Physical Ability
score, .7% in the Peer Relations score, .9% in the Parent Relations score, .6% in the
Maths score, .9% in the Verbal score, .7% in the General Schooling score, 1.1% in the
General Self-Esteem score, 1.7% in the Opposite-Sex Relations score, .9% in the
Same-Sex Relations score, 2% in the Emotional Stability score, and 1.5% in the
Honesty/Trustworthiness score.
At the student and time level, differences were found to be significant,
suggesting individual students differed in their amount of each self-concept domain
(Physical Appearance: 2u0 = .602, SE = .031; Physical Ability: 2u0 = .803, SE =
.037; Peer Relations: 2u0 = .637, SE = .033; Parent Relations: 2u0 = .634, SE = .032;
Maths: 2u0 = .723, SE = .035; Verbal: 2u0 = .751, SE = .036; General Schooling: 2u0
= .651, SE = .033; General Self-Esteem: 2u0 = .595, SE = .031; Opposite-Sex
Relations: 2u0 = .665, SE = .034; Same-Sex Relations: 2u0 = .556, SE = .030;
Emotional Stability: 2u0 = .598, SE = .032; and Honesty/Trustworthiness: 2u0 = .614,
SE = .032) and each domain of self-concept also differed across time (Physical
Appearance: 2e0 = .322, SE = .010; Physical Ability: 2e0 = .173, SE = .005; Peer
293
Relations: 2e0 = .346, SE = .010; Parent Relations: 2e0 = .341, SE = .010; Maths: 2e0
= .277, SE = .008; Verbal: 2e0 = .254, SE = .008; General Schooling: 2e0 = .358, SE
= .011; General Self-Esteem: 2e0 = .376, SE = .011; Opposite-Sex Relations: 2e0 =
.361, SE = .011; Same-Sex Relations: 2e0 = .393, SE = .012; Emotional Stability: 2e0
= .420, SE = .012; and Honesty/Trustworthiness: 2e0 = .342, SE = .010).
The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the individual level is
63.6% in the Physical Appearance score, 81.7% in the Physical Ability score, 64.3%
in the Peer Relations score, 64.4% in the Parent Relations score, 71.9% in the Maths
score, 74.1% in the Verbal score, 64.1% in the General Schooling score, 60.6% in the
General Self-Esteem score, 63.7% in the Opposite-Sex Relations score, 58% in the
Same-Sex Relations score, 57.6% in the Emotional Stability score, and 63.2% in the
Honesty/Trustworthiness score. The percentage of total variance that can be attributed
to the occasion level is 34% in the Physical Appearance score, 17.6% in the Physical
Ability score, 34.9% in the Peer Relations score, 34.7% in the Parent Relations score,
27.5% in the Maths score, 25% in the Verbal score, 35.2% in the General Schooling
score, 38.3% in the General Self-Esteem score, 34.6% in the Opposite-Sex Relations
score, 41% in the Same-Sex Relations score, 40.4% in the Emotional Stability score,
and 35.2% in the Honesty/Trustworthiness score.
Model 2: BB effects model of Self-Concept. Model 2 was used to determine
how much of the reported self-concept scores in the experimental condition, changed
as a result of BB, in comparison to the control condition (see Table 8.17). Three new
terms (orthogonal contrasts) were added to the model: (1) condition; (2) time; and (3)
the interaction between condition and time.
Results indicated that the main effect of condition was statistically significant
for all participant self-concept domains except Parent Relations and Maths (Physical
294
Appearance: C1vC2ijk = .155, SE = .013; Physical Ability: C1vC2ijk = .047, SE =
.010; Peer Relations: C1vC2ijk = .162, SE = .013; Verbal: C1vC2ijk = .028, SE = .012;
General Schooling: C1vC2ijk = .062, SE = .014; General Self-Esteem: C1vC2ijk =
.136, SE = .014; Opposite-Sex Relations: C1vC2ijk = .206, SE = .013; Same-Sex
Relations: C1vC2ijk = .114, SE = .014; Emotional Stability: C1vC2ijk = .092, SE =
.015; and Honesty/Trustworthiness: C1vC2ijk = .044, SE = .014). These were all in
positive directions, suggesting that student self-concept in physical appearance and
ability, verbal and general schooling abilities, general peer as well as opposite and
same-sex relations, emotional stability, honesty, and general self-esteem were
statistically significantly higher during the experimental condition than the control
condition. The result for the main effect of time was also statistically significant and
positive for all self-concept domains except Parent Relations (Physical Appearance:
T1vT2T3ijk = .049, SE = .006; Physical Ability: T1vT2T3ijk = .018, SE = .004;
Peer Relations: T1vT2T3ijk = .055, SE = .006; Maths: T1vT2T3ijk = .013, SE = .006;
Verbal: T1vT2T3ijk = .013, SE = .005; General Schooling: T1vT2T3ijk = .016, SE =
.006; General Self-Esteem: T1vT2T3ijk = .038, SE = .006; Opposite-Sex Relations:
T1vT2T3ijk = .066, SE = .006; Same-Sex Relations: T1vT2T3ijk = .047, SE = .006;
Emotional Stability: T1vT2T3ijk = .038, SE = .007; and Honesty/Trustworthiness:
T1vT2T3ijk = .014, SE = .006), suggesting student self-concept in physical appearance
and physical ability, math as well as verbal and general schooling abilities, general
peer as well as opposite and same-sex peer relations, emotional stability, honesty, and
general self-esteem, were statistically significantly higher at the middle and end of the
school year (the average across T2 and T3), than that at the beginning of the school
year (T1).
295
Table 8.17
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Self-Concept
Parameter (Equation parameter) Physical Physical Peer Parent
Appearance Ability Relations Relations
Self-Concept
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .117(.064) .043(.044) .081(.043) .046(.047)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) .155(.013) .047(.010) .162(.013) .022(.014)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) .049(.006) .018(.004) .055(.006) -.006(.006)
Interactions
C.T (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk) .027(.006) .003(.004) .029(.006) .007(.006)
Random
Maths Verbal General General
Schooling Self-Esteem
Self-Concept
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .034(.041) .061(.048) .041(.045) .091(.050)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) -.002(.012) .028(.012) .062(.014) .136(.014)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) .013(.006) .013(.005) .016(.006) .038(.006)
Interactions
C.T (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk) -.005(.006) .003(.005) .007(.006) .018(.006)
Random
e: bet. occasion variance .276(.008)
2
.253(.008) .354(.011) .355(.011)
Opposite- Same-Sex Emotional Honesty
Sex Relations Stability
Relations
Self-Concept
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .114(.064) .051(.047) .070(.067) .063(.057)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) .206(.013) .114(.014) .092(.015) .044(.014)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) .066(.006) .047(.006) .038(.007) .014(.006)
Interactions
C.T (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk) .037(.006) .027(.006) .015(.007) .006(.006)
Random
e: bet. occasion variance .302(.009) .370(.011) .406(.012) .340(.010)
2
bet.=between.
296
It is important to note that the interactions of Condition by Time for many
self-concept domains were also statistically significant in the expected directions
(Physical Appearance: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .027, SE = .006; Peer Relations:
C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .029, SE = .006; General Self-Esteem: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk =
.018, SE = .006; Opposite-Sex Relations: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .037, SE = .006;
Same-Sex Relations: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .027, SE = .006; and Emotional Stability:
C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .015, SE = .007). As can be seen in the following figures, when
taking into account condition versus time, physical appearance (see Figure 8.16), peer
relations (see Figure 8.17), as well as opposite and same-sex peer relations
(see Figures 8.18 and 8.19 respectively), emotional stability (see Figure 8.20), and
general self-esteem (see Figure 8.21), increased statistically significantly as a direct
outcome of BB.
Figure 8.16. Predicted mean standardised Physical Appearance score based on the
297
Figure 8.17. Predicted mean standardised Peer Relations score based on the equation
for Model 2 of the analysis
Figure 8.18. Predicted mean standardised Opposite-Sex Relations score based on the
298
Figure 8.19. Predicted mean standardised Same-Sex Relations score based on the
Figure 8.20. Predicted mean standardised Emotional Stability score based on the
299
Figure 8.21. Predicted mean standardised General Self-Esteem score based on the
increasing students peer, opposite-sex, and same-sex peer relations self-concepts, as
well as general self-esteem for the total sample. In addition, the results for Research
Question 2.4.3 showed BB was also effective in enhancing emotional stability and
physical appearance self-concepts for the total sample, as observed with the
statistically significant Condition by Time interaction. These factors of self-concept
were all non-academic and relevant to contributing to protective factors that assist
students in not becoming involved in school bullying.
(SDQI-E) for Critical Groups
statistically significantly higher self-concepts in the multiple domains peer related
factors (Peer Relations, Opposite-Sex Relations, and Same-Sex Relations) and general
300
self-esteem, than students from the control condition. Furthermore, Research Question
2.4.4 asked what impact BB would have on male and female Year 5 and 6 students
from the experimental conditions, Physical Appearance, Physical Ability, Parent
Relations, Maths, Verbal, General Schooling, Emotional Stability, and
Honesty/Trustworthiness self-concept scores in comparison to the control condition.
One multilevel model was used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions
on 12 self-concept factors, measured by the SDQI-E, for Year 5 and 6 males and
females. This model, Model 3, was an extension of Model 2 that was used to test
Hypothesis 2.4.1 and Research Question 2.4.3, and was the year and gender
determine how much of the reported self-concept scores in the experimental
time.
301
Table 8.18
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Self-Concept
Parameter (Equation parameter) Appearance Ability Peer Parent Maths Verbal Schooling General SE Opposite Same Emotional Honesty
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .118(.064) .034(.045) .080(.045) .042(.047) .028(.044) .075(.047) .049(.046) .090(.051) .115(.062) .050(.048) .071(.068) .073(.055)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) .159(.017) .050(.018) .116(.018) .028(.018) .008(.018) .048(.018) .061(.018) .110(.018) .103(.018) .069(.018) .053(.018) .033(.018)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) .049(.006) .017(.004) .055(.006) -.006(.006) .013(.006) .013(.005) .016(.006) .038(.006) .066(.006) .047(.006) .038(.007) .013(.006)
Y (Yijk) -.008(.017) -.004(.018) .066(.018) -.009(.018) -.013(.018) -.027(.018) .002(.018) .041(.018) .142(.018) .071(.018) .063(.018) .015(.018)
G (Gijk) .006(.026) .229(.028) .009(.027) .015(.027) .145(.028) -.171(.028) -.115(.027) -.017(.026) -.047(.027) -.023(.026) .122(.026) -.122(.026)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) .027(.006) .003(.004) .028(.006) .006(.006) -.004(.006) .002(.005) .007(.006) .018(.006) .037(.006) .027(.006) .015(.007) .006(.006)
YxG (Y.Gijk) .043(.017) -.005(.017) -.026(.018) -.025(.018) .005(.018) .015(.018) .014(.018) .009(.018) .017(.018) -.031(.018) -.002(.018) -.026(.018)
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) .000(.026) .002(.028) .011(.027) -.012(.027) .000(.028) .019(.028) .012(.027) .000(.026) .024(.027) .005(.026) .032(.026) .027(.026)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) .002(.017) .019(.017) .031(.018) .026(.018) -.018(.018) -.027(.018) -.019(.018) .015(.018) .004(.018) .030(.018) -.021(.018) .016(.018)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) -.069(.026) -.040(.028) -.028(.027) -.036(.027) -.036(.028) .017(.028) -.032(.027) -.065(.026) -.012(.027) -.001(.026) -.022(.026) -.040(.026)
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.008(.006) .005(.004) .003(.006) -.006(.006) -.017(.006) .002(.005) .001(.006) -.005(.006) .000(.006) -.009(.006) .005(.007) .006(.006)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) .017(.006) -.003(.004) .016(.006) .017(.006) .001(.006) .004(.005) .006(.006) .009(.006) .008(.006) .022(.006) .005(.007) .006(.006)
YxG (Y.G.T1vT2T3ijk) .003(.006) -.001(.004) -.011(.006) -.002(.006) -.011(.006) -.001(.005) -.001(.006) -.009(.006) -.004(.006) -.015(.006) -.004(.007) -.011(.006)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) -.003(.006) .007(.004) .003(.006) .013(.006) .003(.006) .006(.005) .014(.006) .002(.006) -.018(.006) -.010(.006) -.019(.007) .001(.006)
G (G.C.Tijk) -.001(.006) -.002(.004) -.004(.006) .006(.006) -.004(.006) .007(.005) .000(.006) .005(.006) -.004(.006) .001(.006) .004(.007) -.002(.006)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) -.012(.006) -.006(.004) -.004(.006) -.005(.006) .005(.006) -.010(.005) .002(.006) -.007(.006) -.004(.006) -.007(.006) -.024(.007) -.015(.006)
Random
2 : bet. school variance .020(.014) .007(.007) .008(.007) .009(.007) .007(.006) .008(.007) .008(.007) .011(.009) .018(.013) .010(.008) .023(.016) .014(.010)
2u: bet. student variance .590(.030) .745(.034) .647(.032) .631(.032) .698(.034) .714(.034) .639(.033) .597(.031) .677(.034) .562(.030) .584(.031) .599(.031)
2e: bet. occasion variance .292(.009) .170(.005) .308(.009) .338(.010) .274(.008) .253(.008) .353(.010) .353(.010) .299(.009) .366(.011) .401(.012) .338(.010)
Note. Standard errors are given in parentheses. Values in bold are statistically significant, p<.05. Equation parameters are presented for reference purposes. bet=between. Y=Year. G=Gender. C.T=C1vC2.T1vT2T3.
YxG=Year.Gender. Year: Year 5=-1, Year 6=+1. Gender: female=-1, male=+1, Appearance=Physical Appearance, Ability=Physical Ability, Peer=Peer Relations, Parent=Parent Relations, Schooling=General
Schooling, General SE=General Self-Esteem, Opposite=Opposite-Sex Relations, Same=Same-Sex Relations, Emotional=Emotional Stability, Honesty=Honesty/Trustworthiness.
302
statistically significant for Peer Relations (Yearijk = .066, SE = .018), General Self-
Esteem (Yearijk = .041, SE = .018), Opposite-Sex Relations (Yearijk = .142,
SE = .018), Same-Sex Relations (Yearijk = .071, SE = .018), and Emotional Stability
(Yearijk = .063, SE = .018). These were all positive and revealed that Year 6 students
reported statistically significantly higher self-concepts related to peer, opposite-sex,
and same-sex peer relations, as well as higher general self-esteem and emotional
stability self-concepts, than Year 5 students. The main effect of gender was also
statistically significant for Physical Ability (Genderijk = .229, SE = .028), Math
(Genderijk = .145, SE = .028), Verbal (Genderijk = -.171, SE = .028), General
Schooling (Genderijk = -.115, SE = .027), Emotional Stability (Genderijk = .122, SE =
.026), and Honesty/Trustworthiness (Genderijk = -.122, SE = .026). This revealed that
males reported statistically significantly higher physical ability, math, and emotional
stability than females, while females reported statistically significantly higher English
and general schooling abilities, as well as higher honesty self-concepts than males.
The interaction of year by gender was statistically significant only for Physical
Appearance (Year.Genderijk = .043, SE = .017). The graph of this interaction (see
Figure 8.22) revealed that male and female Year 5, and male Year 6 students reported
similarly high physical appearance self-concepts, while female Year 6 students had
comparatively low physical appearance self-concepts to the other critical groups.
Also of interest were the statistically significant year by Condition by Time
interactions (Year.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk) found for four self-concept domains (Parent
Relations = .013, SE = .006; General Schooling = .014, SE = .006; Opposite-Sex
303
Relations = -.018, SE = .006; and Emotional Stability = -.019, SE = .007). These
results suggested that the effects of BB differed statistically significantly among
males and females for parental relations, general schooling, opposite-sex peer
relations, and emotional stability self-concepts. From the figures it can be seen that
BB had a statistically significantly greater direct impact on increasing parental
relations with Year 6 than Year 5 students (see Figure 8.23), on increasing general
schooling self-concepts for Year 6 than Year 5 students (see Figure 8.24), on
increasing opposite-sex peer relations for Year 5 students than Year 6 students
(although the pattern of relations in the experimental condition were similar for both
years; see Figure 8.25), and on increasing the emotional stability of Year 5 than Year
6 students (see Figure 8.26). It is interesting to note that for the general schooling self-
concept, as can be seen in Figure 8.24, the W1 and W5 scores of students in both
years were similar, yet the rates of increase for reaching W5 from W1 differed across
Year 5 and 6 students.
Figure 8.22. Predicted mean standardised Physical Appearance score between Males
and Females in Years 5 and 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
304
Figure 8.23. Predicted mean standardised Parental Relations score for Years 5 and 6
students based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
Figure 8.24. Predicted mean standardised General Schooling score for Years 5 and 6
305
Figure 8.25. Predicted mean standardised Opposite-Sex Relations score for Years 5
and 6 students based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
Figure 8.26. Predicted mean standardised Emotional Stability score for Years 5 and 6
306
No statistically significant gender by Condition by Time interactions were
found for any self-concept domain. However, interestingly, statistically significant
year by gender by Condition by Time interactions (Year.Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk)
were found for four self-concept domains (Physical Appearance = -.012, SE = .006;
Verbal = -.010, SE = .005; Emotional Stability = -.024, SE = .007; and
Honesty/Trustworthiness = -.015, SE = .006). These results suggested the effects of
BB statistically significantly differed among year and gender groups for physical
appearance, verbal schooling, emotional stability, and honest self-concepts. From the
figures it can be seen that BB had a statistically significantly greater direct impact on
increasing physical appearance self-concepts with Year 6 females than the other
critical cohorts (see Figure 8.27), on increasing verbal schooling self-concepts for
Year 5 and 6 females as well as Year 6 males than Year 5 males (see Figure 8.28), on
increasing emotional stability self-concepts for male Year 5 students than the other
critical cohorts (see Figure 8.29), and on increasing the honesty self-concept of Year 6
female and Year 5 males than Year 5 females (see Figure 8.30). No further year,
gender, or year by gender differences were found for the impact of BB.
Moreover, the interaction of Condition by Time for the Physical Appearance,
Peer Relations, General Self-Esteem, Opposite-Sex Relations, Same-Sex Relations,
and Emotional Stability self-concepts were still statistically significant in the desired
directions (Physical Appearance: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .027, SE = .006; Peer
Relations: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .028, SE = .006; General Self-Esteem:
C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .018, SE = .006; Opposite-Sex Relations: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk =
.037, SE = .006; Same-Sex Relations: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .027, SE = .006; and
Emotional Stability: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .015, SE = .007), over and above the effects
of year, gender, and year by gender that were entered.
307
Figure 8.27. Predicted mean standardised Physical Appearance score for Male and
Female Years 5 and 6 students based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
Figure 8.28. Predicted mean standardised Verbal Schooling score for Male and
308
Figure 8.29. Predicted mean standardised Emotional Stability score for Male and
Figure 8.30. Predicted mean standardised Honesty/Trustworthiness score for Male
and Female Years 5 and 6 students based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
309
increasing students peer, opposite-sex, and same-sex peer relations self-concepts, as
well as general self-esteem for the total sample, after year and gender effects were
entered. For opposite-sex peer relations, BB was shown to be more effective in
increasing opposite-sex peer relations self-concepts with Year 5 students than Year 6
students (although the pattern of change was similar during the experimental
condition between both groups). The results for Research Question 2.4.4 showed BB
was also effective in enhancing physical appearance, and emotional stability
self-concepts, after year and gender effects were entered. Year and gender interactions
revealed BB was more effective in increasing the physical appearance self-concepts of
Year 5 females than other critical cohorts (although all other critical groups did
increase from W1 to W5), and in increasing emotional stability
self-concepts in Year 5 males than all other critical groups (although other critical
groups did increase from W1 to W5). Interestingly, BB also had greater impacts on
parent relations self-concepts with Year 6 students than Year 5 students, in increasing
Year 6 general schooling abilities self-concepts than Year 5 students (although the
starting value at W1, and the ending value at W5 were the similar for both groups),
and increasing the honesty self-concepts of Year 6 females and Year 5 males, than
Year 5 females. Importantly, no further year, gender, or year by gender interactions
were significant, suggesting BB was just as effective in enhancing student peer
relations, general self-esteem, and same-sex peer relations self-concepts with all year,
gender, and year by gender cohorts.
310
Hypothesis 2.5.1: Impact of BB on Coping Strategies (ACSI)
students from the experimental condition would report significantly higher problem
solving and support seeking coping strategies, and statistically significantly lower
avoidance coping strategies, than students from the control condition. Two multilevel
models were used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on three
types of coping strategies, measured by the ACSI. These models were: (1) variance
components (null) model; and (2) BB intervention effects model.
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for coping strategies.
Table 8.19
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Coping Strategies
Parameter (Equation parameter) Avoidance Problem Support
Solving Seeking
Coping
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.020(.097) .069(.030) .088(.054)
Random
2
.611(.018) .595(.018) .499(.015)
bet.=between.
of coping strategy used by students, did not differ statistically significantly between
schools (Avoidance: 20 = .053, SE = .033; Problem Solving: 20 = .002, SE = .003;
and Support Seeking: 20 = .013, SE = .010). The percentage of total variance that
311
can be attributed to the school level is 4.7% in the Avoidance score, .2% in the
Problem Solving score, and 1.3% in the Support Seeking score. At the student and
time level, differences were found to be significant, suggesting individual students
differed in the amount of coping strategies they used (Avoidance: 2u0 = .461, SE =
.030; Problem Solving: 2u0 = .441, SE = .028; and Support Seeking: 2u0 = .518, SE =
.030), and use of coping strategies by students statistically significantly differed
across time (Avoidance: 2e0 = .611, SE = .018; Problem Solving: 2e0 = .595, SE =
.018; and Support Seeking: 2e0 = .499, SE = .015). The percentage of total variance
that can be attributed to the individual level is 41% in the Avoidance score, 42.5% in
the Problem Solving score, and 50.3% in the Support Seeking score. The percentage
of total variance that can be attributed to the occasion level is 54.3% in the Avoidance
score, 57.3% in the Problem Solving score, and 48.4% in the Support Seeking score.
Model 2: BB effects model of Coping Strategies. Model 2 was used to
determine how much of the reported coping strategy scores in the experimental
condition, changed as a result of BB, in comparison to the control condition (see
Table 8.20). Three new terms (orthogonal contrasts) were added to the model:
for avoidance and seeking support coping strategies (Avoidance: C1vC2ijk = -.072, SE
= .017; and Support Seeking: C1vC2ijk = .031, SE = .016). This was in a negative
direction for avoidance suggesting that avoidance coping strategies were statistically
significantly lower during the experimental condition than the control condition.
Support seeking was found to be in a positive direction, suggesting that support
seeking coping strategies were statistically significantly higher during the
experimental condition than the control condition. The result for the main effect of
312
time was statistically significant for avoidance and problem solving coping strategies
(Avoidance: T1vT2T3ijk = -.045, SE = .008; and Problem Solving: T1vT2T3ijk =
-.017, SE = .008). These were in negative directions suggesting that avoidance and
problem solving coping strategies at the middle and end of the school year
beginning of the school year (T1). It is important to note that the Condition by Time
interactions for all coping strategies were also statistically significant in the expected
directions (Avoidance: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.032, SE = .008; Problem Solving:
C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .016, SE = .008; and Support Seeking: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk =
.017, SE = .007). As can be seen in Figure 8.31, when taking into account condition
versus time, avoidance coping strategies decreased more in the experimental condition
than the control condition, from T1 to the average of T2 and T3. In addition, problem
solving, as can be seen in Figure 8.32, and seeking support, as observed in Figure
8.33, increased more in the experimental condition than the control condition, from
T1 to the average of T2 and T3. As seen in the graphs of the interactions, avoidance
coping strategies decreased statistically significantly as an outcome of BB, while
problem solving did not decrease as much in the experimental condition as is the
control condition, and seeking support increased statistically significantly as a direct
outcome of BB in comparison to the baseline condition.
reducing avoidance coping strategies, and increasing problem solving and support
seeking coping strategies for the total sample, as observed with the statistically
313
Table 8.20
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Coping Strategies
Solving Seeking
Coping
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.014(.098) .067(.030) .085(.054)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) -.072(.017) .007(.017) .031(.016)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.045(.008) -.017(.008) .008(.007)
Interactions
-.032(.008) .016(.008) .017(.007)
(C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk)
Random
2
.472(.030) .441(.028) .516(.030)
bet.=between.
Figure 8.31. Predicted mean standardised Avoidance score based on the equation for
314
Figure 8.32. Predicted mean standardised Problem Solving score based on the
Figure 8.33. Predicted mean standardised Support Seeking score based on the
315
Hypothesis 2.5.2: Impact of BB on the Coping Strategies (ACSI) of Critical Groups
significantly higher problem solving and support seeking coping strategies, and
statistically significantly lower avoidance coping strategies, than students from the
control condition. One multilevel model was used to evaluate the experimental versus
control conditions on three types of coping strategies, measured by the ACSI, for
Year 5 and 6 males and females. This model, Model 3, was an extension of Model 2
from Hypothesis 2.5.1, and was the year and gender interaction effects model.
determine how much of the reported coping strategy scores in the experimental
time.
statistically significant for Avoidance (Yearijk = -.074, SE = .019), and Support
Seeking (Yearijk = -.036, SE = .018). This revealed that Year 5 students reported
statistically significantly higher uses of avoidance and support seeking coping
strategies than Year 6 students. The main effect of gender was also statistically
significant for Avoidance (Genderijk = .056, SE = .025), and Support Seeking
(Genderijk = -.273, SE = .024). This revealed that males reported statistically
316
significantly higher uses of avoidance coping strategies than females, and females
reported statistically significantly higher uses of support seeking coping strategies
than males. There were no statistically significant interaction effects of year by gender
found.
Table 8.21
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Coping Strategies
Solving Seeking
Coping
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.016(.097) .056(.031) .091(.057)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) -.038(.019) .011(.018) .051(.018)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.045(.008) -.017(.008) .008(.007)
Y (Yijk) -.074(.019) -.001(.018) -.036(.018)
G (Gijk) .056(.025) -.023(.025) -.273(.024)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) -.032(.008) .016(.008) .016(.007)
YxG (Y.Gijk) .001(.019) .002(.018) -.018(.018)
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) -.015(.025) -.057(.025) -.024(.024)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) .002(.019) -.020(.018) -.010(.018)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) -.005(.025) -.005(.025) .002(.024)
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) .002(.008) .013(.008) .007(.007)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) -.016(.008) -.012(.008) -.015(.007)
YxG (G.Y.T1vT2T3ijk) .004(.008) .007(.008) .000(.007)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) .001(.008) .029(.008) .012(.007)
G (G.C.Tijk) -.014(.008) -.017(.008) -.002(.007)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) -.004(.008) .004(.008) -.002(.007)
Random
Also of interest were the statistically significant year by Condition by Time
interactions, as well as the gender by Condition by Time interactions found for
problem solving coping strategies (Year.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .029, SE = .008;
317
Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.017, SE = .008). These results suggest the direct
effects of BB on the use of problem solving coping strategies of upper primary
students statistically significantly differed between Year 5 and 6 students, as well as
among males and females. BB increased students use of problem solving coping
strategies for Year 5 students more than for Year 6 students (see Figure 8.34), and for
females more than for males (see Figure 8.35).
Figure 8.34. Predicted mean standardised Problem Solving score for Year 5 and 6
Figure 8.35. Predicted mean standardised Problem Solving score for Males and
318
No further year, gender, or year by gender differences were found for the
impact of BB on students use of coping strategies. For avoidance and support seeking
coping strategies, there were no differences in the direct effect of BB between year,
gender, or year by gender groups, suggesting that BB was equally effective in
decreasing students avoidance coping strategies, and increasing students use of
support seeking coping strategies.
Moreover, the interaction of Condition by Time for all coping strategies were
still statistically significant in the desired directions (Avoidance: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk =
-.032, SE = .008; Problem Solving: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .016, SE = .008; and
Support Seeking: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .016, SE = .007), over and above the effects of
year, gender, and year by gender that were entered.
Summary. Hypothesis 2.5.2 was supported for each coping strategy. BB was
shown to be effective in reducing avoidance coping strategies, and increasing problem
solving and seeking support from friends coping strategies, after year and gender
effects were entered. Year and gender interactions revealed BB had a greater impact
on Year 5 students than Year 6 students use of problem solving strategies. No other
year, gender, or year by gender interactions were significant, suggesting BB was just
as effective in decreasing avoidance coping strategies, and increasing support seeking
strategies for all year, gender, and year by gender cohorts.
Hypothesis 2.6.1: Impact of BB on Total School Belonging (pASBS)
students from the experimental condition would report significantly higher levels of
total school belonging, than students from the control condition. Two multilevel
models were used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on Total
319
School Belonging, measured by the pASBS. These models were: (1) variance
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for school belonging.
Table 8.22
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Total School Belonging
Parameter (Equation parameter) Total School Belonging
School Belonging
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .054(.067)
Random
Results at the school level suggest that the variation in students sense of school
belonging, did not differ statistically significantly between schools (20 = .023, SE =
.016). The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the school level is
2.2% in the total school belonging score. At the student and time level, differences
were found to be significant, suggesting individual students differed in the amount of
school belonging they felt (2u0 = .584, SE = .032), and the amount of school
belonging they felt, statistically significantly differed across time (2e0 = .417, SE =
.012). The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the individual level is
57%, and to occasion level is 41.7%.
320
Model 2: BB effects model of Total School Belonging. Model 2 was used to
determine how much of the reported total school belonging scores in the experimental
Table 8.23
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Total School Belonging
School Belonging
Fixed
Main Effects
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.017(.007)
Interactions
Condition versus Time (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk) .020(.007)
Random
2
.413(.012)
Results indicate that the main effect of condition for the control versus
experimental groups was not statistically significant for total school belonging
(C1vC2ijk = -.012, SE = .015), but the main effect of time was statistically significant
(T1vT2T3ijk = -.017, SE = .007). The statistically significant time effect was in a
negative direction, suggesting that school belonging was statistically significantly
lower at the middle and end of the school year (the average across T2 and T3) than
that at the beginning of the school year (T1). The interaction of Condition by Time
was also statistically significant in the expected direction (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .020,
SE = .007). As can be seen in Figure 8.36, when taking into account condition versus
time, school belonging increased more in the experimental condition than the control
condition, from T1 to the average of T2 and T3. That is, Total School Belonging
321
increased statistically significantly as a direct outcome of BB in comparison to the
baseline condition.
Figure 8.36. Predicted mean standardised Total School Belonging score based on the
enhancing total school belonging for the total sample, as observed with the
Hypothesis 2.6.2: Impact of BB on the Total School Belonging (pASBS) of Critical
Groups
significantly higher total school belonging levels, than students from the control
conditions on Total School Belonging, measured by the pASBS, for Year 5 and 6
males and females. This model, Model 3, was an extension of Model 2 from
Hypothesis 2.6.1, and was the year and gender interaction effects model.
322
determine how much of the reported total school belonging scores in the experimental
time.
Table 8.24
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Total School Belonging
School Belonging
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .048(.069)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) .014(.018)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.017(.007)
Y (Yijk) -.039(.018)
G (Gijk) -.174(.026)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) .019(.007)
YxG (Y.Gijk) -.040(.018)
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) -.058(.026)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) -.017(.018)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) -.028(.026)
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) .011(.007)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) -.006(.007)
YxG (G.Y.T1vT2T3ijk) .003(.007)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) .008(.007)
G (G.C.Tijk) -.008(.007)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) .003(.007)
Random
2
.550(.030)
323
statistically significant (Yearijk = -.039, SE = .018). This revealed that Year 5 students
reported statistically significantly higher levels of school belonging than Year 6
students. The main effect of gender was also statistically significant (Genderijk = -
.174, SE = .026). This revealed that females reported statistically significantly higher
levels of school belonging than males. The interaction of year by gender was also
statistically significant (Year.Genderijk = -.040, SE = .018). As can be seen in Figure
8.37, male Year 6 students reported the lowest level of school belonging than all other
critical groups.
Figure 8.37. Predicted mean standardised Total School Belonging score for critical
groups
Time (Year.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.008, SE = .007), gender by Condition by Time
(Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .008, SE = .007), and year by gender by Condition by
Time interactions (Year.Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .003, SE = .007). Moreover, the
324
interaction of Condition by Time on the total school belonging score was still
statistically significant (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .019, SE = .007), over and above the
effects of year, gender, and year by gender that were entered into the model
(see Figure 8.36). These results suggest that the statistically significant effects of BB
on increasing total school belonging scores did not differ statistically significantly
among the critical groups. That is, BB was equally effective in increasing total school
belonging scores with all critical groups.
enhancing total school belonging, after year and gender effects were entered. Total
school belonging was shown to increase statistically significantly as a direct outcome
of BB, with no statistically significant differences between year and gender groups
found. This revealed that BB was just as effective in enhancing total school belonging
with all year, gender, and year by gender cohorts.
Types of School Belonging (pASBS)
students from the experimental condition would report significantly higher levels of
support they receive from their school, acceptance of school rules, and feelings of
attachment to the school, than students from the control condition. Two multilevel
models were used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on the three
types of school belonging, measured by the pASBS. These models were: (1) variance
325
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for the types of school
belonging. Results are presented in Table 8.25.
Table 8.25
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Support, Rule Acceptance, Attachment
Types of School Belonging
Parameter (Equation parameter) Support Rule Attachment
Acceptance
School Belonging
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) -.055(.064) .086(.055) .008(.059)
Random
2
.511(.029) .511(.029) .551(.030)
bet.=between.
of school belonging, did not differ statistically significantly between schools
(Support: 20 = .021, SE = .014; Rule Acceptance: 20 = .014, SE = .010; and
Attachment: 20 = .017, SE = .012). The percentage of total variance that can be
attributed to the school level is 2.1% in the Support score, 1.4% in the
Rule Acceptance score, and 1.7% in the Attachment score. At the student and time
level, differences were found to be significant, suggesting individual students differed
in the amount of school belonging they felt (Support: 2u0 = .511, SE = .029;
Rule Acceptance: 2u0 = .511, SE = .029; and Attachment: 2u0 = .551, SE = .030),
and students sense of school belonging statistically significantly differed across time
(Support: 2e0 = .474, SE = .014; Rule Acceptance: 2e0 = .446, SE = .013; and
Attachment: 2e0 = .438, SE = .013). The percentage of total variance that can be
326
attributed to the individual level is 50.8% in the Support score, 52.6% in the
Rule Acceptance score, and 54.8% in the Attachment score. The percentage of total
variance that can be attributed to the occasion level is 47.1% in the Support score,
45.9% in the Rule Acceptance score, and 43.5% in the Attachment score.
Model 2: BB effects model of support, rule acceptance, and attachment types
of school belonging. Model 2 was used to determine how much of the reported types
of school belonging in the experimental condition, changed as a result of BB, in
comparison to the control condition (see Table 8.26). Three new terms (orthogonal
contrasts) were added to the model: (1) condition; (2) time; and (3) the interaction
between condition and time.
Table 8.26
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Support, Rule Acceptance, Attachment Types
of School Belonging
Acceptance
School Belonging
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .054(.064) .085(.055) .010(.059)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) -.004(.015) .001(.015) -.029(.015)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.009(.007) -.015(.007) -.020(.007)
Interactions
.025(.007) -.009(.007) .016(.007)
(C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk)
Random
2
.470(.014) .444(.013) .434(.013)
bet.=between.
for attachment (C1vC2ijk = -.029, SE = .015) suggesting students sense of attachment
to their school was statistically significantly lower during the experimental condition
than the control condition. The result of time was also in a negative direction and
327
statistically significant for rule acceptance (T1vT2T3ijk = -.015, SE = .007), and
attachment (T1vT2T3ijk = -.020, SE = .007). This suggests that student acceptance of
the school rules, and their attachment to the school at the middle and end of the school
year (the average across T2 and T3) were statistically significantly lower than that at
the beginning of the school year (T1). It is important to note that the Condition by
Time interaction for support and attachment were also statistically significant in the
expected direction (Support: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .025, SE = .007; and Attachment:
C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .016, SE = .007). As can be seen in the figures, when taking into
account condition versus time, students sense of support from the school (see Figure
8.38), and their attachment to the school (see Figure 8.39), increased more in the
experimental condition than the control condition, from T1 to the average of T2 and
T3. That is, Support and Attachment increased statistically significantly as an
outcome of BB. This was not statistically significant for rule acceptance suggesting
acceptance of the school rules did not increase statistically significantly as a direct
outcome of BB.
Figure 8.38. Predicted mean standardised Support score based on the equation for
328
Figure 8.39. Predicted mean standardised Attachment score based on the equation for
Summary. Hypothesis 2.6.3 was supported for support and attachment, but not
for acceptance of school rules. BB was shown to increase the support students felt
from their school, and the attachment they felt to their school, as observed with the
Types of School Belonging (pASBS) of Critical Groups
significantly higher levels of support they receive from their school, acceptance of
school rules, and feelings of attachment to the school, than students from the control
conditions on the three types of school belonging, measured by the pASBS, for Year 5
and 6 males and females. This model, Model 3, was an extension of Model 2 from
Hypothesis 2.6.3, and was the year and gender interaction effects model.
329
determine how much of the reported types of school belonging in the experimental
time.
statistically significant for Support (Yearijk = -.045, SE = .018), and
Rule Acceptance (Yearijk = -.034, SE = .017). This revealed that Year 5 students
reported statistically significantly higher levels of perceived school support, and had
higher acceptance of school rules than Year 6 students. The main effect of gender was
also statistically significant for all types of school belonging (Support: Genderijk = -
.096, SE = .025; Rule Acceptance: Genderijk = -.233, SE = .024; and Attachment:
Genderijk = -.134, SE = .026). This revealed that females reported statistically
significantly higher levels of perceived school support, acceptance of school rules,
and attachment to the school than males.
The interaction of year by gender was also statistically significant for Support
(Year.Genderijk = -.041, SE = .018) and Rule Acceptance (Year.Genderijk = -.040, SE
= .017). The figures showed that male Year 6 students reported the lowest sense of
support from the school (see Figure 8.40), as well as the lowest acceptance of school
rules (see Figure 8.41), than all other critical groups.
330
Table 8.27
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Support, Rule
Acceptance, Attachment Types of School Belonging
Acceptance
School Belonging
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .051(.065) .078(.056) .006(.061)
Condition (C1vC2ijk) .030(.018) .023(.017) -.014(.018)
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.010(.007) -.014(.007) -.021(.007)
Y (Yijk) -.045(.018) -.034(.017) -.023(.018)
G (Gijk) -.096(.025) -.233(.024) -.134(.026)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) .025(.007) .009(.007) .016(.007)
YxG (Y.Gijk) -.041(.018) -.040(.017) -.025(.018)
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) -.036(.025) -.077(.024) -.043(.026)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) -.012(.018) -.016(.017) -.016(.018)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) -.027(.025) -.015(.024) -.029(.026)
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) .017(.007) -.006(.007) .014(.007)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) -.005(.007) -.010(.007) -.003(.007)
YxG (G.Y.T1vT2T3ijk) .000(.007) .011(.007) .000(.007)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) .007(.007) .007(.007) .007(.007)
G (G.C.Tijk) -.007(.007) -.012(.007) -.003(.007)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) .001(.007) .007(.007) .001(.007)
Random
2
.466(.014) .440(.013) .432(.013)
It is important to note that the Condition by Time interaction for Support and
Attachment was also statistically significant in the expected direction (Support:
C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .025, SE = .007; and Attachment: C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .016,
SE = .007), over and above the effects of year, gender, and year by gender that were
entered into the model (see Figures 8.38 and 8.39). This suggests that when taking
into account condition versus time, perception of support received from the school
331
(see Figure 8.38), and feelings of attachment to the school (see Figure 8.39) increased
more in the experimental condition than the control condition, from T1 to the average
of T2 and T3. That is Support and Attachment increased statistically significantly as
an outcome of BB. This was not statistically significant for rule acceptance suggesting
acceptance of school rules did not increase statistically significantly as a direct
outcome of BB. In addition, there were no gender and year by Condition by Time
interactions. These results suggest that the impacts of BB on all types of school
belonging did not statistically significantly differ among the critical groups. That is,
BB was equally effective in increasing perceived school support and attachment to the
school with all critical groups, but not with increasing acceptance of school rules.
Figure 8.40. Predicted mean standardised Support score between Males and Females
in Years 5 and 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
332
Figure 8.41. Predicted mean standardised Rule Acceptance score between Males and
Summary. Hypothesis 2.6.4 was supported for support and attachment, but not
for acceptance of school rules. BB was shown to be effective in increasing support
students felt from the school, and their attachment to the school, after year and gender
effects were entered. This revealed that BB was just as effective in increasing support
and attachment with all year, gender, and year by gender cohorts. BB was not shown
to be effective in increasing acceptance of school rules for the total sample, or by year
or gender cohorts.
Hypothesis 2.7.1: Impact of BB on Depression (CDI-10)
depression, than students from the control condition. Two multilevel models were
used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on depression, measured
by the CDI-10. These models were: (1) variance components (null) model; and (2) BB
intervention effects model.
333
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for depression.
Table 8.28
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Depression
Parameter (Equation parameter) Depression
Depression
Fixed
Main Effects
Random
2
.671(.036)
Results at the school level suggest that the variation in the amount of
depression experienced by students, did not differ statistically significantly between
schools (20 = .010, SE = .008). The percentage of total variance that can be
attributed to the school level is .9%. At the student and time level, differences were
found to be significant, suggesting individual students differed in the amount of
depression they experienced (2u0 = .671, SE = .036), and depression symptoms of
students statistically significantly differed across time (2e0 = .467, SE = .014).
The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the individual level is 58.4%,
and attributed to the occasion level is 40.7% in the depression score.
Model 2: BB effects model of Depression. Model 2 was used to determine
how much of the reported depression in the experimental condition, changed as a
result of BB, in comparison to the control condition (see Table 8.29). Three new
334
Table 8.29
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Depression
Depression
Fixed
Main Effects
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.024(.007)
Interactions
-.019(.007)
(C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk)
Random
2
.457(.014)
for depression (C1vC2ijk = -.081, SE = .015), suggesting that depression was
statistically significantly lower during the experimental condition than the control
condition. The result of time was also in a negative direction and statistically
significant (T1vT2T3ijk = -.024, SE = .007), suggesting depression at the middle and
end of the school year (the average across T2 and T3) was statistically significantly
lower than that at the beginning of the school year (T1). The interaction of depression
with Condition by Time was statistically significant in the expected direction
(C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.019, SE = .007). As can be seen in Figure 8.42, when taking
into account condition versus time, depression decreased more in the experimental
condition than the control condition, from T1 to the average of T2 and T3. That is,
depression decreased statistically significantly as an outcome of BB.
335
Figure 8.42. Predicted mean standardised Depression score based on the equation for
reducing depression for the total sample, as observed with the statistically significant
Condition by Time interaction.
Hypothesis 2.7.2: Impact of BB on Depression (CDI-10) by Critical Groups
significantly lower levels of depression, than students from the control condition. One
multilevel model was used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on
depression, measured by the CDI-10, for Year 5 and 6 males and females. This model,
Model 3, was an extension of Model 2 from Hypothesis 2.7.1 and was the year and
gender interaction effects model.
determine how much of the reported depression in the experimental condition,
changed as a result of BB, in comparison to the control condition for each year
336
(5 and 6) and gender (male and female; see Table 8.30). Twelve new terms
time.
statistically significant (Yearijk = -.048, SE = .019), revealing that Year 5 students
reported statistically significantly higher depression than Year 6 students. The main
effect of gender, and the interaction effect between year and gender were not
statistically significant (Genderijk = -.042, SE = .028; and Year.Genderijk = .020, SE =
.019).
Also of interest were the statistically significant gender by Condition by Time
interactions (Gender.C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = .014, SE = .007), suggesting the effects of
BB differed statistically significantly among males and females. As can be seen in
Figure 8.43, although depression decreased from W1 to W5 for both males and
females, there was a direct impact of BB on the reduction of depression in females as
opposed to male students. No further year, or year by gender differences were found
for the impact of BB.
Moreover, the interaction of Condition by Time for depression was still
statistically significant in the desired direction (C1vC2.T1vT2T3ijk = -.020, SE =
.007), over and above the effects of year, gender, and year by gender that were
entered.
337
Table 8.30
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Depression
Depression
Fixed
Main Effects
Time (T1vT2T3ijk) -.025(.007)
Y (Yijk) -.048(.019)
G (Gijk) -.042(.028)
Basic Interactions
C.T (C.Tijk) -.020(.007)
YxG (Y.Gijk) .020(.019)
Y (Y.C1vC2ijk) -.032(.028)
G (G.C1vC2ijk) -.010(.019)
YxG (Y.G.C1vC2ijk) .035(.028)
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) .003(.007)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) -.003(.007)
YxG (G.Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.008(.007)
Interactions by C.T
Y (Y.C.Tijk) .001(.007)
G (G.C.Tijk) .014(.007)
YxG (Y.G.C.Tijk) -.004(.007)
Random
2
.669(.036)
338
Figure 8.43. Predicted mean standardised Depression score for Males and Females
reducing depression after year and gender effects were entered. Year and gender
interactions revealed BB had a more direct impact on reducing depression among
females than males, although depression decreased for both groups from W1 to W5.
Hypotheses 2.8.1 and 2.8.2: Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program
Outcomes on Student Knowledge of Bullying and Action to Prevent Bullying
As part of investigating the impact of BB on student behaviour and
psychosocial outcomes, it is important to test whether the program was associated
with an increase in student knowledge and action to prevent bullying within the BB
schools. It is important to note that data for Knowledge and Action was collected
during the experimental condition (C2) only. Hence, three time waves of data were
assessed across T1, T2, and T3 across the experimental condition. Hypotheses 2.8.1
and 2.8.2 were designed to evaluate the impact of BB on student knowledge of
bullying, and the actions to prevent bullying as indicated by student responses to the
BBPS.
339
Hypothesis 2.8.1: Impact of BB on Knowledge and Action of Bullying Prevention
(BBPS)
Overview. Hypothesis 2.8.1 proposed that over three time waves (W3-W5)
students would report significantly higher knowledge of bullying, and report
significantly higher levels of action to prevent bullying, following the implementation
of BB when compared to prior implementation of BB. Two multilevel models were
used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions on Knowledge and
Action, measured by the BBPS. These models were: (1) variance components (null)
variance components associated with school, student, and time, for knowledge of
bullying and action to prevent it. Results are presented in Table 8.31.
Table 8.31
Model 1: Variance Components Model for Participant Roles
Parameter (Equation parameter) Knowledge Action
BBPS
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .382(.027) .133(.067)
Random
2 : between school variance .002(.002) .020(.016)
2u: between student variance .091(.017) .581(.041)
2
.550(.021) .496(.019)
Results at the school level suggest that the variation in the amount of
knowledge students had about bullying, and in the amount of action students reported
using to prevent bullying, did not differ statistically significantly between schools
(Knowledge: 20 = .002, SE = .002; and Action: 20 = .020, SE = .016). The
340
percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the school level is .3% in the
Knowledge score, and 1.8% in the Action score. At the student and time level,
differences were found to be significant, suggesting individual students differed in
their amount of reported knowledge of bullying, and differed in the amount action to
prevent bullying (Knowledge: 2u0 = .091, SE = .017; and Action: 2u0 = .581, SE =
.041). In addition, student knowledge of bullying and their actions to prevent it
statistically significantly differed across time (Knowledge: 2e0 = .550, SE = .021; and
Action: 2e0 = .496, SE = .019). The percentage of total variance that can be attributed
to the individual level is 14.2% in the Knowledge score, and 53% in the Action score.
The percentage of total variance that can be attributed to the occasion level is 85.5%
in the Knowledge score, and 45.2% in the Action score.
Model 2: BB effects model of Knowledge about bullying and Action to
prevent it. Model 2 was used to determine how much of the reported knowledge about
bullying and student action to prevent it in the experimental condition, changed as a
result of BB, in comparison to the control condition (see Table 8.32). Three new
Table 8.32
Model 2: Intervention Effects Model of Knowledge about bullying and Action to
prevent it
BBPS
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .383(.025) .133(.067)
Time A (T1vT2T3ijk) .216(.010) .063(.011)
Time B (T2vT3ijk) -.002(.017) .030(.019)
Random
2 : between school variance .001(.002) .020(.015)
2
.144(.016) .588(.041)
2e: between occasion variance .406(.016) .483(.019)
341
Results indicate that the main effect of Time A (see Chapter 6) was
statistically significant for both Knowledge (T1vT2T3ijk = .216, SE = .010) and
Action (T1vT2T3ijk = .063, SE = .011). These results were in positive directions,
suggesting that student knowledge about bullying, and student action to prevent it
increased statistically significantly from pre-intervention at the beginning of the
school year (T1) to post-intervention at the middle and end of the school year
(the average across T2 and T3). It is important to note that the second main effect
(Time B) was not statistically significant for Knowledge (T2vT3ijk = -.002, SE = .017)
and Action (T2vT3ijk = .030, SE = .019). This shows that the later impacts of BB on
Knowledge and Action were maintained at levels resembling the initial post-test at
T2.
increasing student knowledge about bullying, and increasing their actions to prevent
bullying, for the total sample, as observed with the statistically significant Condition
by Time interaction.
Hypothesis 2.8.2: Impact of BB on Knowledge and Action of Bullying Prevention
(BBPS) for Critical Groups
Overview. Hypothesis 2.8.2 proposed that over three time waves (W3-W5)
male and female Year 5 and 6 students would report significantly higher knowledge
of bullying, and report significantly higher levels of action to prevent bullying,
following the implementation of BB, when compared prior to implementation of BB.
One multilevel model was used to evaluate the experimental versus control conditions
on Knowledge and Action, measured by the BBPS, for Year 5 and 6 males and
females. This model, Model 3, was an extension of Model 2 from Hypothesis 2.8.1,
and was the year and gender interaction effects model.
342
determine how much of the reported knowledge about bullying and student action to
prevent it in the experimental condition, changed as a result of BB, in comparison to
the control condition for each year (5 and 6) and gender (male and female; see Table
8.33). Twelve new terms (orthogonal contrasts) were added to the model: year;
gender; year by gender; and the interactions of year, gender, and year by gender with
condition, time, and condition by time.
Table 8.33
Model 3: Year and Gender BB Intervention Effects Model of Knowledge of Bullying
and Action to prevent it
BBPS
Fixed
Main Effects
Intercept (0ijk) .382(.023) .127(.066)
Time A (T1vT2T3ijk) .218(.010) .063(.011)
Time B (T2vT3ijk) -.003(.017) .032(.019)
Y (Yijk) .046(.020) .092(.032)
G (Gijk) -.044(.020) .021(.032)
Interactions
YxG (Y.Gijk) -.023(.020) -.068(.032)
Interactions by Time A
Y (Y.T1vT2T3ijk) -.057(.010) -.012(.011)
G (G.T1vT2T3ijk) -.010(.010) .000(.011)
YxG (Y.G.T1vT2T3ijk) .024(.010) -.009(.011)
Interactions by Time B
Y (Y.T2vT3ijk) -.007(.017) -.045(.019)
G (G.T2vT3ijk) -.003(.017) .004(.019)
YxG (Y.G.T2vT3ijk) .006(.017) -.008(.019)
Random
2 : bet. school variance .001(.002) .019(.015)
2u: bet. student variance .142(.016) .574(.040)
2
.396(.015) .480(.019)
bet=between. Y=Year. G=Gender. YxG=Year.Gender. Year: Year 5=-1, Year 6=+1.
Gender: female=-1, male=+1.
343
statistically significant for Knowledge (Yearijk = .046, SE = .020) and Action (Yearijk
= .092, SE = .032). This revealed that Year 6 students reported statistically
significantly more knowledge of bullying, and used more actions to prevent bullying
than Year 5 students. The main effect of gender was also statistically significant for
Knowledge (Genderijk = -.044, SE = .020), revealing that females reported statistically
significantly higher levels of knowledge about bullying than males. The interaction of
year by gender was also statistically significant for Action (Year.Genderijk = -.068, SE
= .032). As can be seen in Figure 8.44, Year 6 females were the most likely to take
action to prevent bullying, while Year 5 females were the least likely to take action to
prevent bullying.
Figure 8.44. Predicted mean standardised Action score between Males and Females in
Years 5 and 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
344
Also of interest were the statistically significant year by Time A effects found
for Knowledge (Year.T1vT2T3ijk = -.057, SE = .010). These results suggested that the
effects of BB differed statistically significantly among Year 5 and Year 6 students. As
can be seen in Figure 8.45, knowledge of bullying increased for both Year 5 and Year
6 cohorts, but this increase was statistically significantly greater for Year 5 students
than Year 6 students. No gender impacts on knowledge about bullying were found,
however, year by gender groups differed by Time A effects (Year.Gender.T1vT2T3ijk
= .024, SE = .010). As can be seen in Figure 8.46, Year 5 females had the greatest
increase in knowledge about bullying than all other critical groups (although all
knowledge increased for all cohorts). There were no statistically significant year,
gender, or year by gender interactions by Time B effects (T2vT3ijk), revealing that
knowledge about bullying was maintained from T2 to T3 for all year and gender
groups.
Figure 8.45. Predicted mean standardised Knowledge score for Year 5 and Year 6
345
Figure 8.46. Predicted mean standardised Knowledge score for Males and Females in
Year 5 and Year 6 based on the equation for Model 3 of the analysis
In relation to action to prevent bullying, BB had a greater impact on further
increasing the actions of Year 5 students than Year 6 students, from the first
post-test at T2, to the second post-test at T3(Year.T2vT3ijk = -.045, SE = .019; see
Figure 8.47). No further year, gender, or year by gender differences were found for
the impact of BB, suggesting that the impact of BB on increased action to prevent
bullying was statistically significant for all year and gender cohorts from the pre to
post testing phase.
Moreover, the main effects of Time A for Knowledge and Action were still
statistically significant in the desired directions (Knowledge: T1vT2T3ijk = .218, SE =
.010; and Action: T1vT2T3ijk = .063, SE = .011), over and above the effects of year,
gender, and year by gender that were entered.
346
Figure 8.47. Predicted mean standardised Action score for Year 5 and Year 6 students
Summary. Hypothesis 2.8.2 was supported for both Knowledge and Action.
BB was shown to be effective in increasing student knowledge of bullying and their
actions to prevent it, after year and gender effects were entered. Year and gender
interactions revealed BB had a greater impact on increasing Year 5 students
knowledge of bullying than all other cohorts, and on further increasing Year 5
students action to prevent bullying at the second post-test in comparison to the first
post-test. Importantly, BB statistically significantly increased knowledge and action
of all cohorts. No further year, gender, or year by gender interactions were significant,
suggesting BB was just as effective in increasing the action of all year by gender
groups to prevent bullying. Furthermore, student increases in knowledge and action
were maintained at the second post-test.
347
Chapter Summary
This chapter was designed to evaluate the impact of BB on bullying
behaviours, being bullied, participant roles, and other student psychosocial correlates
to involvement in bullying (i.e., self-concept, coping strategies, school belonging, and
depression). In addition, Chapter 8 was designed to test the implementation of BB
within schools by assessing the knowledge students had gained about bullying, and
the actions they take to prevent it. This chapter presented the variance components
(null) model, the BB intervention effects model, and the year and gender interaction
effects model for each outcome variable. BB was found to impact in the desired
direction for total bullying behaviours, social forms of bullying, total target
experiences, social forms of target experiences, all participant roles (except actively
reinforcing bullying), many facets of self-concept (physical appearance,
peer relations, general self-esteem, opposite-sex relations, same-sex relations, and
emotional stability), coping strategies, total school belonging, support and attachment
forms of school belonging, and depression. Moreover, BB was found to impact on
increasing student knowledge about bullying and the action they take to prevent it.
Importantly, many of the outcomes for the psychosocial factors had parallel findings
to the reductions found in bullying others and being bullied, suggesting that BB had
flow-on impacts on psychosocial wellbeing. The next chapter presents the discussion
for Study 1 and 2 results.
348
CHAPTER 9
Discussion
Complete and valid information about school-based prevention programs
is in everyones best interest.
Ryan and Smith (2009).
Introduction
This research was designed to examine the effectiveness of a new primary
schools anti-bullying intervention: the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program
(BB). The investigation was comprised of two interrelated studies. Study 1 was
developed to rigorously test the psychometric properties of the instruments used to
measure bullying, target experiences, participant roles, self-concept, coping strategies,
school belonging, and depression with upper primary students. Study 2 utilised these
psychometrically sound instruments to evaluate the impact of BB on: (1) reducing
student engagement in bullying others and target experiences of bullying; (2) reducing
reinforcement and ignoring of bullying and increasing behaviours which advocate for
the person being targeted; (3) increasing positive psychosocial constructs which can
349
protect students from being involved in bullying (e.g., self-concept, problem solving,
seeking support, coping strategies, school belonging); (4) reducing negative
psychosocial constructs associated with involvement in bullying (e.g., negative coping
strategies, depression); and (5) the fidelity of BB implementation in schools. This
chapter firstly discusses the key findings of Studies 1 and 2. Secondly the strengths
and limitations are examined in relation to the implementation of BB and the sample
studied. Lastly, the implications of this investigation for theory, research, and practice
are discussed.
Study 1 Discussion: Psychometric Assessment of Measures
Research on school bullying has predominantly aimed at investigating
psychological and psychosocial correlates to elucidate why bullying happens.
However, this focus on between-network designs has often been to the neglect of
within-network issues, such as demonstrating the psychometric properties of
instruments used to measure bullying (see Chapter 2). These problems are further
compounded when atheoretical approaches are employed. For example, to-date, many
school bullying researchers continue to measure bullying with the use of single-item
scales (Baldry & Farrington, 2004; Sapouna, 2008), although bullying is theorised to
be multidimensional (e.g., physical, verbal, social). This is of concern given the
substantial number of studies on bullying which use unsubstantiated single-item
instruments to measure, analyse, and draw inferences about the nature and frequency
of school bullying as well as evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. Theory,
research, and practice are intertwined such that weaknesses in any one of these areas,
will result in problems in the others. Consistent with a new theory-driven field of
bullying research in secondary schools (e.g., Marsh, Parada, Craven, & Finger, 2004;
Parada, 2006), the present investigation focused firstly on within-network issues, with
350
a thorough examination of the psychometric properties of the instruments employed
that in turn were based on a theoretical multidimensional construction of the bullying
construct.
Key Findings: Psychometric Properties of Instrumentation
Study 1, aimed to demonstrate that each of the instruments used in this study
were psychometrically sound, valid, and robust measures of the latent constructs
under investigation for use with upper primary school male and female students,
across Years 5 and 6. Psychometric testing consisted of estimates of reliability,
construct validity, criterion-related validity, and invariance across critical groups.
More specifically Study 1 aimed to test the psychometric properties of the:
1. Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument Bully/Target (APRI-BT) as a

measure of six distinct scales - three forms of bullying (physical, verbal,
social relational) and three target experiences (physical, verbal, and social
relational bullying);
2. Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument Participant Roles (APRI-PR) as a
measure of four forms of participant roles (active reinforcer, passive
reinforcer, ignore/disregard, and advocate);
3. Self-Description Questionnaire I Extended (SDQI-E) as a measure of
12 facets of pre-adolescent self-concept (physical appearance, physical
ability, peer relations, parent relations, mathematics ability, verbal ability,
general schooling ability, general self-esteem, opposite-sex peer relations,
same-sex peer relations, emotional stability, honesty/trustworthiness);
4. Adolescent Coping Strategy Indicator (ACSI) as a measure of three coping
strategies when faced with difficulties (problem solving, avoidance,
seeking support);
5. Pre-adolescent School Belonging Scales (pASBS) as a measure of three
aspects of school belonging (attachment, support, and rule acceptance);
6. Child Depression Inventory - Short Form (CDI-10) as a uni-dimensional
measure of childrens depressive symptoms;
7. Beyond Bullying Program Scale (BBPS) as a two factor measure of
preadolescent student knowledge about bullying and action to prevent
bullying pre and post intervention;
grouped together in a single battery; and
351
grouped together in a single battery.
Internal consistency, construct validity, convergent and discriminant validity,
and factorial invariance of the APRI-BT were acceptable. Internal consistency with
the total sample, and that of the critical groups were acceptable. The six-factor first
order and two-factor second-order factor structure of APRI-BT were found to have an
excellent model fit, with distinct factors for upper primary aged students. Convergent
and discriminant validity was demonstrated with high correlations within the bully
and target factors (e.g., Bullying Physical with Bullying Verbal), and the low but
positive correlations between the bully and target factors (e.g., Bullying Physical,
Target Physical). The structural integrity was further evinced with the minimal
differences of grade, gender, and grade by gender models during factorial invariance
testing. This result confirms that the APRI-BT is a reliable, useful, and appropriate
measure of the different forms of bullying and target experiences, as well as overall
engagement in bullying others and experiences of being targeted, for use with pre-
adolescent males and females from Years 5 and 6. The results also offer further
support for the multidimensionality of bullying and target experiences latent
constructs pertaining to physical, verbal, and social forms of bullying.
and factorial invariance of the APRI-PR were acceptable. The reliability estimate for
the total sample, and that of the critical groups were acceptable for each factor of the
APRI-PR. The four-factors were found to have an excellent model fit, with distinct
factors for upper primary aged students. Convergent and discriminant validity was
demonstrated with logically positive (e.g., active and passive reinforcement) and
negative correlations (e.g., active reinforcement and advocating for the target)
352
between participant roles. Moreover, the testing of factorial invariance showed the
APRI-PR to be a structurally sound measure with minimal differences in fit indices
between the grade, gender, and grade by gender models. This result confirms that the
APRI-PR is a reliable, useful, and appropriate measure of student participant roles for
use with male and female students from Years 5 and 6. The results also offer support
for the multidimensionality of participant roles that upper primary school students use
when they witness bullying.
and factorial invariance of the SDQI-E were acceptable. Internal consistency with the
total sample and that of the critical groups were acceptable. The 12-factors of the
SDQI-E were found to have a good model fit, with all a priori item-to-factor loadings
significant and all item-to-factor loadings above the minimum level of acceptance for
any factor loading. Convergent and discriminant validity was demonstrated with high
correlations among the school factors, and between General Self-Esteem with most
other factors. The 12 factors of the SDQI-E were also found to be invariant across
critical groups of grade, gender, and grade by gender. These results confirm the
SDQI-E as a reliable, useful, and appropriate upper primary school measure of the
multiple self-concept domains with pre-adolescent students. The results also offer
further support for the multidimensionality of the self-concept construct and the
theory on which this conception is based (see Chapter 2).
and factorial invariance of the ACSI were acceptable. Internal consistency with the
total sample and that of the critical groups were acceptable for problem solving and
seeking support. However, these were low for the avoidance factor across the grade
by gender samples. The three factor structure of ACSI was found to have a good
353
model fit, with distinct factors for upper primary aged students with the problem
solving and support seeking factors. The distinct a priori item-to-factor loadings for
the avoidance factor were low; however they were all above the minimum level of
acceptance for factor loadings. Convergent and discriminant validity was
demonstrated with high correlations between problem solving and seeking support,
and low correlations between avoidance and problem solving as well as support
seeking. The differences in fit indices were minimal across grade, gender, and grade
by gender models as parameters were increasingly restricted. This result confirms that
the ACSI is a reliable, useful, and appropriate measure of the problem solving and
support seeking factors for use with pre-adolescent males and female students in
Years 5 and 6. The factor of avoidance was deemed acceptable for use within this
study with grade 5 and 6 students, although caution should be taken when drawing
inferences to the wider population. The results also offer further support for the
theorising of coping strategies that upper primary students use as multidimensional.
Internal consistency, construct validity, convergent validity, and factorial
invariance of the pASBS were acceptable. Internal consistency with the total sample,
and that of the critical groups were acceptable. The three-factor first order, and
one-factor second-order factor structure of pASBS was found to have an excellent
model fit, with distinct factors for upper primary aged students. Convergent validity
was demonstrated with high correlations between the first-order factors. The structural
integrity was further demonstrated with the minimal differences of grade, gender, and
grade by gender models during factorial invariance testing. These results confirm that
the pASBS is a reliable, useful, and appropriate measure of the different types of
school belonging, as well as overall school belonging, for use with pre-adolescent
males and female students in Years 5 and 6. These results offer support for the
354
multidimensionality of the school belonging construct, as incorporating attachment
students feel towards their school, the support students perceived they receive from
their school, and their acceptance of school rules.
Internal consistency, construct validity, and factorial invariance of the CDI-10
were acceptable. The reliability estimate of the total sample and that of the critical
groups were acceptable for the single-factor CDI-10. The single-factor instrument was
found to have an excellent model fit, with distinct item-to-factor loadings for upper
primary aged students. Moreover, the testing of factorial invariance showed the
CDI-10 to be a structurally sound measure with minimal differences in fit indices
between the grade, gender, and grade by gender models. However, even though
unacceptable RMSEA fit indices were found for four of the groups, the high NNFI
and CFI fit indices demonstrate the CDI-10 as an acceptable measure of depression
with the current grade and gender samples. This result confirms that the CDI-10 is a
reliable, useful, and appropriate measure of student depressive symptoms for use with
male and female students from Years 5 and 6.
Internal consistency, construct validity, convergent validity, and factorial
invariance of the BBPS were acceptable. Internal consistency with the total sample,
and that of the critical groups were acceptable. The two-factor CFA conducted on the
BBPS was found to have an excellent model fit, with all a priori item-to-factor
loadings significant and all item-to-factor loadings above the minimum level of
acceptance for any factor loading. Convergent validity was shown with high
correlations among the two factors. The two factors of the BBPS were also found to
be invariant across critical groups of grade, gender, and grade by gender. This result
confirms that the BBPS is a reliable, useful, and appropriate upper primary school
355
measure of student knowledge of bullying, and the actions pre-adolescent students
take to prevent it.
Moreover, the twenty-nine factor W1 instrument battery and the thirty-one
factor W3 instrument battery were supported. The factor structure of both instrument
batteries were found to have an excellent fit with positive and distinct factors for
upper primary students. All a priori item-to-factor loadings were significant, all
item-to-factor loadings were above the minimum level of acceptability for any factor
loading and distinct factors were found among the scales. Convergent and
discriminant validity were also demonstrated with appropriate high, low, positive, and
negative relations between corresponding factors. For the purposes of this
investigation, these result offer support for the robustness of the W1 and W3 battery
of instruments, as well as all instruments individually, as valid measures of
involvement in bullying and related psychosocial constructs with pre-adolescent male
and female students in Years 5 and 6.
Summary of Key Findings for Study 1
Study 1 was designed to assess the reliability and validity of each instrument
used with pre-adolescent students within this investigation. A rigorous statistical
procedure was used to show the structural integrity of the measures across gender and
Year cohorts. All instruments, consisting of the APRI-BT, APRI-PR, SDQI-E, ACSI,
pASBS, CDI-10, and BBPS, were found to be psychometrically sound measures of
bullying and related constructs, and were found to be useful and appropriate measures
for the upper primary cohorts. In addition, the W1 and W3 battery of instruments
were found to be reliable and valid batteries of instruments for Year 5 and 6 male and
female students.
356
Study 2 Discussion: Impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program
Study 2 evaluated the impact of a new anti-bullying program (BB) which was
based on the successful Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools Program (Craven &
Parada, 2002; Parada, 2006; Parada, Craven, & Marsh, 2008). BB is based on a
whole-school model which assists students, parents, and school staff to prevent and
manage bullying and associated behaviours. This study was designed to evaluate the
effectiveness of BB in the upper primary grades on subsequent bullying behaviours,
target experiences, participant roles, and psychosocial correlates to bullying
(i.e., self-concept, coping strategies, school belonging, depression, and student
knowledge and action to prevent bullying). In addition, a measure of intervention
fidelity (BBPS) was used to test how well the program was implemented in schools as
an outcome to changes in student knowledge about bullying and their actions to
prevent it. Three multilevel models were used to evaluate BB with the use of
experimental versus control conditions on each outcome variable. The three models
included: (1) variance components (null) model; (2) BB intervention effects model;
and (3) grade and gender effects model. The following section discusses the findings
of this study.
Key Findings: Impact on Bullying, Target Experiences, and Participant Roles
BB was found to effectively reduce total bullying behaviours and target
experiences for the student sample. This demonstrates the robustness of BB as an
empirically demonstrated effective intervention in addressing total bullying and total
target experiences. This study contributes an empirically-demonstrated effective
anti-bullying intervention to the international literature for upper primary students.
Further examination of the impact of the intervention on physical, verbal, and
social forms of bullying was conducted. BB was found to effectively reduce social
357
forms of bullying and target experiences. BB was also found to reduce social target
experiences for Year 5 students more than for Year 6 students. Hence the BB
intervention is effective in addressing social forms of bullying. It is promising that the
results had a greater impact on social bullying. This is because BB was built on
specifically enhancing prosocial behaviours and the social relations of students. Social
forms of bullying are some of the most secretive and subtle forms of bullying; and
hence, can be difficult to reduce. Yet, BB successfully reduced this form of bullying,
making this intervention an important contribution to anti-bullying research, practice,
and prevention.
BB was not effective in addressing physical and verbal forms of bullying and
target experiences. There are a number of potential explanations for this. For example,
perhaps those students who engage in or are bullied in physical and verbal forms may
be more chronically involved, and it is possible that BB was not as successful in
reducing rates for those chronically involved. Alternatively, with the program being
based on peer intervention, it is possible that students may have been more fearful or
anxious about intervening (Blanchard, Blanchard, Griebel, & Nutt, 2008) with
physical and verbal forms of bullying. Jeffrey, Miller, and Linn (2001) suggest
students may fail to prevent bullying because they are scared to be picked on next.
Given the high correlation found between engagement in physical and verbal forms of
bullying (.88; which was much higher than those found between social and physical:
.80, or social and verbal forms: .78), students who witness physical and verbal forms
of bullying may be fearful that they would be bullied themselves in physical and
verbal forms if they intervened. In addition, because the program was heavily based
on peer intervention, and bullying happens in peer secrecy, this may have led teachers
to rely more on students informing them of when bullying occurs. Observational
358
studies have shown for example that teachers are often unaware of as many situations
of bullying due to the secret nature of bullying (Atlas & Pepler, 1998). When peers
fail to let a teacher know, or fail to intervene, teachers are unaware of the bullying,
and therefore the bullying will continue. A further explanation could be that the
design of the study was developed to measure incidents of bullying immediately
following implementation of BB, and then three months following implementation of
the program. It is possible that students began practicing their use of the peer
intervention strategies on behaviours they perceived they would be able to
successfully intervene in. These may have been more socially oriented behaviours, as
opposed to more overt forms of bullying. It is possible that students may have
intervened in situations they perceived as more overt forms as time progressed. It
should be noted that physical and verbal forms of bullying and target experiences did
decline, but the decline was not significant. Perhaps a longer delay in the follow-up
may have shown differing results. In addition, total forms of bullying declined
significantly as an impact of BB. Given that the score for total forms of bullying was
produced by scores from all forms of bullying, including physical and verbal forms, it
is possible that the significant decline in bullying found was explained to some degree
by the non-significant decline in physical and verbal behaviours. Further research
with a longer delay follow-up post-test, and longer-term intervention strategies is
needed to clarify these issues.
All forms of bullying and target experiences (including physical and verbal
forms) decreased from W1 to W5. The decrease of physical and verbal forms of
bullying during the control condition may have impacted on the non-significant
results found when compared to the experimental condition. That is, the interaction of
condition by time may have underestimated the impact of BB on physical and verbal
359
forms, because these forms of bullying and target experiences already decreased
during the control condition. Importantly, these forms of bullying contributed to the
significant reduction of total bullying and total target experiences. Hence, the
non-statistically significant reductions of physical and verbal forms should be
considered concurrently with the statistically significant reductions of bullying and
target experiences. Perhaps the impact of the research team in the school during the
control condition influenced the reduction of bullying during the control condition
(see later discussion, Strengths and Limitations), by making bullying more salient to
teachers, parents, and students alike. Or perhaps students were more conscious of
being punished if they were to bully. These suggestions remain to be elucidated by
further research.
BB was found to effectively reduce passive reinforcement and ignoring of
bullying behaviours, as well as increasing students use of advocating for the target
for the student sample. More specifically, while BB reduced actions of ignoring
bullying for both males and females, the reduction was more prevalent for the female
cohort. When the overall impact of gender was investigated for ignoring incidents of
bullying, females were found to ignore incidents of bullying, statistically significantly
more than males. The statistically significantly greater impact of decreasing ignoring
behaviours of females than males is a positive finding considering that females were
more likely to ignore bullying. Furthermore, the greater statistically significant
decrease in ignoring incidents of bullying for female students does not mean that
ignoring did not decrease statistically significantly for males. The already significant
decrease in ignoring behaviour was just greater for females than males (as observed
with the statistically significant reduction of ignoring incidents of bullying, over and
above the impact of grade, gender, and grade by gender; see Table 15: C.Tijk, Chapter
360
8). As was seen in Figure 8.15 (Chapter 8), ignoring bullying still decreased for
males, with males having lower ignoring behaviours than females at all time points
(except W1). This suggests that BB was effective in reducing ignoring behaviours for
both male and female cohorts.
No further statistically significant grade, gender, or grade by gender
interactions were found for participant roles. This suggests BB was just as effective in
reducing passive reinforcement, and increasing advocacy for the target with all grade,
gender, and grade by gender cohorts. These results demonstrate that BB is a robust
intervention for addressing the roles students use when they see bullying happen,
particularly for decreasing passive reinforcement of bullying, and increasing
advocacy. The increase in advocacy for the target also implies support for the use of
the BB strategy of Help (see Chapter 4) being used by students. This further
demonstrates that the BB student strategies were used by students, and effective in
increasing the helping behaviours of students who witness bullying. These results are
promising considering that BB was built on enhancing peer relations and increasing
the helping behaviours of students.
The intervention was not effective in reducing active reinforcement of
bullying. Unexpectedly, males increased their active reinforcement of bullying during
the experimental condition (see Figure 8.14, Chapter 8). However, this increase was
not as high as that found for the control group. Perhaps the influence of the research
team within the school during the control condition impacted on the different levels of
active reinforcement between the control and experimental conditions. That is,
perhaps those students who were occasionally involved in actively reinforcing
bullying during the control condition, reduced their active reinforcement of bullying
during the experimental condition. It should be noted that the experimental condition
361
contained a new group of students who were previously from Year 4 during the
control condition. It is possible that these students may have been more conscious
about actively reinforcing bullying than the students prior, because they knew of the
BB program and were aware that the BB intervention would take place during the
time that they were in Year 5. They also knew that their behaviours would be more
scrutinised during the experimental condition. Hence, the new Year 5 students in the
experimental condition, contributed to the low experimental scores. In addition, it is
possible that BB was more effective in reducing bullying and related behaviours for
the general student sample, than for students who were chronically involved; and
hence, active reinforcement of bullying was lower in the experimental condition, but
did not decrease any further. There is a need for a longer delay in follow-up research,
and possibly longer-term intervention strategies to combat those chronically involved
to elucidate these issues in future anti-bullying research.
Key Findings: Impact on Psychosocial Correlates
Secondary impacts on student wellbeing and psychosocial development were
also evident as an outcome to the implementation of BB within the upper primary
years. BB was found to effectively enhance physical appearance, peer relations,
opposite-sex and same-sex peer relations, and emotional stability self-concepts, as
well as general self-esteem. BB was more effective in increasing opposite-sex
relations self-concepts with Year 5 students than Year 6 students. However,
opposite-sex peer relations self-concept increased for both Year 5 and Year 6
students, the patterns of change were similar during the experimental condition for
both groups (see Figure 8.25, Chapter 8), and the increase in opposite-sex peer
relations was still significant, over and above the impact of grade, gender, and grade
by gender interactions (see Table 8.18: C.Tijk, Chapter 8). There were no grade,
362
gender, or grade by gender interactions with peer relations self-concept, same-sex
relations self-concept, and general self-esteem, suggesting BB was just as effective in
enhancing peer and same-sex relations self-concept, and general self-esteem, with all
grade, gender, and grade by gender cohorts. BB was specifically designed to enhance
student self-concept. One of the key components of BB was the inclusion of
behaviour management and self-concept enhancement strategies for teachers that were
designed to improve student self-concept. This is an important result given that BB
underpins enhancing prosocial peer relations among students, and considering these
self-concept factors protect students from becoming involved in bullying (e.g., Marsh
et al., 2004; OMoore & Kirkham, 2001). These findings support the effectiveness of
BB and the enhancement of student self-concept strategies used by teachers within the
program.
Unexpectedly, grade and gender interactions showed BB to be more effective
in increasing the physical appearance self-concepts of grade 6 females than other
critical groups. It should be noted that the physical self-concept scores of all other
critical groups did increase from W1 to W5, and were generally higher than that for
the grade 6 female cohort. Yet the impact of BB on physical appearance was more
direct for grade 6 females (see Figure 8.27, Chapter 8). This is important considering
that the female grade 6 cohort were found to have lowest physical appearance
self-concepts of all groups, when all other students (grade 5 males and females, and
grade 6 males) had similarly high physical appearance self-concepts, and similar
patterns of change over time (see Figure 8.22, Chapter 8). It is possible that the link
between physical self-concept and body image is particularly salient for grade 6
females. That is, it is during grade 6 that females become more conscious of their
body image, resulting in the lower physical appearance self-concept scores for this
363
cohort than the other cohorts who had similarly high physical appearance self-concept
scores. However, it is beyond this study to infer anti-bullying research to other
important student outcomes not investigated in this study, such as student body image.
Further research investigating the impact of self-concept enhancement strategies with
the grade 6 cohort is needed. What is important, are the physical appearance
self-concept enhancements of female grade 6 students, those students who had the
lowest physical appearance self-concept scores.
Also unexpected were the differences in the impact of BB on emotional
stability, parental relations, general schooling, and honesty self-concepts. While
emotional stability self-concepts statistical significance increased as an outcome to
BB, over and above the grade, gender, and grade by gender interactions, increases in
emotional stability appeared to be significantly greater for grade 5 males, than all
other critical groups (see Figure 8.29, Chapter 8). This was unpredicted given that
males were found to have higher emotional stability self-concepts than females
overall. Perhaps this represents a maturity effect for male grade 5 students, or
alternatively, it is possible that grade 5 males felt more confident after learning the
new student strategies of BB, considering that males were found to be bullied more
often than females (see Table 8.9: Grijk, Chapter 8). However, this is speculation that
needs to be elucidated by future research.
The impact of BB on parental and general schooling self-concept was not
statistically significant over and above the grade, gender, and grade by gender
interactions; however, the impact of BB appeared to be statistically significantly more
effective in enhancing the parental relations and general schooling self-concepts of
grade 6 students than grade 5 students. These positive impacts could be reflective of
the positive impact of parental involvement for the grade 6 cohort in the use of the
364
self-concept enhancement strategies by teachers across all schooling subjects. It
should be noted that for grade 5 students, the general schooling self-concept was
higher for the grade 6 cohort. In addition the parental self-concept scores of grade 5
students were as high as that of the grade 6 cohort at W5. These findings remain to be
elucidated by future research. Also of interest were the statistically significantly
greater increase in the honesty self-concept of grade 6 females and grade 5 males than
for grade 5 females. These results were unanticipated. It is beyond the scope of this
study to hypothesise on why parental and general schooling self-concepts did not
increase significantly for grade 5 students. It is possible that the diffusion effects of
the self-concept enhancement strategies used by teachers had impacted on more areas
than those specifically targeted by BB (see Craven et al., 2001).
BB was found to effectively reduce students use of avoidance coping
strategies, and effectively increase students use of problem solving and support
seeking strategies, over and above the impact of grade, gender, and grade by gender
interactions. These results demonstrate that BB is a robust intervention for
encouraging students to use positive coping strategies (i.e., problem solving and
support seeking strategies), and decreasing their use of negative coping strategies
(i.e., avoidance coping strategies). For the coping strategy of support seeking, given
that the three BB strategies of Stop, Help, and Tell (see Chapter 4) were provided to
students, it is promising to see that the support seeking coping strategy increased
significantly as a direct outcome to BB for all critical groups. This provides support
for the BB intervention and the theoretical basis of the Tell strategy, in that students
were seeking support from others more often (including telling someone about it),
subsequent to BB than prior to BB. However, it should be noted that caution should
be taken when drawing conclusions for the avoidance coping strategy, as this factor,
365
although acceptable for use within this study, was not well supported by the
psychometric testing conducted in Study 1.
In addition, grade effects showed that BB was more effective in enhancing
grade 6 students use of problem solving coping strategies than grade 5 students, in
enhancing the use of problem solving strategies for females than males. Perhaps this
represents a maturity effect for the grade 6 cohort. This may be linked to the later
findings showing that grade 6 students used significantly more actions to prevent
bullying than grade 5 students (although the increase was statistically significant for
both cohorts). That is, grade 6 students were more likely to use problem solving
coping strategies, such as greater use of actions (e.g., stopping and helping during
incidents of bullying), than grade 5 students. Regarding the differences between male
and female students, it is possible that for females, the higher use of problem solving
coping strategies may have been a maturation effect. However, further research is
needed to elucidate this.
Further secondary impacts of BB were found with the statistically significant
increase in students sense of school belonging. Students overall sense of school
belonging was found to increase as an outcome of BB, but when the types of school
belonging were examined, BB was found to effectively increase students sense of
support they received from their school, and the attachment they felt to their school.
There were no grade, gender, or grade by gender differences found, suggesting BB
was just as effective in increasing students sense of support, and increasing the
attachment students felt to their school with all grade, gender, and grade by gender
cohorts. The statistically significant increase in students sense of support from their
school is promising and implies support for the BB school-wide program, reflective of
366
the change in school climate experienced. This demonstrates that BB was effective in
targeting school climate and student school belonging.
BB was not effective in increasing students acceptance of school rules. It is
possible that student acceptance of school rules did not increase because student
acceptance of school rules may be more difficult, or take a longer period to change.
Future research with a longer delay follow-up, and possibly a longer-term program are
required to elucidate this issue. However, what was found was that the results showed
students felt more supported and attached to their school as an outcome to BB, and
BB could benefit from reviews to enhancement of student acceptance of school rules.
The final secondary impact of BB investigated in this study was the impact of
BB on depression. Depression was significantly reduced as a direct result of the
implementation of BB. When grade, gender, and grade by gender effects were added
to the model, it was interesting to note that BB was more effective in reducing
depression for females than males, although depression decreased for both males and
females from W1 to W5. These results show support for BB in producing positive
flow-on effects that impact on reducing depressive symptoms, given the pervasive
negative outcomes of bullying on mental health issues (Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpela,
Rantanen, & Rimpela, 2000; Rigby, 1998; Roland, 2002). Previous research has
shown depression leading to later involvement in bullying, and involvement in
bullying leading to later depression. This program has important implications for
preventing this vicious cycle of bullying linked to depression, and in reducing
depression to ensure that students have a better chance to reach their full potential
during their adult years.
367
Key Findings: Impact on Student Knowledge and Preventative Action
A measure of student knowledge of bullying and their action to prevent it was
included within this investigation, as a measure of fidelity for how well the program
was implemented within schools. This measure included items related specifically to
the topics within BB, and to the specific student strategies. BB was found to
effectively increase students knowledge of bullying and their actions to prevent it,
over and above the impact of the grade, gender, and grade by gender interactions.
These results increased from the pre-test to the first post-test, and were maintained
from the first post-test to the second post-test. This suggested that BB was effective in
increasing student knowledge of bullying, and the action students take to prevent
bullying. This also shows that the BB program was implemented in schools
successfully. Given that the three BB strategies of Stop, Help, and Tell (see Chapter
4), were provided to students, it is promising to see that action to prevent bullying
(which incorporated items that refer to the stop and help strategies; e.g., I have told a
bully to stop bullying, I have helped a person who was being bullied), increased
significantly as a direct outcome of BB for all critical groups. These results provide
support for the BB Stop, and Help strategies, wherein students actions to prevent
bullying increased subsequent to BB.
Grade and gender effects showed that BB increased grade 5 female students
knowledge of bullying to a greater degree than all other cohorts. It is possible that
grade 5 female students increase in knowledge was greatest because grade 5 students
were less likely to have received anti-bullying education prior to BB (due to being
younger) than grade 6 students, and for the female grade 5 students to increase in
knowledge to a greater extent because they may have been more conscious about
learning about bullying. Further evidence is needed in future research to discern this.
368
In addition, BB was found to further increase grade 5 students action to
prevent bullying, from the first post-test to the second post-test, above and beyond the
already statistically significant increase from the pre-test to the average of the first and
second post-test. It is important to note that when the actions of students in grade 5
increased, the highest score was for students at W5. However, this level of action did
not reach the high levels of action from grade 6 students. Perhaps the lag in grade 5
students reaching a similar level to that of the grade 6 students in actions to prevent
bullying, may have been due to grade 5 students gradual increase in confidence to
take action to prevent bullying. This may be a more daunting task for younger
students. Further evidence in future research is needed to test this suggestion.
Summary of Key Findings for Study 2
Using a sophisticated baseline-control study within primary schools, Study 2
was designed to evaluate the impact of BB on bullying behaviours, target experiences,
participant roles, related psychosocial constructs (i.e., self-concept, coping strategies,
school belonging, and depression), and knowledge and action to prevent school
bullying. Results demonstrated that total bullying behaviours and total target
experiences decreased as a direct outcome to BB. When the different forms were
examined, social forms of bullying and target experiences were found to reduce
statistically significantly. This was a positive achievement considering BB was
developed to encourage prosocial behaviours, and to enhance student peer relations
and attests to the robust nature of the BB intervention in regard to social bullying.
A number of important secondary impacts on enhancing student social
relations were also found. This consisted of: (a) increasing students use of advocating
for the target; (b) improving student peer related self-concept factors (i.e., peer
relations, opposite-sex, and same-sex peer relations); (c) strengthening support
369
seeking coping strategies of students; and (d) enhancing students actions to prevent
bullying. These key areas suggest that BB was effective in addressing prosocial
behaviours, increasing student helping behaviours, decreasing peer reinforcement of
bullying, and increasing students use of effective coping strategies. The results also
imply support for the Stop, Help, and Tell strategies, and the behaviour management
strategies for teachers to encourage prosocial peer relations, as effective intervention
strategies that helped students to take action in preventing bullying. In addition, the
increase in many important self-concept factors, which potentially help protect
students from being involved in bullying, show support for the self-concept
enhancement strategies used by teachers, and the theory on which these strategies are
based. Moreover, student knowledge about school bullying was higher following the
implementation of BB. These results provide support for the effectiveness of the
curriculum-based activities in BB for increasing student knowledge about bullying,
how to address it, and that BB was implemented well in schools. Finally, the
enhancement in students sense of being more supported by their school, and feeling
more attached to their school subsequent to BB, demonstrated that BB was effective
in enhancing these constructs. Given previous research has demonstrated these factors
serve to limit risks of bullying (Marsh et al., 2004), these results attest to the salience
of BB.
Strengths and Limitations
This study has a number of strengths. BB is a new, modified anti-bullying
program for primary schools. It was theoretically derived from Social Identity Theory
and Self-Concept Theory, which suggests bullying develops as an outcome to
environmental process, self-perceptions within the social context, and in particular via
reinforcement and non-punishment from the school and the peer group. The results
370
offer support for the theoretical underpinnings of bullying, and this research has made
important contributions to extending the school bullying literature and our
understanding of bullying. Firstly, it was shown that bullying can be conceptualised as
occurring with three forms. The multidimensionality of bullying has been supported
for younger children, showing support for the existence of the three forms of bullying
and target experiences (i.e., physical, verbal, and social). In addition, a suite of
adolescent instruments have been tested with the upper primary grades, and were
shown to be psychometrically sound and useful measures for pre-adolescent students.
This measures provide bullying researchers and teachers with a suite of appropriate
instrumentation to measure: (a) different roles students take on when bullying
happens; (b) important self-concept facets to understanding bullying, (c) student
coping strategies; (d) multidimensional school belonging constructs; (e) depressive
symptoms of upper primary students; (f) and a new multiple-item multidimensional
scale of the fidelity of the BB implementation in schools.
Secondly, a further key component of bullying was in the modification of BB
for the upper primary grades, followed by a comprehensive test of this new bullying
prevention program. In the context of a recent review of comprehensive anti-bullying
program evaluations, this research meets five of the seven recommendations for
evaluating bullying prevention programs (Ryan & Smith, 2009): (1) the use of a
baseline-control study; (2) the collection of outcome data at least six months
following implementation of BB; (3) reporting a rigorous psychometric assessment of
instruments used to measure bullying and its psychosocial correlates; (4) the inclusion
of a measure of fidelity for how well BB was implemented in schools; and (5) the use
of multilevel modeling to evaluate BB. In contrast to current bullying evaluations that
use single-item measures, and omnibus F-tests, which capitalise on error, to evaluate
371
bullying (e.g., Baldry & Farrington, 2004; Peterson & Rigby, 1999), this study used
multiple-item and multidimensional measures of bullying and its related constructs,
which do not capitalise on error. In addition, in contrast to studies that use more
comprehensive approaches, yet fail to show significant outcomes with primary aged
students (e.g., Frey, Hirschstein, Snell, Edstrom, MacKenzie, & Broderick, 2005), this
study demonstrated an effective bullying prevention program that measured outcomes
based on multilevel modeling; that is, measured intervention outcomes with more
accurate measures. BB was still found to be empirically supported as statistically
significantly effective in reducing total and social bullying and related constructs, as
well as enhancing student wellbeing. A more comprehensive measurement and
evaluation of bullying is necessary in order to accurately inform policy and in the
development of more accurate prevention strategies that can be used in schools. This
study has made an important contribution to addressing this need.
Key features of BB include a whole-school policy, a teacher-managed whole-
school program where all resources were provided, specific behaviour management
strategies for teachers in preventing bullying and enhancing student self-concept,
curriculum activities that teach students to address bullying, and a parent education
program. However, it should be noted that BB was not effective in statistically
significantly reducing physical and verbal forms of bullying and target experiences
(although there were decreases that contributed to the significant total bullying and
target experiences statistically significant decrease), and in decreasing active
reinforcement of peers when bullying happens. It is possible that these forms of
bullying and target experiences, and reinforcement behaviours, require longer-term
solutions, or perhaps a longer delay in follow-up measures may be beneficial to
elucidating these issues. Further research in these areas is required. Overall, this
372
program was shown to be a robust program for upper primary grade students, with
key features such as the specific behaviour management and self-concept
enhancement strategies for teachers, and student strategies to prevent bullying, that
have important implications for strengthening anti-bullying research, and important
contributions for the prevention of bullying within primary schools.
The analyses conducted are sophisticated, empirically-valid statistical
procedures to identify results for this complex control-group multi-cohort
multi-occasion research design. This study provided researchers with a new suite of
instruments that have been shown to be psychometrically sound measures that can be
used with upper primary students. In addition, the comprehensive evaluation of BB
showed BB to be an effective program for reducing bullying and related behaviours,
and increasing student wellbeing, within the upper primary grades. This research
design and study is part of leading international research of bullying prevention in
schools, particularly in the primary grades. Furthermore, it is one of only a handful of
thorough whole-school anti-bullying evaluations worldwide, and one of only a few
with a sophisticated baseline-control study within primary schools where bullying was
shown to decrease. BB was therefore shown to be one of the most practical bullying
prevention programs world-wide that can be dependably used in schools.
The current limitation of this study involves the upper primary sample. BB
was designed as a whole-school approach to preventing bullying. However, the
program was tested and implemented with only upper primary school students in
grades 5 and 6. Whilst, schools were encouraged to use the program school-wide the
extent to which this suggestion was implemented is unknown. Future research could
consider implementing and testing the BB program across the whole school
simultaneously to fully capitalise on the benefits of a whole-school approach.
373
Moreover, for many of the outcomes a decrease (or increase) in the desired
direction for BB impacts were observed during the control condition, prior to BB. It is
possible that the presence of the research team within the school during the control
condition may have influenced student outcomes over time, reducing the direct
impacts of BB. While researchers were not directly involved in the prevention of
bullying, they may have inadvertently impacted on the control group scores. For
example, students were aware that the research team was collecting information about
their behaviours, and possibly deliberated about the impact that would have on how
they would be perceived by their teachers, parents, friends, and other school
personnel.
A further limitation consists of the sample of students used within this
research. The student sample was recruited from Catholic schools, hence it is difficult
to generalise the results to non-Catholic schools. Careful consideration was taken
however in recruiting a sample of students from diverse SES and cultural
backgrounds. It is possible that students within the Catholic schools system may not
reflect the wider community, but when taking into account issues of school bullying,
it should be considered that bullying is a universal phenomenon where no school
system is immune, regardless of its foundation.
Chapter Summary
This chapter discussed the contributions of this study to theory, research, and
practice. BB was shown to be an effective program in reducing overall bullying
behaviours for upper primary students, and in particular, in enhancing the wellbeing
of student outcomes evinced with the BB flow-on effects. Importantly, the key
secondary impacts of BB were found with the enhancement of peer relations and
pro-social behaviours. BB also demonstrated successful impacts with the
374
implementation of effective strategies for students to prevent bullying, that led to
increased actions of students to prevent bullying, reductions of bullying and related
behaviours, and increased student knowledge of bullying. This study serves as a basis
for further strengthening anti-bullying theory, measurement, and practice.
375
CHAPTER 10
Summary
Before we had the bullying program, youd see some girls walking round
by themselves... and now... you see groups and stuff.
Australian Primary School Student (personal communication,
August 10, 2007).
The short- and long-term impacts of bullying can prevent students from
reaching their full life potential. Later adulthood consequences have been found for
students who experienced being targeted or who were involved in bullying during the
primary school years. Preventing bullying for primary school aged children is
therefore crucial. This thesis was comprised of two studies that aimed to: (1) test the
psychometric properties of the measures used in this study to examine bullying and
related psychosocial constructs for upper primary aged school children; and (2) test
the impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program on reducing bullying
and target experiences, increasing prosocial participant roles students employ when
bullying happens, enhancing related psychosocial constructs, and testing how well the
program was implemented in schools.
376
Implications for Theory, Future Research, and Practise
A common limitation of school bullying research is the over-reliance on the
use of non-validated or single-item bullying measures in the pursuit of
between-network designs before within-network issues have been resolved. This is
problematic. To-date, school bullying researchers have theorised bullying to occur in
three forms; yet, they continue to ignore the three forms when measuring school
bullying (e.g., Baldry & Farrington, 2004; Sapouna, 2008). There is a lack of bullying
measures which have been developed based on theoretical conceptualisations of the
nature of the bullying construct. In order to accurately measure bullying, appropriate
and validated instruments that reflect a researchers operational definition of bullying
is necessary. Without valid instrumentation to measure bullying, the inferences drawn
to the population also become invalid. Theory, research, and practice are intertwined,
such that inadequacies in measurement that fail to be based on theory, lead to serious
concerns for the validity of the research conducted, and in the practices used to
prevent bullying. This study has implications for strengthening future bullying theory,
and has made a significant contribution to advancing research and practice, based on
sound theoretical underpinnings. This research has demonstrated the psychometric
properties of theoretically derived instruments that conceptualise bullying, participant
roles, and the complexity of related psychosocial constructs, and provided
justification for the measures that were used with upper primary students within this
study. The use of stronger attention to theory and within-network issues of school
bullying research, has implications for research in detecting a more accurate
understanding of bullying, in the creation of a more accurate knowledge base on
which bullying literature is built, and on practice in discovering more accurate
preventative strategies to reduce bullying in schools. This research has capitalised on
377
within-network designs and demonstrated the psychometric properties for the
measures of bullying and related constructs. Furthermore, this research showed
support for the measures to be used as valid and reliable measures for upper primary
students.
A second gap within current school bullying literature, is that schools
internationally are fraught with a considerable number of unsupported anti-bullying
programs. More rigorous research is needed to test such programs and empirically
demonstrate the successful features of such interventions. In particular, recent
research has highlighted the need for these programs to undergo comprehensive
evaluative procedures in search of more accurate outcomes that do not capitalise on
error, and in more accurately validated bullying prevention programs (Ryan & Smith,
2009). This study consisted of a multi-cohort, multi-occasion, baseline-control
research design used to evaluate the impact of BB. Results of this research underline
the important implications for the need in bullying research to pursue sophisticated
empirical tests of the impact of anti-bullying programs, consistent with the stated
goals of the intervention. In addition, BB was found to be a valuable program for
reducing bullying and related behaviours, increasing social helping student
behaviours, and enhancing student wellbeing with analytical procedures that do not
capitalise on error. Education systems, teachers, and school psychologists would be
well advised to avoid the plethora of anti-bullying programs available that are
unsubstantiated by a research-evidence base. More rigorous scrutiny of anti-bullying
programs is needed in order to address the complex nature of the bullying
phenomenon and help students reach their full potential.
In addition, while BB was found to significantly reduce total and social
bullying behaviours and target experiences for Years 5 and 6 students, there is still
378
much to be learnt regarding the most effective preventative strategies for schools. In
relation to BB specifically, a focus on reducing physical and verbal forms of bullying
and target experiences, as well as in decreasing active reinforcer roles, is still
required. Furthermore, evaluations of whole-school anti-bullying programs which are
implemented over a longer term should be developed and assessed. The prevention of
bullying with a once-off anti-bullying strategy is unlikely to have long-lasting change
within schools. Given the scope of positive secondary impacts of BB on prosocial
relations and enhanced student wellbeing within this study, a longer-term follow-up
may have been beneficial, particularly on preventing physical and verbal forms. This
research is one of the leading international school bullying prevention studies that
investigated issues of bullying in the primary grades, and found significant reductions
of bullying with the use of a comprehensive evaluative procedure that does not
capitalise on error. The research and prevention strategies within this study contribute
to the theoretical underpinnings of school bullying literature and offer a constructive
bullying prevention program for primary schools internationally.
Concluding Notes
Study 1 offered important insights into the validation of bullying measures for
pre-adolescent children in Years 5 and 6. This provided support for, and examples of,
rigorous testing procedures that were used to validate multiple-item measures of
bullying and related constructs. Psychometric assessment was conducted with an
examination of reliability estimates, followed by confirmatory factor analysis of a
priori theories, and lastly testing the invariance of the factorial structure across grade,
gender, and grade by gender. Key findings include support for the Adolescent Peer
Relations Instrument Bullying/Target (APRI-BT) to be used with upper primary
school students. In particular, the APRI-BT was supported as an accurate measure of
379
physical, verbal, and social forms of bullying and target experiences, as well as total
engagement in bullying others and total target experiences for grade 5 and 6 students.
This measure was based on theoretical definitions of bullying and results provide
support for the multidimensional theoretical structure of the bullying and target
constructs for primary aged students, demonstrating that grade 5 and 6 students can
differentiate between three forms of bullying accurately.
The additional instruments used in this study were also supported as useful,
appropriate, and accurate multidimensional measures of self-concept, participant
roles, coping strategies, and school belonging for upper primary students. Also, the
unidimensional measure of depression was shown to be a useful measure of
depressive symptoms for grade 5 and 6 students. In addition, a new instrument
developed to test the fidelity of implementation of BB (with items related to specific
facets of BB), was supported as psychometrically sound in measuring upper primary
students knowledge about bullying, and the actions they take to prevent it. These
results show support for the instruments as appropriate measures of bullying
behaviours, target experiences, participant roles, and related psychosocial constructs
for upper primary school students.
Study 2 was designed to comprehensively test the impact of BB on bullying,
target experiences, and related psychosocial constructs. BB was found to significantly
and directly reduce total bullying and target experiences, as well as social forms of
bullying and target experiences. In addition, crucial secondary impacts were found for
related psychosocial constructs. This included significant reductions in passively
reinforcing and ignoring incidents of bullying, avoidance coping strategies, and
depression, as well as positive impacts on increased student advocacy for the target,
peer related self-concept factors (i.e., peer relations, opposite-sex relations, and
380
same-sex relations self-concept), emotional stability self-concepts, general self-
esteem, student use of problem solving and support seeking skills, and school
belonging, as an outcome of BB. Further validation of BB was found with the
significant increase in student knowledge of bullying and the adaptive actions
students take to prevent it.
Evidence was also found to support the measures used within this study as
appropriate measures of the intended goals of BB. That is, evidence was found in
support of the changes in school climate; reductions in bullying behaviours, target
experiences, and reinforcing participant roles; increases in student knowledge as an
outcome to the classroom-based curriculum activities; increases in student use of the
BB Stop, Help, and Tell strategies; and enhanced student prosocial behaviours and
peer relations with the use of self-concept enhancement and behaviour management
strategies by teachers.
Important theoretical contributions were also made within this study. Critical
considerations were discussed for the way in which researchers operationally define
and then measure bullying. Inconsistency in aligning an operational definition of
bullying to the way in which bullying is measured has implications for the resultant
attributes that are being measured. For example, single-item measures of bullying do
little to measure the different forms of bullying, and do little to fully elucidate the
impact of interventions on different bullying forms, yet are continually used in school
bullying research (e.g., Baldry & Farrington, 2004; Sapouna, 2008). These
inconsistencies have further implications when data are analysed with dichotomous
variables (see Chapter 2). When researchers strive to align their measures of their
operational definition of bullying, more accurate inferences can then be drawn from
the sample to the population.
381
This study has contributed to school bullying prevention literature by
providing researchers with an empirically tested and validated suite of theoretically
derived instrumentation in which to measure bullying and related constructs with
upper primary students. In addition, an operational definition of bullying was
provided and it was demonstrated how chosen measures were used to measure student
involvement in bullying more accurately. The present investigation also contributed to
research and practice by providing a new empirically supported anti-bullying program
for the upper primary grades. Hence this study makes a valuable contribution to the
international literature.
In summary, this thesis has capitalised on advances in bullying theory and
research and has made important contributions to school bullying research and
practice. Theory, research, and practice were intertwined within this research with the
use of: theoretical approaches underpinning the measurement of bullying and related
constructs; the development of a comprehensive whole-school approach for primary
schools; strong research methodology and sophisticated baseline-control study to
evaluate the impact of BB; the use of psychometrically sound instruments to evaluate
the key objectives of BB; and the development of a new primary schools bullying
prevention program that was demonstrated to impact positively on outcomes
consistent with the key goals of BB. Hence, this research has added to the literature on
bullying by demonstrating methodological and statistical advancements in school
bullying research within the primary grades. Moreover, this research has implications
for the way in which future research is conducted, bullying prevention is implemented
in schools, and anti-bullying programs are evaluated in bullying research.
382
REFERENCES
Ahmed, E., & Braithwaite, V. (2004). Bullying and victimization: Cause for concern
for both families and schools. Social Psychology of Education, 7(1), 35-54.
doi:10.1023/B:SPOE.0000010668.43236.60
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting
interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Alsaker, F. D. (1995). Is puberty a critical period for socialization? Journal of
Adolescence, 18(4), 427-444. doi:10.1006/jado.1995.1031
Amirkhan, J. H. (1990). A factor analytically derived measure of coping: The Coping
Strategy Indicator. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 1066-
1075. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.1066
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Anderman, E. M. (2002). School effects on psychological outcomes during
adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 795-809.
doi:10.1037//0022-0663.94.4.795
Andreou, E., Didaskalou, E., & Vlachou, A. (2007). Evaluating the effectiveness of a
curriculum-based anti-bullying intervention program in Greek primary schools.
Educational Psychology, 27(5), 693711. doi:10.1080/01443410601159993
Arora, T. (1996). Defining bullying: Towards a clearer general understanding and
more effective intervention strategies. School Psychology International, 17(4),
317-329. doi:10.1177/0143034396174002
Atlas, R. S., & Pepler, D. J. (1998). Observations of bullying in the classroom. The
Journal of Educational Research, 92(2), 86-99. Retrieved from
http://www.heldref.org/pubs/jer/about.html
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2008). ASGC 2008 Electronic Structures. Retrieved
July 29, 2008 from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/1216.0.15.001
Australian National Crime Prevention Strategy. (1999). Pathways to Prevention:
Developmental and Early Intervention approaches to crime in Australia.
Canberra, ACT, Australia: Attorney-Generals Department.
Babyak, M. A. (2004). What you see may not be what you get: A brief, nontechnical
introduction to overfitting in regression-type models. Psychosomatic Medicine,
66(3), 411421. doi:0033-3174/04/6603-0411
Baldry, A. C. (2003). Bullying in schools and exposure to domestic violence. Child
Abuse & Neglect, 27(7), 713-732. doi:10.1016/S0145-2134(03)00114-5
Baldry, A. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2004). Evaluation of an intervention program for
the reduction of bullying and victimization in schools. Aggressive Behavior,
30(1), 1-15. doi:10.1002/ab.20000
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
383
Barnett, M. A., Burns, S. R., Sanborn, F. W., Bartel, J. S., & Wilds, S. J. (2004).
Antisocial and prosocial teasing among children: Perceptions and individual
differences. Social Development, 13(2), 292-310. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2004
.000268.x
Batsche, G. M. (1997). Bullying. In G. G. Bear, K. M. Minke & A. Thomas (Eds.),
Childrens needs II: Development, problems, and alternatives (pp. 17180).
Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
Baumeister, R. F. (1986). Public self and private self. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for
interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological
Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
Baumeister, R. F., Smart, L., & Boden, J. M. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism
to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological
Review, 103(1), 5-33. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.5
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological
Bulletin, 107(2), 238-246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the
analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588600.
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
Berkowitz, AD (2003). Applications of Social Norms Theory to other health and
social justice issues. In H. W. Perkins (Ed.), The Social Norms approach to
preventing school and college age substance abuse (pp. 259-279). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Berman, S. L., Kurtines, W. M., Silverman, W. K., & Serafini, L. T. (1996). The
impact of exposure to crime violence on urban youth. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 66(3), 329-336. doi:10.1037/h0080183
Berne, S., (1999). Bullying: An effective anti-bullying program for primary schools.
Cheltenham, Victoria, Australia: Hawker Brownlow.
Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General Systems Theory: Foundations, Development,
Applications. New York: George Braziller.
Bjrkqvist, K. (1994). Sex differences in physical, verbal, and indirect aggression: A
review of recent research. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 30(3/4), 177-188.
doi:10.1007/BF01420988
Bjrkqvist, 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(2), 117-127. doi:10.1002/1098-2337(1992)18:2<117::
AID-AB2480180205>3.0.CO;2-3
Blanchard, R. J., Blanchard, D. C., Griebel, G., & Nutt, D. (2008). Introduction to the
handbook on fear and anxiety. In B. J. Blanchard, D. C. Blanchard, G. Griebel,
D. & Nutt, D. (Eds.), Handbook of Anxiety and Fear, Vol. 17 (pp. 136-162).
Newbury Park, CA: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/S1569-7339(07)00001-X
Blum, R. W. (2005). A case for school connectedness. The Adolescent Learner, 62(7),
16-20. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/
apr05/vol62/num07/toc.aspx
384
Borg, M. G. (1999). The extent and nature of bullying among primary and secondary
schoolchildren. Educational Research, 41(2), 137153.
doi:10.1080/0013188990410202
Boulton, M. J., & Flemington, I. (1996). The effects of a short video intervention on
secondary school pupils' involvement in definitions of and attitudes towards
bullying. School Psychology International, 17, 331-345.
doi:10.1177/0143034396174003
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Brown, R. L. (1994). Efficacy of the indirect approach for estimating structural
equation model with missing data: A comparison of five methods. Structural
Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1, 287316. Retrieved from
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/10705511.asp
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.
A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162).
Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
Buhs, E. S., & Ladd, G. W. (2001). Peer rejection as an antecedent of young
children's school adjustment: An examination of mediating processes.
Developmental Psychology, 37(4), 550-560. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.37.4.550
Byrne, B. M. (1984). The general/academic self-concept nomological network: A
review of construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54,
427-456. doi:10.2307/1170455
Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modelling with LISREL, PRELIS, and
SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Byrne, B. M., & Shavelson, R. J. (1987). Adolescent self concept: Testing the
assumption of equivalent structure across gender. American Educational
Research Journal, 24, 365-385. doi:10.2307/1163115
Byrne, B. M., & Worth Gavin, D. A. (1996). The Shavelson Model revisited: Testing
for the structure of academic self-concept across pre-, early, and late
adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(2), 215-228.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.88.2.215
Campbell, M. A. (2005). Cyber bullying: An old problem in a new guise? Australian
Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 15(1), 68-76. doi:10.1375/ajgc.15.1.68
Campbell, J. D., & Lavallee, L. F. (1993). Who am I? The role of self-concept
confusion in understanding the behaviour of people with low self-esteem. In R.
Baumeister (Ed.), Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard (pp. 3-20). New
York: Plenum Press.
Campbell, M. L. C., & Morrison, A. P. (2007). The relationship between bullying,
psychotic-like experiences and appraisals in 14-16-year olds. Behaviour
research and therapy, 45(7), 1579-1591. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2006.11.009
Casella, R. (2003). Punishing dangerousness through preventive detention: New
directions for youth development. New Directions for Youth Development,
2003(99), 55-70. doi:10.1002/yd.54
385
Charman, T., & Pervova, I. (2001). The internal structure of the Child Depression
Inventory in Russian and UK schoolchildren. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
30(1), 41-51. doi:10.1023/A:1005220820982
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for
testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233255.
doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
Christie-Mizell, C. A. (2003). Bullying: The consequences of interparental discord
and childs self-concept. Family Process, 42(2), 237-251. doi:10.1111/j.1545-
5300.2003.42204.x
Clayton, C. J., Ballif-Spanvill, B., & Hunsaker, M. D. (2001). Preventing violence
and teaching peace: A review of promising and effective antiviolence, conflict-
resolution, and peace programs for elementary school children. Applied and
Preventive Psychology, 10(1), 1-35. doi:10.1016/S0962-1849(05)80030-7
Colvin, G., Sugai, G., Good, R. H., & Lee, Y. Y. (1997). Using active supervision and
precorrection to improve transition behaviors in an elementary school. School
Psychology Quarterly, 12(4), 344-363. doi:10.1037/h0088967
Connolly, I., & O'Moore, M. (2003). Personality and family relations of children who
bully. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(3), 559-567. doi:10.1016/
S0191-8869(02)00218-0
Conway, R. (2001). Encouraging positive interactions. In P. Foreman (Ed.),
Integration and inclusion in action (pp. 311-359). Southbank, Victoria,
Australia: Nelson Thomson Learning.
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and
applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104. doi:0.1037/0021-
9010.78.1.98
Cowie, H., & Sharp, S. (1994). Empowering pupils to take positive action against
bullying. In P. K. Smith & S. Sharp (Eds.), School bullying: Insights and
perspectives (pp. 108-131). London: Routledge.
Craig, W. (1998). The relationship among bullying, depression, anxiety and
aggression among elementary school children. Personality and Individual
Differences, 24(1), 123-130. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00145-1
Craig, W. M., & Pepler, D. J. (1995). Peer processes in bullying and victimization: An
observational study. Exceptionality Education Canada, 5, 81-95. Retrieved from
http://www.acquirecontent.com/titles/exceptionality-education-canada
Craven, R. G. (Ed.). (1999). Teaching Aboriginal studies. Sydney, NSW, Australia:
Allen and Unwin.
Craven, R. G., Finger, L. R., & Yeung, A. (2007). Beyond bullying in primary
schools: Theory, instrumentation and intervention. Paper presented at the
Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, November 25-29,
2007. Freemantle, Western Australia, Australia.
Craven, R. G., Marsh, H. W., & Burnett, P. (2003). Cracking the self-concept
enhancement conundrum: A call and blueprint for the next generation of self-
concept enhancement research. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven & D. M.
McInerney (Eds.), International advances in self research (Vol. 1, pp. 91-126).
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
386
Craven, R. G., Marsh, H. W., & Debus, R. L. (1991). Effects of internally focused
feedback and attributional feedback on enhancement of academic self-concept.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 17-27. doi:10.1037/0022-
0663.83.1.17
Craven, R. G., & Parada, R. H. (2002). Beyond Bullying Secondary School Program:
Teacher's handbook. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Publication Unit, Self-Concept
Enhancement and Learning Facilitation (SELF) Research Centre, University Of
Western Sydney.
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social
information-processing mechanisms in childrens social adjustment.
Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 74-101. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.1.74
Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-
psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66(3), 710-722.
doi:10.2307/1131945
Crick, N. R., Nelson, D. A., Morales, J. R., Cullerton-Sen, C., Casas, J. F., &
Hickman, S. E. (2001). Relational victimisation in childhood and adolescence: I
hurt you through the grapevine. In J. Juvonen, A. Nishina, & S. Graham (Eds.),
Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized (pp. 196-
214). New York: Guilford.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests.
Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281302. doi:10.1037/h0040957
Dake, J. A., Price, J. H., & Telljohann, S. K. (2003). The nature and extent of bullying
at school. Journal of School Health, 73(5), 173-180. Retrieved from
http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0022-4391
Davanzo, P., Kerwin, L., Nikore, V., Esparza, C., Forness, S., & Murrelle, L. (2004).
Spanish translation and reliability testing of the Child Depression Inventory.
Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 35(1), 75-92. doi:10.1023/B:CHUD
.0000039321.56041.cd
Deater-Deckard, K. (2001). Annotation: Recent research examining the role of peer
relationships in the development of psychopathology. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(5), 565-579. doi: 10.1111/1469-7610.00753
Deutsch, M. (1973). The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and destructive
processes. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Doherty, M. J. (2009). Theory of mind: How children understand others thoughts
and feelings. New York: Psychology Press.
Due, P., Holstein, B. E., Lynch, J., Diderichsen, F., Nic Gabhainn, S., Scheidt, P.,
Currie, C, & The Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children Bullying Working
Group, (2005). Bullying and symptoms among school-aged children:
International comparative cross-sectional study in 28 countries. European
Journal of Public Health, 15(2), 128-132. doi:10.1093/eurpub/cki105
Dusenbury, L., Falco, M., Lake, A., Brannigan, R., & Bosworth, K. (1997). Nine
critical elements of promising violence prevention programs. The Journal of
School Health, 67(10), 409-414. Retrieved from
387
Edens, J. F. (1999). Aggressive children's self-systems and the quality of their
relationships with significant others. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4(2),
151-177. doi:10.1016/S1359-1789(97)00050-5
Eisenberg, M. E., Neumark-Sztainer, D., & Perry, C. L. (2003). Peer harassment,
school connectedness, and academic achievement. The Journal of School
Health, 73(8), 311-316. Retrieved from
Elias, M. J., Zinc, J. E., Weissberg, R. D., Frey, K. S., Greenberg, M. T., Hayes, N.
M., et al. (2002). Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for
educators. In T. N. Thornton, C. A. Craft, L. L. Dahlberg, B. S. Lynch, & K.
Baer (Eds.), Best practices of youth violence prevention: A sourcebook for
community action (pp. 153-159). Atlanta, Georgia: Center for Disease Control
and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.
Elinoff, M. J., Chafouleas, S. M., Sassu, K. A., (2004). Bullying: Considerations for
defining and intervening in should settings. Psychology in the Schools, 41(8),
887-897. doi:10.1002/pits.20045
Elliot, M., (1991). Bullies, victims, signs, solutions. In M. Elliott (Ed.), Bullying: A
practical guide to coping for schools (pp. 8-14). London: Longman.
Elliott, D. S. (Ed.). (1999). Blueprints for violence prevention. Boulder, Colorado:
Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence/Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.
Elsea, M., & Rees, J. (2001). At what age are children likely to be bullied at school?
Aggressive Behavior, 27(6), 419-429. doi:10.1002/ab.1027
Epstein, S. (1973). The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory. American
Psychologist, 28(5), 404-416. doi:10.1037/h0034679
Eron, L. D., Huesmann, L. R., Dubow, E., Romanoff, R., & Yarmel, P. W. (1987).
Childhood aggression and its correlates over 22 years. In D. H. Crowell, I. M.
Evans, & C. R. O'Donnell (Eds.), Childhood aggression and violence (pp. 249-
262). New York: Plenum.
Espelage, D. L, Bosworth, K., & Simon, T. (2000). Examining the social context of
bullying behaviors in early adolescence. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 78(3), 326-333. Retrieved from
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/browse_JJ_J152
Espelage, D. L., Bosworth, K., & Simon, T. (2001). Short-term stability and change
of bullying in middle school students: An examination of demographic,
psychosocial, and environmental correlates. Violence and Victims, 16(4), 411-
426. Retrieved from http://www.springerpub.com/journal.aspx?jid=0886-6708
Fekkes, M., Pijpers, F. I. M., Frediks, A. M., Vogels, T., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P.
(2006). Do bullied children get ill or do ill children get bullied? A prospective
cohort study on the relationship between bullying and health-related symptoms.
Pediatrics, 117(5), 1568-1574. doi:10.1542/10.1542/peds.2005-0187
Fekkes, M., Pijpers, F. I. M., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P. (2006). Effects of
antibullying school program on bullying and health complaints. Archives of
Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 160(6), 638-644. Retrieved from
http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/
388
Finger, L. R., (2002). Do my self-beliefs lead me to bully or be bullied? An
investigation into the causal relations between bullying, victimisation and self-
concept. Unpublished honours dissertation, University of Western Sydney,
NSW, Australia.
Finger, L. R., (2006). Beyond Bullying Program Scale. Unpublished measure,
University of Western Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Finger, L. R., Craven, R. G., & Dowson, M. (2006). Assessing bullying, being
bullied, and self-concept: A psychometric evaluation of the adolescent peer
relations instrument and self-description questionnaire II for upper primary aged
children. In R. G. Craven, J. Eccles & M. T. Ha (Eds.), Self-concept, motivation,
social, and personal identity for the 21st century (Proceedings of the 4th
International Biennial Self-Concept Enhancement and Learning Facilitation
Research Conference, July 23-26, 2006). Ann Arbor, Michigan: Self-Concept
Enhancement and Learning Facilitation (SELF) Research Centre.
Finger, L. F., Craven, R. G., Parada, R. H., & Yeung, A. S. (2007). Beyond Bullying
Primary Schools Program: Behaviour management, skills enhancement, and life
learning. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Publication Unit, Self-Concept Enhancement
and Learning Facilitation (SELF) Research Centre, University Of Western
Sydney.
Finger, L. R., Craven, R. G., & Yeung, A. (2007). What bullying is not: Key elements
to student understanding and identification of bullying at school. Paper
presented at the University of Western Sydney College of Arts Conference,
September 27-28, 2007. Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Finger, L., Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (2006). Is categorisation best practice for
school bully research? An investigation into the process of dichotomisation. In
M. Atherton (Ed.), Scholarship and community (Proceedings of the College of
Arts, Education, and Social Science Conference, October 7-9, 2005). Sydney,
NSW, Australia: University of Western Sydney.
Finger, L. F., Parada, R. H., Craven, R. G., & Marsh, H. W. (2007). Beyond bullying:
New successful strategies to empower children to make a real difference [DVD].
Publication Unit, Filmotion Productions.
Fleishman, J., & Benson, J. (1987). Using LISREL to evaluate measurement models
and scale reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47(4), 925
939. doi:10.1177/0013164487474008
Forero, R., McLellan, L., Rissel, C., & Bauman, A. (1999). Bullying behaviour and
psychosocial health among school students in NSW, Australia. British Medical
Journal, 319(7206), 344348. Retrieved from http://www.bmj.com/
Frey, K. S., Hirchstein, M. K., Snell J. L., Edstrom, L. V., MacKenzie, E. P., &
Broderick, C. J. (2005). Reducing playground bullying and supporting beliefs:
An experimental trial of the Steps to Respect program. Developmental
Psychology, 41(3), 479-491. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.41.3.479
Frost, L. (1991). A primary school approach what can be done about the bully? In
M. Elliott (Ed.), Bullying: A practical guide to coping for schools (pp. 29-37).
London: Longman.
389
Frude, N. (1993). Hatred between children. In V. Varma (Ed.), How and why children
hate: A study of conscious and unconscious sources (pp. 72-93). London:
Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Galinsky, E., & Salmond, K. (2002). Ask the children: Youth and violence. Students
speak out for a more civil society. The ask the children series. Denver,
Colorado: The Colorado Trust, Families and Work Institute. Retrieved from
http://www.familiesandwork.org/summary/yandv.pdf.
Galloway, D., & Roland, E. (2004). Is the direct approach to reducing bullying always
the best? In P. K. Smith, D. Pepler, & K. Rigby (Eds.), Bullying in schools: How
successful can interventions be? (pp. 1-12). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Gold, M. S., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Treatments of missing data: A Monte Carlo
comparison of RBHDI, iterative stochastic regression imputation, and
expectation-maximization. Structural Equation Modeling, 7(3), 319-355.
doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0703_1
Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. London: Edward Arnold; New
York: Halstead Press.
Goodenow, C. (1993). Classroom belonging among early adolescent students:
Relationships to motivation and achievement. Journal of Early Adolescence,
13(1), 21-43. doi:10.1177/0272431693013001002
Graham, J. W., & Hofer, S. M. (2000). Multiple imputation in multivariate research.
In T. D. Little, K. U. Schnabel, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Modeling longitudinal and
multilevel data: Practical issues, applied approaches, and specific examples
(pp. 201-218). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Griezel, L (2007). Out of the schoolyard and into cyberspace: Elucidating the nature
and psychosocial consequences of traditional and cyber bullying for Australian
secondary students. Unpublished honours dissertation, University of Western
Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Griezel, L., Craven, R. G., Yeung, A. S., Finger, L. R. (2009). The development of a
multi-dimensional measure of cyber bullying. Paper presented at the Australian
Association for Research in Education Conference, December 1-4, 2008.
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Hay, I. (2000). Gender self-concept profiles of adolescents suspended from high
school. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(3), pp345-352.
doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00618
Heinrich, C. C., Brookmeyer, K. A., & Shahar, G. (2005), Weapon violence in
adolescence: Parent and school connectedness as protective factors. Journal of
Adolescent Health, 37(4), 306-312. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.03.022
Henington, C., Hughes, J. N., Cavell, T. A., & Thompson, B. (1998). The role of
relational aggression in identifying aggressive boys and girls. Journal of School
Psychology 36(4), 457477. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(98)00015-6
Hills, A. M. (2008). Foolproof guide to statistics using SPSS. Frenchs Forest,
Australia: Pearson Education.
390
Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in
survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1(1), 104-121.
doi:10.1177/109442819800100106
Hinkley, J. W., Marsh, H. W., Craven, R. G., McInerney, D. M., & Parada, R. (2002).
Social identity and Navajo high school students: Is a strong social identity
important in the school social context? In W. J. Lonner, D. L. Dinnel, S. A.
Hayes, & D. N. Sattler (Eds.), Online readings in psychology and culture (Unit
3, Chapter 5), Bellingham, Washington: Center for Cross-Cultural Research,
Western Washington University.
Hodges, E. V. E., & Perry, D. G. (1999). Personal and interpersonal antecedents and
consequences of victimization by peers. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 76(4), 677-675. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.677
Hoof, A., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W., Beek, Y., Hale III, W. W., Aleva, L. (2008). A
multi-mediation model on the relations of bullying, victimization, identity, and
family with adolescent depressive symptoms. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 37(7), 772-782. doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9261-8
Holmes-Smith, P. (2008). Structural equation modelling: From the fundamentals to
advanced topics. School Research, Evaluation, and Measurement Services: Red
Hill.
Ingram, S. (2000). Why bullies behave badly. Current Health 2, 27(3), 20. Retrieved
from http://www.weeklyreader.com/teachers/current_health_2/
Jankauskiene R., Kardelis K., Sukys S., Kardeliene L. (2008). Associations between
school bullying and psychosocial factors. Journal of Social Behavior and
Personality, 36(2), 145-162. doi:10.2224/sbp.2008.36.2.145
Jeffrey, L. R., Miller, P., & Linn, M. (2001). Middle school bullying as a context for
the development of passive observers to the victimization of others. Journal of
Emotional Abuse, 2(2-3), 143-156. doi:10.1300/J135v02n02_09
Jenkins, R (1997). School delinquency and the school social bond. Journal of
Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34(3), 31-35. doi:10.1177/0022427897034
003003
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1996). Conflict resolution and peer mediation programs
in elementary and secondary schools: A review of the research. Review of
Educational Research, 66(4), 459-506. doi:10.2307/1170651
Johnson, D., & Lewis, G. (1999). Do you like what you see? Self-perceptions of
adolescent bullies. British Educational Research Journal, 25(5), 665-677.
doi:10.1080/0141192990250507
Jreskog, K. G., & Srbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: Structural equation modelling with
the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Kaltiala-Heino, R. Rimpela, M., Marttunen, M., Rimpela, A., & Rantanen, P. (1999).
Bullying, depression, and suicidal ideation in Finnish adolescents: School
survey. British Medical Journal, 319(7206), 348-351. Retrieved from
http://www.bmj.com/
391
Kaltiala-Heino, R., Rimpela, M., Rantanen, P., & Rimpela, A. (2000). Bullying at
school - An indicator of adolescents at risk for mental disorders. Journal of
Kaukiainen, A., Bjrkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., sterman, K., Salmivalli, C.,
Rothberg, S., & Ahlbom, A. (1999). The relationships between social
intelligence, empathy, and three types of aggression. Aggressive Behavior,
25(2), 81-89. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1999)25:2<81::AID-
AB1>3.0.CO;2-M
Keltner, D., Young, R. C., Heerey, E., Oemig, C., & Monarch, N. D. (1998). Teasing
in hierarchical and intimate relations. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 75(5), 1231-1247. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1231
Kent, H., (1986). The Australian Oxford Mini Dictionary (2nd ed.). South Melbourne,
Victoria, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Kernis, M. (1993). The roles of stability and level of self-esteem in psychological
functioning. In R. Baumeister (Ed.), Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard
(pp. 167-182). New York: Plenum Press.
Kids Help Line (2003). Bullying. Kids Helpline Infosheet, 7. Retrieved November 7,
2006, from http://www.ncab.org.au/pdfs/ infosheet_kidshelpline.pdf
Kovacs, M. (1981). Rating scales to assess depression in school-aged children. Acta
Pedopsychiatrica, 46(5-6), 305315. Retrieved from
http://www.springer.com/steinkopff/psychiatrie/journal/787
Kovacs, M. (1992). Children's Depression Inventory (CDI) Manual. North
Tonawanda, NY: Multi Health Systems.
Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2007). Electronic bullying among middle school
students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6), S22-S30.
doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.08.017
Kshirsagar V. Y., Agarwal R., Bavdekar S. B. (2007). Bullying in schools: Prevalence
and short-term impact. Indian Pediatrics, 44(1), 25-28. Retrieved from
http://indianpediatrics.net/
Kumpulainen, K., Rsnen, E., & Henttonen, I. (1999). Children involved in bullying:
Psychological disturbance and the persistence of the involvement. Child Abuse
and Neglect, 23(12), 1253-1262. doi:10.1016/S0145-2134(99)00098-8
Lagerspetz, K. M. J., Bjrkqvist, K., Berts, M., & King, E. (1982). Group aggression
among school children in three schools. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology,
23(1), 45-52. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.1982.tb00412.x
Lagerspetz, K. M. J., Bjrkqvist, K., & Peltonen (1988). Is indirect aggression typical
of females? Gender differences in aggressiveness in 11 to 12 year old children.
Aggressive Behavior, 14(6), 403-414. doi:10.1002/1098-
2337(1988)14:6<403::AID-AB2480140602>3.0.CO;2-D
Lake, V. E. (2004). Profile of an aggressor: childhood bullies evolve into violent
youth. Early Child Development and Care, 174(6), 527-537. doi:
10.1080/0300443042000187040
392
Leadbeater, B., Hoglund, W., & Woods, T. (2003). Changing contents? The effects of
a primary prevention program on classroom levels of peer relational and
physical victimization. Journal of Community Psychology, 31(4), 397-418.
doi:10.1002/jcop.10057
Li, Q. (2007). New bottle but old wine: A research of cyberbullying in schools.
Computers in Human Behavior, 23(4), 1-15. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2005.10.005
Lowenstein, L. F. (1977). Who is the bully? Home and School, 11, 3-4.
Luke, D. A. (2004): Multilevel modelling. Series: Quantitative Applications in the
Social Sciences, No. 143. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ma, X. (2001). Bullying and being bullied: To what extent are bullies also victims?
American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 351-370.
doi:10.3102/00028312038002351
MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the
practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological methods,
7(1), 19-40. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.19
Macklem, G. L. (2003). Bullying and teasing: Social power in children's groups. New
York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
Marsh, H. W. (1988). Self Description Questionnaire: A theoretical and empirical
basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of preadolescent self-concept:
A test manual and a research monograph. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological
Corporation. (Republished in 1992, Publication Unit, SELF Research Centre,
University of Western Sydney).
Marsh, H. W. (1990a). Self Description Questionnaire (SDQ) II: A theoretical and
empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of adolescent self-
concept: An interim test manual and a research monograph. San Antonio, TX:
The Psychological Corporation (Republished in 1992, Publication Unit, SELF
Research Centre, University of Western Sydney).
Marsh, H. W. (1990b). The Self Description Questionnaire-I: SDQ-I manual. Sydney,
NSW, Australia: University of Western Sydney.
Marsh, H. W. (1990c). The structure of academic self-concept: The Marsh/Shavelson
model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 623-636. doi:10.1037/0022-
0663.82.4.623
Marsh, H. W. (1993). Academic self-concept: Theory measurement and research. In J.
Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 4, pp. 5998). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Marsh, H. W. (1994a). Confirmatory factor analysis models of factorial invariance: A
multifaceted approach. Structural Equation Modeling, 1(1), 5-34.
doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00289.x
Marsh, H. W. (1994b). Using the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 to
evaluate theoretical models of self-concept: The Self-Description Questionnaire.
0663.86.3.439
393
Marsh, H. W. (2007). Application of confirmatory factor analysis and structural
equation modeling in sport/exercise psychology. In G. Tenenbaum & R. C.
Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 774 - 798). Hoboken,
NJ: Wiley.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J R., & Hau, K. T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fit
indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In G. A.
Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation
modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 315-353). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J, & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness of fit in confirmatory
factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 391-
410. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.391
Marsh, H., Byrne, B. M., & Shavelson, R. J. (1988). A multifaceted academic self-
concept: Its hierarchical structure and its relation to academic achievement.
0663.80.3.366
Marsh, H. W., Byrne, B., & Yeung, A. S. (1999). Causal ordering of academic self-
concept and achievement: Reanalysis of a pioneering study and revised
recommendations. Unpublished manuscript, SELF Research Centre, University
of Western Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Marsh, H. W., Craven, R., Hinkley, J. W., & Debus, R. L. (2003). Evaluation of the
big-two-factor theory of motivation orientation: An evaluation of jingle-jangle
fallacies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38(2), 189-224. doi:10.1207/
S15327906MBR3802_3
Marsh, H. W., Ellis, L., Parada, R. H., Richards, G., & Huebeck, B. (2005). A short
version of the Self Description Questionnaire II: Operationalizing criteria for
short-form evaluation with new applications of confirmatory analyses.
Psychological Assessment, 17(1), 81-102. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.17.1.81
Marsh, H. W., Parada, R. H., Craven, G. R., & Finger, L. (2004). In the looking glass:
A reciprocal effects model elucidating the complex nature of bullying,
psychological determinants and the central role of self-concept. In C. S. Sanders
& G. D. Phye (Eds.), Bullying: implications for the classroom (pp. 63-109).
Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Marsh, H. W., Parada, R. H., Yeung, A. S., & Healey, J. (2001). Aggressive school
troublemakers and victims: A longitudinal model examining the pivotal role of
self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 411-419. doi:10.1037/
0022-0663.93.2.411
Marsh, H. W., & Rowe, K. J. (1996). The negative effects of school-average ability
on academic self-concepts: An application of multilevel modeling. Australian
Journal of Education, 40(1), 65-87. Retrieved from http://www.acer.edu.au/aje/
Marsh, H. W., & Shavelson, R. (1985). Self-concept: Its multifaceted, hierarchical
structure. Educational Psychologist, 20(3), 107-125.
doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2003_1
394
Marsh, H. W., Tracey, D., & Craven, R. G. (2006). Multidimensional self-concept
structure for preadolescents with mild intellectual disabilities: A hybrid
multigroup-MIMIC approach to dactorial invariance and latent mean
differences. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(5), 705-818.
doi:10.1177/0013164405285910
Matthiesen, S. B., & Einarsen, S. (2004). Psychiatric distress and symptoms of PTSD
among victims of bullying at work. British Journal of Guidance and
Counselling, 32(3), 335-356. doi:10.1080/03069880410001723558
Menesini, E., Codecasa, E., Benelli, B., & Cowie, H. (2003). Enhancing children's
responsibility to take action against bullying: Evaluation of a befriending
intervention in Italian middle schools. Aggressive Behavior, 29(1), 10-14.
doi:10.1002/ab.80012
Merrell, K. W., Gueldner, B. A., Ross, S. W., & Isava, D. M. (2008). How effective
are school bullying intervention programs? A meta-analysis of intervention
research. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(1), 26-42. doi:10.1037/1045-
3830.23.1.26
Morrison, G. M., Redding, M., Fisher, E., & Peterson, R. (2006). Assessing school
discipline. In S. R. Jimerson & M. J. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of School
Violence and School Safety (pp. 211-220). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Mrazek, P. J., & Haggerty, R. J. (1994). Reducing risks for mental disorders:
Frontiers for preventive intervention research. Washington DC: Institute of
Medicine, National Academy Press.
Munthe, E. (1989). Bullying in Scandinavia. In E. Roland & E. Munthe (Eds.),
Bullying: An International Perspective (pp. 66-78). London: David Fulton
Publishers.
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M. D., Saluja, G., & Ruan, W. J. (2004). Cross-national
consistency in the relationship between bullying behaviors and psychosocial
adjustment. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 158(8), 730736.
doi:10.1001/archpedi.158.8.730
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt,
P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with
psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association,
285(16), 2094-2100. doi:10.1001/jama.285.16.2094
Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
OConnell, A. A., & McCoach, D. B. (2004). Applications of hierarchical linear
modeling for evaluations of health interventions: Demystifying the methods and
interpretations of multilevel models. Evaluation in the Health Professions,
27(2), 119-151. doi:10.1177/0163278704264049
Olweus, D. (1972). Personality and aggression. In J. K. Cole & D. D. Jensen (Eds.),
Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 261- 321). Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.
395
Olweus, D. (1986). The Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. Mimeo, Bergen,
Norway: Research Centre for Health Promotion, Univeristy of Bergen.
Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and
effects of a school-based intervention program. In D. Kepler & K. Rubin (Eds.),
The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 411-448).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Olweus, D. (1992). Bullying among schoolchildren: Intervention and prevention. In
R. D. Peters, R. J. McMahon, & V. L. Quinsey (Eds.), Aggression and violence
throughout the life span (pp. 100-125). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Olweus, D. (1993a). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers.
Olweus, D. (1993b). Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Long-term
consequences and an effective intervention program. In S. Hodgins (Ed.),
Mental disorder and crime (pp. 317-349). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Olweus, D., (1993c). Victimisation by peers: Antecedents and long-term outcomes. In
K. Rubin & J. Asendorf (Eds.), Social withdrawal, inhibition and shyness (pp.
315-341). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Olweus, D. (1997). Bully/victim problems in school: Facts and intervention.
European Journal of Psychology of Education, 12(4), 495-510. Retrieved from
http://www.ispa.pt/ejpe/
Olweus, D. (1999). Sweden. In P. K. Smith, Y. Morita, J. Junger-Tas, D. Olweus, R.
F. Catalano, & P. T. Slee (Eds.), The nature of school bullying (pp. 827).
London: Routledge.
OMoore, A. M., & Kirkham, C. (2001). Self-esteem and its relationship to bullying
behaviour. Aggressive Behavior, 27(4), 269-283. doi:10.1002/ab.1010
O'Moore, A. M., & Minton, S. J., (2005). An evaluation of the effectiveness of an
anti-bullying programme in primary schools. Aggressive Behaviour, 31(6), 609-
622. doi:10.1002/ab.20098
Orpinas, P., & Horne, A. M. (2006). Bullying prevention: Creating a positive school
climate and developing social competence. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Orpinas, P., Horne, A., & Staniszewski, D., (2003). School bullying: Changing the
problem by changing the school. School Psychology Review, 32(3), 431-444.
Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/publications/spr/sprmain.aspx
Palmieri, P. A., Weathers, F. W., Difede, J., & King, D. W. (2007). Confirmatory
factor analysis of the PTSD checklist and the clinician-administered PTSD Scale
in disaster workers exposed to the World Trade Center Ground Zero. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 116(2), 329341. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.116.2.392
Parada, R. (2000). Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument: A theoretical and empirical
basis for the measurement of participant roles in bullying and victimisation of
adolescence: An interim test manual and a research monograph: A test manual.
Sydney, NSW, Australia: Publication Unit, Self-concept Enhancement and
Learning Facilitation (SELF) Research Centre, University of Western Sydney.
396
Parada, R. H. (2006). School bullying: Psychosocial determinants and effective
intervention. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Western Sydney,
NSW, Australia.
Parada, R. H., Craven, R. G., & Marsh, H. W. (2008). The Beyond Bullying
Secondary Program: An innovative program empowering teachers to counteract
bullying in schools. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven & D. M. McInerney (Eds.),
Self-processes, learning, and enabling human potential: Dynamic new
approaches (Vol. 3, pp. 373-400). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Parada, R. H., Craven, R. G., & Marsh, H. W. (2003). The Beyond Bullying Program:
An innovative program empowering teachers to counteract bullying in schools.
Paper presented at the Joint New Zealand Association for Research in Education
and Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, December 1-
3, 2003. Auckland, New Zealand.
Parada, R. H., & Richards, G. E., (2002). The School Belonging Scale: SBS.
Unpublished measure, University of Western Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Pellegrini, A. D. (2002). Bullying, victimization, and sexual harrassment during the
transition to middle school. Educational Psychologist, 37(3), 151-163.
doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3703_2
Pellegrini, A. D., & Long, J. D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance,
and victimization during the transition from primary school through middle
school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20(2), 259-280.
doi:10.1348/026151002166442
Pepler, D. J., Craig, W., Ziegler, S., & Charach, A. (1993). A school-based anti-
bullying intervention: Preliminary evaluation. In D. Tattum (Ed.),
Understanding and Managing Bullying (pp. 76-91). Oxford: Heinemann Books.
Peterson, L., & Rigby, K. (1999). Countering bullying at an Australian secondary
school with students as helpers. Journal of Adolescence, 22(4), 481-492.
doi:10.1006/jado.1999.0242
Peterson, J. L., & Zill, N. (1986). Marital disruption, parent-child relationships, and
behavior problems in children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48(2), 295-
307. doi:10.2307/352397
Poulin, F., Dishion, T. J., & Haas, E. (1999). The peer influence paradox: Friendship
quality and deviancy training within male adolescent friendships. Merrill-
Palmer Quaterly, 45(1), 42-61. Retrieved from http://www.asu.edu/clas/ssfd/
mpq/
Pratto, F., & Walker, A. (2001). Dominance in disguise: Power, beneficence, and
exploitation in personal relationships. In A. Y. Lee-Chai & J. A. Bargh (Eds.),
The use and abuse of power: Multiple perspectives on the causes of corruption
(pp. 93-114). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., MacCallum, R. C., & Nicewander, W. A. (2005). Use
of extreme groups approach: A critical examination and new recommendations.
Psychological Methods, 10(2), 178192. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.10.2.178
Prevention Research Coordinating Committee (2007). What is Prevention Research?
Retrieved from http://prevention.nih.gov/research.aspx
397
Quintana, S. M. (1998). Childrens developmental understanding of ethnicity and
race. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 7(1), 27-45. doi:10.1016/S0962-
1849(98)80020-6
Randall, P. (1996). Adult bullying: Perpetrators and victims. London; New York:
Routledge.
Rasbash J., Browne W., Healy M., Cameron, B., & Charlton, C. (2005). MLwiN:
Version 2.02 (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA. Retrieved from
www.cmm.bristol.ac.uk/MLwiN/.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications
and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Chan, W. S. (1993). Application of a hierarchical linear model
to the study of adolescent deviance in an overlapping cohort design. Journal of
Clinical and Consulting Psychology, 61(6), 941-951. doi:10.1037/0022-
006X.61.6.941
Rigby, K. (1997). Bullying in schools: And what to do about it. Melbourne, Victoria,
Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Rigby, K. (1998). The relationship between reported health and involvement in
bully/victim problems among male and female secondary schoolchildren.
Journal of Health Psychology, 3(4), 465-476.
doi:10.1177/135910539800300402
Rigby, K. (2001). Stop the bullying: A handbook for schools. Melbourne, Victoria,
Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Rigby, K. (2002). A meta-evaluation of methods and approaches to reducing bullying
in pre-schools and early primary school in Australia. Canberra, ACT, Australia:
Attorney-General's Department.
Rigby, K. (2003). Stop the bullying: A handbook for schools (Rev. ed.). Melbourne,
Victoria, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Rigby, K (2004). Addressing bullying in schools: Theoretical perspectives and their
implications. School Psychology International, 25(3), 287-300.
doi:10.1177/0143034304046902
Rigby, K., (2007). Children and bullying: How parents and teachers can reduce
bullying. Oxford: Blackwell.
Rigby, K., & Cox, L. (1996). The contribution of bullying at school and low self-
esteem to acts of delinquency among Australian teenagers. Personality and
Individual differences, 21(4), 609-612. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(96)00105-5
Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1991). Bullying among Australian school children: Reported
behaviour and attitudes toward victims. The Journal of Social Psychology,
131(5), 615-627. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/
Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1993). Dimensions of interpersonal relations among
Australian school children and their implications for psychological well-being.
Journal of Social Psychology, 133(11), 33-42. Retrieved from
http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/
398
Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1999). Suicidal ideation among adolescent school children,
involvement in bully-victim problems, and perceived social support. Suicide and
Life-Threatening Behavior, 29(2), 119-130. Retrieved from
www.guilford.com/pr/jnsl.htm
Rigby, K., Smith, P. K., & Pepler, D. (2004). Working to prevent school bullying:
Key issues. In P. K. Smith, D. Pepler, & K. Rigby (Eds.), Bullying in schools:
How successful can interventions be? (pp. 1-12). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Roberts, W. B. Jr., & Morotti, A. A. (2000). The bully as victim: Understanding bully
behaviors to increase the effectiveness of interventions in the bully-victim dyad.
Professional School Counseling, 4(2), 148-155. Retrieved from
http://www.schoolcounselor.org/content.asp?pl=325&sl=132&contentid=235
Robinson, J. H., & Clay, D. L. (2005). Potential school violence: Relationship
between teacher anxiety and warning-sign identification. Psychology in the
Schools, 42(6), 623-635. doi:10.1002/pits.20100
Rogers, R., S. (1991). Now you see it, now I dont. In M. Elliot (Ed.), Bullying: A
practical guide to coping for schools (pp.1-7). Harlow, Essex: Longman.
Roland, E. (1993). Bullying: A developing traditional of research and management. In
D. Tattum (Ed.), Understanding and managing Bullying (pp. 143-151). Oxford:
Heinemann Books
Roland, E. (2002). Bullying, depressive symptoms and suicidal thoughts. Educational
Research, 44(1), 55-67. doi:10.1080/00131880110107351
Roland, E., & Galloway, D. (2002). Classroom influences on bullying. Educational
Research, 44(3), 299-312. doi:10.1080/0013188022000031597
Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R. L., & Rubin, D. B. (2000). Contrasts and effect sizes in
behavioral research: A correlational approach. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Rowe, K. (2005). Practical multilevel analysis with MLwiN & LISREL. Camberwell:
Australian Council for Educational Research.
Rule, B., & Ferguson, T. (1986). The effects of media violence on attitudes, emotions
and cognition. Journal of Social Issues, 42(3), 29-50. Retrieved from
www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0022-4537
Ryan, W., & Smith, J. D. (2009). Antibullying programs in schools: How effective are
evaluation practices? Prevention Science, (2009, March). doi:10.1007/s11121-
009-0128-y
Rys, G. S., & Bear, G. G. (1997). Relational aggression and peer relations: Gender
and development issues. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 43(1), 87-106. Retrieved
from http://www.asu.edu/clas/ssfd/mpq/
Salmivalli, C. (1998). Intelligent, attractive, well-behaving, unhappy: the structure of
adolescents self-concept and its relations to their social behavior. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 8(3), 333-354. doi:10.1207/s15327795jra0803_3
Salmivalli, C. (2001). Peer-led intervention campaign against school bullying: Who
considered it useful, who benefited? Educational Research, 43(3), 263-278.
doi:10.1080/00131880110081035
399
Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., Kaistaniemi, L., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1999). Self-
evaluated self-esteem, peer-evaluated self-esteem, and defensive egotism as
predictors of adolescents participation in bullying situations. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(10), 1268-1278. doi:10.1177/0146167299258008
Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1998). Aggression in the
social relations of school-aged girls and boys. In P. Slee & K. Rigby (Eds.),
Childrens peer relations (pp. 60-75). London: Routledge.
Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (2000). Aggression and
sociometric status among peers: do gender and type of aggression matter?
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 41(1), 17-24. doi :10.1111/1467-
9450.00166
Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., & Voeten, M. (2005). Anti-bullying intervention:
Implementation and outcome. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(3),
465-487. doi:10.1348/000709905X26011
Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., Bjrkqvist, K., sterman, K., & Kaukiainen, A.
(1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to
social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22(1), 1-15.
doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:1<1::AID-AB1>3.0.CO;2-T
Snchez, B., Coln, Y., & Esparza, P. (2005). The role of sense of school belonging
and gender in the academic adjustment of Latino adolescents. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence, 34(6), 619-628. doi:10.1007/s10964-005-8950-4
Sapouna, M., (2008). Bullying in Greek primary and secondary schools. School
Psychology International, 29(2), 199-213. doi:10.1177/0143034308090060
Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art.
Psychological Methods, 7(2), 147-177. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.147
Schuster, B. (1996). Rejection, exclusion and harassment at work and in schools: An
integration of results from research on mobbing, bullying, and peer rejection.
European Psychologist, 1(4), 293317. doi:10.1027/1016-9040.1.4.293
Schwartz P., Patterson. D., & Steen, S. (1995). The dynamics of power: Money and
sex in intimate relationships. In Kalbfleisch, P. J. & Michael J. C. (Eds.)
Gender, power, and communication in human relationships (pp. 253-276).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E., & The Conduct Problems
Prevention Research Group. (2000). Friendship as a moderating factor in the
pathway between early harsh home environment and later victimization in the
peer group. Developmental Psychology, 36(5), 646-662. doi:10.1037/0012-
1649.36.5.646
Seaton, (2008). The Big-Fish-Little-Pond effect under the grill: Tests of its
universality, a search for moderators, and the role of social comparison.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Western Sydney, NSW,
Australia.
Selman, R. L. (1980). The growth of interpersonal understanding: Developmental
and clinical analyses. San Diego, CW: Academic Press.
400
Shapiro, J. R, Baumeister, R. F., & Kessler, J. W. (1991). A three-component model
of children's teasing: Aggression, humor, and ambiguity. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 10(), 459-472. Retrieved from
http://www.guilford.com/pr/jnsc.htm
Sharp, S., & Cowie, H. (1994). Empowering pupils to take positive action against
bullying. In P. K. Smith & S. Sharp (Eds.), School bullying: Insights and
perspectives (pp. 108-131). London: Routledge.
Sharp, S., & Thompson, D. A. (1994). The role of whole-school policies in tackling
bullying behaviour in schools. In P. K. Smith & S. Sharp (Eds.), School bullying
and how to cope with it (pp. 57-83). London: Routledge.
Sharp, S., Thompson, D. A., & Arora, T. (2000). How long before it hurts? School
Psychology International, 21(1), 37-46. doi:10.1177/0143034300211003
Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Validation of construct
interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 407-441.
doi:10.2307/1170010
Shulman, H. A. (1996). Using developmental principles in violence prevention.
Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 30(3), 170-180. Retrieved from
http://www.schoolcounselor.org/content.asp?pl=325&sl=132&contentid=235
Simpson, (2007). Exploration of adolescent achievement motivational patterns using
a 12-factor model across grades and sex. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Western Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Slee, P. T. (1995). Bullying in the playground: The impact of inter-personal violence
on Australian children's perceptions of their play environment. Children's
Environments, 12(3), 320-327. Retrieved from
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/che/cerg/about_cerg/
Slee, P. T. (1996). The P.E.A.C.E Pack: A programme for reducing bullying in our
schools. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 6(2), 63-69.
Retrieved from http://www.australianacademicpress.com.au/Publications
/Journals/Guidance&Counselling/guidecounsel.htm
Slee, P. T., & Mohyla, J. (2007). The PEACE Pack: an evaluation of interventions to
reduce bullying in four Australian primary schools. Educational Research,
49(2), 103-114. doi:10.1080/00131880701369610
Smith, D. J., Schneider, B. H., Smith, P. K., & Ananiadou, K. (2004). The
effectiveness of whole-school antibullying Programs: A Synthesis of Evaluation
Research. School Psychology Review, 33(4), 547-560. Retrieved from
http://www.nasponline.org/publications/spr/sprmain.aspx
Smith, P. K. (2000). Bullying: Don't suffer in silence An anti-bullying pack for
schools. United Kingdom: Department for Education and Skills.
Smith, P. K. (2004). Bullying: Recent developments. Child and Adolescent Mental
Health, 9(3), 98-103. doi:10.1111/j.1475-3588.2004.00089.x
Smith, P. K., Madsen, K. C., & Moody, J. C. (1999). What causes the age decline in
reports of being bullied? Towards a developmental analysis of risks of being
bullied. Educational Research, 41(3), 267-285. doi:10.1080/0013188990410303
401
Smith, S. G., & Sprague, J., (2001). Rate and prevalence of bullying and harassment
in a middle school: Results of a school-wide student, staff, and parent survey.
Paper presented at the Oregon Conference, March, 2001, Eugene.
Smith, S. G., & Sprague, J. R. (2002). The mean kid: An overview of bully/victim
problems and research-based solutions for schools. Oregon School Study
Council Bulletin, 44(2) [whole issue].
Solberg, M. E., & Olweus, D. (2003). Prevalence estimation of school bullying with
the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. Aggressive Behavior, 29(3), 239-268.
doi:10.1002/ab.10047
Stevens, V., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., & Van Oost, P. (2002). Relationship of the family
environment to children's involvement in bully/victim problems at school.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31(6), 419-428.
doi:10.1023/A:1020207003027
Stevens, V., Van Oost, P., & De Bourdeaudhuij, I. (2000). The effects of an anti-
bullying intervention programme on peers' attitudes and behaviour. Journal of
Strom, P. S., & Strom, R. D. (2005). When teens turn cyberbullies. Education Digest,
71(4), 35-41. Retrieved from http://www.eddigest.com/
Suckling, A & Temple, C. (2001). Bullying: A whole-school approach. Melbourne,
Victoria, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Sutton, J., & Smith, P. K. (1999). Bullying as a group process: An adaptation of the
participant role scale approach. Aggressive Behaviour, 25(2), 97-111.
doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1999)25:2<97::AID-AB3>3.0.CO;2-7
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty & J.
Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.
64-82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.
G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations
(pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.).
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Tomada, G., & Schneider, B. H. (1997). Relational aggression, gender, and peer
acceptance: Invariance across culture, stability over time, and concordance
among informants. Developmental Psychology, 33(4), 601-609.
doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.4.601
Trochim, W. M. K. (2006). The nomological network: What is the nomological net?
Research Methods Knowledge Base. Retrieved April 8 2008, from http://www.
socialresearchmethods.net/kb/nomonet.php.
Turner, J. H. (1988). A Theory of Social Interaction. Stanford: Stanford University
Press.
Vaughan, G. M., & Hogg, M. A. (1998). Introduction to social psychology. Sydney,
NSW, Australia: Prentice Hall.
Watson, J. B., & Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 55(3), 1-14. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.3.313
402
Whitney, I., Rivers, I., Smith, P., & Sharp, S. (1994). The Sheffield Project:
Methodology and findings. In P. Smith & S. Sharp (Eds.), School bullying:
Insights and perspectives (pp. 20-56). London: Routledge.
Wilson, D. (2004). The interface of school climate and school connectedness and
relationships with aggression and victimization. The Journal of School Health,
74(7), 293-299. Retrieved from http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?
ref=0022-4391
Wolke, D., Woods, S., Bloomfield, L., & Karstadt, L. (2000). The association
between direct and relational bullying and behaviour problems among primary
school children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied
Disciplines, 41(8), 9891002. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00687
Yang, S., Kim, J., Kim, S., Shin, I., & Yoon, J. (2006). Bullying and victimization
behaviors in boys and girls at South Korean primary schools. Journal of the
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 45(1), 69-77.
doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000186401.05465.2c
Yoneyama, S., & Naito, A. (2003). Problems with the paradigm: The school as a
factor in understanding bullying (with special reference to Japan). British
Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(3), 315-330.
doi:10.1080/01425690301894
403
Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program:
Implementing an Effective Whole-School Program to Manage Bullying,
Enhance Prosocial Behaviour, and Boost Student Well-Being in the
Upper Primary Grades
Linda R. Finger
BA(Hons) (University of Western Sydney)
A thesis submitted to the University of Western Sydney in fulfilment of the

requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Psychology)
2009
Volume II
Linda R. Finger 2009

LIST OF APPENDIXES
Volume II
Appendix 1 Teacher Manual.................................................................................. 404

Appendix 2 Single-Item Measures used for the School Report............................. 550
Appendix 3 Example of Individual School Report ................................................ 554
Appendix 4 School Report with Data from All Schools ....................................... 565
Appendix 5 Example of a School Feedback Presentation ..................................... 587
Appendix 6 Anti-Bullying School Policy Template .............................................. 595
Appendix 7 Structured Interview Form and Thinking Time Template ................. 603
Appendix 8 Teacher Activity Book and Curriculum Mapping ............................. 608
Appendix 9 Beyond Bullying Primary Schools DVD ............... see back inside cover
Appendix 10 Parent brochure .................................................................................. 725
Appendix 11 Parent and child brochure .................................................................. 728
Appendix 12 Flash Cards ......................................................................................... 738
Appendix 13 Poster.................................................................................................. 747
Appendix 14 List of Additional Resources ............................................................. 749
Appendix 15 Newsletter articles .............................................................................. 750
Appendix 16 Scale Items and Corresponding Factors ............................................. 765
Appendix 17 Example of CFA Output for Each Critical Group: APRI-BT............ 777
Appendix 18 Item Parcelling ................................................................................... 787
Appendix 19 Means and Standard Deviations......................................................... 788
APPENDIX 1
Teacher Manual
404
TEACHER MANUAL
Linda Finger,
Rhonda Craven,
Roberto Parada,
& Alexander Yeung
Centre for Educational Research,

University of Western Sydney
405
2007 Centre for Educational Research, University of Western Sydney.
Copyright 2007
This work is copyright. All rights reserved. Except under the conditions
described in the Copyright Act 1998 of Australia and subsequent
amendments. Permission is given for participating schools to reproduce
this work for teachers. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and
rights should be addressed to:
Professor Rhonda Craven

Centre for Educational Research
Locked Bag 1797SELF Research Centre, Building 1
Linda Finger,
Bankstown Campus Rhonda Craven,
PENRITH SOUTH DC
NSW 1797 Roberto Parada,
Australia
& Alexander Yeung
Centre for Educational Research,

406
CONTENTS
CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... 407

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... 409
PREFACE .................................................................................................................. 410
Purpose of Beyond Bullying 410
CHAPTER 1 .............................................................................................................. 413
What is Bullying and Why is it Important to Address it? .......................................... 413
Why Address Bullying in Schools? 413
How Many Students Are Affected by Bullying? 413
Who is Affected by Bullying in Schools? 414
What are the Benefits of Addressing Bullying in Schools? 418
What is Bullying? 419
How is Bullying Different to Other Forms of Aggressive Behaviour? 420
The Many Faces of Bullying 420
What Bullying Is Not 422
What are the Differences Between Bullying, Prosocial Teasing, and
Constructive Conflict? 422
What are the Causes of Bullying? 426
Debunking Bully Myths 433
Summary 440
CHAPTER 2 .............................................................................................................. 443
What Research Says About Bullying ......................................................................... 443
What Factors Underpin Bullying? 443
Why are School Climate and Classroom Management Critical? 444
In What Ways Can Family Influence the Manifestation of Bullying Behaviours?
446
In What Ways Can Family Influence the Manifestation of Bullying Behaviours?
447
What Role do Peers Play in Shaping Bullying? 448
What Role do Peers Play in Shaping Bullying? 449
The Role of Self-Concept and Individual Characteristics in Bullying 452
Are Sex and Age Differences Risk Factors in Bullying? 454
How is it that a child becomes bullied? 456
Previous Anti-Bullying Interventions: What works? 458
Summary 459
CHAPTER 3 .............................................................................................................. 462
BEYOND BULLYING: ............................................................................................ 462
An Overview of the Primary School Program ........................................................... 462
Aims 462
The Resources 463
Key Elements 466
Expected Outcomes 468
Successful Implementation 471
407
Keys to Success 473
Summary 473
CHAPTER 4 .............................................................................................................. 476
SCHOOL POLICY: ................................................................................................... 476
A Precondition to Effective Implementation ............................................................. 476
The Importance of School Policy 476
Anti-bullying policy for students 476
What is a Strong School Bully Policy? 482
Purpose 482
What Is Bullying? 483
Policy Aims 483
Guidelines for Addressing Bullying 484
School Procedures for Addressing Bullying 485
Clear Procedures for Managing Bullying Incidents 487
How Can School Policy Be Developed and Implemented Effectively? 493
Summary 494
CHAPTER 5 .............................................................................................................. 497
Behaviour Management ............................................................................................. 497
Overview: Two Key Strategies 497
Objectives 498
Enhance Peer Relations and Self-Concept 499
Techniques to Assist Managing Bullying Behaviours 506
Strategies for Students 529
Coping Strategies 530
Summary 538
CHAPTER 6: Summary & References ...................................................................... 541
Summary 541
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 544
408
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Devising this program would not have been possible without the support of all
organisations, staff, and students involved in the Beyond Bullying Project. With
special thanks to:
Catholic Education, Diocese of Parramatta
Counselling and Behavioural Services
Suzanne Savage, Mary Immaculate Primary School, Quakers Hill
Staff and Students at Mary Immaculate Primary School, Quakers Hill
Parramatta Diocese Catholic schools, Principals, staff, and students

Holy Spirit Primary School
Our Lady of Mount Carmel Primary School
St Josephs Primary School
St Madeleines Primary School
St Margaret Marys Primary School
St Michaels Primary School
St Patricks Primary School
St Thomas Aquinas Primary School
Lisa Car, Kurt Marder, Ferina Kayhum, SELF Research Unit, Centre for
Educational Research
Paul Atkins, Passtec Management Services
Producer Fred El-Harris and Filmotion crew
Gillian and Eliot Reynolds, SongCave Studios
Seraya, AquaGirl Music n Business
Matt Glendenning, Design of the Times
Gary Hardman, Australian Sound Music
Steve Karouche and Zayann Jappie
409
PREFACE
Beyond Bullying is not just another anti-bullying intervention. It differs to other

interventions in that it is:
Based on recent advances in international theory, research, and practice;

Comprehensive by focussing on the whole-school culture, school policy,
and effective management of behaviours; and
For all students not just bullies or targets, where good behaviour is
reinforced and where whole-school prevention is emphasised.
Purpose of Beyond Bullying

The Beyond Bullying Program offers important educational and socio-economic
benefits by enriching the psychosocial adjustment and life potential of young
Australians. It is designed to empower teachers, students and parents to adopt key
roles to prevent bullying within their school. This Teacher Manual was developed
to ensure schools have the knowledge, skills, and classroom resources to
implement the Program successfully.
Parts of this text come from the secondary schools research conducted by Roberto
Parada, Rhonda Craven and Herbert Marsh. The Beyond Bullying: Primary
School Program is an extension of the work from the Beyond Bullying: Secondary
School Program (Craven, & Parada, 2002), specifically designed for primary
schools.
410
Chapter 1: What is Bullying & Why is it Important to Address it?
____________________________
411
____________________________
The responsibilities of the teacher extend

beyond the realm of teaching to developing the
whole child. More and more teachers are
expected to understand the dynamics of the
individual within the classroom, and how
children get along with their peers. Peer
bullying behaviours constitute just some of the
many complex interactions of children.
Although some subtle bullying behaviours may
be viewed as tolerable, they are not. All forms
of bullying are serious, hurtful and can lead a
child to become an adult that cannot reach
their life potential. Understanding what bullying
is and how it affects students allows us to be
better equipped to effectively stop bullying
behaviours. This chapter provides a teacher-
orientated overview about the nature, causes,
consequences, and myths about bullying.
412
____________________________
CHAPTER 1
What is Bullying and Why is it Important to

Address it?
Why Address Bullying in Schools?
Students, teachers, parents, caregivers and members of the wider

school community have a shared responsibility to create a safe and
happy environment, free from all forms of bullying.
New South Wales, Department of Education and Training Policy for Dealing with
Bullying (2005, Page number).
I believe that schools and other institutions, where they stand in the
place of parents of young people, do have a positive duty to be
vigilant, to put in place Programs to guard against bullying, whether
it is physical or emotional, and to deal firmly with it and stamp it out
if it occurs.
Coroners report on the death of Matt Ruddenklau, Dominion,

30 August, 1997.
Bullying and victimising behaviours represent a significant problem for schools

around the world. There is concern about an increasing amount of violence and
aggression in our society. Increase in violent behaviour has been accompanied by
a decrease in the average age for violent offenders, however, it is also true that the
victims of youth violence are usually other young people. To prevent youth
violence and contribute to reducing reduce the rate of violent crime and enduring
emotional disability inflicted on victims, it is critical to address the early signs of
antisocial behaviours and depression. Aggression against peers in the school, or
bullying, may be one of these early behaviours that contribute to the development
of antisocial behaviour patterns (Farrington, 1993).
How Many Students Are Affected by Bullying?
413
____________________________
Bullying is pervasive in Australian schools and internationally. 1 in 6 students in

Australian schools reported being bullied at least once a week (Rigby & Slee,
1999). Furthermore, 1 in 10 Australian students reported being an active bully
(Rigby, 1995). A survey (Forero, McLellan, Rissel, & Bauman, 1999) of more
than 3900 Australian students aged between 12 and 16 years in 15 Government
and Independent schools in NSW reported that:
23.7% of them bullied other students,
12.7% were victims of bullying and
21.5% were both bullies and were bullied.
The first ever comprehensive survey conducted by the NSW Bureau of Crime
Statistics and Research (Baker, 1998) indicated that:
29% of secondary students in NSW reported having assaulted someone;
27% had maliciously damaged property.
Similar figures have been found in schools in Canada, Scandinavia, Ireland and
England (Smith, Morita, Junger-Tas, Olweus, Catalano & Slee, 1999).
Maxwell and Carroll-Lind (1997) found that students in Years 7 and 8 reported
that over the past 9 months:
Direct Experiences of Physical Violence

49% were punched, kicked, beaten or kicked by children.
23% had been in a physical fight with children.
Direct Experiences of Emotional Abuse

70% had been the subject of nasty gossip.
67% had been threatened, frightened or called names by other children.
54% reported being ganged up on, left out, or not spoken to by children.
15% reported being treated unfairly or bullied by adults.
Direct Experiences of Sexual Abuse

3% reported unwanted sexual touching.
40% reported being asked unwanted sexual things.
Witnessing Violence or Abuse

64% watched someone threatened, frightened or called names by children.
62% watched someone ganged up on, left out, or not spoken to by children.
53% watched someone punched, kicked, beaten or hit by children.
51% watched a physical fight.
15% watched others being treated unfairly/bullied by an adult.
Who is Affected by Bullying in Schools?
414
____________________________
The Ripple Effect of Bullying
Bullying is a problem for bullies, victims, bystanders, others at school, parents,

families, and communities (see Figure 1.1). For bullies, aggression may persist
into adulthood in the form of criminality, marital violence, child abuse and sexual
harassment (Farrington, 1993; Olweus, 1991). For victims, repeated bullying can
cause psychological distress and many related difficulties (Besag, 1989; Olweus,
1993) that endure beyond the schooling years. Bystanders watching incidents of
bullying and other students in the school who have heard about such incidents can
feel unsafe at school and this can extend to feeling unsafe in the community.
Parents are angered that children become victims of bullying.
Figure 1.1: The Ripple Effects of Bullying (Sullivan, The Anti-Bullying Handbook,
2000, p.32)
415
____________________________
What Research Says About the Impact of Bullying?
Long-term effects begin in early childhood and develop into serious adulthood
issues for both the perpetrators of bullying and those who are victimized by them
(Olweus, 1993a). It is not just at the student level where negative consequences
can arise. Schools at large and staff are also impacted. For example, a poor
educational environment and even increased occupational stress for staff can arise.
Bullying can create a hell on earth for someone who is victimised,

and can seriously threaten that persons opportunities in life.
Sullivan, 2000, p. x.
Bullying, both physical and non-physical, has made some children

so desperate that they have attempted or succeeded in committing
suicide.
Sullivan, 2000, p. 11.
Impact on bullies
Bullies are disadvantaged in many ways. For
example high levels of engagement in peer
bullying has been associated with delinquent
behaviour in Australian teenagers (Rigby & Cox,
1996). Eron (1987) showed that bullies identified
by age eight are six times more likely to be
convicted of a crime by age twenty four and five
times more likely than non bullies to end up with a
serious criminal record by age thirty.
Olweus (1991) reported that approximately 60% of

boys identified as bullies in grades 6 through to 9
had at least one conviction at the age of 24 and that
35% to 40% had three or more convictions. This
was true of only 10% of the control group. In
comparison, Olweus also reported that former
victims had an average or below average level of
criminality in early adulthood. NSW Criminal
Court Statistics reveal that over 50% of all offenders in NSW are under the age of
25 with the largest group being 14 to 19 year olds (NSW Bureau of Crime
Statistics and Research, 1997). International studies examining the onset of
criminal behaviour patterns have demonstrated that antisocial and criminal acts
begin early in adolescence and are extremely stable over time (Fergusson, &
Horwood, 1999).
416
____________________________
Impact on targets
The extent of damage that bullying has on a young
person's life has begun to be elucidated by
researchers. Rigby (1996) found that targets of
bullying:
reported twice as frequently as non-victims
being depressed or having suicidal thoughts;
had lower self-esteem,
were more anxious and depressed; "
had poorer physical health;
have fewer friends; and
were absent from school more often than non-
victims.
% &'
Research has also found that male adolescents who (
report being frequent targets of bullying are more
likely than others to approve of husbands abusing " ) " *
their wives.
Impact on society and schools

Not only do negative impacts happen to those involved, but the wider school
community is also affected. Bullying affects everyone. When nothing is done to
prevent bullying other students will feel scared that they will be bullied next. This
creates an environment of indifference, stops students from speaking up about
bullying and is what allows bullying to thrive in schools. When students feel
scared their academic work and attention is also affected.
The community at large can also be affected. Negative publicity or harmful media
coverage can have damaging and long-ranging outcomes for community and
school reputations, which can be difficult to repair.
Additionally, the social and economic costs of
violence and aggression are quite significant in
Australia. It is estimated that aggressive crime cost
Australian society $18 billion per annum or 4% of
GDP (Walker, 1997). The economic and social
costs of bullying have not been directly studied,
however, the link between bullying behaviours at
school and future criminality, poor mental health
and diminished school performance has been
identified.
Australian and overseas research has shown that for
targets, repeated bullying has been linked to ! "
psychological distress, depression, psychopathology
and deteriorating physical health (Marsh, Parada, # $
Yeung & Healey, 2001, Slee, 1995a; 1995b;
Hawker & Boulton, 2000). The most commonly
associated mental health problem with school bullying is depression. Depression
has been estimated as one of the most costly mental health disorders in western
countries (Panzarino, 1998).
417
____________________________
The impact of bullying in the school years can extend beyond the bully and victim
to the peer group, school, and community at large in the form of criminality and
mental health problems. Intervening to reduce the rate of bullying may in the long
term not only reduce violence in the school community, but also prevent the
development of antisocial behaviours in individual students who are bullies, and
reduce the long-term emotional disturbances which are associated with being
victimised (Hoover & Oliver, 1996).
Given the adverse consequences, it is crucial that early intervention works to

decrease bullying, specifically during the early phases, before the cumulative
effects have an opportunity to commence.
What are the Benefits of Addressing Bullying in Schools?
For Bullies
Learning self-control;
Learning lifelong social skills to interact with others positively;
Learning societal expectations for appropriate social behaviour; and
Avoidance of long-term problems post-schooling years.
For Victims
Put a stop to the hell on earth some students experience at school;
Reducing youth suicide;
Ensure targets experience their right to experience the benefits of schooling in
a safe environment;
Ensure targets reach their full academic and emotional potential;
Reduce the long-term emotional disturbances which are associated with being
victimised; and
Learning skills to avoid being a target and reinforcing bullying behaviours.
For Bystanders and Others

Reducing feelings of powerlessness;
Ensuring all students feel safe at school; and
Empowerment through knowing that they can do something about bullying.
For Parents and Families

Reducing the adverse impact that bullying has on parents and families;
Empowerment through knowing how they can contribute to addressing
bullying at school;
Feeling assured that the school has a proactive policy to address school
bullying; and
Knowing how to work with the school on addressing bullying incidents.
For the Broader Community

Reduce the incidents of youth violence in the school and community; and
Ensure students feel safe in the wider community.
418
____________________________
What is Bullying?
Dominance; recurring; and deliberate.
These three words form the basis of how bullying has been defined and how
bullying is different from other forms of aggressive behaviour. Deliberate actions
of intimidation, humiliation, and submission are repeated to overpower another
person. These intentional behaviours are coupled with victimisation to prevent the
target from using effective coping strategies to defend themselves.
Acts of aggression which are repeated generate a deeper level of fear

and intimidation than an isolated event
Orpinas & Horne, 1996
Bullying behaviour is often an expression of a need such as to get attention from

others or take out frustrations on someone else. Some students may be
intentionally behaving in a certain way, but they may be unaware that they are
bullying. For example, a student in class may enjoy getting the attention of peers
by cracking jokes about another student. Whilst they enjoy the attention of their
peers they may not be aware that they are causing real harm to that other student.
However, it needs to be emphasised that bullying is a deliberate act designed to
inflict physical and psychological harm. It is repetitive in nature whereby bullies
continue to bully others.
Features of Bullying
Is usually repetitive;
Is a conscious act of aggression and/or manipulation by one or more people;
Physical or psychological harm is intended;
Is often organised and systematic;
Is sometimes premeditated and sometimes opportunistic;
Is sometimes directed towards one victim, and sometimes occurs randomly;
Can last for short periods or can endure for years;
Is repeated over a period of time or is random but a serial activity carried out
by someone who is feared for this behaviour; and
Is an abuse of power.
Bullying is a cowardly act because it is done to cause hurt without

fear of recrimination.
Sullivan, 2000, p. 9.
419
____________________________
How is Bullying Different to Other Forms of Aggressive

Behaviour?
Bullying is differentiated from other forms of aggressive behaviour

in that it involves a more powerful group/individual dominating
through violence, aggression or intimidation a less powerful
group/individual over an extended period of time.
Olweus, 1997
To deal effectively with bullying it is important to know what bullying is exactly

and also what bullying is not. Bullying incorporates a wide range of behaviours:
name calling, extortion, physical violence, slander, exclusion from the group,
damage to others property, verbal intimidation (Smith & Sharp, 1994), and using
technology to bully (cyber bullying). Bullying behaviours have been classified
into two categories: physical and non-physical.
The Many Faces of Bullying
Bullying can happen in a number of ways, as depicted in Table 1.1 and Figure 1.1:
Physical Bullying
Physical bullying is characterised by behaviours that involve hitting, kicking,
pinching, throwing objects intended to hit, taking money, or belongings. Physical
bullying is easy to identify and causes visible injuries (e.g., cuts and bruises). In
its most extreme form it has resulted in murder. (i.e. hitting, pushing, throwing
objects intended to hit, and stealing).
Verbal Bullying
Verbal bullying can include behaviours such as name-calling, swearing, rude
gestures, nasty phone calls or internet messages, and making jokes about
someone.
Social Bullying
Social Bullying is characterised by the hurtful manipulation of peer
relationships/friendships to inflict harm on others through behaviours such as
social exclusion and rumour spreading.
Other Bullying
To this list we would add cyber bullying although as yet little research has been
undertaken as to the nature and prevalence of this form of bullying. Additionally,
other forms include racist remarks, sexual harassment and inter-generational
bullying.
420
____________________________
Table 1.1: Examples of Physical and Non-Physical Types of Bullying

Examples of Examples of Examples of Examples of
Physical Bullying Verbal Bullying Social Bullying Other Forms of
Behaviours Behaviours Behaviours Bullying
Biting Abusive Mean faces Cyber

Hair pulling language Manipulating Bullying
Kicking Abusive friendships Racist
Locking in a telephone Ruining bullying
room calls friendships Sexual
Pinching Extorting Systematically harassment
Punching money or excluding, Bullying
Pushing possessions ignoring, and special needs
Scratching Intimidation isolating children
Spitting threats of Sending (often Sexual
Damaging a violence anonymous) preference
Persons Name calling poisonous bullying
Property Racist notes Inter-
remarks Abusive generational
Spiteful emails bullying
teasing (Cruel
remarks)
Sexually
suggestive
language
Rude gestures
Adapted from Sullivan, The Anti-Bullying Handbook, 2000, p.14
Figure 1.1: Some Types of Bullying
421
____________________________
What Bullying Is Not

Bullying is not criminal behaviour. Sometimes childrens play may be seen as
rough by adults but is playful in intention. One off physical fights are also not
instances of bullying.
Bullying is not:
A Criminal Activity
- Assault with a deadly weapon;
- Inflicting grievous bodily harm;
- Seriously threatening to harm or kill;
- Serious theft; and
- Sexual abuse.
Exuberant Physical and Verbal Play
- Play-fights;
- Rough and tumble play;
- Verbal sparring; and
- Prosocial teasing.
One-Off Physical Fights
Constructive Conflict Between friends
What are the Differences Between Bullying, Prosocial Teasing,

and Constructive Conflict?
The Nature of Teasing

A significant issue in examining bullying is the place of teasing within the
framework of bullying (Swain, 1998). Teasing can be either playful or aggressive.
Teasing can be carried out by name calling, physical, and aggressive gestures and
by playing games or pranks on targets of the tease (Kowalski, 2000). The
underlying purpose of teasing is often ambiguous (Shapiro, Baumeister, &
Kessler, 1991). Teasing may often be almost indistinguishable from bullying.
Teasing is not only common in interpersonal interactions but it may also be used
as a positive way to relate to others (Shapiro et al., 1991). Teasing allows for
polite ways of pointing out social deviations in order to enhance an individuals
group membership success, therefore being a central aspect of socialisation.
Teasing also allows the enhancement of bonds between social, romantic, and
family members. Teasing may also allow individuals to learn about, negotiate, and
assume social identities (Keltner, Young, Heerey, Oemig, & Monarch, 1998).
Teasing is a common social interaction between individuals and it should not be
assumed that all teasing is bullying.
Sometimes it is difficult to determine whether subtle behaviours presented by

students are forms of bullying or teasing. Craven and Parada (2002) suggest
students who think they are just teasing may find it acceptable to keep bullying
others, and teachers who respond to playful teasing as if it were bullying may
overreact in their management of these behaviours. They also suggest it is
422
____________________________
possible that students start out using non-hurtful behaviours, but these escalate
into bullying or other aggressive behaviours. Being able to determine exactly what
is happening is crucial to accurately assessing what type of situation it is, and how
to deal with it most effectively.
Two Forms of Teasing
There is support that teasing comes in two forms (Barnett, Burns, Sanborn, Bartel
& Wilds, 2004; Keltner, Young, Heerey, Oemig, & Monarch, 1998): Prosocial
and antisocial teasing. While antisocial teasing falls under the wider range of
bullying behaviours (i.e. name-calling) and is aimed to intimidate, Prosocial
teasing serves to enhance peer relations. This type of teasing is playful and
experienced as a prosocial means of
Prosocial teasing can serve communication.
to establish, maintain, and
What differentiates prosocial from
enhance interpersonal antisocial teasing is the intention of the
relationships and assist in act. Antisocial teasing is executed to harm,
resolving conflicts intimidate, humiliate, and ridicule. This
Barnett, Burns, Sanborn, Bartel, type is perceived by the person being
& Wilds, 2004, p. 293. teased to be damaging and is usually
followed by the person bullying defending
their behaviour with statements like I was just mucking around, it was only a
joke. The students who tease in this way use explanations that include the words
only and just to justify their behaviour. Students who use this type of teasing
may be less likely to stop teasing as they perceive it as harmless, and may enjoy
the social rewards that result from antisocial teasing.
Conversely, prosocial teasing comprises behaviours in which no harm was
intended. These include students playing and interchanging roles (they reciprocate
the behaviours, or at least can reciprocate them), the student being teased is
laughing genuinely and there is shared enjoyment.
How Teasing Can Be Misinterpreted

If a student who bullies considers what they are doing constitutes prosocial teasing
rather than bullying it is less likely that they will refrain from bullying. Similarly,
if a target of a prosocial tease interprets the tease as bullying they are more likely
to be negatively affected by the teasing. Oliver, Hoover and Hazler (1994) after an
extensive survey of North American students concluded that students can
simultaneously hold conflicting views about teasings intention. They surveyed
students specifically on whether they perceived that teasing was prosocial. They
found that:
73% of 9th grade and above students agreed;

A staggering 90% of students of fourth through to 8th grade also agreed that
teasing was done in fun and it caused no harm; and
However a great proportion of these students in a separate section rated
teasing as bullying and recognised bullying as being damaging.
423
____________________________
There is also independent evidence to suggest that those involved in the bullying
episode may hold totally different views about what is happening in the
interaction. Relative to targets, bullies tend to minimise the negative impact of
their behaviours, view their behaviour more benignly, and perceive the
behaviour as justifiable (Kowalski, 2000). Bullies often state that they were just
kidding or having fun and that no harm was intended (Hoover & Olson, 2000).
It may be that at least some of the bullying going on in schools is teasing with no
harm intended, at least from the side of the teaser. Yet the question still remains
on how to differentiate between bullying and teasing. Roberts and Morotti (2000)
have proposed that although teasing behaviours may have a normal developmental
aspect, the manner, intensity and incidence in which they are delivered to a target
delineate between what can be construed as normal and what could be labelled
bullying. From this perspective teasing should be perceived as bullying when it is
high intensity, repetitive, and decoded by the target as damaging (see Table 1.4).
Bullying and teasing are social actions that have a definitive purpose in shaping
and controlling social interactions between groups and/or individuals. Teasing is
more likely to occur when the social desire is to increase affiliation and enhance
the social success of both the teaser and the target, whereas bullying aims to
minimise the social success of the target and enhance the social success of the
bully.
Constructive Conflict
Another type of common peer interaction which often gets mistaken for bullying
is constructive conflict (see Table 1.4). Conflict is
a phenomenon that cannot be avoided. Deutsch
(1973) suggests two types of conflict exist: I also had a fight with my
Constructive and destructive conflict. Destructive friend, but I hope we be friends
Conflict can be viewed under bullying terms (i.e. again because we were best
threats and intimidation) and is aimed to upset. friends. And we were in this
Conversely, constructive conflict serves to restore school since kindergarten.
friendships. This occurs when disagreements
between students happen, but no bullying occurs. Year 6 Student
What differentiates constructive from destructive
conflict is the motive for it. The essential difference being that with constructive
conflict the students are friends, and want to remain mutual friends.
Incidents may trigger the struggle between friends for a number of different
reasons.
For example, some conflict may appear because:
Something happened (i.e. a student copied their friends work);
There was a conflict of interest (i.e. one student wanted to play soccer
whereas the other wanted to play football);
There was a conflict of beliefs (i.e. each student believed they were right and
did not want to see the other persons point of view); or
There was a conflict of peer relations (i.e. triangle of peer relations where
one student likes two other students but they dont like each other).
Whatever the reason, both are hurt by the experience, both students still want to be
friends, and they are not turning other students against each other.
424
____________________________
Table 1.4: Differences between Bullying, Teasing, and Constructive Conflict

CONSTRUCTIVE
BULLYING PROSOCIAL TEASING
CONFLICT
Considered to be Intended Considered to Intended Considered to be Intended
Harmfully Playfully out of Conflict
The other person knows you The other person knows you The other person is also
are serious are joking serious
Decreases Social Relations Increases Social Relations Temporarily Decreases

among Peers and Limits among Peers and Expands Social Relations among
Social Success of the Social Success of the Peers but does NOT Limit
person being bullied person being teased Social Success of involved
Motivated by desire to Motivated by desire to students
increase personal social increase social relations Motivated by desire to
credence of the person among peers protect self
bullying
Person being bullied of Person being teased is of Persons in conflict are of

lower status equal status equal status
Designed to lower people Designed to encourage peer Designed to protect self, not
who are already of low relations among students, to lower or increase
status, so that it becomes not to lower or increase personal social standing
tougher to increase their personal social standing
social standing
Low Engagement of High Engagement of High Engagement of

Restorative Action Restorative Action Restorative Action
The person bullying does The person teasing will try The persons in conflict try
not try to ensure the person to ensure the other person to address their issues
they are picking on knows knows they are joking
they are joking
High frequency per Low frequency per Low frequency per

interaction interaction interaction
Happens repeatedly Happens infrequently when Happens infrequently when
they meet they meet, may be a once
off occurrence if serious
*Adapted from Beyond Bullying: Secondary School model (Craven & Parada, 2002).
425
____________________________
Tips for Teachers
When playing stops being fun and starts hurting, it is time for the
playing to stop If it hurts, it must stop.
Orpinas, & Horne, 2006, p. 16.
It is difficult to determine whether certain behaviours constitute bullying or other

forms of behaviour. As a teacher, it would be unhelpful to render a behaviour as
bullying, when it is prosocial teasing or constructive conflict. Yet, it would also be
unhelpful to render a behaviour as prosocial teasing or constructive conflict when
it is actually bullying. So, how will you know? The only way to find out is to ask.
Teachers are encouraged to listen for just and only statements (i.e. I was only
joking) as these tend to be indicative of excuses to pardon the behaviour. In
addition, when the outcomes are clear, if it is hurtful and mean to a student, then
this renders it destructive (i.e. bullying).
What are the Causes of Bullying?
The Origins of Bully Victim Roles
Factors that promote aggressive and victimising behaviours within the school have
been the focus of only a few studies. These studies have found that in contrast to
commonly held beliefs, bullying is not a result of large or small class sizes or
academic competition and although student personal characteristics which deviate
markedly from the norm may contribute to being a target of bullying, their
contribution is not a sufficient aspect to become a target of bullies (Olweus,
1996). The reasons that promote students to bully others therefore remain to be
elucidated. Glover, Cartwright, and Gleeson (1998) have reported findings based
on extensive student self-report that at least four factors contribute to bullying and
victimisation in schools: (a) Personal factors such as ethnic background, religion
and gender; (b) Socio-economic issues such as area of residence, perceptions of
being rich or poor and the way people dress; (c) School-attitudes held by students,
such as scholastic aptitude, sports ability and (d) being perceived as different. It is
unclear whether these characteristics apply equally to boys or girls and whether
they apply differentially to those victimising or being targeted.
Demographic characteristics such as age and gender have been consistently

associated with victimising others. As mentioned previously, boys bully more than
girls and there seems to be a decline in victimisation with an increase of age
(Rigby, 1996). Psychological or cognitive explanations about why particular
students engage in bullying have largely concentrated on cognitive deficit
theories. The general consensus has been that bullies are deficient in social
information processing or may be intellectually simple (Besag, 1989). Advocates
of this view have generally referred to the aggression and conduct disorder
literature to justify their claims. Much of the work in this area has stemmed from
the work of Crick and Dodge (1994) who have proposed a social cognition model
426
____________________________
which explains responses to social situations as being mediated by a filtering

process. This cognitive filter is biased in aggressive individuals, interpreting
neutral or ambiguous cues as hostile and therefore being more likely to engage in
aggressive behaviours. Bosworth et al. (1999) for example found in a sample of
adolescent high school students that misconduct, anger and beliefs supportive of
violence were significantly related to bullying behaviours. Pellegrini, Bartini, and
Brooks (1999) studying a sample of primary school students found that pro-active
aggression, or aggression which is used instrumentally to achieve some end, and
re-active aggression in which aggression is used as a response to provocation or
after loosing control, were both related to engagement in bullying.
Sutton, Smith, and Swettenham (1999) have questioned the

assumption that all bullies are cognitively deficient decoders of peer
interactions. They have argued that although bullying is an
aggressive act this does not imply that bullies and aggressive or
conduct disordered individuals are a homogenous group. They have
pointed out the fact that bullying is in fact always an interaction,
which occurs within a complex social environment.
Bullies are part of highly structured social groups that requires of them the ability
to negotiate and attribute mental states to themselves and others in order to
explain or predict their behaviour, otherwise referred to as theory of mind. This is
exemplified by the types of bullying that students engage in particularly indirect
bullying such as exclusion. A bully employing exclusion needs an understanding
of: who is a safe target; who will join them in excluding the target; and what kind
of reasons peers will consider justifiable to engage in excluding other students,
and mobilising those cognitions in order incite other students to exclude the target.
Such sophisticated cognitions contravene the notion that bullies are cognitively
inept or simple in their interactions with peers (Sutton et al., 1999). Further
research is therefore needed to examine the contributing factors that lead students
to victimise others.
The factors that predict victimisation are also elusive. The only physical
characteristic that has been associated with victimisation is physical strength
(Olweus, 1997). Victims tend to be physically weaker than their bullies. Olweus
has found no support for other physical factors such as weight, wearing glasses,
dress, or the way the victim speaks which reliably predict victimisation.
Ultimately, any explanation of how bullying behaviours come to be maintained
must be able to reconcile students individual attributes and the fact that bullying
occurs within a complex social setting. To date research has largely concentrated
on an individualistic, mainly pathological, understanding of the origin of bullying
(see Sullivan, 2000; Rigby, 1996; Besag, 1989) and has to a large extent neglected
how social aspects of peer interactions may be responsible for initiating and or
maintaining bullying dyads or groups.
A social interaction model of bullying can also help to explain bullying (Craven,
& Parada, 2002: refer to Figure 2.3). For example, when an individual wishes to
427
____________________________
affiliate to a group or to another individual, the group/individual will assess the

membership potential of the applicant and cues will be given as to the expected
behaviour from the applicant. Some of these cues may be open and directly
communicated, others may be offered ambiguously such as in the form of low
face threat teasing, with high redressive action. If the individual conforms and is
able to decode the cues being given their likelihood of membership success will
be high. For various reasons some individuals will not be able to decode some of
the cues being offered or may purposely not wish to comply. The group or
individual may therefore choose to increase the frequency and saliency of the cues
by altering their face threat and redressive action. This will continue until the
applicant complies. Some applicants, however, will still be unable or will choose
not to comply. Certain groups or individuals will then make it clear to the
applicant that membership is not possible in a mutually acceptable way. At this
point however other groups or individuals may communicate their unwillingness
to let the applicant participate by increasing face threat and reducing or
eliminating redressive actions or bullying. In this model bullying develops as a
dysfunctional form of group exclusion. The exclusion of the applicant by bullying
may in future become a part of that groups or individual norms. Other individual
or groups wishing to join them will be given the exclusion of the bullied
individual as part of the norms to increase membership success. New individuals
may therefore bully the failed applicant or target to increase their membership
success rather than due to any personal reasons. The target however having no
access to the rationalisations of the bullies will not be aware of this process.
Hence, perpetuating the target cycle. The target may observe future applicants
who have bullied them gain membership success, without access to the
rationalisations of the bullies, targets may conclude that bullying others may
increase their own membership success to other groups and begin to engage in this
behaviour themselves.
Indirect support for a relational model of bullying may be found in research

conducted by Merton (1996) and others (Evans & Eder, 1993; Kinney, 1993) who
have looked at the response to rejection by non-aggressive children. Merton
concluded that rejection becomes part of the schools norm in junior high school
students who are rejected by their peers. Rejected students are unlikely to change
their status and typically require a change in school setting to do so. Merton
further demonstrated that rejected students who actively engaged in behavioural
changes to modify their reputation bias did not succeed unless the changes were
dramatic. Status changes did not occur unless the student became more like the
dominant peer group and actively showed evidence against the label they had been
assigned. In order to do this the rejected student had to behave in ways that
exceeded the expectations of the dominant peer group and needed to demonstrate
behaviours that blatantly counter the previously rejected label. Conceptualising
bullying as social interaction used to form group membership sheds light on many
of the different types of bullying observed and the ways in which students may
become part of a perpetuating target cycle. Initial rejection and bullying is
explained as an inability to adequately comply with established norms some of
which are communicated ambiguously by the group through teasing. Further
victimisation by other students is indirectly encouraged as they use the victim to
increase their own membership success. Witnessing the success of their tormentor
428
____________________________
targets may turn to bullying as an attempt to increase their own social status and
even self-esteem.
Figure 2.3: Social Interaction Model of Bullying

*Developed by Craven & Parada (2002) as part of the Secondary Schools Bullying Project.
Self-concept and Bully-Victim Roles
429
____________________________
Self-concept theory may provide some insights into why students engage in
bullying and why they remain victims. Self-concept is defined as how a person
views himself or herself. Self-concept is characterised by its multidimensional
structure (Marsh & Hattie, 1996). A multidimensional conceptualisation of self-
concept proposes that people possess different self-concepts in each specific
multidimensional facet of self-concept. For example, a student may have a high
mathematics self-concept but a low relationship with peers self-concept. Self-
concept is not defined by how other people (eg. teachers, friends or parents) view
a person although these people can influence self-concept development (Marsh &
Craven, 1997).
Self-concept perceptions are formed through experience with and interpretation of

ones physical, academic and social environments. Social factors such as social
comparison processes are important. Students for example use evaluations of the
performance of their classmates to establish frames of reference for evaluating
their own performances (Marsh, 1990). Self-concepts are also formed when
students make evaluations of their performance based on their previous
accomplishments in similar areas. Self-concept is also influenced by the
evaluation of significant others, experiences of positive and negative
reinforcement generated by self-talk as well as external agents. A paradox may be
occurring in schools whereby bullying and associated violent behaviours may
serve to enhance ones self-concept. Bullies in particular achieve a personal sense
of power and may receive social reinforcement from their peers for engaging in
bullying behaviours that result in the intimidation of their victims. Atlas and
Pepler (1995) have observed that peers were present in 85% of bullying episodes.
Peer onlookers may act to reinforce the bullying behaviour and inflate the bullys
self-worth. Indeed the most common reported motivations for bullying are to feel
powerful or to look cool (Farrington cited in Sutton & Smith, 1999). Further
support may be found in studies that have looked at sociometric popularity. In
sociometry studies students have been asked to nominate the traits of other
students whom they believe to be popular rather than to nominate their own self-
perceived popularity. These studies indirectly support the notion that students can
gain social praise through antisocial acts. Parkhurst and Hopmeyer (1995) found
that children who were perceived to be popular displayed higher levels of
aggression and lower levels of pro-social behaviour. Sociological studies looking
at the social structure of preadolescent and adolescent peer groups found a strong
relationship between being perceived as popular and being described as mean. The
author hypothesised that meanness may be an external expression of
invulnerability protecting popularity from competitors (Merten, 1997).
Within this social context, bullying behaviour and self-concept may

be positively related. Students protect their gains in self-concept
through bullying others.
This would necessarily imply that students with a low self-concept might engage
in bullying behaviours in order to enhance their self-concept. Marsh, Parada,
430
____________________________
Yeung & Healey (2001) found that aggressive school troublemakers (getting into
physical fights, getting into trouble, being seen as a troublemaker, and being
punished for getting into trouble) and Victim (being threatened with harm, not
feeling safe) factors were related to three components of self-concept (General,
Same Sex Relations, and Opposite Sex Relations) based on the large, North
American representative National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS).
Longitudinal structural equation models for students in 8th, 10th and 12th grades
showed that the Troublemakers and Victim constructs were reasonably stable over
time and moderately correlated. This implies that many students were both
troublemakers and victims simultaneously. Findings that many students were both
Victims and Bullies replicated a long line of research in this area (eg Forero et al.,
1999). Whereas, the Aggressive Troublemaker factor was also correlated
somewhat negatively with self-concepts, the Troublemaker factor had small
positive effects on subsequent self-concept. This suggests that low self-concept
may trigger trouble-making behaviour in a possibly successful attempt to enhance
subsequent self-concept.
Although boys had higher Troublemaker and Victim scores than

girls, the effects of these constructs on subsequent self-concept were
similar for boys and girls.
In a recent study by Salmivalli (1998), the self-concept of 281 14-15 year old
male and female students was analysed using cluster analysis to form groups with
similar self-concept as measured by the Piers-Harris Childrens Self-Concept
Scale. These scores were related to participation in victimising other students.
Results showed that adolescents who tended to bully others had high social and
physical self-concept although views of themselves were rather negative on the
other scales (academic for example). In this same study, victims had low scores in
most self-concept domains. There was, however, a group of victimised children
who still reported high self-concept in the areas of family related and behavioural
self-concept. Hay (2000) examined the multidimensional self-concept profiles of
high school students who had been suspended from their schools for persistent
behaviour problems (e.g., in-class disruption, verbal or physical aggression).
Results showed a mixture of self-concept scores. Students tended to score low
(when compared to peer normative scores) in the areas of school, parent/child
relationships and in levels of school/student connectedness. In this particular study
gender differences were also found. The boys aggressive school trouble making
behaviours were not associated with emotional instability or male peer rejection.
For both boys and girls the total self-concept scores were low compared to norms,
suggesting that overall schools troublemaking is associated with an overall low
self-concept.
To date there have been a number of studies which have looked at self-concept in
relation to victimisation. These studies have largely concentrated on the effects of
victimisation on self-concept. A consistent negative correlation has been found
between peer victimisation and childrens global or general self-concept (Neary &
Joseph, 1994; Rigby & Cox, 1996; Stanley, & Aurora, 1998). Studies which have
431
____________________________
looked at specific aspects of self-concept, such as social self-concept, have

generally found that victims tend to have negative self-views regarding the extent
that they see themselves as being socially competent or well accepted by their
peers (Callaghan & Stephen, 1995; Hawker & Boulton, 2000). Suggesting a
downward spiral for victims of bullying which may help to perpetuate their victim
status. Investigating this spiral Egan and Perry (1998) tested two hypotheses in
relation to self-regard and victimisation. First, whether low self-regard contributed
over time to victimisation by peers. Second, whether high or low self-regard had
any protective function in children with personal characteristics such as physical
weakness, anxiousness and poor social skills. Their results supported the view that
low self-concept leads to further victimisation over time, similarly among children
with undesirable social characteristics children with high self-concept were less
likely to become caught up in victimisation over time.
Marsh, Parada, Craven, and Finger (2004) used a longitudinal design to analyse
the relation between bullying and self-concept for Australian students. They found
that bullying others at one time leaded to lower general self-esteem, same-sex
relations, honesty/ trustworthiness, academic self-concepts and higher emotional
stability at a later stage. While bullying others tended to have negative causal
outcomes on particular aspects of self-concept, victimisation was consistently
negatively related to all areas of self-concept. More specifically, important
negative outcomes for targets included lower same-sex relations and emotional
stability self-concepts. Furthermore, these effects lasted continually following
Time 1 and Time 2 outcomes. Effects beyond Time 2 lead to further negative
effects and declines in self-concept factors. This has important implications for
those who are bullied. Once they are bullied, it only gets worse if nothing is done
to prevent bullying, or at the very least to prevent the negative effects. Conversely
and more importantly, overall high self-concept patterns prevented students
becoming involved as either a bully or a victim, revealing the significant impact of
self-concept to involvement in bullying.
It seems therefore that the relationship between bullying, victimisation, and self-
concept with regards to victims is clearly a negative one. The nature of this
relationship for bullies however is unclear. Staub (1999) argued that the issue
might not simply be the level of self-esteem but what it is based on. For example,
he proposed that aggressive children might not have the socially valued means to
gain a positive image through competence and good performance at school.
Therefore they organise their self-esteem around strength, power and physical
superiority over others.
Harming others may become a way of reaffirming self-identity and

to compensate for frustration in other areas.
432
____________________________
Debunking Bully Myths

Myths about bullying
misconceptions that make it Myths about bullying are created as
possible to ignore physical, excuses not to intervene, or excuses to
emotional and social cruelty blame the person being bullied. Stopping
bullying is difficult, it takes time, and
even as it takes place right in there are no magic overnight fixes
front of us. available. Often it is easy to listen to
Some myths provide general beliefs about bullying and be
tempted to believe some yourself
comfortable categories or without thinking about what they really
stereotypes of bullies and mean. In this section, we debunk some
victims...Others promote of the most common myths about
adults powerlessness to bullying.
change the situation for the
better. MYTH 1: Its just what kids do
Sheraz, 2002, p.12.
Bullying is not normal childhood
behaviour. Its intended to harm others
and has lasting negative consequences that prevail into adulthood. Sayings such as
its all a bit of fun contribute to the power of this myth and prevent bullying
from being taken seriously.
MYTH 2: Its only a minor event, theyll get over it
The truth is bullying gets worse over time. Although some incidents may start out
small, research has shown bullying becomes more frequent over time. Doing
nothing to counter its effects unfortunately only leads to longer ranging, more
severe incidents.
MYTH 3: Ignore the bullying and

it will go away
Behavior characterized by
bullying does not disappear Bullying will not just go away. Ignoring it
with time. On the will only make it worse and can result in
contrary bullies are the person bullying try harder to get
rewarded for their behavior attention, to humiliate, to intimidate, and
by an increase in status as such escalate bullying. If it doesnt look
among their friends, and a like it is bothering the person being picked
on, they have to try another means, and
more exciting social life that could be a more severe means, gaining
(Bold inserted). more support from peers or even trying to
bully someone else. Bullying in this
Sheras, 2002, p.21. instance is not being solved, it is fuelling
the problem.
433
____________________________
MYTH 4: There are Bullies and there are Victims
So often those involved in bullying are labeled as either bullies or victims. While
it is easy to label a student as a bully, a victim or otherwise, labeling students this
way actually assumes that for those who bully others:
(a) these behaviours are normal behaviours for that student;

(b) the student cannot help using this type
of behaviour and is incapable of A bully is not a special
prosocial behaviours; kind of person with some
(c) the student is stuck in this role and kind of pathology inside.
cannot change; Nor is a victim like that
(d) only certain people with certain Any child can be a bully,
characteristics can be bullies; and for that matter, a
(e) the student is the problem not the victim.
behaviour; and Elliott, 1991, p.6.
(f) the student will always act this way and
there is nothing we can do to change that.
Additionally, for those who are bullied by others this view assumes that:
(a) the student is powerless;

(b) the student is stuck in this role and maybe somehow caused others to bully
them;
(c) only certain people can be victims;
(d) the situation is helpless; and
(e) there is nothing we can do to change their situation.
These assumptions are tempting to believe, but they are wrong. The fact is,
students are always learning, always creating, and always changing. Change is a
fundamental part of being human, and adapting to necessary change is something
students are certainly capable of accomplishing.
In addition our research has shown that bullies are often also targets, and targets
are also victims (Marsh, Parada, Craven, & Finger, 2004). Bullying and being
bullied are also mutually reinforcing over time: (a) todays bullies become
tomorrows victims; and (b) todays victims become tomorrows bullies. Not
surprisingly, there were obvious differences found between bullying and being
bullied. However, what was more striking in this research was the similarity
between bullies and victims on a wide variety of psychological constructs
(attitudes toward bullying, roles taken when confronted with a bullying situation,
strategies for coping with problems, inability to control anger, depression, life
event stress, and importantly low self-concept on most of the different areas of
self-concept measured, and self esteem).
434
____________________________
MYTH 5: Victims are just asking for it
Students spend a lot of time together. In spending so much time together it is

understandable that at times some students may not get along. Sometimes a
student may do something which may inflame another student. They may copy
someone elses work, they may do something another student does not like, they
may be saying things which are at socially inappropriate times or they may do
something that prevents another student concentrating on what they are doing. The
person who is said to be asking for it may or may not realise they are bothering
the other student. However, no matter what a student does there is no reason to
bully. Nothing makes it OK to bully. If a student has a reason for bullying
someone, to them it is an excuse which assumes the person deserved to be bullied.
Students have no right to bully someone because they may irritate them. There are
many ways in which to let someone know that they are finding it hard to
concentrate with them around. Effective descriptive communication to the person
and telling a teacher are two of these ways. Bullying is not one of them.
MYTH 6: Bullies are tough
Bullies may appear tough. They may be tall, they may have lots of friends to
support them, or they may have a tough look on their face. But, bullies are not
tough. They are actually cowards who only attack people less powerful than them
to make themselves feel more powerful.
I never get bullied because me and my gang are the strongest in

the school.
Year 6 Student
At times students who bully may look tough on the outside, but they may actually
be hurt, afraid, or insecure on the inside. Sometimes they may have been bullied
by others, or by members of their family (i.e. siblings), and bully others to make
themselves feel better.
MYTH 7: I didnt see it happen so I cant do anything about it
Sometimes when students tell adults about bullying, the adult might say I didnt
see it happen so I cant do anything about it. For a child to hear this is
distressing. Sometimes an adult may say this because they are unsure how to find
out what happened and how to prevent it happening again. Students interpret this
to mean if they cant do anything about it, I cant do anything about it, no-one
can do anything about it, and it will never be stopped. However, adults can do
something to stop it, even if they did not see it happen. Effective information
gathering and active listening to students is essential to acquiring accurate
information, or at least enough information to know that something has happened
and for appropriate school-devised policy consequences to follow.
435
____________________________
MYTH 8: Its up to kids to deal with it
This type of myth assumes that targets are at fault and they need to deal with it by
themselves. While children do play an important role in reinforcing bullying, as
well as being able to influence their social group and stop the bullying, they
cannot be expected to deal with bullying on their own. Students who take on this
role tend to deal with situations using revenge tactics which may inflame the
situation.
The whole-school community is responsible for stopping bullying. It is vital that

staff and parents are there to support students and to follow through with school-
devised policy procedures. Students are unable to deal with bullying on their own.
They need guidance, assistance, support, and adults who take bullying seriously
and actively intervene. Research clearly shows that a one sided approach to
bullying (i.e. it is only up to students) is ineffective. It takes a community of
people to stop bullying.
MYTH 9: Only boys bully
She started to dig her nails into us and kick us.
Year 5 Student
Although boys tend to bully more, females do still bully in physical, verbal,
social, and cyber forms. Research suggests that their bullying is more subtle (i.e.
social exclusion) which is more difficult to detect. Our research suggests that both
boys and girls bully and both bully using all bullying types.
MYTH 10: Theres only ever one bully doing the bullying
People who bully tend to bully in a social arena. Even if they are bullying alone,
the person bullying tends to have a
group of helpers at hand. Some
bystanders may see bullying happen and
I think it is just mean to
want to stop it but do not because they bully someone and just leave
are scared they will be bullied next. them it is even worse if you
Others watch and laugh, or support the just watched or helped the
person who bullies. In this way, the bully.
people who bully are not alone. They
have supporters, they have power, and Year 6 Student
they know that no-one will get them into
trouble. People can bully alone or in a group and these people can also bully an
individual or a group of individuals.
436
____________________________
MYTH 11: Students learn bullying from home. Theres nothing we

can do to counteract home effects
A minority of students who bully have been bullied themselves by family

members. However, this does not mean their behaviour or attitudes cannot change.
The school environment is separate from the home environment. While parents do
influence their children, teachers and peers are also a significant influences
especially considering the amount of time spent together. This myth is an excuse
not to do anything to stop the bullying. Bullying can be stopped, and although it
may take longer with some students, their behaviours can be changed into more
prosocial ones.
Educators may not be able to influence how children and parents

engage in problem solving at home, but they can model effective
conflict resolution methods in the classroom.
Orpinas, & Horne, 2006, p.76.
MYTH 12: Theres no bullying at this school
For a school where this is the notion, that

I think my school is a school must have found the miracle cure for
bullying and failed to share it with the rest of
little bit safe but bullying the world. Schools which claim to have zero
and calling names go on bullying are more likely to be unaware of what
here. constitutes bullying behaviours and are
usually unable to accurately identify bullying
Year 6 Student within their school. Ignoring bullying by
saying it does not exist exacerbates the
problem. Being able to recognise that it exists is a step towards achieving a
reduction in bullying. Parents are also more likely to support a school who seeks
to counteract bullying as they want their children to learn in a bully free
environment.
MYTH 13: That class has lots of bullying because they have so
many students in their class
Bullying has nothing to do with the size of a class. Our research has shown this
also to be the case. There is no evidence to suggest that bullying happens more
frequently in bigger class sizes. Bullying is more likely to happen due to
individual class structures and school ethos rather than due to class size.
437
____________________________
MYTH 14: Its the kids who are different who get picked on the
most
I might have to have glasses and braces, I am afraid I will

be teased.
Year 6 Student
This myth supports the notion that the persons being bullied are to blame for the
bullying. It suggests that something is wrong with the person being picked on and
theres nothing anyone can do to stop it. In some cases students are picked on
because of their appearance. However, it is more likely that this happens due to
the sense of vulnerability perceived by the person bullying.
The person bullying seeks someone who they can have power over. They seek
students with not many friends, students who may be physically smaller, or
students who may be unable to retaliate. If a child is small but has many friends,
they are unlikely to be perceived as vulnerable. In addition, a child who is quick to
retaliate with a clever comment or joke is also unlikely to be perceived as
vulnerable. The essential quality that any bully looks for in a victim is not
difference but vulnerabilitysome indication that the bully can abuse this child
without retaliation (Sheras, 2002, p. 60). In essence, being different does not
necessitate being bullied. It is the way in which vulnerability is perceived that
bullying eventuates.
MYTH 15: Its just a bit of fun
Students who say they are just have fun, are likely to be taking part in antisocial
forms of teasing to get a laugh from peers. They may not realise their jokes are
seriously harmful, or they may find the social appeal for making hurtful jokes is
more rewarding and justified for the harm. These students may also be resilient to
change because they do not see the seriousness of the issue and they enjoy the
social rewards they get. Any statements using the words just and only (i.e. I
was only having some fun, it was just a joke), should be a clear warning signal
for teachers.
MYTH 16: Victims need to learn to stand up for themselves and not
take it
When asked how to stop bullying, many people say that students need to stick up
for themselves or need to fight back. However, with both of these methods come
problems. Students become bullied because the person bullying knows they are
more powerful than the target is. The person bullying may be really popular and
have a group of students supporting them, which prevents someone being picked
on from defending themselves, even if they had one or two people there to support
them. In another scenario, the person bullying may be physically bigger and if the
target stands up for themselves, they risk being seriously injured.
438
____________________________
I dont want to help because I am afraid to get picked on.

Year 6 Student
Students who witness bullying are scared to stand up for the person being bullied
because they think it will happen to them next. If bystanders are scared and unable
to stop the bullying, how can a student being bullied be expected to stand up for
themselves? Excuses such as these imply that it is the targets fault for being
bullied, and they have to deal with it.
MYTH 17: Bullies just dont know how to get along with people
Previous bullying research suggests that bullies are socially unskilled or

intellectually simple who do not know how to get along with people. While it may
be true that some students who bully may not able to make friends in prosocial
ways, this is not true for most students who bully. To bully effectively, a number
of key skills are essential. For example, students who bully need to have an
understanding of:
Who is vulnerable and how to spot them;
Who will support them to bully;
What explanation they can use to get away with the behaviour; and
The ability to form an alliance of students who will also work to exclude that
individual.
Being able to use sophisticated social skills conflicts with the notion that bullies
are socially unskilled. Bullying others takes complex cognitive talents which
allows them to control who they get along with and who they do not want to
associate with.
MYTH 18: Bullying happens at all schools in all countries. Isnt it

just what kids do?
Bullying is not accepted as a normal part of growing up. Feeling afraid to go to

school at a young age is a clear distress signal for any school. Bullying is a cruel
behaviour with serious short and long-term consequences that continue into
adulthood.
Involvement in school bullying has been identified as contributing to peer

rejection, diminished school performance, delinquent behaviour, criminality,
psychological disturbance, further violence in the school, depression, and suicidal
ideation (e.g., Deater-Deckard, 2001; Galinsky & Salmond, 2002; Marsh et. al.,
2004; Rigby & Cox, 1996; Rigby & Slee, 1999).
439
____________________________
Negative consequences of bullying happen not only for those who bully or who
are bullied, but they can also have a significant effect on schools and communities
at large. When nothing is done to prevent bullying school safety issues, distrust
amongst students, formation of gangs, a poor educational environment, and even
increased occupational stress for teachers can arise. Given the adverse
consequences, early intervention becomes more crucial to tackle bullying before
the cumulative effects commence.
Myths provide the easy option for people not to do anything for
those situations which are difficult to deal with or they believe
cannot be helped. Ignorance is bliss, so they say.
Summary
In an effort to prevent bullying, the means at which to stop it starts at first
understanding what it is, how it differs to other behaviours (to prevent insufficient
or exaggerated responses to bullying), and how it affects students and school
communities at large. Having an understanding of bully myths and why they arise
can also help schools respond. Preventing bullying is important considering the
short and long-term consequences for targets, bullies, schools, and the wider
community.
440
Chapter 2: What Research Says About Bullying
____________________________
441
____________________________
A well designed Program based on evidence

in theory and research is important for
developing the most effective means of
preventing and stopping bullying in schools.
This chapter provides an overview of recent
bullying research.
442
____________________________
CHAPTER 2
What Research Says About Bullying
What Factors Underpin Bullying?
What are Risk and Protective Factors?
Often research undertakes to seek the causes of behaviours. In terms of bullying

research there are a number of factors which influence its onset (see Table 2.1).
Although some causes may have more of an effect than others (i.e. peer relations
may have more impact on bullying than family relations for some students, and
vice versa for other students), no single cause can be identified as the only cause.
Orpinas and Horne (2006) offer two important considerations when exploring the
causes of behaviour. They suggest:
Causes are not causes in themselves, but rather risk factors (or protective
factors for not being involved). No single identified cause will lead a student
to bully. Rather, there may be a higher chance that a student will be involved
in the presence of that so called risk factor; and
One risk factor alone may influence a person to be involved. However, it is

the accumulation of various risk factors that are stronger predictors to
outcome behaviours.
Risk and protective are those life circumstances which relate to the likelihood of
being involved in bullying. Risk factors are the factors which may lead someone
to be involved, and protective factors are the factors which may guard someone
from being involved in bullying. For example family relations may be both a risk
and protective factor. If a student has negative relations with their parents, this
may be a risk factor to bullying others at school, yet, if a student has positive
family relations, this may act as a protective factor to being involved.
However, risk and protective factors are not causes in themselves. It is the
cumulative effect of various risk and protective factors that influence a students
likelihood of being involved in bullying. For example, a student who has positive
family relations, yet is involved in a peer group and school environment that
condones name-calling and social exclusion may be influenced to bully others.
443
____________________________
Why are School Climate and Classroom

Management Critical?
Previous researchers have established that one of the

risk factors to bullying is school climate (Yoneyama
& Naito, 2003). For example, schools are created as
socialising and educating institutions which are
based on hierarchical relations. Within the school
environment, Roland and Galloway (2002) stress
that it is the work of classroom management and
social structure together, that contribute
significantly to school bullying and that these issues
need to be addressed clearly within a whole-school
approach for anti-bullying intervention to be
effective. In a study of 99 teachers and 2002
students they found that classroom management had
a direct impact, as well as an indirect impact via
social structure on the prevalence of bullying. This
important finding demonstrates the influential role
of the teacher in the management of student social
dynamics.
Interviews conducted with secondary school

teachers and students from the Beyond Bullying
Program support the findings that teachers
significantly impact their students. Results suggest
that some the methods in which teachers manage
their class can be interpreted by students as
bullying. For example:
When teachers were not consistent in their
attempt to discipline, students understood this
to mean that teachers were favouring some
students while picking on others;
Teachers use of nick-names, put downs and
classroom shaming produced feelings of
vulnerability because students were unable to
retaliate against the teacher; and
The use of splitting language (i.e. expressions
which imply group membership such as those
at the back, I dont have to tell you who
came first, I also dont have to tell you who
came last, your work is so much neater
then, why cant you be more like, or
has problems at home) by teachers
identifies segregated groups within the class,
some of which are problematic to the teacher.
444
____________________________
Many teachers may not even realise that these ways of managing student
behaviours are ways of humiliating students in front of peers. For this reason it is
important that teachers understand the extent of their own actions and realise the
repercussions of this style of behaviour management.
Zero tolerance policies may be more problematic than beneficial

Clearly stated and consistently reinforced school policies against
bullying reflect a schoolwide commitment to reduce bullying and
aggression and highlight them as unacceptable the best discipline
policies focus on finding a solution to bullying problems, rather than
merely on punishing the perpetrators.
Orpinas & Horne, 2006 p.48.
In terms of how teachers identify bullying among students, Robinson and Clay
(2005) suggest there are two distinct factors which determine whether
identification of bullying behaviours renders attention by teachers (including
subtle behaviours):
knowledge (knowledge that bullying has pervasive consequences for those

involved, knowledge of what bullying is, knowledge of what causes bullying,
and knowledge of how to stop bullying); and
time (time to watch over all students as well as time to intervene).
They suggest that knowledge of what signs to look for increases the correct
identification of bullying behaviours and warning signs of bullying for teachers,
leading more teachers to accurately decipher the social relations among their
students.
Knowledge of where bullying happens is also an important factor to help prevent

bullying. Bullying happens most frequently in the playground where it can be
difficult for teachers to see all students at the same time. Bullying may also occur
frequently in those areas in the school which are out of sight for teachers (e.g.
toilets).
While it is difficult to increase teacher supervision time, it is possible to use time

more effectively during contact with students. When teachers become more active
in their approach to peer interactions in the playground, a reduction in bullying
follows. A more active approach is defined by initiating small talk and interacting
with students on a day to day basis.
The concept of a positive school climate underlies the theoretical

framework for school responsibility. Interventions that draw on key
concepts of the school and classroom environment as a factor for
bullying focus on interventions that change the school climate.
445
____________________________
Table 2.1: Risk and Protective Factors Related to the School Environment
Risk Factors Protective Factors
Inefficient Classroom Management Effective Classroom Management

Produce feelings of vulnerability amongst Empower students with the use of
students with the use of inconsistent consistent behaviour management
behaviour management techniques, nick- techniques, positive reinforcement for
names, put downs, classroom shaming, appropriate behaviour and classroom
and splitting-language specific unified language
Insufficient Knowledge Sound Knowledge

Little knowledge of what constitutes Knowledge of what constitutes bullying,
bullying, where it happens, the where it happens, the consequences of
consequences of bullying, and how to stop bullying, and how to stop it.
it.
Idle Supervision Active supervision

Failing to actively interact with students Using time effectively by actively
interacting with students
Overlook positive behaviour and Reinforcing positive behaviour and

prosocial interactions prosocial interactions
Zero tolerance policies Clear and consistent school policies

Foster punitive measures for behaviour which are actively exercised within the
management school
Foster consistent measures for behaviour
management
Destructive Conflict Resolution between Constructive Conflict Resolution

staff between staff
As part of the whole-school approach (see Figure

2.1), one key aspect is the management of student
behaviour and the school climate students are
subject to. While the school does not bear the
complete responsibility for student bullying, the
school does play an important and influential
role to bullying, and can provide increasing
protection from antisocial behaviours.
Figure 2.1: Shows the impact level of school
446
____________________________
In What Ways Can Family Influence the

Manifestation of Bullying Behaviours?
The home environment, like the school environment

may also foster authoritarian styles that contribute to
bullying. For example Connolly and O Moore
(2003) used the Family Relations Test and found
that bullies tended to have more ambivalent
perceptions of their relationship with family
members whereas controls displayed positive
relations with family members.
In a study reflecting child and parental perceptions

of family functioning and child-rearing practices,
Stevens, De Bourdeaudhuij, and Van Oost, (2002)
found children who were classified as bullies,
perceived significantly less family cohesiveness,
expressiveness, organisation, control, social
orientation and personal relationship, and more
conflict in the family than children classified as
victims, bully/victims, and those not involved.
A fundamental difficulty of any anti-bullying

intervention, although particularly important for
younger children, is gaining parental support and
then transforming this support into parental
involvement. While involvement can only be
decided by the parent, the school does have
influence on the probability of participation. If
parents trust the school, they can trust that their
involvement will make a difference in their childs
life.
The family environment, particularly for primary

aged children, is an important basis for preventing
bullying at the individual level. Interventions that
fail to take the time to include family, run the risk of
unsuccessful results in terms of preventing bullying.
School bullying intervention may be more effective

by offering parents information that educates them
about bullying. Direct methods may include parent
information nights and school meetings with
parents. Indirect means can be accomplished by
raising awareness using pamphlets, newsletters, and
take-home material.
447
____________________________
Education for parents should provide information on what is bullying, the causes,
the consequences, information about the school bully policy, and how to contact
the school if their child is involved in bullying (Parada & Craven, 2002).
Gaining support from parents requires
Parents can do a great deal to prevent positive school-parent and teacher-
parent relations. Parents have the
their children from becoming bullies, ability to effectively help manage their
victims or even passive bystanders but children control anti-social behaviours,
only if they take the time to understand help their children perceive bullying as
the dynamics of bullying relationships, inappropriate, help their children
encourage their childrens trust and acquire positive peer interactions
confidence and intervene in effective ways skills, and encourage their children to
assist the school in addressing bullying
when necessary. (Parada & Craven, 2002). It is crucial
that parents also be aware and give
(Sheraz, 2002, p. 3-4.) their child appropriate support in
dealing with bullying. The importance
of parental involvement, especially for primary children, is a key goal for the
Beyond Bullying: Primary School Project.
Table 2.2: Risk and Protective Factors Related to the Family Environment
Low Parental Self-Concept High Parental Self-Concept

Having a low perception of relationship to Having a high perception of relationship to
parents has been empirically supported to parents has been empirically supported to
be positively related to bullying (such that be positively related to not being involved
thinking that you dont have a good in bullying (such that thinking that you
relationship with parents may lead to have a good relationship with parents may
bullying others). protect students from being involved in
bullying).
Ambivalent perceptions of Positive relations with family

relationship with family
Low family cohesiveness, High family cohesiveness,

expressiveness, organisation, control, expressiveness, organisation, control,
social orientation and personal social orientation and personal
relationship relationship
Raising awareness and support from parents is an integral

step to the effectiveness of the Beyond Bullying Program.
Parents play a vital role in supporting their children and
encouraging them to prevent bullying in their schools.
Parent resources and information are designed to
increase parent knowledge of what bullying is, what to
do if their child is involved, how to support their
children, how to empower their child to help, and how
to approach the school in the case of a situation of
bullying involving their child.
Figure 2.2: Shows the impact level of family
448
____________________________
What Role do Peers Play in Shaping

Bullying?
Atlas and Pepler (1998) suggest one of the reasons

bulling survives, is due to incidents of bullying
being removed from the eyes of adults (i.e.
teachers). What allows bullying to thrive in secrecy
is that students who bully others do not want to get
into trouble, and students who are bullied by others
do not want the bullying to worsen which they often
consider a likely outcome if they report bullying.
Salmivalli, Lagerspetz, Bjrkqvist, sterman, and

Kaukiainen (1996) have suggested that participation
in bullying behaviours involves a sense of
enjoyment by the perpetrators and also by their
peers. Bullying usually involves most peers in the
class or peer group who are either actively involved
or passively aware of the bullying process. Peers
have the capacity to:
Encourage the bully (actively or passively);
Ignore the bullying incident;
Help the target; or
Fail to discourage the bullying behaviour.
This is evident in observational research by Atlas

and Pepler (1998) who explored the prevalence of
peer involvement in bullying. In a video based
analysis, Atlas and Pepler monitored primary school
students in classroom and playground settings, and
found 85% of bullying incidents occurred with the
involvement of peers. Bandura (1973) has explained
that behaviour will be continued, mimicked, or
modelled if reinforced, or if behaviour escapes
punishment. Students who bully other students, or
are involved in bullying incidents may believe this
behaviour is acceptable. In support of this concept,
Atlas and Pepler further found bullying is reinforced
and escapes punishment from the peer group with
bystanders encouraging or failing to discourage
bullying behaviours. Bullies may continue bullying
in an attempt to gain further reinforcement or non-
punishment from their peers. Hence previous
research suggests that peer bystanders contribute to
the dynamic of bullying by reinforcing the
behaviour, failing to punish the perpetrator, and
failing to protect the victim.
449
____________________________
Children are at a stage in their lives where they are finding out who they are and
where they fit in within the school social hierarchy. The Social Interaction Model,
a subset of the Social Identity Theory, states that by categorising oneself into a
certain group to which one belongs, gives an individual the opportunity to
compare their group and themselves to other groups and other individuals at the
school, to discern their own positions within the social hierarchy. If bullying is
positively reinforced by the peer group and perceived by individuals to improve
their position in the social hierarchy of the school, categorisation of oneself into a
group that is of high status and exclusive, is likely to enhance ones sense of
popularity. Furthermore, it is probable then that other students who witness
bullying may perceive the high social pay-offs for bullying and may mimic this
behaviour for personal gains in social standing and power within the school social
system, or may wish to gain entry into that popular group. This is supported by
studies such as those of Crick and Dodge (1994) who concluded that desirable
outcomes of aggressive behaviour are expected by those who tend to use
aggressive means.
Because bullying occurs most often in a social environment among peers, and
children have a need to achieve and maintain positive relations with their peers
where they seek self-enhancement and dominance, students may use bullying
behaviours as a way of acquiring dominance, status, and popularity in their peer
group. In doing so, not only do they bully others to show their power, they bully
others to prevent other students from entering their powerful group.
Peers not only play an important role in creating bullying situations, but may also
play an important role in protecting victims. Students are responsible for
preventing bullying in two key ways:
The influence they have on bullying as members of the peer group; and
Being able to control their own behaviour.
One of the most important steps to preventing bullying in the Beyond Bullying
Program is to empower students to become active positive bystanders. That is, to
increase the capacity of students to cease reinforcing bullying behaviours, and to
enhance their effort to stop the bullying by supporting both the person bullying
and the person being bullied. Standing up for the person being picked on is often
met with reluctance by students due to fear. Students are scared to tell the bully to
stop, scared to support the person being bullied, and scared to tell someone about
it because they think it will happen to them next. However, stopping bullying at
the student level is vital to breaking the cycle of accepted aggressive behaviour.
Students have the capacity to learn new reinforcement behaviours in place of

encouraging bullying, ignoring, or failing to discourage the behaviour. Peer group
training, discussion, and role-playing help students understand and learn from
their role as a reinforcer to bullying and can manage ways to positively reinforce
peers who attempt to stop bullying, reinforce pro-social behaviour, reinforce in-
appropriate behaviour, and support the victim.
450
____________________________
Bullying happens in secrecy within a social

environment. To impact significantly within
this framework, important work which
encourages students to speak out and stop
reinforcing the negative behaviours can
instigate real positive change in the social
sphere. The impact here is at the family
and class level (Figure 2.3) and the risk
factors are summarised in Table 2.3
Figure 2.3: Impact level of Peers
Teaching people to anticipate high-risk situations successfully

prevents relapse of the risk behaviour.
Stevens, Van Oost et al., 2000, p31.
Teaching children to anticipate high-risk situations can be achieved by teaching

children to learn situational responses, to reinforce peer behaviour, and to use
social-cognition or cognitive-behavioural skills. Teaching students to anticipate
situational circumstances in which bullying may occur (i.e. jealousy, locations of
low-supervised areas) can help students deal with peer social pressure and help
students effectively practice alternative methods to deal effectively with bullying
(such as using help seeking skills).
Table 2.3: Risk and Protective Factors Related to the Peer Environment
Peer Reinforcement of Bullying Peer Reinforcement for stopping

Bullying
Wishing to be a group member of a Wishing to be a group member of a

high-status group of students who bully group of students who do not condone
others bullying
Feeling of power, control and high social Feeling of power, control and high social
self worth by means of bullying self worth without the means of bullying
451
____________________________
The Role of Self-Concept and Individual

Characteristics in Bullying
A number of individual factors have the potential to

influence a students likelihood of involvement in
bullying. For example some factors include student
self-perceptions and their attitudes to bullying.
Self-Concept
Self-concept has been recognised as an important

component of bullying and victimisation. An
individuals social identity is an integral and
important part of that persons self-concept. If
bullying is positively reinforced by the peer group
and perceived by individuals to improve their
position in the social hierarchy of the school,
categorisation then of oneself into a group that is of
high status and exclusive, is likely to enhance ones
sense of popularity. When they bully, they may
expect positive social outcomes, which may thus
lead them to feel good about themselves and
perceive themselves to be quite popular, increasing
their self-concept and perception of themselves. In
this way, some students may feel more comfortable
organising their self-perceptions around their
strength, power, and social status as opposed to
socially accepted forms of performance,
competence, and prosocial skills.
For this reason it is important that individuals

involved in bullying gain specific help with peer
relational issues. This can be achieved by
developing behavioural contracts and behavioural
and emotional control training with the students
involved. Educating students about their individual
role and influence is an important component of an
anti-bullying intervention. Bullies can be shown the
consequences of their actions and learn self-control
strategies. Targets of bullying can be trained in
target avoidance, resilience, and seeking assistance.
Bystanders can be taught not to reinforce bullying,
to adopt zero tolerance for bullying, to assist both
bullies and targets, and the importance of reporting
bullying. Interventions can also benefit by
simultaneously enhancing students self-concept;
and teaching students prosocial social skills that
enhance their ability to control their behaviour.
452
____________________________
Attitudes
School bullying researchers are in agreement that attitudes may induce aggressive
behaviour (McConville & Cornell, 2003; Nesdale & Scarlett, 2004). Andreou,
Vlachou, and Didaskalou, (2005) suggest attitudes are related to bullying others
and being bullied in that aggressive attitudes may activate aggressive behaviours
via environmental cues which would normally not be ignited for children with
non-aggressive attitudes. Activities which enhance students understanding of what
bullying is and how to debunk the myths can achieve impressive attitude change,
and an increased removal from involvement or support of bullying.
Individual factors can play a significant role by

increasing the likelihood of involvement for
some students. The Beyond Bullying
Program enhances self-concept and teaches
students positive social skills that enhance
their worth in the peer group and enhance
their ability to control their behaviour,
coupled with education for maximum
attitude change. The impact here is at the
student level (refer to Figure 2.4) and the
risk factors are summarised in Table 2.4.
Figure 2.4: Shows the impact level of individual characteristics
Self-concept plays an integral and important part in the development

and acceptability of bullying. The response students and teachers
give to behaviour may be a critical component to the development of
how that person perceives themselves and the motivations that
maintain their use of those behaviours.
Table 2.4: Risk and Protective Factors Related to the Individual Characteristics
Increasing Self-Worth via bullying Increasing Self-Worth via prosocial

means
Reinforcing Bullying Preventing Bullying

This says to peers that bullying is ok This says to peers that bullying in not ok
Pro-bully Attitudes Pro-Target Attitudes

Attitudes that support the bully (i.e. Attitudes that support and help the target
believing the bully is tough) (i.e. the person bullying is doing the wrong
thing)
453
____________________________
Are Sex and Age Differences Risk Factors

in Bullying?
Males have often been cited as the more aggressive

sex, and bullying has been suggested to increase
with age. But is this really the case?
Sex Differences
Before the theory of social bullying was developed,

researchers ignored female aggressiveness. Scores
were so low that female aggressiveness was said to
be redundant (Olweus, 1972, cited in Salmivalli et
al., 1998). However, Bjrkqvist (1994) suggested it
is nonsensical (p. 177) to assert that males are
more aggressive than females when differences in
the type of bullying are likely to be related to both
sex and developmental conditions. Females may
actually use more subtle forms of aggression (i.e.
social). Whilst previous research shows that males
tend to use more physical and verbal forms of
bullying, research to support the theory that females
use more social forms of bullying than males, yields
inconclusive results, with most research suggesting
males use this type more often also.
The commonly held belief is that females tend to

bully using more social means, whereas boys tend to
bully with more physical or verbal forms. There are
two possible explanations for this:
1. Social expectations attributed to sex roles; and
2. Sex differences in friendship groups.
Social expectations placed on children from a young

age teach children, in a generalised form, that males
are strong and play rough whereas girls are nice and
have lots of friends (Tulloch, 1995). It is a logical
progression then that physical aggression may be
expected and used to create social order among
males, whereas undetectable social forms of
bullying may be used by females as effective ways
of hurting other females due to the expectation that
females behave in more socially-oriented ways
(Salmivalli et al., 1996).
454
____________________________
It has also been suggested that the reason for the sex differences in types of
bullying may be due to the friendship patterns of each sex (Lagerspetz, Bjrkqvist,
& Peltonen, 1988). Males tend to form looser but larger friendship groups, valuing
power and status in their relationships which facilitate more physical and verbal
types of bullying, whereas females tend to form closer friendships which are more
likely to facilitate social forms of bullying. It also follows that females may use
more socially-oriented forms of aggression because social forms are likely to be
more hurtful for females, and males may use more physical forms of aggression
because they are able to ascertain their strength and power in the social group over
another less powerful individual. However, our research has shown that both
females and males use all forms of bullying.
Age Related Trends
Evidence that children as young as pre-school age use bullying behaviours is a

clear concern for society. Although there is research support for bullying to peak
during high school, it is now more widely accepted that bullying appears before
high school. Research has shown victimisation to be as high as 40% for primary
school students (Wolke, Woods, Bloomfield, & Kartstadt, 2000).
In general, there is reasonable consensus among researchers that bullying

decreases with age (e.g. Rigby, 2002). However, Marsh, Parada, Craven, and
Finger (2004) in a longitudinal study with secondary students found that 3 types
of bullying (physical, verbal, and social) increased from Year 7 onwards, rather
than decreased as expected. In addition, bullying was found to be maintained at
peak levels from years 9 and 10 until Year 11. These age related trends indicate
that bullying increases with age. This together with the cumulative consequences
of bullying show how preventing bullying early has important implications for
later involvement in bullying and the onset of later psychosocial issues.
455
____________________________
How is it that a child becomes bullied?
It is tempting to assume that a limited

repertoire of social skills is partly responsible
for rejection by peers, it is possible that such
rejection and subsequent low rates of social
interaction might have restricted the
development of the individuals social skills.
Frude, 1993, p. 76.
When Monks, Smith, and Swettenham (2005)

examined 104 Year 4 to Year 6 students social
cognitive abilities and attachment, they found that
victims did not display lower social cognitive task
scores or have insecure attachment qualities.
A lot of emphasis is usually placed on how bullying

occurs. In order for bullying to occur, a target may
be identified by the bully to be vulnerable. But what
risk factors are associated with being victimised,
what does a person bullying look for? The concept
of vulnerability in no way condones the behaviour
of the person bullying, nor does it blame the victim.
But is important for understanding why some
children and not others become targeted more
severely.
A number of theories suggest targets are in some

way different to other students. Things such as
wearing glasses, weighing more than their peers,
coming from another country, or having a disability
have been mentioned as some of the potential
reasons for being bullied.
Vulnerability refers to having less power in some

form. For example being physically smaller, not
having so many friends to back them up, anxious
about responding to verbal attacks, or having a low
sense of self-worth which when bullied perpetuates
that sense of insignificance. The person bullying
will look for some indication that will allow them to
know that they will win, that they will have power
over that person, and to show off that power in the
peer group.
456
____________________________
Having a vulnerable side (or risk factor for being bullied) does not mean a student
will be bullied. For example, a student who is small but has many friends will be
less likely to be bullied. Students who have not got many friends but look like
they can hold their own in a fight may also not be vulnerable to bullying. Building
resiliency skills, increasing students involvement as positive social bystanders,
and increasing students sense of self-worth are three key prevention methods all
students can use to decrease risk factors to being bullied (refer to Table 2.5 for
risk factors).
Table 2.5: Risk and Protective Factors Related to Being Bullied

Risk Factors (signs of vulnerability) Protective Factors (signs of resilience)
Not having many friends Having supportive friends or many friends
Physically Short Physically Tall
Physically Weak Physically Strong
Low self-worth High sense of self-worth
Anxious about responding Comfortable to respond
Building resiliency skills, increasing

students involvement as positive
social bystanders, and increasing
students sense of self-worth as
part of the BB Program are three
key prevention methods all
students can use to decrease risk
factors to being bullied. The impact
here is at the student level (Figure
2.5)
Figure 2.5: Impact level of vulnerability
457
____________________________
Previous Anti-Bullying Interventions: What works?
Unfortunately no single silver bullet will stop bullying. Interventions which seek
to change one aspect of the developmental pattern of bullying (i.e. focus on
individual intervention) fail to account for all types of students who bully, and fail
to create real change within their school environment. Table 2.6 highlights
individual intervention techniques and the issues associated with concentrated
efforts.
Table 2.6: Concentrated efforts and how they fail alone

Concentrated Why They are Important Why They Fail Alone
Efforts
School Prevention Provide expectations of behaviour for This enforces authority and fails to
Interventions run at all students and ways of managing effectively prevent bullying within
the school level behaviour which is universal for the the peer group.
with policy school.
implementation
Family Family influence does not stop at Individually this blames parents for
Cohesiveness students own behaviour, but in their bullying yet takes no responsibility
Family focused ability to stop reinforcing antisocial for the school and peer environment.
interventions for behaviour amongst peers. Parental
parents involvement is important for student
behaviour and action, as well as
providing their child with support.
Peer Participation Important for creating reinforcement Fails to effectively support students
Peers involved in change in students, where students are and makes students responsible for
preventing bullying able to reinforce positive behaviours dealing with all issues of antisocial
and stop reinforcing hurtful behaviour (including persistent
behaviours. behaviours).
Individual This is important for providing Blames the victim and stereotypes
Attention or support to students who are students as involved. This singles out
Victim Focused persistently involved in bullying or students and encourages peers to label
Focused being bullied. Counselling and them as bullies or victims. Labelling
intervention for referral can work well here. then creates a pattern of behaviour for
bullies and victims that student which they cannot break.
Alone, these interventions are able to achieve only marginal results in

preventing bullying. Together, they make a combined attempt to prevent
bullying and integrate all members of the school community to be
involved. Together, real long-lasting change is possible.
To date, the most effective approaches to prevent bullying in schools have been
whole-school approaches. Whole-school approaches which have even 1 aspect
missing (i.e. parental support for young children), also fail to deal with the issue
comprehensively and may receive only marginal effects which are not long-
lasting. Whole-school approaches integrate all aspects concentrated efforts, and go
beyond purely preventing bullying.
458
____________________________
Summary
A theory should undergrid the
development of any bullying Implications for the Beyond Bullying
prevention intervention program Program
and provide the framework for The focus of a whole-school intervention
its evaluation. approach by this investigation is based in
part on the influence of the school system on
Orpinas, 2006, p.6. child behaviours, and offers specific ways to
deal with these issues effectively within the
school climate and classroom. In order to create a safer school environment, this
intervention aims to educate teachers on the warning signs, what bullying is, what
causes bullying, the consequences of bullying, and how schools can appropriately
manage these behaviours within their classroom as well as in the playground.
The Program however does not stop at the school level. Students become
responsible for their own behaviour, parents are advised to support their children
and encourage them to prevent bullying, and the community is also invited to take
part to help raise awareness.
In order to actively prevent bullying within schools the underlying mechanisms

that drive bullying must be understood. Particular distinctions of bullying and
victimisation for males and females, as well as age related developmental trends
further help to elucidate a clearer picture of the underpinnings of bullying. This
section represents the underlying framework for the Beyond Bullying Intervention
for Primary Schools, important for the development of an effective primary
schools intervention project.
The Beyond Bullying whole-school approach is based on an ecological model

which employs a whole-school approach.
An ecological model is a comprehensive model

which takes all levels of influence into account
on a students behaviour. Every level of
influence does have an effect on student
behaviour (refer to Figure 2.6). Although,
it may seem like a smaller level of
influence has a smaller effect, in reality
students can be introduced to more
educated decisions based on even small
levels of influence. In other words, small
levels of influence can have a huge impact
on student behaviour. The level of influence
cannot be underestimated in terms of the
degree of potential change in students.
Figure 2.6: Impact level of whole-school
459
Chapter 3: Beyond Bullying An Overview
____________________________
460
____________________________
The success of the Beyond Bullying Program

is dependent on whole-school effort. The
school is responsible for initiating change
through a well designed and well integrated
school policy, teachers are able to influence
the social climate between peers, students are
accountable for controlling their own behaviour
and weakening the reinforcement patterns of
bullying situations, and parents are
encouraged to support the aims of the
Program, their school and their children.
All members within the school community have

a combined role to assist with the prevention
of bullying. It is the combined effort that will
determine success within a school.
461
____________________________
CHAPTER 3
BEYOND BULLYING:
An Overview of the Primary School Program
Schools are the ideal environment in which to reduce bullying and

manage student behaviours. Some advantages to a whole-school
approach include that schools:
Are able to access the largest number of children for any given
period;
Can reach students at early ages;
Have the ability to target groups over an extended period of time to
create a zero tolerance climate for bullying whilst simultaneously
reinforcing pro-social behaviours;
Are able to include all children (e.g., bullies who use aggressive
and non-aggressive means, targets, bystanders, children with pro-
social attitudes); and
Are able to accomplish productive long-term change in childrens
behaviour and inspire and capture childrens commitment to
addressing bullying.
Aims
The Beyond Bullying: Primary School Program is designed to empower teachers,
students, and parents to contribute to addressing bullying in primary schools.
Program resources focus on practical strategies and are written in plain English.
Resources have been developed based upon an extensive search of the research
literature and successful testing of the Program in secondary schools. Practical
strategies are based on using a whole-school approach whereby teachers, parents,
and students work together to address bullying.
462
____________________________
The aim of the whole-school framework is to actively involve all members of the
school community in preventing and addressing bullying. There is a school policy
which is developed and adhered to by all members of the school community, anti-
bullying strategies are actively implemented by all, and a movement into a
positive school culture with zero tolerance for bullying is sought.
The Resources
The resources are designed to help teachers, students, and parents to:
Appreciate the rationale for addressing bullying as a critical social justice

issue of our time;
Understand and utilise effective practical strategies for preventing and
addressing bullying behaviours; and
Develop a personal commitment to addressing bullying.
Resources comprise:
A teacher manual to provide teachers with an overview of the Beyond

Bullying Program, an example school policy, and a summary of recent
research about bullying;
Student activities resources for an 8 week Program of lessons, student-
oriented films, a music-CD, and a student information brochure; and
Information for parents a parent information brochure, a PowerPoint
presentation for parents, a brochure and CD that can be viewed with their child
(see Figure 1.1).
463
____________________________
Information
for Parents
Student
Materials
Example School Policy
Student-
Student Teacher Oriented
Lessons Workshop Films and
for 8 Materials a Music
weeks CD
Teacher Manual
Parent
Information Parent
Student Information Brochure
Evening Booklet
Powerpoint (to be read with parents)
Student-
orientated
Film on
CD
Figure3.1: The Beyond Bullying Resources

*Developed by Craven & Parada (2002) as part of the Secondary Schools Bullying Project.
464
____________________________
Teacher Resources
Teacher resources include:

Teacher manual which provides teachers with an overview of the Beyond
Bullying Primary Program, its resources, and the theory and research on
which it is based;
Student manual containing classroom activities to be implemented over an 8
week period; and
Multi-media resources (student-orientated films, music CD, references to
stories about bullying).
Teacher resources are designed to assist teachers to:

Appreciate the rationale for addressing bullying in the primary school context;
Develop a whole-school policy to proactively address and effectively deal
with bullying incidents in the primary school context;
Utilise and vigilantly implement effective practical strategies for preventing
and addressing bullying incidents;
Recognise different types of bullying behaviours and readily differentiate
these behaviours from other common anti-social behaviours; and
Genuinely feel inspired to develop a professional and personal commitment to
addressing bullying.
Content draws upon the latest research findings from the international research
arena. The resources emphasise:
The vital ongoing role of all teachers in addressing and preventing bullying
incidents;
The need to develop a whole-school concerted policy that involves teachers,
students, and parents working together to address and prevent bullying
incidents;
Teaching strategies for reinforcing positive peer relation behaviours that help
students to understand and utilise more frequently socially appropriate
behaviours;
Strategies for teachers and schools to address and reduce different types of
bullying incidents;
The importance of educating different categories of students (bullies, victims,
and bystanders) about effective strategies for preventing and addressing
bullying; and
The importance of creating a whole-school climate of proactive support and
promotion of positive peer relationship behaviours and zero bullying tolerance
and reinforcement.
465
____________________________
Student Activities
Student resources include:

Student manual containing information for students and classroom activities
to be implemented over an 8 week period;
Multi-media resources (student-orientated films, music CD, references to
stories about bullying); and
A student booklet that contains additional information that can be read with
parents at home.
Student activities are designed to assist students to:

Appreciate the rationale for addressing bullying in the primary school context;
Understand the consequences of bullying for bullies, targets, and society;
Self-manage their behaviour to prevent engagement in bullying behaviours;
Acquire positive peer interaction skills to increase positive peer interactions;
Perceive bullying as inappropriate and see bullies as students with problems
rather than as tough guys to reduce peer reinforcement bullies receive from
engaging in bullying behaviours;
Become aware of strategies that can help them to avoid becoming targets of
bullying and help them to assist targets; and
Feel inspired to develop a personal commitment to addressing bullying.
Parent Information
Parent resources include:

Parent powerpoint presentation that can be used to provide parents with an
information session about bullying;
Parent brochure containing information for parents;
A student-orientated film on DVD for parents to watch with children; and
A student booklet that contains additional information that can be read with
parents at home.
Parent information is designed to assist parents to:

Understand the nature and consequences of bullying for bullies, targets, and
society;
Appreciate the need for a whole-school policy on addressing bullying
behaviours, understand the mechanics of the policy, and support the school in
implementing the policy;
Understand some of the myths and facts about bullying;
Help children to manage and control anti-social behaviours;
Help children to perceive bullying as inappropriate;
Help children acquire positive peer interaction skills; and
Genuinely feel inspired to encourage their children to assist the school to
address and prevent bullying behaviours.
Key Elements
466
____________________________
Establishing a Concerted School Policy
The Beyond Bullying: Primary School Program is based upon the development of
a proactive whole-school policy (see Figure 3.2) which includes the need to:
Establish a whole-school approach to address and prevent bullying;
Develop a clear procedure for managing bullying incidents;
Educate students about positive peer relationship skills, behavioural self-
management skills, target avoidance and assistance skills, and the
consequences of bullying; and
Inform parents about the rationale and nature of the school policy and foster
their involvement and support.
Implementing a Whole-School Teacher Intervention
At the heart of the Beyond Bullying: Primary School Program is a whole-school

teacher intervention. Teachers make the difference. The teacher intervention
involves teachers:
Reinforcing positive peer interactions;
Proactively addressing bullying behaviours;
Developing and implementing curriculum activities that genuinely educate
students to address bullying; and
Implementing a series of student activities over an 8 week period to create a
highly visible anti-bullying Program and actively engage students in
promoting a positive school climate with zero reinforcement and tolerance of
bullying behaviours.
Educating Students
Students play a crucial role in the Beyond Bullying: Primary Program. Students
need to be actively engaged in creating and shaping a positive school-
environment. This can be achieved by teaching students:
Bullying is not tolerated in the school;
The nature and consequences of bullying;
Self-control strategies;
Target avoidance skills, resilience, and target assistance;
Positive peer interaction skills;
To avoid reinforcing bullying behaviours;
Where they can seek assistance; and
To constantly promote a positive school climate.
The Beyond Bullying: Primary Program contains example student activities for
raising awareness of the issues and teaching students positive self-management
skills.
Parental Support
467
____________________________
Parental support is crucial. Parents need to be informed about:

The nature and consequences of bullying for targets, bullies, and society;
The rationale for addressing bullying;
The school policy for managing bullying incidents; and
How they can assist their child to support the school policy.
Expected Outcomes
Outcomes include being able to establish safer school communities where

children:
Can feel safe and secure;

Are able to learn in an educational environment free of bullying;
Can feel that they belong to their school; and
Know that their peers and school will actively intervene in bullying.
Students will also build their repertoire of knowledge and skills about how to
address bullying. As an outcome to completing the 8 week program, students will
be able to develop knowledge and skills to empower them to:
Understand and identify the nature of bullying, the different forms bullying
takes, the differences between bullying and teasing; the causes of bullying,
and the short-term and long-term consequences of bullying for bullies,
targets, schools, and communities;
Understand and develop a commitment to implementing their schools anti-
bullying policy;
Rebut misconceptions and stereotypes about bullying and understand the
facts;
Explore methods and develop skills for developing pro-social behaviours
and preventing bullying in a safe environment; and
Effectively intervene to stop school bullying by assisting bullies to change
their behaviour, assisting targets, ensuring bystanders do not support
bullying, and telling others about bullying to put a stop to it;
468
____________________________
Theoretical
Framework
Genuine
Commitment
Whole-School
Approach
Measures and
Analysis
School Climate Whos

involved?
Anti-Bullying Safe Teachers Students Family

Policy Environment
Integrate into Classroom Implement Peers Individual Education

Curriculum Management Curriculum
Reinforce Manage Bullying Classroom Situational Reinforcement Cognitive- Educating Bullies, Support
Positive Peer Behaviours Behavioural Targets,
Victims and
Policy Training Bystanders
Relations Training
Targeted Curriculum Involvement

Curriculum Perspective
Figure 3.2: Beyond Bullying: Primary Program

*Adapted from Beyond Bullying: Secondary School model (Craven & Parada, 2002).
469
____________________________
The Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program is underpinned by a whole-school

ecological model including: the community, school, classroom, family, and
student levels (Figure 3.3). These range from the macro (most broad influence on
individual) to the micro (most influential on individual) levels of influence. Our
resources are aimed to impact at all these levels. For example:
Community Level
The potential for increased community and cultural involvement are designed to
impact at the community level;
School Level
School policy development and implementation is designed to impact at the
school level and on the school ethos to initiate change;
Classroom Level
Classroom activities, behaviour management, self-concept enhancement, and the
enhancement of peer relations are designed to impact at the classroom level;
Family Level
Resources for family support are designed to impact at the family level; and
Student Level
Self-concept enhancement, behaviour correction as well as intervention at the
individual level are designed to impact at the student level.
Figure 3.3: Intervention Levels of Impact
470
____________________________
Successful Implementation
The Beyond Bullying Framework is built on 5 key steps to preventing bullying (as
outlined in Figure 3.4).
Step 1: Making Plans
The first stage sets the pace for the intervention. This begins with teachers making
a commitment to decrease bullying and implement the Beyond Bullying
intervention actively within their school. Data is collected and analysed for each
school before the intervention to ascertain the nature of bullying within each
school to inform school policy development. Teachers attend a one day in-service.
Step 2: School Policy Development
A school policy is developed. School behaviour management plans are revised

and amended according to new school anti-bullying policy. The new school bully
policy is formally integrated into classroom activities and launched around the
school (with information distributed to parents about the policy via school
newsletters etc).
Step 3: Intervention Implementation
The intervention is implemented. Children complete activities over an 8 week

period. A parent information evening is held. A parent brochure, a booklet about
bullying and a child-orientated film for parents and children to share are
distributed. Teachers actively implement the schools policy in relation to
behaviour management and reinforcing positive self-concept and pro-social
behaviour. The implementation of the intervention is evaluated by collecting and
analysing data.
Step 4: Sustaining
Schools continue to apply strategies to creating a more consistent school ethos to

decrease bullying by continuing to implement the school policy, and educating
new staff, students, and parents of the schools anti-bullying policy and strategies.
Data are collected to evaluate the long-term impact of the intervention.
Step 5: Attaining and Sustaining Positive School Climate
A more positive school climate with zero tolerance for bullying is achieved and
sustained.
471
____________________________
STEP 1. Adoption of the Beyond Bullying Program
STEP 2. Specialised Beyond Bullying Training
STEP 3. Adoption of the Whole School Policy
STEP 4. SYSTEM ROLES
ACTIVE TEACHER PARENT

STUDENT ACTION
ROLE PARTICIPATION
Enhance Peer Relations Support child and Educating Students

and Self-Concept school
Manage Bullying Attend Information Increasing Targets

Behaviours Evening Resilience
Curriculum Activities Communicate Educating By-standers

successfully with school Not to Reinforce Bullies
Manage with families Use Resources Increasing Self-control
Exercise Personal Share resources with Empower students to

Coping Strategies child Tell
STEP 5. Positive school climate with

zero reinforcement and tolerance of bullying
Figure 3.4: Key elements to the Beyond Bullying Intervention*

*Developed by Craven & Parada (2002) as part of the Secondary Schools Bullying Project. Reprinted with
permission from Craven and Parada, 2007. Modified in collaboration with CEO.
472
____________________________
Keys to Success
The key factors to a successful and sustainable whole-school Beyond Bullying

program rests upon:
Creation and implementation of a whole-school anti-bullying school policy

that parents are informed about and genuine partners in implementing and
school dedicate an ongoing commitment to implement the policy actively;
Proactive, vigilant, and committed teachers that address all bullying
issues seriously within the classroom, school, and playground; actively
manage student behaviour; and simultaneously reinforce prosocial
behaviours;
Student education, empowerment, and action to have the knowledge,
skills, and attitudes to be committed to positively address and prevent
bullying;
A school climate which fosters support, empowerment, and the promotion
and reinforcement of pro-social behaviours, positive self-concepts, and
positive peer relationships, and zero reinforcement and tolerance of bullying
behaviours; and
Encouragement of parental support of students and the wider school
community, with an aim towards parental participation.
Summary
Schools are equipped to provide a supportive environment that helps

children manage their behaviours as well as learn new behaviours
during peer interaction
Baldry 2003
The Beyond Bullying: Primary Program resources are based on a whole-school

approach to addressing bullying such that teachers, parents, and students all have
vital roles in the implementation of the Program. A fundamental key to the
Programs success is the ongoing commitment of schools to vigilantly implement
the policy and establish and maintain a highly visible positive school climate that
promotes positive peer interactions and zero reinforcement and tolerance of
bullying behaviours. An effective whole-school anti-bullying approach creates a
school-wide anti-bullying policy and educates teachers, students, and parents on
all aspects of addressing and preventing bullying.
473
Chapter 4: School Policy A Precondition
____________________________
474
____________________________
Students have the right to feel safe and

supported during attendance at school. The
creation of a positive school climate can
ensure this requirement is met. The first step
in building a positive school climate starts with
the development of an active school policy
which is reinforced as well as modelled by
teachers and staff within the school. As an
outcome to this:
Parents and caregivers in such schools feel

part of a school community that is respectful,
cooperative and inclusive. Parents are more
likely to work in partnership with the school
when issues of bullying arise and will support
the school in its attempts to reduce such
unacceptable behaviours.
www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/bullying/parent/backgr
ound.htm
This chapter outlines (a) what constitutes a

school policy; (b) how the school policy can be
developed with participation at all school
levels; and (c) how to effectively implement
and integrate the policy within your school.
475
____________________________
CHAPTER 4
SCHOOL POLICY:
A Precondition to Effective Implementation
The Importance of School Policy
The importance of a well devised school policy developed by all members of the
school cannot be understated. A well planned school policy makes integration into
the classroom more effective, more receptive to students, more accessible to
parents, and more open for teachers to use. Using step by step instructions,
creating a well planned and effective school policy for any school can be
straightforwardly achieved. A number of education authorities have also
developed guidelines for developing school policy (see Table 4.1).
Table 4.1: Catholic Education, Parramatta Diocese guidelines for School Policy
(www.parra.catholic.edu.au/bullying)
Anti-bullying policy for students
A policy document for use by schools in conjunction
with the Catholic Education Office Anti-Bullying website
www.parra.catholic.edu.au/bullying
Date July 2005
Contact Person Senior Professional Officer, Policy, Planning and

Equity, Catholic Education Office. Phone: 9840 5600
Review date The use of the policy will be monitored during 2005 and
reviewed in 2006
Distribution Systemic Catholic schools, Diocese of Parramatta
Related system policies, documents and procedures
Procedures to be followed in the Suspension and Expulsion of Students from

Catholic Schools (1996; in revision, 2005)
Anti-racism Policy Statement and Support Materials (1998)
Managing a Safe School Environment Legislative Changes (2003)
476
____________________________
Maintaining Right Relations (2003)

Protective Practices for School Staff in their Relationships with Students (2004)
Child Protection Kit (2004)
Approaches to Student Management-A System Framework (working draft, 2005)
Anti-Bullying website (2005) (www.parra.catholic.edu.au/bullying)
1. Introduction
The Catholic education system in the Diocese of Parramatta is committed to developing an
educational and organisational culture based on mutual trust and respect that assists people
to recognise and develop their personal capabilities. Any type of bullying in Catholic
schools is contrary to Gospel values and the systems
Vision Statement: Catholic Schools in the Diocese of Parramatta (1999). These values and
principles are outlined in the following statements:
To be inviting, inclusive and just is to ensure that we work to promote the common good in
our schools, the system as a whole, and the wider society. We will be inviting, inclusive
and just by:
embracing the diversity of people and cultures
promoting collaborative practice
encouraging staff to strive for growth
providing staff with access to appropriate, growth-promoting development
opportunities
All children and young people have a right to an education that is free from discrimination,
harassment and bullying. Students who are the targets of persistent bullying can suffer
long-term psychological, social and developmental damage that can continue into their
adult years.
Violence, bullying and harassment affect everyone, not just the targets of bullies and the
perpetrators themselves. It also affects those who witness the violence and aggression that
is often associated with bullying and the distress and powerlessness of the victim or
victims. Bullying behaviours can have a profound long-term effect on the culture of a
school.
Staff in the Catholic education system in the Diocese of Parramatta are committed to
developing and implementing policies, procedures and practices that protect students from
bullying behaviours and creating educational communities that are proactive in the
promotion of positive behaviours by all students.
This policy document is linked to the systems Maintaining Right Relations (2003) policy.
2. Definition
Bullying is repeated psychological or physical oppression of a less powerful person or
group of persons by a more powerful person or group of persons (Rigby, 1996) that creates
a risk to mental and physical health and safety. Bullying is ongoing in nature and the bully
is encouraged by anothers pain, distress, fear and humiliation. Bullying may manifest
477
____________________________
itself in the form of emotional, social, verbal and/or physical incidents, all of which will
cause distress. Examples of bullying include:
Physical: hitting; pushing; tripping; kicking; spitting on others
Verbal: teasing; using offensive names; yelling or screaming abuse; constant
criticism of a person; inappropriate comments about a persons appearance
Non-verbal: writing offensive notes, in any medium; graffiti about others; rude
Gestures
Psychological: spreading rumours; hiding or damaging possessions; inappropriate
use of information technologies, such as using email, websites or text messaging to
hurt others; using the internet or mobile phones to spread rumours or
misinformation; unauthorised use of camera phones to cause harm to others
Social-Emotional: deliberately excluding others from a group; refusing to sit next
to someone; overtly encouraging other people to actively ignore or avoid a person
Extortion: threatening to take someones possession, food or money Property:
stealing, hiding, damaging or destroying property
3. The impact of bullying
Bullying behaviour stops an individual from feeling comfortable in a schools shared

environment. Bullying behaviour can also adversely affect the long-term emotional and
social development of the bully. Bullying impacts on the school community as a whole.
Individual students who are bullied may:
begin to feel worthless and develop poor self-esteem and self-worth
experience feelings of isolation and distress in the school environment
feel scared and anxious about their personal safety
develop emotional and/or psychological problems
develop long-term problems in establishing friendships and social connections with
their peers
develop learning and academic delay or difficulties
become angry and resentful as a result of their ongoing distress and social isolation
A bullying culture in a school may result in:

the development of a school atmosphere of distrust and fear
an increase in the number and severity of violent and aggressive acts by students
the development of a frustrated and resentful parent community
an increase in feelings of powerlessness by significant numbers of students,
teachers and parents
4. School responsibilities
It is the responsibility of the school principal to ensure specific policies, procedures and
curriculum measures are established and implemented in the school to develop and
maintain a culture of care in which bullying behaviour is not accepted under any
circumstances.
478
____________________________
Bullying in the school environment also has legal ramifications for principals, teachers,
students and parents. School authorities have a duty of care towards students and staff and
that means taking all reasonable measures to ensure that the school is a safe place for
students and staff. Apart from the common law duty of care, there exists a general
framework of State and Commonwealth civil legislation that applies to bullying. As a
result, the school authority is responsible for ensuring that schools are safe learning and
work environments for students and staff, free from victimisation, harassment, unlawful
discrimination, vilification, abuse or any other threats to the health and safety of the
schools occupants.
Procedures to manage any incidents that may arise from bullying are also the responsibility
of the principal and school staff and need to be addressed in specific school protocols. The
principal should ensure that the school community is made aware of these policies and
procedures. It is the responsibility of the Catholic Education Office to provide appropriate
system support and direction to school principals and staff so that they can establish safe
and protective school environments for all students.
4.1 Preventative strategies

In schools and educational settings those responsible will work towards preventing
bullying through a range of strategies that may include:
the development and monitoring of the school culture to ensure it is based on
mutual trust and respect
the development and implementation of specific policies and procedures that are
appropriate to the developmental stages of students
the provision of specific educational programs and resources
training programs and professional development for members of the school
community
regular monitoring and evaluation of the schools anti-bullying policies and
procedures
school-based activities where the value of the individual is affirmed and personal
qualities such as compassion, kindness, respect and tolerance are fostered and
modelled by staff and students
opportunities for cross-school student leadership and involvement, such as peer
support and student representative processes
the promotion and implementation of values-based curriculum options
the provision of PD/H/PE syllabus coverage to ensure the teaching of all essential
learn about and learn to units of work that may relate to bullying behaviours
school-based programs and activities that promote the skills of communicating,
decision-making, interacting, planning and problem-solving for students
4.2 Addressing specific instances of bullying

Schools will have established policy and procedure documentation about managing
bullying incidents. These will be published and promoted within the school community.
Policy and procedure documentation about bullying incidents should include:
the schools procedures for dealing with bullying behaviour
the timeframe for responding to instances of bullying
the staff responsible for the various stages of the schools response to bullying
Should an instance of specific bullying occur, schools will implement their procedures
in a timely manner.
479
____________________________
4.3 School documentation

Documentation gathered in the schools response to specific instances of bullying will
indicate:
what was allegedly said and done to the complainant
the date, time and the place when the incident(s) occurred
any witnesses to the incident
the reaction (if any) of the complainant
whether the complainant had experienced that treatment before (if yes, a staff
member should establish if it was from the same student or students)
notification of the incident to the parents of those students involved in the incident
follow-up action, in conjunction with the relevant staff member and student
4.4 Follow-up action by the school

Follow-up action by schools will ensure:
resolution of the problem in an amicable and impartial manner
advice to the complainants that they may take the matter further if they are not
satisfied with the way that the school handled their complaint
monitoring of the situation
appropriate feedback to parents of students involved
4.5 More serious matters

Persistent incidents of bullying that interfere with the safety and well-being of other
students need to be reviewed in the context of other relevant diocesan student
welfare policies, and appropriate action taken.
The Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 places a
mandatory obligation on principals, or their delegates, teachers and other staff to
make a report to the Department of Community Services if current concerns exist
for the safety of a child or a young person.
4.6 Procedural fairness

Schools will ensure that procedural fairness applies in dealing with any incidents of
bullying. Appropriate and timely support, management and resolution of reported incidents
of bullying will be offered to all persons involved in these incidents.
4.7 A checklist for schools

The following checklist may be helpful for schools when establishing and implementing
measures to deal with bullying behaviour:
the school has established and promoted procedures to deal with bullying
behaviours
staff are aware of their roles and responsibilities in relation to responding to
incidents of bullying
the school provides regular professional development for all staff members and
students about the implications of bullying
the school maintains confidentiality when dealing with complaints of bullying
behaviour
parents of students involved in bullying incidents are given appropriate feedback
480
____________________________
the school has implemented procedures for the reporting and documentation of
instances of bullying
the school has in place procedures for monitoring and evaluating its range of
responses for dealing with bullying behaviour
the procedures for dealing with bullying behaviour are consistent and compatible
with other student management and welfare policies and procedures
the school has developed a restorative and rehabilitation plan for both the
perpetrator(s) and victim(s) of bullying behaviour
5. What parents can do
Schools in the Diocese of Parramatta will work to maintain ongoing partnerships with parents
and parishes in the prevention and appropriate response to bullying behaviours. Parents can
refer to the Catholic Education Offices Anti-Bullying website for specific strategies in dealing
with bullying behaviours. Parents can also:
communicate any concerns about bullying with the school
let their child know that bullying in any form is never acceptable
help their child develop skills to appropriately deal with bullying
develop their childs self-esteem about other aspects of their life
Can talk about the feelings they may have

www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/bullying/parent/background.htm
Can talk about feelings/ behaviours they may witness in their child
6. Further options
In instances when parents feel that the school is not addressing their concerns in an appropriate
and timely manner, they may wish to seek the assistance of the Area Administrator responsible
for the school. Area Administrators can be contacted at the Catholic Education Office.
7. Catholic Education Office support
The Catholic Education Office will support schools in implementing this policy by:
ensuring all staff, students and parents have access to a copy of this policy and other
relevant resources
providing a website and other resources, accessible to all members of the school community,
focusing on different aspects of bullying
supporting individual schools in developing their own procedures and strategies in
addressing bullying
Signed:
Dr Anne Benjamin
Executive Director of Schools
Diocese of Parramatta
481
____________________________
What is a Strong School Bully Policy?
What to Include
The school bully policy forms the basis of the conduct of student behaviour
among peers and at school. Developing a school policy is the most important first
step which forms the basis of transforming the school climate into a more positive
and safe environment for all students.
There are a number of important points to include in a school bully policy. These
include:
A definition of bullying;
How bullying affects students and the wider school community;
How the school is responsible for preventing bullying;
Clear plain English statements on what the school will do in response to
incidents of bullying (e.g., the timeframe for responding to instances of
bullying, the staff responsible for the various stages of the schools
response);
How the school will follow through with the procedures;
The role of students and bystanders in preventing bullying; and
What parents can do to prevent bullying.
An Example School Policy (developed by Craven, & Parada, 2002 as part of the
Secondary Schools Bullying Project)
Purpose
X Primary School actively seeks to provide students with a stimulating learning

environment that is safe. It is a fundamental right of everyone in our school community
to feel safe. It is the right of everyone to be able to come to our school each day without
fear of being intimidated, humiliated or threatened verbally or physically with harm.
Bullying denies this right to members of our school community and as such bullying is
not accepted in our school.
X Primary School holds the following expectations of all members of our school
community:
We behave, speak and treat one another in respectful ways.
We understand that everyone is different, and we respect

those differences.
We look out for one another, and offer our support when
others need our help.
This policy outlines the responsibilities of all staff and students and how parents can
assist, to ensure that our school is beyond bullying and safe for everyone.
482
____________________________
What Is Bullying?
Bullying is made up of behaviours intended to deliberately hurt, threaten, frighten or

exclude someone by physical and non-physical means over extended periods of time. An
individual or group may direct these behaviours towards another individual or group.

They repeatedly verbally abuse a person or group by calling them unpleasant names,
by writing them nasty notes and/or messages or by using unpleasant gestures.
They repeatedly physically harm a person or group or physically intimidate them by
threatening physical harm or by destroying/taking their belongings without
permission.
They repeatedly encourage their friends or people they know to verbally, physically
threaten a person or group; or ask them to harass, embarrass, ignore or exclude that
person or group from activities.
Bullying may take one, two or all of these forms. Repeatedly means that they do these
things to that person or group the majority of the time they talk about them see them or
spend time around them.
Research has shown that bullying has negative, longterm consequences for all
involved.
Such consequences include:

For victims - constant feelings of rejection, low self-regard, fear, an inability to solve
problems with others in acceptable ways, relationship difficulties, and problems with
achieving full potential academically and socially;
For bullies - an increased risk of criminal behaviour.
As such, bullying behaviours have no place at this school.
Policy Aims
This policy aims to ensure:

Our school is a secure and safe environment free from threat, harassment, and
intimidation;
Teachers, students, and parents are aware of and encouraged to implement positive
strategies to prevent and address school bullying;
Teachers, parents, and students are knowledgeable about the nature, causes and
consequences of bullying and the procedures that have been set in place to address
bullying episodes in this school;
Teachers, parents, and students are committed to collaborate on maintaining a bully-
free environment;
483
____________________________
Students are taught pro-social peer interaction skills, conflict resolution skills, and
are encouraged to and positively reinforced for interacting with members of the
school community in a positive manner; and
Teachers are aware of their role in fostering the knowledge and attitudes which will
be required to achieve the above aims.
Guidelines for Addressing Bullying
This school will address all bullying acts in a serious manner. Those who carry out
bullying will be given every opportunity to change their behaviour and reflect on the
consequences of their actions on others and choose more acceptable ways of behaving.
Everyone in our school will play a part in reducing and preventing bullying.
Staff Responsibilities
Staff of x Primary School will endeavour to:

Model positive relationships in their day to day dealings with members of the school
and model pro-social ways of resolving disputes;
Positively reinforce students for behaving in an appropriate pro-social manner;
Be knowledgeable about and educate students about the nature, causes, and
Be familiar with our schools behaviour code and management system, including the
contents of this policy;
Respond immediately, decisively, and consistently to cases of bullying brought to
their attention by students, parents and/or colleagues;
Respond to early signs of distress in students. These early signs can include an
unusual lack of concentration or inappropriate behaviours such as aggressive
behaviour outbursts and poor class or school attendance;
Seek advice and support from colleagues when unsure as to how to respond to and
address specific bullying incidents; and
Encourage students to report situations of bullying by: listening carefully and
avoiding giving judgements when reports are made, and remaining calm and
understanding of the students/parents/colleagues concern.
Student Responsibilities
A strong anti-bullying stance by students contributes in a major way to making the

school a safe place. For this reason our school expects all students to:
Contribute to a safe learning environment by being respectful of others;
Positively interact with members of the school community in their day to day
dealings and resolve disputes in pro-social ways;
Be knowledgeable about the nature, causes and consequences of bullying, strategies
484
____________________________
for preventing and addressing bullying, and the procedures that have been set in place
to address bullying episodes in this school;
Be aware that bullies rely on other people not to do or say anything to anyone about
their behaviour towards others so it is important to address bullying by offering to
help the target of the bully, or being vocal or ignoring bullies to show disapproval of
bullying, and reporting bullying incidents to teachers;
Watch for early signs of distress in other students such as temper outbursts,
absenteeism, or crying without apparent reason and seek support and advice to help
them; and
Reporting all bullying incidents to a trusted adult so that all incidents of bullying can
be addressed seriously.
Parent Assistance
Bullying can best be dealt with a community approach this is why our school
encourages parents to:
Be knowledgeable about the nature, causes, and consequences of bullying and the
procedures that have been set in place to address bullying episodes in this school;
Encourage children to interact positively with other people in their day to day
dealings and enact pro-social ways of resolving disputes;
Positively reinforce children for behaving in an appropriate pro-social manner;
Inform their children about effective strategies for dealing with bullying (e.g. the
need to inform a teacher and seek assistance if they are experiencing bullying at
school, the importance of not responding aggressively to bullies as this can serve to
intensify aggression);
Watch for warning signs such as: physical injuries, such as bruises; repeatedly losing
possessions; reluctance to go to school or talk about school; altered sleep patterns;
mood swings; changes in personality; few if any friends; lack of interest in life or
unexplained health problems;
Contact their childs teacher as early as possible if they suspect their child is being
bullied or is bullying other children;
Allow the school to investigate and manage the situation and be aware it is not
appropriate for parents to approach alleged bullies or targets; and
Discuss bullying incidents with the school to discuss the strategies the school is using
to address a specific bullying incident and consult with parents as to how they may
be able to assist us to resolve the situation.
School Procedures for Addressing Bullying
Preventing and Addressing Bullying Via a Whole-School Policy
This policy is designed to use a whole-school approach whereby teachers, parents, and
students are actively involved in implementing this policy by working together to address
and prevent bullying.
485
____________________________
The Role of Teachers
Teachers at x primary school will:

Reinforce students positive peer interactions in the classroom, school, and
playground;
Vigilantly monitor and proactively address bullying incidents according to the
schools management procedures;
Develop and implement a sequence of focussed curriculum activities that genuinely
educate students about the nature, causes, and consequences of bullying and
successful strategies for preventing and addressing bullying in the school context;
and
Actively engage students in promoting a positive school climate with zero
reinforcement and tolerance of bullying behaviours.
Parent Education
Parental support is crucial. The school will provide parents with information about:
The rationale for addressing school bullying and foster their involvement and
support;
The nature, causes and consequences of bullying for targets, bullies, bystanders, and
communities;
Successful strategies for encouraging their children to prevent and assist in
addressing bullying in the school context;
Educating Students
Students in our school are actively engaged in creating and shaping a positive school-
environment. This is achieved by educating students about:
The nature, causes, and consequences of bullying;
Target avoidance skills and resilience;
Avoiding reinforcing bullying behaviours;
The importance of reporting bullying incidents to teachers;
Where they can seek assistance;
Strategies they can implement to constantly promote a positive school climate; and
School procedures for addressing suspected bullying incidents.
486
____________________________
Clear Procedures for Managing Bullying Incidents
All suspected bullying incidents will be taken seriously and investigated fully. This
policy includes the following management procedures (see Figure 4.1).
INCIDENT OF BULLYING Provide Behaviour

BROUGHT TO YOUR Correction technique;
ATTENTION Fill out incident report;
individually;
happens;
Provide warning and Inform students;
technique; and YES
IS THIS A 1ST NO
Carry out Behaviour MINOR OFFENCE? Ask students to report back
other
major
offences


parents; and
YES NO Prepare Behaviour
Follow through with PREVIOUS BEHAVIOUR Agreement;
consequences at appropriate CONTRACT? Outline consequences for
step.
breaking agreement;
parents and students; and

Step 2: Thinking Time Lunch + Notify Parents
Step 3: Thinking Time Lunch + Interview NO
WAS THERE A
Parents RESOLUTION?
Step 5: 1 Day Thinking Time + Interview
Parents
Step 6: Interview Parents. Referral to CBS or Praise student for taking control
other professional for educational, behavioural and following through
and emotional assessment to be considered.
Figure 4.1: Behaviour Management Procedures
487
____________________________
Initial Interview Form Number:

Year Grade Class Number
Initial Interview Form
Person undertaking Interview: __________________________

Student (s) Interviewed: ___________________________________________
Witnesses: ______________________________________________________
Brief Description of Incident
When did Incident take place?

st nd
Before school; 1 Break; 2 Break; In class; After School
Date:___/___/___ Time: ____:_____am/pm
Where Did Incident Take Place

Playground; Classroom; Toilets; Bus; Canteen; Other
Please specify:
Who was Directly Involved and what did they do?
Who was Indirectly Involved and what did they do?
Who else may have relevant information?
What form of bullying took place?

Verbal; Physical; Social; Cyber Other
Please specify what happened:
488
____________________________
Have there been any other incidents? If so, how long has this been
happening?
What appears to be the most important contributing factors?
Who has been notified about the problem?
What was the outcome?
Have Strategies been tried before If so, what?
What step in our school policy is this?
Details of new strategy:
REVIEW DATE:
How was this resolved?
489
____________________________
Thinking Time Sheet
This sheet was made so that you can think about what you did, and
what you can do differently next time.
Name:
Year:
Class:
Teachers Name:
What got me here? Describe what happened

Write down what you did and what you have been asked to think about. For example,
my teacher asked me to stop talking and I kept on talking.
What happened after?

Write down what happened after what you did. For example, I was told to stay in during
my break
490
____________________________
Why did you do what you did?

Think about what got you here and why you did what got you here. Think hard and try to
remember what was happening before the event and why you did it.
What were you thinking before?
What were you feeling before?
What was happening around you?
What can you do differently next time?

Think of some other things you can do instead of doing what you did. For example, next
time I can wait till my break to tell my friend something. This way I will be able to spend
my break with my friends instead.
What would happen if you did this instead?
491
____________________________
MAINTAIN/ENHANCE CORRECT/REDIRECT
ESTABLISHING EXPECTATIONS
FEW
FAIR
POSITIVE
PRAISE IN PUBLIC CORRECT IN PRIVATE
INSTRUCTION DELIVERY
DIRECTED DISCUSSION
GET
GAIN ATTENTION
EXPECTATION PROMPT
TO DO PROMPT
PRAISE ON TASK
ADT REDIRECT OFF-TASK

(ATTENTION DURING TASK)
WWD
SDP (What are you doing, What should
(SPECIFIC DESCRIPTIVE PRAISE) you be doing? Do it now, please)
SPECIFY/DESCRIBE
INTERNALISE SHARED CONTROL
MODEL INTERNALISEC
ACCT
ATTENTION
CHOICE/CONSEQUENCE
TIME TO CHOSE
LOGICAL CONSEQUENCE
492
____________________________
How Can School Policy Be Developed and Implemented

Effectively?
The school policy usually taken as a serious matter needs to be right before action
really takes place. It is useful to establish a Policy Development Team that
involves parents, students, teachers, and the Principal to involve all members of
the school community.
Once the policy is developed it is also important to ensure all members of the
school community are aware of it (see Table 4.2). For example, your school might
like to develop some guidelines or rules that sum-up the new policy and
classroom/playground behaviour for students (i.e. we respect each other, we
support one another, we STOP, HELP, and TELL) so they can be communicated
and taught to students in the classroom. You might like to send out newsletters to
parents about your new policy and you might like to include a copy of your
schools policy on the internet.
A follow-up of Primary schools 1 year later did suggest that

keeping the whole-school policy active was important for continuing
positive outcomes.
Smith, Ananiadou and Cowie, 2003
493
____________________________
Table 4.2: Effective methods for distributing policy details

Who Should Know Methods of Informing Group Members
School Executives Meetings or discussion, receive a policy
Teachers Meetings, discussion, receive a policy
School Counsellor Meetings, discussion, receive a policy
Students Class activities, school assemblies, receive a

summary of policy
Parents Newsletters (refer to Attachment 3 for

template), summary of policy, can download
policy from website
Community (i.e. interested Can download policy from website,

youth groups or cultural discussion, or meetings
groups)
Other (any other members of Meetings, discussion, receive a policy

the school community you think
should know about this, i.e.
administrative colleagues, bus
drivers, cleaners)
This step is crucial to transforming the school climate.
Summary
Schools are legally liable to protect children from harassment and discrimination
under the age of 16. To ensure this happens, clear guidelines are developed and
consistently exercised within the school. Specific procedures are set out in the
policy for students, parents, and staff so that all members of the school community
can actively prevent bullying within the school. The development of a policy for
your school in collaboration with all members of the school is the first step in
creating a positive school climate.
494
Chapter 5: Behaviour Management
____________________________
495
____________________________
The teacher - student relationship is one of

continual learning. Teachers have the ability to
influence and change student behaviours and
peer social dynamics inside and outside of the
classroom.
Evidence suggests that when students feel

recognised and appreciated by at least one
adult at school they will be less likely to act out
against the school ethos of non-violence.
Additionally, managing bullying within

classrooms and schools can be stressful,
especially at the beginning. It can tempting to
assume that strategies are not working within
a classroom, and revert back to previous
techniques out of frustration. However,
frustration often occurs due to negative
thoughts which intensify and accelerate when
stress arises.
This chapter provides an overview of easy to

follow and detailed strategies which form the
basis of student behaviour management and
effective coping strategies
(Developed and adapted from Beyond Bullying: Secondary
School Program).
496
____________________________
CHAPTER 5
Behaviour Management
Overview: Two Key Strategies

Teachers spend considerable amounts of direct contact with their students. They
are responsible for the social structure of the class and possess a vital role in
appropriately managing school bullying. The Beyond Bullying Program highlights
2 overarching interacting strategies that teachers can use to change the social
dynamic of their classrooms. These are to simultaneously:
Enhance Self-Concept and Peer Relations amongst students; and
Manage Bullying Behaviours.
In Figure 5.1, the 2 strategies are depicted as overlapping. No single strategy

works independently. For maximum benefit, all strategies work in congruence
with one another. An overview of these strategies is covered in this chapter.
1. Enhance 2. Manage
Self-Concept & Bullying
Peer Relations Behaviours
1. Enhance Self-Concept & Peer Relations: 2. Manage Bullying Behaviours:

Here, the idea is to praise, model, establish The focus on the second system is related to
expectations and provide feedback for transforming the unacceptable behaviours
positive behaviours. The focus is on positive to more prosocial ways of behaving.
behaviours.
Figure 5.1: Two Interacting strategies underlying Beyond Bullying
497
____________________________
Techniques to enhance individual student self-concept and peer relations are

designed to create a positive school and classroom environment. This serves to
reinforce and encourage the use of positive behaviours. To increase prosocial
behaviour among students, teachers are encouraged to use these techniques as part
of their routine classroom management. Consistent and persistent use of these will
create a more supportive environment and empower students to feel good about
themselves when they use prosocial behaviours.
The key factors to effectively enhancing self-concept are to:

Refer to specific positive behaviour. General feedback to students does not
allow students to understand what they are doing correctly. Specific
reference to behaviour on the other hand allows students to use identifiable
behaviours over and over again.
State Behaviour in the Positive. Tell students what you want them to do as
opposed to what not to do. Avoid saying, stop the behaviour (i.e. stop
hitting), and say instead, do behaviour (i.e. keep your hands down).
Praise. Praise, praise, praise. Reinforce prosocial behaviour, even when the
student behaved inappropriately the day before.
Strategies are for all students. These techniques should be used with all
students. All students stand to benefit from these techniques. Students can
not only enhance self-concept here, but may also model these techniques
with their peers, creating a more positive school culture.
Each individual teacher is a fundamental resource for the schools effort to deal
with bullying. Several international and Australian studies have shown, however,
that the great majority of bullying is not reported to teachers or is not noticed by
them. In most schools the playground and classroom are the two places where the
majority of the bullying takes place. Studies that videotaped children playing at
school showed that teachers on playground duty were only aware of 17% of the
playground bullying observed by the researchers. One of the key aspects of any
intervention against bullying is to empower teachers to recognise, and then
effectively intervene in bullying episodes. In this chapter you will learn specific
strategies to encourage positive peer relations in your school and classroom.
Objectives
By the end of Chapter 5, you will be able to:

Establish and maintain clear expectations which will help to reduce the
prevalence of bullying in your school;
Enhance student self-concept via prosocial interactions you will reduce the
need of bullies to bully others and reduce the affect on targets; and
Promote positive peer relations in your school and prevent bullying in your
school by using specific strategies like: Establishing Clear Expectations,
Modelling, paying Attention o Positive Behaviours, and employing Specific
Feedback Techniques to enhance self-concept.
498
____________________________
Enhance Peer Relations and Self-Concept
Enhancing students self-concepts is a vital preventative strategy for all teachers

to employ with all students to foster and sustain an anti-bullying school ethos.
Enhancing self-concept not only helps students to feel good about their abilities to
act in a prosocial way it also serves to reinforce and therefore encourage the
repetition of such behaviours.
Enhancing the self-concept of specific students who engage in less desirable

social behaviours is also an important intervention to utilise in order to train
students to utilise more appropriate behaviours. Enhancing self-concept impacts
directly upon actual behaviour such that enhancing a students peer interaction
self-concept results in reinforcing and therefore increasing the frequency of
desirable prosocial behaviours. Some points to remember about enhancing self-
concept:
The SELF Research Centres research has increasingly led to the conclusion
that targeting general self-concept (or global self-esteem) as an intervention is
not particularly useful;
The Centres research has shown that when specific facets of self-concept are
targeted (e.g. peer relations self-concept) the specific target area can be
enhanced in a relatively short period;
To achieve these results we used special forms of feedback. These strategies

will make sense to you, as all teachers tend to use them. The difference lies in
doing so systematically;
It is important that these strategies be used with all students to ensure all
students prosocial behaviour is continually reinforced to improve repetition of
these behaviours; and
We also ensure students experiencing difficulties acting in a prosocial manner

are given the special feedback regularly to help in enhancing a particular skill.
Exercising strategies to enhance student self-concept will allow

students who bully to find alternative behaviours without bullying,
and allow students who are bullied to feel good about themselves.
Not only will these help students who are directly involved in
bullying, but will allow other students to feel confident within
themselves, and do something to prevent bullying. There are two
strategies which are important to use frequently (internally focused
and attributional feedback) and one strategy for correcting
undesirable behaviour (corrective feedback).
499
____________________________
Self-Concept Enhancement: Internally focused feedback
Internally focused feedback is a technique used to encourage students to build

their own self-concept through self-talk (i.e. I am friendly, I am worthless,
nobody loves me). This technique employs focused feedback to let students
know which specific behaviour they performed was valuable, and how when they
use this behaviour it can make them feel good about themselves.
What makes this technique effective is the combined power of reference to the
specific behaviour, praise for that behaviour, and encouragement to keep using
that prosocial behaviour. Encouragement motivates and empowers students to act
in prosocial ways. Encouragement is the key to transforming praise into
internalisation of those values.
There are 5 steps to integrating Internally focused feedback
effectively (refer to Table 5.1 also):
Step 1: Gain attention. You can gain the student/s attention
by saying their name or moving closer to the student/s;
Step 2: Praise the Specific Behaviour. Let the student know

which specific behaviour they are doing correctly, i.e. You
INTERNALLY
FOCUSED
are working really nicely in a group here. I can see that
FEEDBACK youre all sharing ideas and helping each other out with all
the things you have to get done;
Step 3: Generalise the Behaviour. You can generalise their specific behaviour to
other areas which will allow students to do this also (e.g. knowing how to work
well in a group will help you get along with other students and people in
general);
Step 4: Encourage Internalisation. Teachers model how what has been said to
students should make them feel good about themselves to encourage
internalisation of the praise. (e.g. You should be proud of yourself because you
were able to share ideas and support one another in a group); and
Step 5: Model Internalisation. Modelling to students how they can internalise

their positive behaviours will lead them to use these in reference to themselves
(e.g., I know I would be proud of myself if I were to share and help my group
out).
How to Provide Internally Focused Feedback

Step 1: Gain attention
Step 2: Praise the Specific Behaviour
Step 3: Generalise the Behaviour
Step 4: Encourage Internalisation
Step 5: Model Internalisation
When using Internally Focused Feedback:
500
____________________________
Be clear about what skill you want to enhance (e.g., Coping with a verbal
tease by keeping calm);
Gain the students attention;
Start by praising the student for his/her skill or strategy use (e.g., You are
really not letting Mario get to you, thats because you are ignoring the things
he says and keeping calm);
Encourage generalisation (e.g., Knowing how to keep calm will help you get
along with other students and people in general);
Encourage internalisation (e.g., You should congratulate yourself that you
kept calm despite what was being said); and
Model internalisation (e.g., I know I would feel very pleased with myself if I
had kept calm after all that!).
Table 5.1: Steps to Successfully Implement Internally Focused Feedback
Step
Example Why this is Important
Involved
STEP 1: Say students name or
Gain Attention move closer to the
student.
STEP 2: You are working Research shows that it is important to advise the
Praise the really nicely in a group student what the actual behaviour was that has
Specific here. I can see that attracted the teachers praise to encourage the
Behaviour youre all sharing ideas repetition of such behaviours in the future.
and helping each other
Stating the exact behaviour also ensures that
out with all the things
teachers reinforcement is contingent upon
you have to get done.
performance and therefore credible.
This type of feedback known as performance
feedback has been shown to be more effective
than general praise.
STEP 3: Knowing how to work Generalising the feedback beyond the specific
Generalise the well in a group will behaviour observed ensures that:
Behaviour help you get along with the broader area of self-concept is reinforced;
other students and the broader type of behaviour is valued and
people in general. therefore similar behaviour types might be
repeated; and
that the feedback is not dismissed as isolated
to a one-off behaviour and therefore seen as
not important for future reference.
STEP 4: You should be proud Encouraging students to internalise the feedback
Encourage of yourself because you by feeling good about what they have
Internalisation were able to share ideas accomplished ensures that students are being
and support one another encouraged to internalise and transfer the praise to
in a group. their self-concept.
STEP 5: I know I would be Modelling the internalisation encourages students
Model proud of myself if I to internalise the feedback.
Internalisation were to share and help
my group out.
501
____________________________
Self-Concept Enhancement: Attributional Feedback
Attributional feedback is based on changing what students attribute their successes

and failures to. This approach encourages the specific behaviour to occur again by
paying attention to that behaviour. This empowers students to attribute their
success to specific behaviour. There are three types of attributional feedback:
1. Attribution to ability;
2. Attribution to effort; and
3. Attribution to strategy.
When children do achieve success from legitimate efforts, a

teachers praise and recognition that the success resulted from the
students efforts, even if the task was small, will increase the childs
propensity to be optimistic and to expect success in the next task.
Orpinas & Horne, 2006, p 119
There are 3 steps to using Attributional Feedback effectively (see Table 5.2):
Step 1: Gain attention. You can gain attention by saying their name or moving
closer to the student or group of students;
Step 2: Describe Specific Behaviour. Be specific about which behaviour is

important for enhancement and refer to that specific behaviour (e.g., You are
working really nicely in a group here. I can see that youre sharing ideas and
helping each other out with all the things you have to get done); and
Step 3: Attribute Success. You can do this in three ways:

(1) via ability (e.g., You are certainly able to work well together and support
each other);
(2) via effort (e.g., You worked well together by trying hard to share your ideas
and helping each other out); and
(3) via strategy (e.g., You worked well together as you know the right way to
work as a group).
Start positive, stay positive, end positive.
ATTRIBUTIONAL FEEDBACK
1. Gain Attention
2. Describe Behaviour
3. Attribute Success
502
____________________________
Table 5.2: Steps to Successfully Implement Attributional Feedback
Step Involved Example Why this is Important
STEP 1: Say students name or

Gain Attention move closer to the
student or group of
students.
STEP 2: You are working Research shows that it is important to advise the
Describe really nicely in a student what the actual behaviour was that has
Specific group here. I can see attracted the teachers praise to encourage the
Behaviour that youre sharing repetition of such behaviours in the future.
ideas and helping
Stating the exact behaviour also ensures that
each other out with
teacher reinforcement is contingent upon
all the things you
performance and therefore credible.
have to get done.
This type of feedback known as performance
feedback has been shown to be more effective
than general praise.
STEP 3:
Attribute You are certainly Research shows that:

Success via able to work well High self-concept children naturally attribute
Ability together and support their successes to their ability (i.e. this form
each other of feedback encourages low self-concept
students to emulate a naturally occurring
process capitalised on by high self-concept
students).
Students prefer to be told that they have
ability or are smart or clever at something.
Increases in ability attributions enhance
students self-concept.
OR OR OR
Attribute You worked well Research shows that:

Success via together by trying
Effort feedback whilst not as valued by students
Effort hard to share your
as ability feedback can be seen as more credible
ideas and help each
by students and can encourage further persistence
other out
on tasks.
Using strategy feedback helps students indirectly
see themselves as having ability and strategy
feedback has been found to more effectively
enhance self-concept than effort feedback alone.
OR OR OR
Attribute You worked well Research shows that not all students consider
Success to together as you know ability feedback credible. Strategy feedback is
Strategy the right way to work considered more credible by students and implies
as a group that the students is smart. Hence this form of
feedback is often more valued than effort or
ability feedback alone.
503
____________________________
Self-Concept Enhancement: Corrective Feedback
Corrective Feedback involves correcting inappropriate behaviour. This is achieved

by dealing directly with the unacceptable behaviour which was presented, and
reinforcing appropriate behaviour. Not only does this technique deal with the
situation at hand, Corrective Feedback focuses on protecting the students sense of
self-worth while encouraging the use of positive behaviour.
There are 5 steps to using the behaviour correction technique of Corrective

Feedback to enhance self-concept effectively see Table 5.3):
Step 1: Take Student Aside. Approach student and think about what behaviour
you would like them to be doing, and take them aside;
Step 2: Bring students attention to their behaviour. Let student know which
behaviour was unacceptable and what they were doing (i.e. getting attention), with
specific reference to that behaviour (e.g., it is not ok to make a joke about
someone and embarrass them in-front of other people just to get a laugh out of
everyone);
Step 3: Acknowledge that they have the appropriate skill. Let the student
know that they are competent to behave appropriately in that circumstance (e.g.,
I know you are able to tell good jokes that dont hurt other people);
Step 4: Link appropriate behaviour to using the correct skill. Inform the
student that they will be able to perform a behaviour acceptably if they use the
correct skills. In this way you can attribute success to future behaviour (e.g., You
will be able to make the funniest jokes when you make jokes that are friendly for
everyone; and
Step 5: Follow through with the consequence if the behaviour attracts one
under school policy or is deemed sufficient to warrant such. Let student know
that because they chose the inappropriate behaviour, they will have a
consequence, and inform them of what it is (e.g., because you made a mean joke,
we will now fill out an incident report).
How to Redirect Behaviour

Step 1: Take Student Aside
Step 2: Bring students attention to their behaviour
Step 3: Acknowledge that they have the appropriate skill
Step 4: Link appropriate behaviour to using the correct skill
Step 5: Follow through with the consequence
504
____________________________
Table 5.3: Steps to Successfully Redirect Inappropriate Behaviour
Step Involved Example Why this is Important
STEP 1: Praise in public and correct in private.

Take Student
Aside
STEP 2: It is not okay to Research shows that it is important to advise the

Bring students make a joke about student what the actual behaviour was that was
attention to someone and inappropriate to discourage the repetition of such
their behaviour embarrass them in- behaviours in the future.
front of other people
just to get a laugh out
of everyone.
STEP 3: I know you are able This component reinforces to the child that you
Acknowledge to tell good jokes that are not criticising them personally and you know
that they have dont hurt other that they are capable of the appropriate behaviour.
the appropriate people.
skill
STEP 4: You will be able to Encourages students to try harder to persist in

Link make the funniest implementing the skill at a future date. Focussing
appropriate jokes when you make on using the right strategy depersonalises the
behaviour to jokes that are friendly failure feedback and encourages future behaviour
using the correct for everyone. to be based upon learning and utilising a skill.
skill
STEP 5: Because you made a

Follow through mean joke, we will
with the now fill out an
consequence incident report.
505
____________________________
Techniques to Assist Managing Bullying Behaviours
What to Do When You Suspect a Bullying Incident
You will note from Figure 5.2 that when a student, staff member, or parent
identifies a bullying episode or incident, the first thing to do is to tailor the
response according to the seriousness of the offence. Any act of bullying which
involves physical violence should be handled as per your schools standard
procedures. If a minor first offence has occurred use -strategies such as (Micro-
Techniques, Expectation Discussion, or Redirection) to handle the situation (see
later discussion). If this is a reported bullying incident or the case that is known to
you or others (such as a bully who has been called to attention previously) there
are some steps that you should take. These include:
Investigate the facts. The purpose is to find out what has been happening and
whether this is a bullying episode;
Interview students individually. Dont be tempted to mediate. Interview
student separately as well as any other people (like other students, or parents)
separately;
Make a decision on what needs to be done. Make up your own mind about
what to do. If unclear about the events err on the side of caution;
Inform students of your decision;
Ask students to report to you in two weeks for a review. This is an opportunity
to see whether the way you handled things worked; and
Send an incident report form to the Year Coordinator (see previous chapter).
They can keep track of which students are involved in bullying and whether
anyone else has had a talk to them previously.
If this is a serious offence or the student fails to respond to your attempts to

resolve the issue you should make sure an incident report is completed and refer
that student to the year coordinator. You may also try and seek advice from
members of staff who have specialist knowledge about bullying.
If after trying many or all of the techniques you know to address bullying, you
believe a student (or students) need further help you should consider referring that
student to the appropriate personnel in your school. You should make yourself
familiar with the relevant contingency management procedures and counselling
services to which your school has access.
The second half of the diagram, after the dotted line, shows you what should
happen after you make a referral. Year coordinators or an appointed staff member
will assess what steps to take next depending on the seriousness of the issue and
what has been done before. In the box at the bottom left hand corner you will see a
series of steps. For most incidents of bullying a student will progress in sequential
order through these steps. Thinking Time is a structured lunchtime detention in
which the student is asked to go through a sequence of structured exercises that
eventually become their behaviour agreement. Helping Myself is also a
506
____________________________
structured exercise or other activity undertaken during a whole-day in-school

suspension.

individually;
happens;
technique; and YES
IS THIS A 1ST NO
other
major
offences


parents; and
step.
breaking agreement;

Step 3: Thinking Time Lunch + Interview NO WAS THERE A
Parents RESOLUTION?
Step 5: 1 Day Thinking Time + Interview Parents
Step 6: Interview Parents. Referral to MEC or
other professional for educational, behavioural Praise student for taking control
and emotional assessment to be considered. and following through
Figure 5.2: Behaviour Management Procedures
507
____________________________


Witnesses: ______________________________________________________

st nd
Date:___/___/___ Time: ____:_____am/pm

Please specify:

508
____________________________
happening?
REVIEW DATE:
509
____________________________
Thinking Time Sheet
Name:
Year:
Class:
Teachers Name:


my break
510
____________________________


511
____________________________
FEW
FAIR
POSITIVE
DIRECTED DISCUSSION
GET
GAIN ATTENTION
EXPECTATION PROMPT
TO DO PROMPT
PRAISE ON TASK

WWD
SPECIFY/DESCRIBE
MODEL INTERNALISEC
ACCT
ATTENTION
CHOICE/CONSEQUENCE
TIME TO CHOSE
LOGICAL CONSEQUENCE
512
____________________________
Establish Clear Expectations
It is very important that students know what the expectations are for their
interpersonal behaviour at school. As part of the Beyond Bullying Program, a set
of core expectations for school behaviour is reinforced in the classroom via
presentation of expectations (i.e. hung on wall), and discussed. This technique can
be used every now and again. This technique requires time and planning, but can
be very effective in increasing student capacity to use prosocial behaviours and to
actively prevent bullying as bystanders. It is important that these expectations are
discussed with students, and that a clear understanding of what the expectations
mean for all students are also discussed in class.
1. CLEAR
EXPECTATIONS
We
WeRespect
STOP Were going to
We Help
talk about
We HELP something really
Others
We TELL
important today.
We Get Help
To bring the new school policy into effect, the new school policy should be
introduced and maintained within the classroom environment. To effectively
establish expectations for student behaviour, 3 5
expectations or rules governing student behaviour are chosen, 1. CLEAR
introduced and maintained within the classroom. Some classes We

EXPECTATIONS
WeRespect
STOP
or schools may already have existing expectations. WeHELP
We Help
Expectations should be simple to remember, read and Others
We TELL
We Get Help
understand. For example, these core expectations may
include:
We STOP
We HELP
We TELL
513
____________________________
It is important that you take some time to discuss these expectations with your
students. Establishing clear expectations has many advantages. For example, we
all need to know from time to time where the boundaries lie and when to draw the
line for certain behaviours. Having expectations drawn up for everyone to see,
reduces the likelihood that a student will take your reprimands personally.
Consider the following scenario:
Joseph is verbally teasing Sally. Mr Barbuto, who is teaching the class at the time,
tries to get Joseph to swap to a more appropriate behaviour.
Mr B: Getting close to Joseph. Joseph what are the expectations about treating one
another
J: Raising his voice. You are always on my back.
Mr B: Calmly. This has nothing to do with me being on your back. Pointing to the
expectations on the wall. Here is what we all have to do, so dont take it personal. Now
what are you going to do?
J: Ill treat Sally with respect.
Mr B: Thank you.
In this scenario, Mr Barbuto was able to diffuse the situation and get Joseph to
swap to amore acceptable behaviour by pointing out to him that his calling him to
attention had nothing to do with how he felt about him personally. It all had to do
with the schools expectations.
Modelling
One of the processes whereby students learn to relate to their peers is to observe
others interacting. Students learn by modelling what they have observed. For
some students, teachers represent the only positive adult role-models which they
can learn from.
The students around you are closely observing the way you solve any
interpersonal difficulties and how you react to bullying. Because students do not
know you personally and have only limited access to you as a whole, they base
their impressions about how you are
all the time on the few glimpses they Ok, lets work out
observe at school. As the authority how we can solve
this together.
figure, your behaviour are then
interpreted as the right thing to do. Maybe we should
try what theyre
doing?
Teachers can model prosocial STAFF STAFF

behaviour on many domains including,
conflict resolution, managing student STUDENT STUDENT
misbehaviour, encouraging and

empowering students, motivating
students and other teachers, and
initiating events. The entire school day
is filled with opportunities where
students learn from teachers and model
their behaviour. How a teacher handles
themselves in any manner is a potential for students modelling that behaviour.
514
____________________________
Attention to Positive Behaviours
Negative behaviours, emotions and cognitions are remembered or spring to mind

quicker and with more intensity than positive ones. When a focus on bullying
arises, negative behaviours are sought and dealt with, however, the numerous
occurrences of positive behaviours are often overlooked. Paying attention to
positive behaviours can have equally motivating and transforming consequences
as behaviour correction which seeks to deal with the unacceptable behaviours.
Paying attention to positive behaviours can increase the use of these positive
behaviours and the value students place on them.
Many students engage in aggressive behaviours to gain attention from you and
other students. If they learn that they can gain attention through more prosocial
behaviours they are less likely to be aggressive. You can give attention to positive
behaviours in many ways, for example, by using discrete gestures, words and non-
specific phrases. Giving attention to positive behaviours can come in many forms,
i.e. praise and encouragement, signals like a smile or nod, and asking them to
distribute notes or work.
How to Pay Attention to Positive Behaviour
Look out for positive behaviour, gestures, discussion, interactions & conflict
resolution styles;
Use general comments or small non-threatening gestures to let students know
they have your attention;
Look for those that occur naturally;
Make attending to positive behaviour a part of your everyday teaching routine;
Give a student attention for positive behaviour, even if they used unacceptable
forms of behaviour that day or previously; and
Remind yourself with a personal cue to pay attention to positive behaviour.
STAFF
Figure 5.2: Modelling prosocial skills

Descriptive Feedback
515
____________________________
Descriptive Feedback is a more structured form of paying attention to positive

behaviours. It can be used with individual students and the class as a whole.
Descriptive Feedback is a short and specific form of verbal comment used when
you want to give the student feedback about something he/she has done well. It is
based on the premise that students are more likely to behave in a particular way
again, if you tell them that what they did was good.
When using Descriptive Feedback:

Gain the student/group/class attention;
Be clear and specific;
Describe/label the behaviour you like;
Be enthusiastic; and
Start positive, end positive. Stay positive, avoid reminding thestudent of
previous failures.
The Steps to Descriptive Feedback:
Step 1: Gain Attention

Step 2: Describe Prosocial Behaviour
Step 3: Praise Behaviour
ForExample:
For compliance
Mark Gain Attention
You did what I asked straight away Describe Behaviour
Thank you for doing what I asked Praise Behaviour
More examples:
For good communication

Judy, you were very polite to Sandip, well done
For independent problem solving

Pho, you worked out the problem you had with Samuel without getting upset,
that was great!
Notes:
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
516
____________________________
Structured Educational Conversations
Education is vital to empowering

students to make real change. If
students know what potential
consequences of bullying exist, what it Were going to
really is, how they play a role in the talk about
development of bullying, how it is something really
misunderstood and what they can do to important today.
stop it, can empower students to do
something about it.
Structured Educational Conversation

can be used effectively to alert
students to what bullying is and how
to stop it.
Structured Educational Conversations

are planned discussions with the aim
to introduce specific educational
outcomes. These discussions differ to
normal lessons in that they are student
focused. Teachers prepare the
discussion by choosing specific
questions which the student/s are
expected to respond to.
The role of the teacher is only to

provide a safe environment for the
conversation and to provide structure
by keeping the conversation focused
on the aims. For this reason, minimal
prompts are used by the teacher and
the student (or students), are asked for the most part to suggest responses based on
their understanding of the subject.
Any corrections made are only made when the student clearly does not know, or
the group fails to provide an answer that is close to the aims. Students share ideas
and discuss important issues in a safe environment, under the guidance of the
teacher. This can be achieved on an individual, small group or class level.
Students enjoy discussing topics, particularly those which affect them, or which
are important in their world. Introducing the class to discussions about bullying
will allow students to share their experiences in a safe environment and send a
clear message that the school is actively seeking to prevent bullying.
517
____________________________
How to conduct Structured Educational Conversation:
Plan your lesson with goals for discussion, questions and prompts to
initiate deeper conversation (refer to Chapter 8: Activities and Resources
for example);
Earlier in the day or the day before, let students know that you will be
discussing the topic.
Establish simple expectations for behaviour (i.e. only talk when a

specific object - book - is given to you, respect each others opinions,
raise your hand if you would like to give your opinion);
Explain why you would like to discuss the topic;
Begin with a stimulus (i.e. picture of bullying and non-bullying

situation) from which to initiate discussion;
Mediate the discussion by maintaining a safe and bully-free environment

(i.e. provide positive reinforcement, praise and encouragement for
comments, ask questions, ask students to elaborate I didnt know that
before, can you tell us more about that, allow students to respond to
each others questions);
Intervenes when students are genuinely unsure or the group cannot find
an answer to appropriately answer the question;
Brings discussion back to focus of topic and change topics when no new
ideas are discussed;
Keep track of the time; and
Finish on a positive note and thank students for sharing their thoughts
and experiences.
Maintaining Focus
When you attempt to correct a students behaviour, they may resist, ignore your
request, or talk back to you. Students may use tactics to divert your attention away
from their previous behaviour and try to get away with the behaviour. These are
known as Sidetracking Tactics (refer to Table 5.4) and can be overcome by
helping to maintain focus on the issue. Using two simple maintaining focus
techniques may result in yourself and the student becoming engaged in a power
struggle. At this point it is a good idea to use your coping strategies to maintain
focus and follow through on their behaviour. The two techniques are:
Broken Record Technique
Refocus
518
____________________________
Maintaining Focus 1: Broken Record Technique

This technique requires you to ignore the new behaviour and repeat instruction in
regards to the behaviour that got your attention. Maintain the instruction in a calm,
consistent and strong (non-hesitant) voice to avoid a power struggle between
yourself and the student. The student may raise their voice in frustration, however,
it is not necessary for you to do so. You may need to reply with repeated
instructions more than once.
Maintaining Focus 2: Refocus

Sometimes a student may laugh, make a joke to acquire peer support, ask
questions, tell you they will do what you say after something happens, or any
other behaviour to sidetrack. Here you can let them know what they are doing,
that it is getting both of you sidetracked, and refocus with the instruction repeated.
These are all positive strategies with the aim to defuse and reduce
the likelihood of an escalation or power struggle between yourself
and the student. They are positive strategies which keep you focused
on the behaviour that initially caught your attention.
Staying focused is a form of asserting your authority without

intimidation. Using these strategies will show the student that you
are under control and that their tactics to sidetrack you will not
work.
519
____________________________
Table 5.4: Sidetracking tactics used by students
520
____________________________
Micro-techniques
Micro-techniques help to prevent bullying from happening with intervention
occurring during the pre-bullying behaviours. For example, you notice that a
behaviour may intensify into bullying (i.e. peer conflict). Here, quick and
effective techniques can be used to stop bullying happening before it takes place.
This is a form of pre-correction. That is, correcting the behaviour before the
unacceptable behaviour occurs. 5 techniques can be employed to pre-correct
behaviour:
Vicinity;
Inclusion;
Secret Signal;
Private Choice; and
Adjacent student.
Micro-technique 1: Vicinity
Vicinity refers to the actual space between teacher and student. When an
unacceptable behaviour is seen, the teacher works to locate themselves closer to
the student so that the student knows you are supervising them. This can be used
in the classroom during lessons and consists of walking over to the student and
standing next to them.
Micro-technique 2: Inclusion
Inclusion involves letting the student have responsibility and keeping them
occupied. You can say the students name in a positive manner, i.e. Lachlan,
come over here, I have a special job just for you.
Micro-technique 3: Secret Signal
Secret signals are used to guide students back to their work or to more acceptable
behaviour. You can work out secret signals with students before they are used.
This can be as simple as tapping an exercise book they are meant to be working
in, to pointing to the side of your head to signal to the student to think about what
they are doing.
Micro-technique 4: Private Choice
Private Choice refers to giving students a private choice of what to do. This is
much like Shared Control except is used more frequently in the classroom and
identifies with the student why they may be acting that way. For example, you can
say It seems that something else is on your mind. Would like to try concentrating
on this or would you like some help from me?
Micro-technique 5: Adjacent Student
This technique requires little effort yet effectively encourages students to
concentrate. Adjacent student involves calling on the student who is next to the
student whose behaviour has caught your attention. This captures their attention
and brings them back to the task at hand.
521
____________________________
Talking with students one-to-one
It is extremely likely that you will need to speak to some students about their
behaviour on a one-on-one basis. This can cause great anxiety at times. The next
three strategies, Expectation Discussion, Redirection and Shared Control have
been designed to help you manage these situations. They build up from an
extremely compliant student to a worse case scenario where you are clearly
confronted by a non-compliant student.
These strategies are designed to complement each other. They begin in similar
ways however, the steps you follow or the strategy you chose are dictated by how
the student responds to your request. This will allow you to have greater control
over the situation by having a plan before you intervene and also let you contain
any situation that may arise.
Expectation Discussion
Expectation Discussion can be used when you need to speak individually to a
student about the way they have been treating other students. The purpose of
Expectation Discussion is to remind the student of the expectations regarding the
treatment of other students. It can be used for minor violations of these
expectations. Expectation Discussion is a positive strategy because it allows the
student to internalise the expectations and correct their own behaviour with
minimal intervention on your behalf. By referring to the expectations when
correcting the students behaviour, it is less likely that the student will perceive
your correction as a personal attack.
When Using Expectation Discussion:

Gain the students attention;
Speak to them in private by asking them to step aside or speaking in a low
tone;
Ask them WHAT are the expectations for their behaviour
Wait for their response;
If their response is correct, ask them what they are going to do next; and
Praise any move towards following the expectations.
The Steps of Expectation Discussion:
Step 1: Gain Attention

Step 2: Prompt Expectation(s)
Step 3: Request Follow Expectation
Step 4: Praise cooperation
522
____________________________
For Example:
Miss Jones notices that Jessica is verbally bullying another student.
TEACHER (T): Walking up to student and Gain Attention

asking her to step aside away from the group
and speaking in a clear calm manner
Jessica
STUDENT (S): Yes Miss?
T: What is the schools expectation about the Prompt Expectation
way we talk to people?
S: We talk to them with respect
T: Thats right, what are you going to do Request Follow Expectation
now?
S: Try and be more respectful?
T: Excellent, thank you for being respectful Praise
to others.
Redirection
Redirection involves a teacher stepping in to have the student redirect their own
behaviour. It is important to use this when the student is aware of their own
behaviour and that it is unacceptable (for example, when this is a repeat
behaviour). This technique involves asking the student what they are doing, as
opposed to why they are doing it. This allows the student to clearly understand
what is being asked of them, and with it ensures that they know it is their
behaviour which is in question, not them.
When Using Redirection:

If you are dissatisfied with the students response to the expectation prompt,
provide the student the expectation. Eg. We treat people with respect.
Ask the student WHAT are you doing?
If satisfied with the answer, ask the student WHAT should you be doing? If
you are not satisfied with the answer tell the student what they were doing.
Ignore all protest and ask, What should you be doing?
Wait for the student to respond and ask that they do what they have just said
Praise cooperation
How to Redirect Behaviour
Step 1: A Behaviour has your Attention
Step 2: Ask student what are you doing?
Step 3: Ask student what should you be doing?
Step 4: Ask student to do what they propose
Step 5: Praise Cooperation
523
____________________________
There are 5 steps to Redirect behaviour effectively:

Step 1: A behaviour has your attention. Approach student and think about what
behaviour you would like them to be doing;
Step 2: Ask the student what are you doing. The student should respond with
what they were doing. If the student gives an unsuitable response, let the student
know how to respond and follow this with the next question i.e. You were saying
nasty things to Tommy, you were being disrespectful. What should you be doing;
Step 3: Ask the student what should you be doing. The student should
respond with what they should be doing. If the student responds with an
unsuitable response, let the student know how to respond and follow this with a
class rule i.e. Uh-uh, if you wish to speak with Tommy you should be saying
something nice. We respect others at school;
Step 4: Ask the student to do what they have proposed. For example I expect
that you respect other students and talk nicely to Tommy now. The student
should respond by performing the action they proposed (i.e. speaking with
Tommy normally). Give the student time to respond (i.e. 5 seconds). If they do not
respond, instruct again; and
Step 5: Praise cooperation. Praise the student for complying. For example
Great, thats respecting. Thank you for talking nicely to others.
For Example:
Continuing on Miss Jones example, where she saw a student verbally bullying
another student.
TEACHER (T): what is the schools

expectation about the way we talk to
people?
STUDENT (S): Dunno!
T: We expect students to be respectful to
one another.
S: Thats crap!
T: Jessica, What are you doing?" WHAT are they doing?
S: Dunno
T: You are being disrespectful to me, what WHAT should they be doing?
should you be doing?
S: Being respectful?
T: Thats right. I expect that you will stop Do prompt
being disrespectful, now.
S: OK Miss
to others.
Shared Control
524
____________________________
This technique is similar to redirection and behaviour swapping, but differs in

that it is teacher directed. Although the teacher is responsible for providing an
alternative behaviour, the behaviour choice ultimately allows the students to make
a conscious decision of how to behave. The aim is for the teacher to clearly
present the consequences to behaviour so that the student is aware of what will
happen with each behaviour choice. Shared Control allows students to change
their behaviour and receive positive attention for doing so.
If the student chooses the unacceptable behaviour, the consequence must follow as
it is linked to the behaviour they chose. A consequence was explained, and if the
student chooses to respond this way, they have chosen the consequence. When
students choose the unacceptable behaviour it is likely that they chose this
behaviour to test whether the teacher will follow through with the consequence.
Shared Control can be used with students who:

Persistently use inappropriate behaviours;
You suspect will incite a power struggle (resistance); or
Are behaving dangerously (where there is a possibility of injury).
Shared Control consist of creating an opportunity for the students to chose how
they will respond to your requests while being fully aware of the consequences
which their response will have.
There are 6 steps to employing Shared Control:

Step 1: A behaviour has your attention. Approach student and think about what
behaviour you would like them to be doing;
Step 2: Bring students attention to their behaviour. Let students know which
behaviour was unacceptable, with specific reference to that behaviour, i.e. when
you make a joke about someone, that is not respecting. At this school we respect
other people;
Step 3: Give students two choices with the consequences for each. Students are
given a choice of two behaviours, each with opposing consequences. The first
refers to the unacceptable behaviour that got your attention, and the second refers
to an acceptable behaviour which they can choose to change their behaviour to,
i.e. You can continue making jokes about other people and I will issue a
behaviour report, or you can say nice things about other people and you can go
back to playing;
Step 4: Let the student know you expect them to choose the appropriate
behaviour. Tell students what you expect, i.e. I know you will make the right
choice;
Step 5: Give student time to choose. Wait for around 5 seconds and ask them
what they decided to do, i.e. wait 5 seconds and say What do you chose to do?
Step 6: Praise cooperation or follow through with consequence. Praise the
student for complying. For example Great, thats respecting. Thank you for
talking nicely to others. You can go back to playing now. Follow through with
consequence if student fails to comply.
525
____________________________
How to Implement Shared Control

Step 1: A Behaviour has your Attention
Step 2: Bring students attention to their behaviour
Step 3: Give students two choices with the consequences for each
Step 4: Let the student know you expect them to choose the appropriate
behaviour
Step 5: Give student time to choose
Step 6: Praise Cooperation
Example 1: Student Complies

another student.
TEACHER (T): You are being disrespectful

to me, what should you be doing?
STUDENT (S): Being respectful to you and
that cow?
T: Being disrespectful is not acceptable in Bring attention to behaviour
this school.
You can continue to be disrespectful and Ill Give choice and consequence
have to make a note of it in your diary or you for continuing AND
can be more respectful and you can get on alternative.
with what you were doing.
I know youll make the right choice for you. Give positive expectation
S: Thinking
T: Waiting briefly. What did you decide? Give time to choose.
S: I will try and be more respectful.
to others.
526
____________________________
Example 2: Student does NOT comply

another student.
T: Being disrespectful is not acceptable in Bring attention to behaviour

this school.
You can continue to be disrespectful and Ill Give choice and consequence
have to make a note of it in your diary or you for continuing AND
can be more respectful and you can get on alternative.
with what you were doing.
I know youll make the right choice for you. Give positive expectation
S: You cant make me be nice to every

one!
T: I see you decided that I should write in Follow through indicating
your diary about your behaviour for your that it was the students
parents to comment. Follow through choice.
Notes:
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
527
____________________________
Behaviour Swapping
This technique is designed to assist students to swap undesirable behaviour to

more appropriate behaviour, and reduce the likelihood of future bullying. The idea
is to have students swap the unacceptable behaviour for an acceptable one. Thus,
students are not simply asked to stop what they are doing, but are taught which
behaviours are not accepted and encouraged to use alternative behaviours.
Behaviour Swapping is not limited to stopping undesirable behaviour, but can also
be used by positively reinforcing appropriate behaviour when no undesirable
behaviour is apparent. This allows students to independently choose appropriate
behaviour.
Behaviour Swapping involves:

Positively reinforcing desirable behaviours witnessed to encourage students to
continue to act appropriately;
Encouraging the use of more desirable behaviours by suggesting to students
more desirable behavioural strategies; and
Discouraging the use of less desirable behaviours by identifying such
behaviours and suggesting alternative desirable behavioural strategies.
How to Swap Behaviour

Make certain that students know which prosocial behaviours they can swap to
(i.e. consider stating specific behaviour in the positive when reinforcing
prosocial behaviours and when correcting undesirable behaviours);
Encourage non-bullying behaviours so that students independently swap to
these appropriate behaviours;
Make prosocial non-bullying behaviours valued; and
Make anti-social bullying behaviours devalued.
Notes:
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
528
____________________________
Strategies for Students
Three simple ways for students to prevent bullying when it happens, or after it
occurs is to Stop, Help and Tell:
Stop
- Students who witness bullying can
stop the bullying by working together
to tell the person bullying to stop;
- Students who are being bullied can tell
the bully to stop and walk away. They
can use I-messages with this to
encourage the person bullying to stop
(i.e. Stop, when you call me names I
feel hurt); and
- Students who realise they are bullying can become role models by
stopping what they do and telling others to stop bullying.
Help
- Students who witness bullying can help
by supporting the person who is being
picked on. They can take them to a safe
area and stick up for them. Students who
witness bullying can also help by
supporting the person who bullies to
stop bullying;
- Students who are being bullied

ask for help from other students
or teachers watching to stop the
person bullying them; and
- Students who realise they are
bullying can help by encouraging
other students to stop bullying.
Tell
- Students who witness bullying, who are
being bullied or who realise they are
bullying can tell the teacher, or tell other
students about it so they can stop the
bullying together.
529
____________________________
Coping Strategies
Coping strategies are what individuals use to deal with stressful

situations. Coping can be positive (e.g. problem solving, seeking
support) where an individual seeks to change their situation and
help themselves, or negative (e.g. avoidant) where an individual may
use destructive behaviours attenuated away from the stressful
situation (Berman, Kurtines, Silverman, & Serafini, 1996).
Day to day strategies to deal with stress usually involve exercise, living a healthy
life, meditation, a relaxing bath, and aromatherapy just to name a few. While these
do provide stress-less properties, a more active approach can increase your
capacity to feel confident to deal with challenging situations and lead you away
from the temptation to avoid stressful situations.
The coping skills here are designed to increase your capacity to:
Understand how thoughts affect behaviour;
Understand how thoughts can inhibit action;
Understand how thoughts affect those involved in bullying;
Critically evaluate incidents of bullying brought to your attention;
Be aware of your own thoughts and how these affect your actions;
Effectively deal with stressful situations; and
Employ the coping strategies as part of your daily routine.
Exercising the coping strategies in conjunction with the behaviour modification

strategies described earlier, will create a more peaceful environment which will
allow students to transform unacceptable behaviours into prosocial ones. We
encourage you to use the coping strategies described here, along with the
techniques for behaviour management, in other areas of your daily teaching role.
We also advocate for you to encourage and support each other with the use of
these strategies.
530
____________________________
Thoughts
Thoughts are like a game of snakes n ladders.

Positive thoughts (ladder thoughts) help you soar
to the top and feel good about yourself. Negative
thoughts (snake thoughts) on the other hand, bring
you down and can make you feel miserable.
How Thoughts Create Action

Challenging situations can conjure up a myriad of
collecting thoughts. A situation may lead to either
snake or ladder thoughts. What you think, may
then determine the way that you handle the
situation (refer to Table 6.1). For example, a
situation between a group of students has escalated
and you have been called in to find out what
happened. You ask a student to stop teasing and
they say Oh, but I dont like them anyway. They
smell. Nobody likes them.
Snake thoughts may lead you to think: Theyre not going to stop just because I
said something. They know what bullying is, they know how it makes people feel,
and they just dont care. Whats the point in me trying when theyre not even
going to listen to me?
Ladder thoughts on the other hand may lead you to think: It seems to me that this
student does not want to stop teasing. I can have a word to them away from their
friends. Maybe theyre just trying to act cool by talking back, justifying their
actions in front of their peers and trying to get away with picking on people. The
way that they are behaving is not acceptable in this school.
Table 6.1: The Role of Thought in Action

Challenging
What I think Therefore I will
Situation
Student says I was Maybe it was a joke. Im Leave the situation, let
just joking. They overreacting. I wish I the students keep
know it was a joke. didnt step in now. These playing and do not
students are right, it was interrupt next time
a joke. A bit of fun something like this
doesnt hurt anyone. happens.
Student says I was I believe this person is Feel calm, repeat

just joking. They giving me an excuse. I instructions, follow
know it was a joke. have a plan. I can get to through with my plan
the bottom of this and and feel good about
find out exactly whats remaining in the
going on. situation.
531
____________________________
Snake Thoughts
Snake thoughts are those thoughts which drive stereotypes
(i.e. only boys bully), are quick to make generalisations (i.e.
bullies cant be helped), and inhibit action. These thoughts
usually have a negative undertone and are not based on any
evidence.
This type of thought is known as evidence-less thinking

(refer to Table 6.2 for types of evidence-less thinking): that
is, thinking without critically evaluating. We may think we
are correct and provide ourselves justification for why our
thought is true (i.e. Sam is a boy, Sally is a girl. Sam
bullies, Sally doesnt. Only boys bully). Rarely do we ask
ourselves to justify our own beliefs (even the most
conscientious person is guilty of this).
People generally think they are right. Having a thought

which you want to believe (for example so that someone
will get the blame) can have devastating results on outcome
actions. Believing these evidence-less thoughts can spur you into INACTION
(doing nothing).
For example, evidence-less thinking can spur your thinking into its not my
problem, this will never change, Ive tried but it doesnt work, so obviously
theres something wrong with the techniques, and no-one else is trying, why
should I. We distort our own thoughts to match our desire for inaction, and our
desire to believe our evidence-less thinking, because, its much easier in the
moment to do nothing. Only later when the behaviour escalates does the need to
intervene become more serious and more stressful.
In terms of the BB program, its important for you to be aware of your own
thoughts, and aware of your own snake-like thoughts. This is important for how
you view:
The person who is bullying;
The person who is being bullied;
Students in general;
Other staff within your school; and
The techniques designed to prevent bullying.
Evidence-less thoughts are treated as truths and there is little

attempt to justify the thought. When justifications are made,
contradictory evidence is ignored or discounted as one offs or
inapplicable.
532
____________________________
Table 6.2: Types of Evidence-less thoughts
Types Thoughts
All or nothing thinking: Seeing things The bullying intervention should get
in black or white categories and rid of 100% of the bullying in this
ignoring levels. school. Otherwise its not worth doing.
Overgeneralisation: This involves I tried Directed Discussion with Joe

taking one or just a few negative about the way he treated Maria. It
incidents and believing that they didnt work! I knew that Directed
represent how things will always be. Discussion wouldnt work with any of
the students.
Catastrophising: What ever can go Bullying is part of life. Its always

wrong will go wrong and there is happened, it is happening now and it
nothing we can do about it. will continue to happen. There is
nothing I can do.
Disqualifying the positive: Rejecting Jessica was nice to Phat today, but I
positive experiences by insisting they wont say anything because she picked
dont count for some reason. on her yesterday
Living by fixed rules: Rules are taken Students shouldnt be rewarded for
as true and never changing. Once doing the right thing
established there is no room for
compromise. This type of thinking
usually has words like should,
ought, must and cant.
Fortune telling: Predicting the We tried all of this in 1966. It didnt

outcome of something without trying it work then it wont work now.
or because it has been tried before.
Failing to realise that the only way to
know whether something will work is
by actually doing it.
533
____________________________
Ladder Thoughts
Ladder thoughts are those thoughts which motivate (i.e. I want to
step-in when students ask for my help), help to build confidence (i.e. I
can do this), and produce action. These thoughts usually have a
positive undertone and are based on evidence.
This type of thought is known as evidence-based thinking: that is,

critically evaluating thought. We genuinely attempt to be aware of
our thoughts and take note to evaluate whether they are truly correct,
seeking instead thoughts which demonstrate why our thought are
false (i.e. Sam is a boy, Sally is a girl. Sam bullies, Sally doesnt.
Only boys bully. Hang on, just because Sally does not bully, doesnt
mean other girls dont. Do I know of another girl who has bullied? Is
it possible that a girl can bully?).
Being able to tell when your thoughts are snakes, can help you to
transform them into evidence-based thoughts which can help to create
real change in the social culture of your school. This is because
evidence-based thoughts have the power to empower. Employing
evidence-based thoughts can spur you into ACHIEVABLE ACTION (doing
something) and can inspire others to act as well.
For example, evidence-based thoughts can spur your thinking into it is a

challenge for me, this situation can change, what am I doing to help or hinder
the situation?, even though Ive tried, maybe there is something I can do
differently, and even if no-one else is trying, I can be the person to show that
change can happen. Using evidence-based thoughts we evaluate our own
thoughts to motivate ourselves into action, and motivate others into action as well.
In terms of the BB program, its important for you to be aware of your own
thoughts, and aware of how you can change your evidence-less thoughts into
ladder thinking. Refer to Table 6.3 for examples of how ladder and evidence-less
thinking differ. Evidence-based thoughts are important for how you:
Manage a situation of bullying;
Manage the social structure in your classroom and school;
Critically evaluate student perceptions;
Motivate staff; and
Employ the techniques within the BB program.
Evidence-based thinkers realise that just because you have a though,

does not mean its true.
534
____________________________
Table 6.3: The Difference between Evidence-Less and Evidence-Based Thoughts
Evidence-less Thoughts Evidence-based thoughts
That student is never going That student could change

to change, they cant be with supportive guidance. I
helped. can do something.
Geese that student whinges a Geese that student is being

lot about getting teased. They picked on a lot. What can I do
need to learn to stick up for to help them out?
themselves.
I cant handle it when they They are talking back but I

talk against me. Why cant can handle this. I know what
they just do as theyre told? to do.
This is so hard, there are so There are some really

many things to learn about. interesting things I didnt
Im never going to know how know before. This helps me to
to use these techniques at the try something different and
same time. Its useless. not give up.
I tried positive I tried positive

reinforcement and it didnt reinforcement and it didnt
work. I knew this whole thing work yet. Maybe I can find
was crap. another reinforcement which
will be more effective. That
student seems to like it when I
nod at them, I can try that.
Ive tried everything with Ive tried everything with

this student and nothing this student and nothing
works. Its hopeless. Theyre seems to have worked. Maybe
a lost cause. I can try to use the techniques
more consistently now that I
am getting used to them. That
will work.
I wish this student would Im glad this student is

leave me alone and stop opening up to me and feels
telling me about every little comfortable to tell me whats
thing that is going on. going on. Its important to
know what our students are
going through and what
worries them. What can I do
to help them?
535
____________________________
How thoughts Spiral Out of Control
Thoughts collect. One thought turns into another thought slightly stronger than the
last, which turn into more thoughts which eventually spiral out of control. Falling
down a negative thinking spiral makes it especially difficult to cope effectively in
stressful situations.
The longer we remain in the spiral the more negative the thinking
becomes
On the other hand, positive thinking leads to being able to deal with the situations
at hand. Opposite to negative thinking, being in a positive thinking spiral allows
you to follow-through with the task at hand and motivates you to use the
appropriate skills to successful handle any situation.
Positive thoughts bring about positive feelings and emotions which

allow you to remain calm, in control and comfortable about
intervening in a bullying situation
Figure 6.1 outlines the process of how the negative and positive thinking spirals
can occur.
"
" "
Figure 6.1: Positive and Negative Thinking Spirals
536
____________________________
Summary of Thoughts
Your ability to remain calm, in control and confident when dealing with bullying
is dependant on the way you think.
Evidence-based thinking is where you make an attempt to fairly assess the

evidence for and against the situation. Evidence based thinkers ask themselves
questions like what is the evidence for what I am thinking?, what if I were
wrong?. This makes them open to change and can therefore cope better with
novel situations.
Evidence-less thinkers do not rely on evidence they have certain fixed rules about
the way things are or should be. Evidence-less thinkers tend to overgeneralise,
think in black or white terms, catastrophise and discount evidence which goes
counter their opinion. This makes them closed to change and find it difficult to
cope with novel situations.
Positive thinking spirals inspire you to do your best. They are positive thoughts
that you repeat to yourself over and over again in your mind. They draw you
upwards to perform.
Negative thinking spirals rob you from performing your very best. They are
negative thoughts that you repeat to yourself over and over again in your mind.
They suck you down and lower your performance.
By closely monitoring your thinking patterns, you will be able to understand your
opinion about bullying, the intervention strategies and your ability to implement
the strategies on fact (evidence-based) or on fiction (evidence-less) and whether
you are spiralling up (positive) or down (negative).
Notes:
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
537
____________________________
Summary
It is important that strategies to prevent bullying are used consistently and

repeatedly. We encourage all teachers to use these in their everyday teaching
routine. For an overview of all techniques, please refer to Table 5.5.
Table 5.5: Behaviour Management Guidelines
Strategies for
Strategies for Teachers
Students
Enhance Peer Managing Coping

Relations and Bullying Strategies
Self-Concept Behaviours
Self-Concept Establish Clear Turning Evidence- STOP
Enhancement Expectations Less thinking into
- Internally Focused Evidence-based HELP
Feedback Modelling thinking
- Attributional TELL
Feedback Attention to
- Corrective Positive Behaviours
Feedback
Descriptive
Feedback
Structured
Educational
Conversations
Maintaining Focus
- Broken Record
Technique
- Refocus
Micro-techniques
- Vicinity
- Inclusion
- Secret Signal
- Private Choice
- Adjacent Student
Talking with
students one-to-one
- Expectation
Discussion
- Redirection
-Shared Control
Behaviour
Swapping
538
539
Schools which put more effort in, tend to fair
better in terms of reducing bullying within their
school. This is particularly the case for Primary
schools (Smith, Ananiadou, & Cowie, 2003)
540
CHAPTER 6: Summary & References
Summary
As part of the Beyond Bullying: Primary School Program, there are various roles
which will help to create an effective reduction in school bullying. The roles of
each school member are outlined below.
Roles for Group Members

Role of Schools
Schools possess one of the greatest responsibilities for managing student

behaviours. Policies within schools shape the actions teachers take and help to
create a safe and favourable learning environment. Schools are advised to:
Adopt the BB program and remain committed to the aims of the program,
working toward long-term goals;
Form a policy development team from members of various school groups;
Develop a whole-school anti-bullying policy specific to the school;
Distribute information to parents, students, staff and the community
regarding initiatives taken by the school;
Actively seek to ensure the program is run effectively within the school (i.e.
all teachers have resources and are working toward school objectives); and
Implement the new school policy actively within the school.
Role of Staff
There are a number of basic responsibilities of staff to achieving positive student

behaviour. These reflect the conducts for modelling behaviour and managing
student behaviour effectively. It is advised that staff members:
Increase their understanding of what constitutes bullying behaviours (i.e. are
you seeing bullying or teasing) and practice identifying these behaviour
within the school environment;
Increase their understanding of how to follow the procedures for managing
inappropriate behaviours as outlined under the new school bully policy;
Be conscious of continually modelling appropriate behaviour with students
and other staff members in and around school. Be aware of personal
expressions, actions and means of communication;
541
Immediately respond to student behaviour whether it is in praise of positive
or inappropriate behaviour;
Respond in reference to specific behavioural actions;
Vary responses and seek to appreciate which responses elicit positive change
in individual students;
Take all incidents of bullying seriously and respond even if they may seem
trivial, minor or premature reactions. If a student feels hurt, that is a clear
distress signal from that student;
Be supportive of initiatives presented by staff and students within the school;
Ask questions, be curious, and seek support for self;
Practice skills until they become habit, support and encourage others, and
persevere: no change will occur without continued effort.
Role of Peers
Peers tend to know more about what happens within social circles. Peers are able
help stop bullying in a number of ways. The BB program advises that students:
Actively support one another during in class activities;
Encourage peers to stop bullying among peers;
Assist in stopping bullying when an incident is witnessed;
Encourage peers to support each other (support the person bullying to stop
bullying and support the person being picked on); and
Encourage peers to tell someone about the bullying.
Role of Students
Individuals are not exempt from making an effort within the BB program.
Individuals are able to increase their knowledge about bullying, encourage others
to stop bullying and actively participate in school initiatives to stop bullying.
Individuals are advised to:
Actively participate in class activities;
Become involved in school initiatives about bullying (i.e. volunteer to help
amend the school policy, write for the school newsletter, or raise broad
school issues at assembly);
Increase their understanding of what constitutes bullying behaviours (i.e. are
you seeing bullying or teasing) and practice identifying these behaviour
within the school environment;
Actively work to stop bullying among peers;
Actively work to support peers who are involved (support the person
bullying to stop bullying and support the person being picked on); and
Actively work to tell someone about bullying they witness, if it is happening
to them, or if they are participating in bullying others.
542
Role of Parents
Being a parent to primary school students is an important role. Parents are able to
influence and support their children and school towards the aims of the BB
program. Parents are advised to:
Support and encourage their child to become positive peer bystanders;
Support the aims of the program and the initiatives of the school (i.e. discuss
issues with school, participate in the information evening and apply the
resources they receive from the school);
Look out for warning signs that their child may be involved in bullying;
Increase their understanding of what constitutes bullying behaviours; and
Increase their understanding of the consequences to bullying.
Role of Community
The community plays an important role in supporting the BB program within

schools. Community support can be gained through:
Informing local media authorities regarding the schools aims and initiatives
to stop bullying;
Distribution of information via newsletters;
Student members of cultural or youth groups working together to discuss or
initiate events which serve to prevent bullying;
Creating a bully awareness page on the school website with information
related to what bullying is, what are the consequences, what the school is
doing to stop bullying, what parents can do and what the wider community
members can do to support the school and raise awareness; and
Discussing the program with other schools within and outside the school
area.
543
REFERENCES
Andreou, E., Vlachou, A., * Didaskalou, E. (2005). The roles of self-efficacy, peer
interactions and attitudes in bully-victim incidents: Implications for
intervention policy-practices. School Psychology International, 26(5), 545-
562.
Atlas, R. S., & Pepler, D. J. (1998). Observations of bullying in the classroom.
The Journal of Educational Research, 92(2), 86-99.
Baker, J. (1998). Juveniles in Crime: Participation Rates and Risk Factors, NSW
Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Sydney.
Baldry, A. C. (2003). Bullying in schools and exposure to domestic violence.
Child Abuse & Neglect, 27(7), 713-732.
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis, Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Barnett, M. A., Burns, S. R., Sanborn, F. W., Bartel, J. S., & Wilds, S. J. (2004).
Antisocial and prosocial teasing among children: Perceptions and individual
differences. Social Development, 13, 292-310.
Berman, S. L., Kurtines, W. M., Silverman, W. K., & Serafini, L.T. (1996). The
impact of exposure to crime violence in urben youth. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 66, 329-336.
Besag, V.E. (1989). Bullies and victims in schools. A guide to understanding and
management. England: Open University Press.
Bjrkqvist, K. (1994). Sex differences in physical, verbal, and indirect aggression:
a review of recent research. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 30(3/4), 177-
188.
Bosworth, K., Espelage, D. L., & Simon, T. R. (1999). Factors associated with
bullying behavior in middle school students. Journal of Early Adolescence,
19, 341-362.
Callaghan, S., & Stephen, J. (1995). Self-concept and peer victimisation among
school children. Journal of Personality and individual Differences, 18, 161-
163.
Connolly, I., & O'Moore, M. (2003). Personality and family relations of children
who bully. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(3), 559-567.
Coroners Report, 1997. Death of Matt Rudenklau. Dominion, 30 August, 1997.
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review of reformulation of social
information-processing mechanisms in childrens social adjustment.
Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 74-101.
Crick, N. R., Nelson, D. A., Morales, J. R., Cullerton-Sen, C., Casas, J. F., &
Hickman, S. E. (2001). Relational victimisation in childhood and
adolescence: I hurt you through the grapevine. In J. Juvonen, A. Nishina, &
544
S. Graham (Eds.), Peer harassment in school: the plight of the vulnerable
and victimized (pp. 196-214). New York: Guilford.
Deater-Deckard, K. (2001). Annotation: recent research examining the role of
peer relationships in the development of psychopathology. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(5), 565-579.
Deutsch, M. (1973). The Resolution of Conflict. New Haven and London: Yale,
University Press.
Egan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (1998). Does low self-regard invite victimization?
Developmental Psychology, 34, 299-309.
Stainton Rogers, R. (1991). Now you see it, now I dont. In M. Elliott (Ed.),
Bullying: A practical guide to coping for schools (pp. 1-7). Harlow:
Longman Group.
Eron, L. D., Huesmann, R. L., Dubow, E., Romanoff, R., & Yarmel, P. W. (1987).
Childhood aggression and its correlates over 22 years. Childhood
Aggression and Violence. New York: Plenum.
Evans, C., & Eder, D. (1993). No exit: Processes of social isolation in the
middle school. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 22, 139-170.
Farrington, D. P. (1993). Understanding and preventing bullying. In M. Tonry &
N. Morris (Eds.) Crime and Justice, Vol 17, (pp. 381-458). Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Fergusson, D. M., & Horwood, L. J. (1999). Prospective childhood predictors of
deviant peer affiliations in adolescence. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 40, 581-592.
Forero, R, McLellan, L, Rissel, C, Bauman, A. (1999). Bullying behaviours and
psychosocial health among school students in New South Wales, Australia.
British Medical Journal, 319, 344-348.
Frude, N. (1993). Vulnerability and resilience. In Understanding Family
Problems. Wiley.
Galinsky, E., & Salmond, K. (2002). Ask the children youth and violence:
students speak out for a more civil society. The ask the children series. The
Colorado Trust, Families and Work Institute,
http://www.familiesandwork.org/summary/yandv.pdf
Glover, D., Cartwright, N. & Gleeson, D. (1998). Towards bully-free schools:
Interventions in action. Bristol, PA: Open university Press.
Hawker, S. J. & Boulton, M. J. (2000). Twenty years research on peer
victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of
cross-sectional studies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(4),
441-455
Hay, I. (2000). Gender self-concept profiles of adolescents suspended from high
school. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(3), pp345-352.
Hoover, J., & Oliver, R. (1996). The bullying prevention handbook: A guide for
principals, teachers, and counselors. Bloomington, IN: National Educational
Service.
545
Hoover, J. H., & Olson, G. (2000). Sticks and stones may break their bones:
Teasing as bullying. Reclaiming Children and Youth: Journal of Strength-
Based Interventions, 9(2), 87-91.
Oliver, R., Hoover, J. H., & Hazler, R. (1994). The perceived roles of bullying in
small-town Midwestern schools. Journal of Counseling and Development,
72 (4), 416-419.
Keltner, D., Young, R.C., Oemig, C., Heerey, E., & Monarch, N.D. (1998).
Teasing in hierarchical and intimate relations. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 75, 1231-1247.
Kinney, D. A. (1993). From nerds to normals: The recovery of identity among
adolescents from middle school to high school. Sociology of Education, 66,
2140.
Kowalski, R. M. (2000). 'I was only kidding!': Victims' and perpetrators'
perceptions of teasing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 231
241.
Lagerspetz, K. M. J., Bjrkqvist, K., & Peltonen (1988). Is indirect aggression
typical of females? Gender differences in aggressiveness in 11 to 12 year old
children. Aggressive Behavior, 14, 403-414.
Lind, J., & Maxwell, G. (1996). Childrens experience of violence at school.
Wellington: Office of the Commissioner for Children.
McConville, D., & Cornell, D. (2003). Aggressive attitudes predict aggressive
behavior in middle school students. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders, 11, 179-187.
Marsh, H. W. (1990a). The structure of academic self-concept: The
Marsh/Shavelson model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 623-
636.
Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. (1997). Academic self-concept: Beyond the
dustbowl. In G. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning,
achievement, and adjustment (pp. 131-198). Orlando, FL : Academic Press.
Marsh, H.W., & Hattie, J. (1996). Theoretical perspectives on the structure of self-
concept. In B. A. Bracken (Ed.), Handbook of self-concept (pp 38-90). New
York: Wiley.
Marsh, H. W., Parada, R. H., Craven, G. R., & Finger, L. R. (2004). In the looking
glass: A reciprocal effects model elucidating the complex nature of bullying,
psychological determinants and the central role of self-concept. In C. S.
Sanders & G. D. Phye (Eds.), Bullying: implications for the classroom (pp.
63-109). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Marsh, H. W., Parada, R. H., Yeung, A. S. & Healey, J. (2001). Aggressive
School Troublemakers and Victims: A Longitudinal Model Examining the
Pivotal Role of Self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2),
411-419.
Maxwell GM, Carroll-Lind J. 1997. The Impact of Bullying on Children.
Wellington: Ofce of the Commissioner for Children.
546
Merton, R. K. (1996). Social Structure and Anomie. In: P. Sztompka (Ed.), Robert
K. Merton on Social Structure and Science, Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press
Monks, C. P., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (2005). Psychological correlates of
peer victimisation in preschool: Social cognitive skills, executive function
and attachment profiles. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 571-588.
Neary, A. and Joseph, S. (1994) Peer Victimization and its relationship to self
concept and depression among schoolgirls. Personality and Individual
Differences. Vol 16, (1) 183:186.
Nesdale, D. & Scarlett, M. (2004). Effects of group and situational factors on pre-
adolescent childrens attitudes to school bullying. International Journal of
Behavioural Development, 28(5), 428-434.
New South Wales Department of Education & Training (2005). Anti-bullying
Plan for Schools. NSW Dept Ed. & Train. Student Services and Equity
Programs.
NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (1997). NSW Bureau of Crime
Statistics and Research, Sydney.
Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among school children: Some basic
facts and effects of a school-based intervention program. In D. Pepler and K.
Rubin (Eds.), The Development and Treatment of Childhood Aggression,
Hillsdale, 411-448.
Olweus, D., (1993). Victimisation by peers: antecedents and long-term outcomes.
In: K. Rubin, J. Asendorf (Eds.), Social withdrawal, inhibition and shyness,
(pp. 315-341). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Olweus, D. (1996, Spring). Bully/victim problems at school: Facts and effective
intervention. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 5 (1), 15-22.
Olweus, D. (1997). Bully/victim problems in school: Facts and intervention.
European Journal of Psychology of Education, XII (4), 495-510.
Orpinas, P., & Horne, A. M. (2006). Bullying prevention: Creating a positive
school climate and developing social competence. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Panzarino, P. J. (1998). The costs of depression: direct and indirect; treatment
versus nontreatment. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 59 (20), 1114.
Craven, R., & Parada, R. H. & (2002). Beyond Bullying Secondary Schools
Program: Consultants handbook. Publication Unit, Self-concept
Enhancement and Learning Facilitation (SELF) Research Centre, University
of Western Sydney.
Parkhurst, J.T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1999). Developmental changes in the sources of
loneliness in childhood and adolescence: constructing a theoretical model. In
K.J. Rotenberg & S. Hymel (Eds.), Loneliness in childhood and adolescence
(pp. 56-79). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pellegrini, A.; Bartini, M.; Brooks, F. (1999) School bullies, victims and
aggressive victims. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 216-224.
547
Rigby, K., & Cox, L. (1996). The contribution of bullying at school and low self-
esteem to acts of delinquency among Australian teenagers. Personality and
Individual differences, 21(4), 609-612.
Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1999). Suicidal ideation among adolescent school
children, involvement in bully-victim problems, and perceived social
support. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 29(2), 119-130.
Rigby, K. (1995) Preventing Peer Victimisation in Schools. In C. Sumner, M.
Israel, M. O'Connell & R.Sarre (Eds.), International Victimology, Selected
papers from the the Eighth International Conference on Victimisation,
Canberra, Australian Institute of Crimimology, 303-311.
Rigby, K. (1996). Bullying in schools - and what to do about it. Melbourne:
ACER.
Rigby, K. (2002). A meta-evaluation of methods and approaches to reducing
bullying in pre-schools and early primary school in Australia. Canberra,
A.C.T.: Attorney-General's Dept.
Roberts, W. B. Jr., & Morotti, A. A. (2000). The bully as victim: Understanding
bully behaviors to increase the effectiveness of interventions in the bully-
victim dyad. Professional School Counseling. Special Issue: School
Violence and Counselors, 4(2), 148-155.
Robinson, J. H., & Clay, D. L. (2005). Potential school violence: Relationship
between teacher anxiety and warning-sign identification. Psychology in the
Schools, 42(6), 623-635.
Roland, E., & Galloway, D. (2002). Classroom influences on bullying.
Educational Research, 44(3), 299-312.
Salmivalli, C. (1998). Intelligent, attractive, well-behaving, unhappy: the structure
of adolescents self-concept and its relations to their social behavior. Journal
of Research on Adolescence, 8(3), 333-354.
Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1998). Aggression in the
social relations of school-aged girls and boys. In P. Slee & K. Rigby (Eds.),
Childrens Peer Relations (pp. 60-75). London: Routledge.
Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., Bjrkqvist, K., sterman, K., & Kaukiainen,
A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: participant roles and their relations
to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 1-15.
Salmivalli, C., & Voeten, M. (2004). Connections between attitudes, group norms,
and behaviour in bullying situations. International Journal of Behavioural
Development, 28(3), 246-258.
Shapiro, J., Baumeister, R., & Kessler, J. (1991). A three component model of
children's teasing: Aggression, humor, and ambiguity. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 10, 459-472.
Sheras, P. (2002). Your child: Bully or victim? Understanding and ending school
yard tyranny. New York: Skylight Press
Slee, P. T. (1995a). Bullying: Health concerns of Australian secondary school
students. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 5, 215-224.
548
Slee, P. T. (1995b). Peer victimization and its relationship to depression among
Australian primary school students. Personality and Individual Differences,
18, 57-62.
Smith, P. K., & Sharp, S. (Eds.). (1994). School Bullying: Insights and
perspectives. London: Routledge.
Smith, P. K., Ananiadou, K. & Cowie, H. (2003) Interventions to reduce school
bullying, Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48, 9, 591-599.
Smith, P.K., Morita, Y., Junger-tas, J., Olweus, D., Catalano, R., & Slee, P.
(1999). The nature of school bullying. A cross-national perspective.
England: Routledge.
Stanley, L., & Arora, T. (1998). Social exclusion amongst adolescent girls: Their
self-esteem and coping strategies. Educational Psychology in Practice, 14,
94-100.
Staub. E. (1999). The roots of evil: Social conditions, culture, personality, and
basic human needs. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 179-192.
Stevens, V., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., & Van Oost, P. (2002). Relationship of the
family environment to children's involvement in bully/victim problems at
school. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 31(6), 419-428.
Sullivan, K. (2000) The Anti-Bullying Handbook. Auckland: Oxford University
Press
Sutton, J., & Smith, P. K. (1999). Bullying as a group process: An adaption of the
participant role approach. Aggressive Behaviour, 25, 97-111.
Sutton, J., Smith, P.K., & Swettenham, J. (1999). Social cognition and bullying;
Social inadequacy or skilled manipulation? British Journal of
Developmental Psychology, 17, 435-450.
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty &
J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language
Acquisition (pp. 64-82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tulloch, M. (1995). Gender differences in bullying experiences and attitudes to
social relationships in high school students. Australian Journal of Education,
39, 279-293.
Walker, J. (1997). Estimates of the Costs of Crime in Australia in 1996, Trends
and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, No. 72, Australian Institute of
Criminology, Canberra.
Wolke, D., Woods, S., Bloomfield, L., & Karstadt, L. (2000). The association
between direct and relational bullying and behaviour problems among
primary school children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(8),
989-1002.
Yoneyama, S., & Naito, A. (2003). Problems with the paradigm: the school as a
factor in understanding bullying (with special reference to Japan). British
Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(3), 315-330.
549
APPENDIX 2
Single-Item Measures used for the School Reports
550
%%+,-. " " "
/ 0,
"" 0 " " 1 2 &
2 2 / 0
($, +3 ! )4556* $ 3 +7 -7(, 3 %%+,-. .7,-. 7- ,- ($, $77% ,- -+ 78

($3 3 % 3 9
: , 4 ; < = >
:
4 , " : 4 ; < = >
; 7 : 4 ; < = >
< 7 : 4 ; < = >
= # : 4 ; < = >
> : 4 ; < = >
6 , : 4 ; < = >
? , : 4 ; < = >
,8 , ' -(3 (7 %%+ ( 3-( , " 9

: +3 "4 -70
+3 -7 +3 -7
@ 7 / " : 4 :@ ( / " : 4
:5 8 : 4 45 ( : 4
:: ( / : 4 4: ( / : 4
:4 ( : 4 44 : 4
:; # / : 4 4; ( / : 4
:< , " : 4 4< ( : 4
:= ( : 4 4= : 4
:> , / : 4 4> # / : 4
:6 : 4 46 ( / " : 4
:? ( : 4
551
,! %3 ($3 - # 3! %7 3 ( (7 +7 ! - '3!0
4?0 / +7 7 % A7,- ,- %%+,-. 7#37-3 +7 , -B( %,C3 9

: 4 ; < = >
4@0 $ 3 +7 33- ,- .!7 " 9
: 4 ; < = >
;50 $ 3 +7 2 7- +7 ! 7'-2 " 9
: 4 ; < = >
;:0 $ 3 +7 33- %%,3 ( ($, $77% ($, +3 !9
$ "
!
;4 " : 4 ; < = >
;; " : 4 ; < = >
;< " : 4 ; < = >
;= : 4 ; < = >
;> : 4 ; < = >
;60 % / / '$ ( , ($3 %7-.3 ( 3!,7 +7 $ 3

33- %%,3 + ($3 #3 3! 7- 7! .!7 9 %3 3 ,! %3 0
: 4 ; < = > 6
;?0 ' "2
( / 7-3 7D 7-%+0
5 , "
: $ 2 / / "2 "2 "
4 ! " "
; "" B " " "
< " 2 "
= # /
>
! " # ! $ !% &'
552
" 2 0 %3 3 ,! %3 ($3 - # 3! %7 3 ( (7
+7 ! - '3!0
;@0 ( 83 % 3 "
: 4 ; < = >
<50 (3 $3! ,-(3!3 (3 ,- (7 ,-. %%+,-.

: 4 ; < = >
<:0 ( 3-( ,-(3!3 (3 ,- (!+,-. (7 (7 %%+,-.

: 4 ; < = >
<40 (3 $3! " (7

: 4 ; < = >
<;0 ( 3-( " (7

: 4 ; < = >
<<0 " (7 ,-.

: 4 ; < = >
<=0 ($, $77% " " " " "

: 4 ; < = >
<>0 , " 2 " ($3 3!+ 8,! ( 3! 7- " 9
, " :
# ( 4
( ;
# " <
# " " =
>
# 6
# ?
# @
# :5
::0 7 1EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
553
APPENDIX 3
Example of Individual School Report
554
(() !*# !
School 4
Linda Finger
! "
# $%
555
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS 3
PREVALENCE 5
BULLIED BY OTHER STUDENTS 5

HOW OFTEN BULLIED 5
LONGEST PERIOD STUDENTS HAVE BEEN BULLIED 6
TYPES 7
HOW DO STUDENTS BULLY 8
IS SCHOOL SAFE FOR STUDENTS? 9
SHOULD TEACHERS STOP BULLYING? 10

HOW INTERESTED ARE STUDENTS TO STOP BULLYING? 10
556
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure 1: Have You Been Bullied at this School by Another Person this
Year? __________________________________________________ 558
Figure 2: What is the Longest Period Over Which You Have Been Bullied
by the Same Person or Group? ______________________________ 559
Figure 3: Which is the Main Way You Have Been Bullied? ________ 560
Figure 4: Have you Been in a Group/ On Your Own, Bullied Another

Person This Year? ________________________________________ 561
Figure 5: This School is a Safe Place for Students _______________ 562
Figure 6: How Interested are Teachers to Stop Bullying (Student

Perception)? ____________________________________________ 563
Figure 7: How Interested are Students to Stop Bullying (Student

Perception)? ____________________________________________ 563
557
PREVALENCE
Bullied by Other Students
How Often Bullied

Data suggests, the prevalence for being bullied at this school is
approximately 36% for Years 5 and 6 students, occurring on a
monthly, weekly and daily basis combined.
31.9% reported they had never been bullied;

31.9% reported they had sometimes been bullied;
6.9% reported they had been bullied once or twice a month
in 2007;
9.7% reported bullying occurred on a weekly basis for them;
16.7% reported it happens several times a week; and
2.8% reported it happened everyday.
50
40
Percentage
30
20
10
0
Never Sometimes Once or Once a Several Everyday
twice a week times a
month week
Figure 1: Have You Been Bullied at this School by Another Person this Year?
558
Longest Period Students Have Been Bullied
Approximately 43% of students reported that the longest period
they have been bullied by the same person or group was for a
week or longer, with 16% being bullied by the same group or
person for at least a year or more.

27.5% reported they had been bullied for a day or two;
13.0% reported they had been bullied for a week;
10.1% reported bullying occurred for several weeks;
4.3% reported it happened for months;
5.8% reported bullying had occurred for a year; and
10.1% reported it happened for several years.
Bullying can happen for days for some students, for months for
other students, and even for several years. For many students, the
bullying cycle is difficult to break, and hence the long-term
consequences may be more severe or long-ranging for those who
are targeted for longer periods.
50
40
Percentage
Percentage
30
20
10
0
Never For a day For a For For For year For
been or two week several months several
build week years
Figure 2: What is the Longest Period Over Which You Have Been Bullied by
the Same Person or Group?
559
Types
The most common form of bullying reported by students was being
laughed at.
24.7% reported they had been laughed at;
17.8% reported they had been physically bullied;
12.3% reported they had been made fun of;
6.8% reported they were ignored;
6.8% reported other ways;
5.5% reported rumours were started about them; and
4.1% reported they had been bullied all of these ways.
Please note: Other behaviours include specific forms of bullying

which happen to them. This can include but is not limited to having
fights with friends which turn into bullying when students turn
others against them, being called nasty names, or having their
property damaged.
30
Percentage
20
10
0
Laughed at Never been Hit, kicked, Making fun Student Others Rumours All of these
build punched, of me ignored were ways
pushed you started
Figure 3: Which is the Main Way You Have Been Bullied?
560
How Do Students Bully
Students were found to bully others slightly more often when they
were in a group as opposed to bullying on their own.
48.6%, and 60.3% reported they had never bullied in a group

or on their own respectively;
30.6%, and 24.7% reported they had sometimes bullied in a
group or on their own respectively;
8.3%, and 5.5% reported they bullied others once or twice a
month in a group or on their own respectively;
4.2%, and 5.5% reported they had bullied once a week in a
6.9%, and 4.1% reported they had bullied several times a
week in a group or on their own respectively; and
1.4%, and 0% reported they had bullied others everyday in a
group or on their own respectively.
70
60
Percentage
50
40 In a Group
30 On Own
20
10
0
Figure 4: Have you Been in a Group/ On Your Own, Bullied Another Person
This Year?
561
IS SCHOOL SAFE FOR STUDENTS?
Having a safe school for students to go is important for student

welfare and effective learning. But how safe do students think
school is? It is positive to see that almost 85% of students across
all schools report that their school is a safe place for students
(true, mostly true, and more true than false). In comparison,
15% of students report that school is not safe (false, mostly
false, and more false than true).
35
30
25
Percentage
20
15
10
0
False Mostly false More false More true Mostly true true
than true than false
Figure 5: This School is a Safe Place for Students
562
Should Teachers Stop Bullying?
Students may interpret how safe school is based on whether they
perceive teachers are interested in helping to prevent social
issues. A total of 95% of students reported they thought teachers
were interested in stopping bullying, and 96% reported they
thought teachers should stop bullying.
90
80
70
Percentage
60 Teachers are Interested

50 in Stoping Bullying
40 Teachers Should Stop
30 Bullying
20
10
0
False Mostly More More Mostly true
false false true true
than than
true false

Perception)?
How Interested are Students to Stop Bullying?

In addition, students perceived students in general as being less
interested to stop bullying than they thought should stop bullying
(74%, and 93% respectively).
90
80
70 Students are Interested in
Percentage
60 Stoping Bullying
50 Students Should Stop
40 Bullying
30 A am Interested in Stoping
20 Bullying
10
0
e e
lse lse tr u
e
ls
e
tru t ru
Fa fa
an
fa
tl y
tl y th an os
os th
M lse e M
fa t ru
o re o re
M M
Figure 7: How Interested are Students to Stop Bullying (Student Perception)?
563
For more information please contact

Bankstown Campus
Locked Bag 1797
Penrith South DC
NSW 1797
l.finger@uws.edu.au
Phone: 02 9772 6428
Fax: 02 9772 6432
564
APPENDIX 4
School Report with Data from All Schools
565
(() !*# !
Linda Finger
! "
# $%
566
TABLE OF CONTENTS
WITH SPECIAL THANKS TO 568

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 570
BACKGROUND INFORMATION 571
PREVALENCE 573
Bullied by Other Students 573
How Often Bullied 573
Longest Period Students Have Been Bullied 575
Types 577
How Do Students Bully 579
Where Does Bullying Happen 580
WHY STUDENTS BULLY 581
IS SCHOOL SAFE FOR STUDENTS? 582
Should Teachers Stop Bullying? 583
How Interested are Students to Stop Bullying? 583
Who would you tell first? 584
IMPLICATIONS 585
567
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure 1a: Have You Been Bullied at this School by Another Person this
Year? _____________________________________________________ 573
Figure 1b: Have You Been Bullied at this School by Another Person this Year
(Differences between Year Groups)? _____________________________ 574
Figure 1c: Have You Been Bullied at this School by Another Person this Year
(Gender Differences)? ________________________________________ 574
Figure 2a: What is the Longest Period Over Which You Have Been Bullied by
the Same Person or Group? ____________________________________ 575
Figure 2b: What is the Longest Period Over Which You Have Been Bullied by
the Same Person or Group (Differences between Year Groups)? _______ 576
Figure 2c: What is the Longest Period Over Which You Have Been Bullied by
the Same Person or Group (Gender Differences)? ___________________ 576
Figure 3a: Which is the Main Way You Have Been Bullied? ___________ 577
Figure 3b: Which is the Main Way You Have Been Bullied (Differences
between Year Groups)? _______________________________________ 578
Figure 3c: Which is the Main Way You Have Been Bullied (Gender
Differences)? _______________________________________________ 578
This Year? _________________________________________________ 579
Figure 6: Where does Bullying Happen at School? __________________ 580
Figure 7: Why do Students Bully? _______________________________ 581
Figure 8: This School is a Safe Place for Students __________________ 582
Perception)? ________________________________________________ 583
Perception)? ________________________________________________ 583
Figure 11: If You Were Being Bullied, Who Would You Tell First?_______ 584
568
WITH SPECIAL THANKS TO
Catholic Education Office, Parramatta Diocese
Counselling and Behavioural Services
Principals, staff and students from the 9 Catholic Education,

Diocese of Parramatta primary schools who have assisted with this
investigation.
Jinnat Ali, Professor Rhonda Craven, Dr Roberto Parada, Lisa

Car, Gawaian Bodkin-Andrews, My Trinh Ha, Jacqueline Cheng,
Kurt Marder, Lucy Griezel, Natasha Magson, Kerry McLeod, Phillip
Parker, and Gillian Sliwka, SELF Research Unit, Centre for
Educational Research
Paul and Vicki Atkins, Passtec Management Services
569
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bullying is a very bad thing I hope that people can realise

how bad it is and stop.
Comment by primary school student
Bullying impacts all schools. But it is the way in which schools

manage student behaviours that determines how this bullying
impacts on students. The following report details the prevalence of
bullying for Years 5 and 6 students (N=937; 468 Year 5; 477
Males) in 8 Australian primary Catholic schools within the Greater
Western Sydney region. Where bullying happens, why it happens,
gender and grade differences, and why its important to stop
bullying are reported.
Findings suggest that bullying is a serious issue within schools

with 31 % of students reporting they are bullied on a monthly basis
or more, and 16 % of students disclosing they bully with their peers
on a monthly basis or more.
570
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
I have been bullied and it really hurts it goes on and on
Bullying is a hurtful and repeated action which is done on purpose

to a student. This can happen by an individual or a group of
bullies. The reasons children bully can vary greatly, but one
underlying factor is that a child bullies to have power over another
person. Power does not just appear through physical strength.
Power can include power with words, power in groups, and power
in status or wealth.
Types of bullying can be varied. Students can bully with their body,
through words, via the social group, or using other means such as
using modern technology to bully.
!"
# $#
%
$ # # & #
" !
&
'
(
571
Understanding what types of
behaviours constitute bullying can
alert teachers to even subtle
behaviours used by students. This
can help teachers to accurately
identify bullying and immediately do
something about it.
572
PREVALENCE
Bullied by Other Students
How Often Bullied

Data suggests, across all schools, the prevalence for being bullied
is approximately 31% for Years 5 and 6 students, occurring on a
monthly, weekly and daily basis combined.

33.8% reported they had sometimes been bullied;
11.6% reported they had been bullied once or twice a month
in 2007;
6.6% reported bullying occurred on a weekly basis for them;
8.2% reported it happens several times a week; and
4.8% reported it happened every day.
50
40
Percentage
30
20
10
0
Twice a Week Times a
Month Week
Figure 1a: Have You Been Bullied at this School by Another Person this
Year?
573
Differences Between Years 5 and 6
Years 5 and 6 showed similar patterns of being bullied across all
schools. Again, 31% of students from both Year 5 and 6 were
bullied on a monthly, weekly and daily basis combined.
50
40
Percentage
30 Year 5
20 Year 6
10
0
Tw ice a Week Times a
Month Week
Figure 1b: Have You Been Bullied at this School by Another Person this Year
(Differences between Year Groups)?
I would like to say that most bullying occurs in year 5. I am

not sure why, but it does
Gender Differences
Males and Females also showed similar patterns of being bullied
across all schools. Interestingly, more males tended to report they
were never bullied (36.4%) than females (33.3%). Again, 31% of
male and female students were bullied on a monthly, weekly and
daily basis combined.
50
40
Percentage
30 Male
20 Female
10
0
Tw ice a Week Times a
Month Week
Figure 1c: Have You Been Bullied at this School by Another Person this Year
(Gender Differences)?
574
Longest Period Students Have Been Bullied
Approximately 42% of students reported that the longest period
they have been bullied by the same person or group was for a
week or longer, with 12.4% being bullied by the same group or
person for at least a year or more.

34.1% reported they had been bullied for a day or two;
10.0% reported they had been bullied for a week;
10.4% reported bullying occurred for several weeks;
9.2% reported it happened for months;
6.0% reported bullying had occurred for a year; and
6.4% reported it happened for several years.
Bullying can happen for days for some students, for months for
other students, and even for several years. For many students, the
bullying cycle is difficult to break, and hence the long-term
consequences may be more severe or long-ranging for those who
are targeted for longer periods.
50
40
Percentage
30
20
10
0
been or two week several months several
bullied week years
Figure 2a: What is the Longest Period Over Which You Have Been Bullied by
the Same Person or Group?
575
Difference Between Years 5 and 6
Years 5 and 6 showed similar patterns of length for being bullied
across all schools. Approximately 42% of students from both Year
5 and 6 have been bullied for at least a week or more by the same
person or group.
50
40
Percentage
30
Year 5
Year 6
20
10
0
Never For a For a For For For year For
been day or week several months several
bullied two week years
Figure 2b: What is the Longest Period Over Which You Have Been Bullied by
the Same Person or Group (Differences between Year Groups)?
Gender Differences
Males and Females also showed similar patterns of rates of being
bullied until for months. After this, females tended to report longer
rates of being bullied from for months to for a year (19% of
males reported being bullied for months or longer, whereas 24%
of females reported this). This suggests some females may be
more susceptible to being bullied for longer periods when they are
bullied. This may be due to females tending to use more social
types of bullying, which would lead to social exclusion or other
forms of ostracising. These types of bullying in turn may also be
more difficult for teachers to identify, resulting in for longer lasting
periods of being bullied for girls.
50
40
Percentage
30
Male
Female
20
10
0
Never For a For a For For For year For
been day or week several months several
bullied two week years
Figure 2c: What is the Longest Period Over Which You Have Been Bullied by
the Same Person or Group (Gender Differences)?
576
Types
The most common form of bullying reported by students were
being laughed at. Verbal types of bullying are the most common
forms of bullying because those who bully are providing
bystanders with entertainment and hence can get away with the
behaviour more readily.
Students were asked which form of bullying had occurred the most
to them, and students were asked to pick one form only.
The second most frequent type was being hit, kicked, punched, or
pushed (physical types), which is clearly a safety concern for
schools. While all forms of bullying harm students emotionally,
physical types can be severe and result in physical injury.
Other behaviours include specific forms of bullying which happen

to them. This can include but is not limited to having fights with
friends which turn into bullying when students turn others against
them, being called nasty names, or having their property damaged.
20.1% reported they had been laughed at;
16.5% reported they had been physically bullied;
12.7% reported they had been made fun of;
10.1% reported other ways;
7.8% reported rumours were started about them;
6.1% reported all of these things happened to them most
frequently; and
4.8% reported they were ignored.
30
25
Percentage
20
15
10
0
Never Laughed Hit, Making Others Rumours All of Student
been at kicked, fun of me were these ignored
bullied punched, started ways you
pushed
Figure 3a: Which is the Main Way You Have Been Bullied?
577
Please note: Other behaviours include specific forms of bullying which happen to them. This
can include but is not limited to having fights with friends which turn into bullying when
students turn others against them, being called nasty names, or having their property
damaged.
Difference Between Years 5 and 6

Students in Years 5 and 6 differed in some forms of bullying which
had been done to them. For example, more students in Year 5
were mainly physically bullied, whereas Year 6 students tended to
be made fun of more often and they were excluded more often
than Year 5 students.
30
25
20
Percentage
Year 5
15
Year 6
10
0
Never Laughed Hit, Making Others Rumours All of Student
been at kicked, fun of me were these ignored
bullied punched, started ways you
pushed
Figure 3b: Which is the Main Way You Have Been Bullied (Differences
between Year Groups)?
Gender Differences
Males and Females differed in the types of bullying they
experienced. For example, males tended to be bullied in physical
ways more often than females, and females tended to be
excluded, made fun of, had rumours spread around about them, or
listed other specific ways they had been bullied.
30
25
Percentage
20
Male
15
Female
10
0
Hit, Never Laughed Making Rumours All of Others Student
kicked, been at fun of me were these ignored
punched, bullied started ways you
pushed
Figure 3c: Which is the Main Way You Have Been Bullied (Gender
Differences)?
578
How Do Students Bully
Bullying occurs in a social group. Students were found to bully
others slightly more often when they were in a group as opposed
to bullying on their own. This can be seen by the larger percentage
of students who report never having bullied others on their own in
comparison to smaller percentage of students who have never
bullied in a group situation. This can be also seen by the greater
score of bullying others in a group than on own for all response
categories (i.e. sometimes, once or twice a month, several times
a week, and everyday).
52.8%, and 68.7% reported they had never bullied in a group

or on their own respectively;
30.5%, and 22.1% reported they had sometimes bullied in a
7.6%, and 5.2% reported they bullied others once or twice a
month in a group or on their own respectively;
4.3%, and 2.4% reported they had bullied once a week in a
2.9%, and 1.0% reported they had bullied several times a
week in a group or on their own respectively; and
1.9%, and 0.6% reported they had bullied others everyday in
a group or on their own respectively.
80
70
60
Percentage
50
In a Group
40
On Own
30
20
10
0
month week
This Year?
579
Where Does Bullying Happen
Bullying occurs most frequently in the playground. Almost, 70% of
students reported bullying occurs in the playground, always, very
often and fairly often. In comparison, students reported that
bullying occurs just over and under 20% in all other areas with a
frequency of fairly often, very often and always (i.e. in the
classroom, at the toilets, library, and canteen, as well as on the
way to and from school and moving to and from class).
100%
90%
80% Never
70% Almost never
60% Sometimes
50%
40% Fairly often
30% Very often
20% Always
10%
0%
On the way home from school
To and From Class
Toilets
Playground
Canteen
Classroom
On the way to school

Library
Figure 6: Where does Bullying Happen at School?
Sometimes I get teased and called names when I walk home
580
WHY STUDENTS BULLY
Students were asked to give a reason for why they would bully, if
they were to bully someone. The most frequent response for
bullying others was because of the way that they spoke.
Interestingly, the second most frequent, and also other frequent

responses were to show off, makes me popular, and to make
friends. These support the notion that bullying occurs in the peer
group, and that students may receive positive social rewards as an
outcome to bullying others.
12.0
10.1 9.9
9.5 9.2
8.6
8.2 8.1 8.0
8.0 7.7 7.7
7.3
Percentage
6.7 6.6 6.6

6.2
4.0
2.6 2.5 2.4
2.1
0.0
They were too intelligent
The way they looked
The country they were born

They were weak
They were not intelligent

The way they spoke
The way they talked
Because of their religion

Other people expect me to
Make me feel better
To show off
To make friends
Their skin colour

Makes me popular
I was told to
It makes me the boss

For fun
Cheer me up
They were new
Figure 7: Why do Students Bully?
581
IS SCHOOL SAFE FOR STUDENTS?
I think bullying is wrong for everyone, I hope no-one does

this in the school.
Having a safe school for students to go is important for student

welfare and effective learning. But how safe do students think
school is? It is positive to see that almost 83% of students across
all schools report that their school is a safe place for students
(true, mostly true, and more true than false). In comparison,
17% of students report that school is not safe (false, mostly
false, and more false than true).
40
35
30
Percentage
25
20
15
10
5
0
False Mostly More false More true Mostly true true
false than true than false
Figure 8: This School is a Safe Place for Students
582
Should Teachers Stop Bullying?
Students may interpret how safe school is based on whether they
perceive teachers are interested in helping to prevent social
issues. Not surprisingly, students tended to say that teachers
should stop bullying, more than what students think teachers are
interested in stopping bullying. A total of 91% of students reported
they thought teachers were interested in stopping bullying, and
97% reported they thought teachers should stop bullying.
100
90
80
70
Percentage
Teachersare
Teachers areInterested
Interested
in in
60 Stoping Bullying
Stopping Bullying
50
40 Teachers Should Stop
Bullying
30
20
10
0
false false true true
than than
true false

Perception)?
How Interested are Students to Stop Bullying?

In addition, students perceived students in general as being less
interested to stop bullying than they thought should stop bullying
(72%, and 95% respectively). Not surprisingly, students were not
as interested to stop bullying as they believed students should stop
bullying. This can be attributed to students being fearful about
trying to stop bullying (believing the bully will get revenge), to
student attitudes that nothing can be done to stop bullying, or to
students really not being interested to prevent bullying (maybe
these students are receiving the positive social rewards from
bullying). 100
90
80 Studentsare
Students areInterested
Interestedin in
70
Importantly, Stopping Bullying
Stoping Bullying
Percentage
60
Students Should Stop
students did believe 50
40
Bullying
that teachers were 30 IAam
amInterested
Interested
Bullying
in in Stoping
Stopping
20 Bullying
more interested 10
than students to 0
prevent bullying. false false true true
than than
true false

Perception)?
583
Who would you tell first?
When students experience bullying, it is important for them to tell
someone about it, so that the bullying can be stopped. Students
cannot be expected to deal with bullying on their own, and
students dont need to keep bullying a secret. Students were
asked who would be the very first person they would tell if they
were being bullied, and the most frequent response was my
teacher. At school, the first point of contact for students (apart
from their peers) is their teachers. In particular, teachers can be
available for students immediately following an incident. Teachers
have an important responsibility to supporting their students, and
can make a real impact in their lives.
25
20
Percentage
15
10
0
I would not tell anyone
The school counsellor

Both my parents at the
My friends at school
My friends outside of
My Teacher
My mother or stepmother
My father or stepfather
My cousin
My sister or brother
Others
same time
school
Figure 11: If You Were Being Bullied, Who Would You Tell First?
584
IMPLICATIONS
Bullying happens most frequently in the playground. Moreover,

when it does happen in the playground, it happens fairly often,
very often, and always almost 70% of the time according to
student report.
Taking into account the high incidence of bullying in the
playground, teachers are encouraged to supervise students
actively:
Teachers are encouraged to make small talk with students
during playground times so that teachers can build trust in
students who are not normally in their class, and students
can feel more comfortable to tell a teacher when bullying
does happen.
During active supervision, teachers may become alert to
when students are about to take part in bullying, before they
bully. Sometimes students are initially mucking around, but
they may end up really hurting one another. Actively
supervising students can alert the attentive teacher to
prevent bullying before it even occurs. The use of small talk
and active supervision will allow teachers to be more aware
of student interactions that may inflame to become bullying
behaviours.
Teachers may also like to thoroughly supervise areas which
have been identified as areas in their school where bullying
occurs more frequently.
In addition, relating to the high incidence of bullying which happens
for longer periods of time (in particular for females), the key areas
to be wary of are to watch out for subtle behaviours (including
social exclusion, and verbal forms where students make jokes
about other students), and aim to prevent these. Subtle behaviours
can be difficult to detect. They may also have a greater impact
than other forms of behaviour because the bullying lasts longer. It
is important that teachers are aware of the social relations of their
students and aware of what their students are experiencing, as
well as assisting their students to deal with this.
These considerations of active supervision, becoming more
attentive to identifying subtle bullying behaviours, and identifying
situations before they occur, play an important role in not just
stopping bullying, but more importantly, preventing it.
585
For more information please contact

Bankstown Campus
Locked Bag 1797
Penrith South DC
NSW 1797
l.finger@uws.edu.au
Phone: 02 9772 6428
Fax: 02 9772 6432
586
APPENDIX 5
Example of a School Feedback Presentation
587
Slide 1
Intervention & Research

recap;
School Policy
Materials; and
Results.
Slide 2
Farmer holding a raining cloud over

his crops with a piece of string
Slide 3
Research Design
Phase 1: 2006 Phase 2: 2007
Baseline 1 Pre-Intervention
Post-
Baseline 2
Intervention
Follow-up
588
Slide 4
Research Design
Phase 1: 2006 Phase
Stage 2: 2007
Baseline 1 Pre-Intervention
Post-
Baseline 2
Intervention
Begins in Week 5 Follow-up
Runs for 8 weeks (10 week)
Slide 5
Slide 6
Praise in Public
Correct in Private
589
Slide 7
Slide 8
Watch out for

subtle behaviours
Slide 9
School Policy
590
Slide 10
School Policy
Begin working on school
policy so that it is specific
for your school;
Integrate some results;
Distribute your school
policy to students, staff
and parents.
Slide 11
Materials
Teacher Activity Book Music DVD with
(with curriculum student comments
mapping)
Poster
Student Activity Book
Activity Cards
Beyond Bullying DVD
2 parent brochures
4 DVDs from USA
Newsletter articles
Music CD
Electronic files
Slide 12
591
Slide 13 Please note: red line indicated total school average. Blue bar
represented individual school results
How Often Bullied by Other Students

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
month week
Slide 14
Longest Period Been Bullied

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
or two week several months several
week years
Slide 15
Types of Bullying
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
er
Never Hit, Rumours Student Laughed Making All of Others

been kicked, were ignored at fun of me these
build punched, started you ways
pushed
592
Slide 16
Bullying Others (In a Group)

80
70
60
50
40 In a group
30
20
10
0
month week
Slide 17
Bullying Others (On Own)

80
70
60
50
40 On own
30
20
10
0
month week
Slide 18
Where does bullying happen?

100%
90%
80%
70% Never
60% Almost Never
Sometimes
50%
Fairly often
40%
Very often
30% Always
20%
10%
0%
Playground Classroom Toilet Canteen Moving to On way On way to Library
and from home from School
class school
593
Slide 19
Is school safe for students?

45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
False Mostly More false More true Mostly true true
false than true than false
594
APPENDIX 6
Anti-Bullying School Policy Template
595
Anti-bullying policy for school X
Purpose
X Primary School actively seeks to provide students with a stimulating learning

environment that is safe. It is a fundamental right of everyone in our school community
to feel safe. It is the right of everyone to be able to come to our school each day without
fear of being intimidated, humiliated or threatened verbally or physically with harm.
Bullying denies this right to members of our school community and as such bullying is
not accepted in our school.
X Primary School holds the following expectations of all members of our school
community:

those differences.
This policy outlines the responsibilities of all staff and students and how parents can
assist, to ensure that our school is beyond bullying and safe for everyone.
What Is Bullying?
Bullying is made up of behaviours intended to deliberately hurt, threaten, frighten or

exclude someone by physical and non-physical means over extended periods of time. An
individual or group may direct these behaviours towards another individual or group.

They repeatedly verbally abuse a person or group by calling them unpleasant names,
by writing them nasty notes and/or messages or by using unpleasant gestures.
threatening physical harm or by destroying/taking their belongings without
permission.
Bullying may take one, two or all of these forms. Repeatedly means that they do these
things to that person or group the majority of the time they talk about them see them or
spend time around them.
596
Research has shown that bullying has negative, longterm consequences for all
involved.
Such consequences include:

For victims - constant feelings of rejection, low self-regard, fear, an inability to solve
problems with others in acceptable ways, relationship difficulties, and problems with
achieving full potential academically and socially;
For bullies - an increased risk of criminal behaviour.
As such, bullying behaviours have no place at this school.
Policy Aims
This policy aims to ensure:

intimidation;
strategies to prevent and address school bullying;
Teachers, parents, and students are committed to collaborate on maintaining a bully-
free environment;
Students are taught pro-social peer interaction skills, conflict resolution skills, and
are encouraged to and positively reinforced for interacting with members of the
school community in a positive manner; and
Teachers are aware of their role in fostering the knowledge and attitudes which will
be required to achieve the above aims.
Guidelines for Addressing Bullying
This school will address all bullying acts in a serious manner. Those who carry out
bullying will be given every opportunity to change their behaviour and reflect on the
consequences of their actions on others and choose more acceptable ways of behaving.
Everyone in our school will play a part in reducing and preventing bullying.
597
Staff Responsibilities
Staff of x Primary School will endeavour to:

Model positive relationships in their day to day dealings with members of the school
and model pro-social ways of resolving disputes;
Positively reinforce students for behaving in an appropriate pro-social manner;
Be knowledgeable about and educate students about the nature, causes, and
contents of this policy;
Respond immediately, decisively, and consistently to cases of bullying brought to
their attention by students, parents and/or colleagues;
Respond to early signs of distress in students. These early signs can include an
unusual lack of concentration or inappropriate behaviours such as aggressive
behaviour outbursts and poor class or school attendance;
Seek advice and support from colleagues when unsure as to how to respond to and
address specific bullying incidents; and
Encourage students to report situations of bullying by: listening carefully and
avoiding giving judgements when reports are made, and remaining calm and
understanding of the students/parents/colleagues concern.
Student Responsibilities
A strong anti-bullying stance by students contributes in a major way to making the

school a safe place. For this reason our school expects all students to:
Contribute to a safe learning environment by being respectful of others;
Positively interact with members of the school community in their day to day
dealings and resolve disputes in pro-social ways;
Be knowledgeable about the nature, causes and consequences of bullying, strategies
for preventing and addressing bullying, and the procedures that have been set in place
to address bullying episodes in this school;
Be aware that bullies rely on other people not to do or say anything to anyone about
their behaviour towards others so it is important to address bullying by offering to
help the target of the bully, or being vocal or ignoring bullies to show disapproval of
bullying, and reporting bullying incidents to teachers;
Watch for early signs of distress in other students such as temper outbursts,
absenteeism, or crying without apparent reason and seek support and advice to help
them; and
Reporting all bullying incidents to a trusted adult so that all incidents of bullying can
be addressed seriously.
598
Parent Assistance
Bullying can best be dealt with a community approach this is why our school
encourages parents to:
Be knowledgeable about the nature, causes, and consequences of bullying and the
procedures that have been set in place to address bullying episodes in this school;
Encourage children to interact positively with other people in their day to day
dealings and enact pro-social ways of resolving disputes;
Positively reinforce children for behaving in an appropriate pro-social manner;
Inform their children about effective strategies for dealing with bullying (e.g. the
need to inform a teacher and seek assistance if they are experiencing bullying at
school, the importance of not responding aggressively to bullies as this can serve to
intensify aggression);
Watch for warning signs such as: physical injuries, such as bruises; repeatedly losing
possessions; reluctance to go to school or talk about school; altered sleep patterns;
mood swings; changes in personality; few if any friends; lack of interest in life or
unexplained health problems;
Contact their childs teacher as early as possible if they suspect their child is being
bullied or is bullying other children;
appropriate for parents to approach alleged bullies or targets; and
Discuss bullying incidents with the school to discuss the strategies the school is using
to address a specific bullying incident and consult with parents as to how they may
be able to assist us to resolve the situation.
School Procedures for Addressing Bullying
Preventing and Addressing Bullying Via a Whole-School Policy
This policy is designed to use a whole-school approach whereby teachers, parents, and
students are actively involved in implementing this policy by working together to address
and prevent bullying.
The Role of Teachers
Teachers at x primary school will:

Reinforce students positive peer interactions in the classroom, school, and
playground;
Vigilantly monitor and proactively address bullying incidents according to the
schools management procedures;
599
Develop and implement a sequence of focussed curriculum activities that genuinely
educate students about the nature, causes, and consequences of bullying and
successful strategies for preventing and addressing bullying in the school context;
and
Actively engage students in promoting a positive school climate with zero
reinforcement and tolerance of bullying behaviours.
Parent Education
Parental support is crucial. The school will provide parents with information about:
The rationale for addressing school bullying and foster their involvement and
support;
The nature, causes and consequences of bullying for targets, bullies, bystanders, and
communities;
Successful strategies for encouraging their children to prevent and assist in
addressing bullying in the school context;
Educating Students
Students in our school are actively engaged in creating and shaping a positive school-
environment. This is achieved by educating students about:
The nature, causes, and consequences of bullying;
Target avoidance skills and resilience;
Avoiding reinforcing bullying behaviours;
The importance of reporting bullying incidents to teachers;
Where they can seek assistance;
Strategies they can implement to constantly promote a positive school climate; and
School procedures for addressing suspected bullying incidents.
600
Clear Procedures for Managing Bullying Incidents
All suspected bullying incidents will be taken seriously and investigated fully. This
policy includes the following management procedures (see Figure 1).

individually;
happens;
technique; and YES
IS THIS A 1ST NO
other
major
offences


parents; and
step.
breaking agreement;

Step 3: Thinking Time Lunch + Interview NO
WAS THERE A
Parents RESOLUTION?
Step 5: 1 Day Thinking Time + Interview
Parents
Step 6: Interview Parents. Referral to CBS or Praise student for taking control
other professional for educational, behavioural and following through
and emotional assessment to be considered.
Figure 1. Behaviour Management Procedures
*See Appendix 7 for Structured Interview Form and Thinking Time Template
601
FEW
FAIR
POSITIVE
DIRECTED DISCUSSION
GET
GAIN ATTENTION
EXPECTATION PROMPT
TO DO PROMPT
PRAISE ON TASK

WWD
SPECIFY/DESCRIBE
MODEL INTERNALISEC
ACCT
ATTENTION
CHOICE/CONSEQUENCE
TIME TO CHOSE
LOGICAL CONSEQUENCE
602
APPENDIX 7
Structured Interview Form and Thinking Time Template
603
Thinking Time Sheet
Name:
Year:
Class:
Teachers Name:


my break
604

605

Witnesses: ______________________________________________________

st nd
Date:___/___/___ Time: ____:_____am/pm

Please specify:

606
happening?
REVIEW DATE:
607
APPENDIX 8
Teacher Activity Book and Curriculum Mapping
608
Teacher Resource
Beyond Bullying:
How Children Can
Make a Real Difference
609
610
TEACHER RESOURCE
2007, Centre for Educational Research,

610
Contents
Week Topic Page
What is bullying? 4
1
What are the different types of bullying? 16
What are the differences between bullying and playful 24

2 teasing?
What is my schools policy on bullying? 30
Who is hurt by bullying? 34

3
What are the myths and the facts about bullying? 52
What can children do to help people feel good about

4 62
themselves?
5 What can we do to STOP the bullying? 72
6 What can be done to HELP? 88
7 Why is it important to TELL someone? 102
8 What else can we do to stop bullying? 112
611
This resource for teachers provides:
8 weeks worth of activities for the Beyond Bullying program;

Core activities, with extension activities listed; and
Curriculum mapping to each activity (these are guides and can be added
to if appropriate).
This teacher resource is set out in topics. Each topic begins with the
materials needed and curriculum mapping, then follows on with the
activities for students. Core activities represent those activities which are
fixed Beyond Bullying activities. The extension activities are provided as
optional (these are stated as EXTENSION ACTIVITY). The weeks
scheduled for these topics are provided on page 1 Contents.
PLEASE NOTE: There is a list of all activities on the

last page. Please tick off each activity as they are
completed with your class and return by fax, email, or
mail at the end of this program to the address given.
612
CURRICULUM MAPPING OF BEYOND BULLYING PROGRAM
The Beyond Bullying Program will assist students to meet curriculum

standards. While the activities in this book do provide students with important
curriculum outcomes, you may also like to be creative with the following
activities and use them to teach other curriculum areas. For example:
- with activity Song Lyrics from Topic 5, you could incorporate a
series of questions to meet the curriculum standards of MUS3.2 and
MUS 3.3 (from CA syllabus);
- when students are reading, you may like to incorporate elements so
that students are meeting Learning about Reading requirements for
the English Syllabus; or
- you may like to incorporate TS17, TS18, and TS19 (from ST
syllabus) into the activities.
These are just a few ideas for how you can incorporate other areas of KLA.
613
TOPIC 1:
What is bullying?
614
List of Materials (Topic 1)
Activities List of Materials

(extension activity in
italics)
Match-up In book under headings What is Bullying and When
is someone bullying.
Film Viewing and Beyond Bullying DVD (with animations). View entire
Discussion film.
Newspaper Reading On opposite page to activity.

Letter to the Editor On opposite page to activity.
Film Viewing Are you a bully? DVD (provided in pack). View entire
film.
Quick Quiz On same page.
615
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
What is bullying?
Activities Curriculum
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Match-up RS3.5
RS3.6
Film Viewing and COS3.1
Discussion V3
V4
TS3.1 TS1
INS3.3 35C6
TS3.2 TS15
IRS3.11
SLR3.13
GDS3.9
Newspaper Reading RS3.5
COS3.1
and Discussion RS3.6
V3 TS1
TS3.1
V4
TS3.2
Letter to the Editor WS3.9
WS3.10
WS3.11 TS16
WS3.13
WS3.14
Film Viewing GDS3.9
WS3.10 35C6
IRS3.11
Quick Quiz COS3.1
TS1
GDS3.9 TS3.1
TS15 35C6
V3 TS3.2
TS16
V4
616
What is bullying?
How these activities will help you to
address bullying.
In these activities you will find out:
What bullying is so you can help stop it;
What bullying is not; and
What other people think about bullying.
To help prevent and stop bullying it is important to know some things

about bullying. Below is some information you may like to read to help
you.
What is bullying?
Bullying is acting in a way to hurt, threaten, frighten, or exclude

someone on purpose;
Individuals or groups of people can bully;
Bullying can be physical (e.g. hitting) or non-
physical (e.g. name calling, excluding people
from a group); and
Bullying can be done to the same person or
group over and over again.
When is someone bullying?

An individual or group is bullying another person
or group when they continue to:
617
Call people nasty names, write nasty notes, make-up stories about
them, or use mean gestures;
Physically harm them or intimidate them by threatening physical harm;

Destroy or take their belongings without permission;
Make nasty phone calls and write mean text messages; and
Leave someone out of activities or games.
Bullying is not:
Criminal behaviour (e.g. violence);
Rough and tumble play that is playful;
A misunderstanding between friends;
Playful teasing; or
A one off physical fight.
Match Up
Match the sentence beginning with the sentence ending by drawing a line to see what bullying is.
Bullying is acting in a way to can bully
non-physical (e.g. name calling, excluding people from a

group);
Bullying often takes place
Bullying can be physical (e.g. hitting) or hurt, threaten, frighten or exclude someone on purpose.
Individuals or groups of people over and over again
Bullying can be done to the same person or group over long periods of time
618
Film Viewing
Watch the film Beyond Bullying: New
Successful Strategies to Empower
children to Make a Real Difference to
see what other people think about
bullying and what should be done
about it.
Discussion
Discuss with a friend or small group what you have learnt from the film in relation to
the following questions. Share your thoughts with your class. You might like to write
some notes here.
What is bullying?
Why is it important for children to help stop bullying?
What do Lia and Ty from the video suggest we do to stop bullying?
Newspaper Reading
Some experts on bullying worked together to discuss
what students can do if they are bullied. Read the
newspaper article on the next page to find out what
they suggest you can do if you are being bullied.
619
Newspaper Source:
The Daily Telegraph.
Surry Hills, N.S.W.:
17th March 2005, pg. 18
620
Discussion
Discuss with a friend what the experts say you can do if you are being bullied. You
might like to talk about the following things which the newspaper says:
If you are being bullied at school but are too nervous to speak up, write it
down.
Stomp out bullying is violent language.
Gillian Calvert said kids often indicated they had to deal with bullies
themselves or with the help of friends.
Letter to the Editor (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

Write a letter to a newspaper editor explaining how todays children can change
bullying.
621
Dear Editor,
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
622
Film Viewing
Watch the film Are you a bully?. As you watch the film write down here the types
of bullying you saw on the film.
Taking peoples things
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
Below is a summary of the film. Can you add anything else to your list?
Are you a bully? explains that bullying does not just happen in
physical ways, but by way of controlling other people, excluding
someone, or spreading rumours about another person.
There are 6 examples of different types of bullying. These are:

1) Mark trips Chaz over in a bus to show how bullies seek power
and attention;
2) Melanie intimidates her sister Jennifer to have control over her
and get what she wants;
3) Abby teases Lauren to make herself feel good;
4) Alex bullies Penny into letting him copy her homework. He does
this by making her feel guilty, and threatening her about lies;
5) Denise excludes Amy at the amusement park; and
6) Nicky gossips about another student, telling lies.
Summary modified from Source:

Hoover, E. (2006). Bully Smart: Are you a bully. In D. Giachetti (Ed.), The Bully Proof Kit, Human
623
Quick Quiz
In the first column is a list of

behaviours that may or may not
be bullying. Look at each one and
discuss with a friend whether the
behaviour listed is bullying. If it
is bullying tick the column yes.
If the behaviour is not bullying
tick the column no. Discuss
your answers with your class.
Is this bullying? Yes No
1 Having a joke with a friend that you both find funny.
2 Spreading rumours that are not true about someone.
Sending a mean text message to the same person again

3
and again.
Playing a game that gets a bit rough but that you both
4
enjoy.
5 Teasing someone so much they feel hurt and upset.
6 Threatening to hurt someone.
7 Saying mean things to someone over and over again.
Teasing a friend about their favourite sports team and

8
they tease you back.
Always leaving someone out of games in the

9
playground.
Making mean phone calls to the same person over and

10
over again.
11 Leaving someone out of class activities all of the time.
624
TOPIC 2:
What are the different types of

bullying?
625

italics)
Sorting On opposite page to activity. Answer to types on next
page.
Bully Snap Use cards from sorting activity.
626
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
What are the different types of bullying?
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Sorting COS3.1 TS1
TS3.1
GDS3.9 TS15 35C6
TS3.2
V4 TS16
Bully Snap COS3.1
INS3.3
TS1
V2 TS3.1
TS15 35C6
V3 TS3.2
TS16
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
627
What are
the
different
types of bullying?
address bullying.
What the different types of bullying are.
Sorting
Cut out the cards on the next page. With a friend see if you can sort the cards into four different types of bullying. See if you can give each type of
bullying a name and write your answers below. Discuss with your class your answers.
1. _________________________ 2. __________________________
3. _________________________ 4. __________________________
628
Biting
Making nasty
jokes about Spreading lies
people
Excluding Taking other

peoples money or Hitting
people things
Threatening
Name calling Kicking
violence
Ruining
Pinching Pushing
friendships
Leaving someone
Mean or rude
Scratching out of class
gestures
activities
Sending nasty Damaging a

Ignoring someone
notes Persons Property
Mean Nasty
Punching
phone calls Comments
Mean email Mean

Leaving people
photographs
out of games messages emailed to others
629
630
Research has found that there are at least 4 main types of bullying:
Physical bullying (e.g., hitting, pinching);
Social bullying (e.g., excluding people, isolating people);
Verbal bullying (e.g., calling people names); and
Cyber bullying (using technology to bully such as email and mobile phones).
Bully Snap
Mix your cards up with a group of friends. Put them together then deal one at a time to each person.
Each person takes turns to lay down one card at a time. When any player sees 2 cards in a row that
are the same form of bullying they put their hands down on the pile of cards and call bully snap and
explain what type of bullying the cards are (e.g., verbal, social, physical, cyber). The first person to
touch the top card and describe the type of bullying that is the same gets to keep the whole pile of
cards. The winner is the person who has the most cards when the teacher says the game is finished.
631
TOPIC 3:
What are the differences

between bullying and
playful teasing?
632

italics)
Finding the difference
between bullying and On same page and next page.
teasing
Role-Playing NA
633
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
What are the differences between bullying and playful teasing?
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Finding the difference COS3.1
RS3.5
between bullying and V3
RS3.6
teasing V4
Role-Playing COS3.1
INS3.3
V1 DRA3.1
TS1
V3 TS3.1 DRA3.2
TS15 35C6
V4 TS3.2 DRA3.3
TS16
COS3.1 DRA3.4
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
634
What are the
differences between
bullying and teasing?
address bullying.
What the differences are between bullying

and teasing so that you can tell the
difference between these behaviours.
People can wrongly think that someone was only teasing when they were
actually bullying. To find out more about what is the difference between
bullying and teasing read the information below.
Playful Teasing Bullying
Is done in fun and no harm is intended. Is done to harm others either physically or to make them feel sad.
Happens now and again. Happens often.
Occurs between people who are friends, Puts people down.

or people who like one another. It does not make friends.
The other person knows you are joking. The other person knows you are serious.
Is done by someone who is liked as a friend. Is done by a person who is not a friend and has more power.
635
Finding the Difference Between Bullying and Teasing
Discuss with a friend or a small group

what you think are the differences
between teasing and bullying. Read the
scenario in the first column. In the
second column circle whether you
think this scenario is an example of
bullying or teasing. Discuss your
answers with your class.
Bullying or playful teasing?
James loves to tease his good friend Robert every Bullying

time Roberts favourite football team loses a
game. Robert likes to tease James back when Teasing
James favourite team loses as well.
Gertrude likes to tease Emily - a new girl at school Bullying

- about how she wears her hair. Gertrude does this
every day in the playground. Emily is upset that
Gertrude says nasty things about her hairstyle. Teasing
Tony teases Emilio a boy younger than him Bullying

about how horrible his lunch looks every day.
Emilio tries to avoid Tony at lunch time. Teasing
Stuart and Ha play footy together. They like to

play at each others houses after school. Bullying
Sometimes they play pretty rough and Stuart
always wins because he is bigger. But he always Teasing
checks Ha is okay. Ha doesnt really mind and
looks forward to the day he beats Stuart.
Kate likes to whisper to her friends stories that are Bullying

not true about Michelle. Michelle is upset that
Kate does this. Teasing
636
Martin tells other people all the time that Angelo Bullying
says horrible things about them even though he
doesnt. Angelo is losing friends because his Teasing
friends think that Martin is telling the truth.
Kelly and Amy like to put each other down Bullying

because they like different types of music. Kelly
and Amy are good friends and like to joke with Teasing
each other about this.
Role-Playing (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

With a friend or a small group write or act out a 1-2 minute roleplay that is an
example of bullying or teasing. Either read out loud or act out your scenario to your
class. See how many people in your class can guess whether your scenario is an
example of teasing or bullying and can explain why.
637
TOPIC 4:
What is my schools policy

on bullying?
638

italics)
Discussion From school.
Letting others know On same page.
639
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
What is my schools policy on bullying?
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE HSIE
italics)
Discussion V2
V3
V4
COS3.1
TS3.1 TS1 SSS3.7
DMS3.2 35C6
TS3.2 TS15 SSS3.8
PSS3.5
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
SLS3.13
Letting others know MUS3.1
MUS3.2
OR
V2 SSS3.7
TS16
PSS3.5 SSS3.8
VAS3.1
VAS3.2
VAS3.3
VAS3.4
640
What is my schools
policy on bullying?
address bullying.
What is your schools policy on bullying,

and how does this affect you.
Discussion
Discuss with your teacher your schools policy on bullying.
Letting Others Know

You might like to create a poem, jingle, song or poster that lets other people know
about your schools policy. Theres an example poem below to get you started.
I arrived at my school at half past nine
Talked with my friends and then went inside
My teacher gave us a new set of rules
And we thought they were pretty cool.
(Rule 1;
Rule2;
Rule 3:
We said, ok thats fine
Late that afternoon when the kids were playing
And everyone was mucking around
One of the kids started picking on me
It wasn't funny, I wish they could see
The other kids said Weve had enough
Cant take no more,
Hey you bully get out the door
Well be listening, well take a look,
How dare you be nasty to our friend cool Brooke!!!
641
TOPIC 5:
Who is hurt by bullying?
642

italics)
Discussion On opposite page to activity.
Film Viewing and Beyond Bullying DVD: Chapter about How bullying
Discussion affects you. View until next red title comes on
screen.
Song Lyrics Music CD provided with 3 songs on it. I wish I knew
is the 1st song. Lyrics on same page.
Poetry Reading On same page.
Newspaper Reading
On opposite page to activity.
and Discussion
Discussion On same page.
Match-up On next few pages with dotted lines.
Design a Brochure/
NA
Poster
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
Who is hurt by bullying?
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Discussion V2 TS3.1
V3 TS3.2 TS1
35C6
COS3.1 RS3.5 TS15
IRS3.11 RS3.6
Film Viewing and V2
Discussion
V3 TS3.1 TS1
35C6
COS3.1 TS3.2 TS15
IRS3.11
643
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Song Lyrics TS3.1
V2
TS3.2
V3 TS1
RS3.5 MUS3.4 35C6
COS3.1 TS15
RS3.6
IRS3.11
WS3.11
Poetry Reading RS3.5
RS3.6
Newspaper Reading V3 RS3.5
and Discussion V4 RS3.6 TS1
35C6
COS3.1 TS3.1 TS15
GDS3.9 TS3.2
Discussion V3 RS3.5
V4 RS3.6 TS1
35C6
COS3.1 TS3.1 TS15
GDS3.9 TS3.2
Match-up V3 RS3.5
V4 RS3.6 TS1
35C6
COS3.1 TS3.1 TS15
GDS3.9 TS3.2
Discussion V3
V4
RS3.5
COS3.1 TS1
RS3.6
DMS3.2 TS15 35C6
TS3.1
INS3.3 TS19
TS3.2
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
Design a Brochure/ COS3.1
VAS3.1
Poster DMS3.2
VAS3.2
INS3.3 TS16 35C6
VAS3.3
GDS3.9
VAS3.4
IRS3.11
644
Who is hurt by
bullying?
address bullying.
This activity will help you to see that bullying

needs to be taken seriously. When you do this
you will understand that:
Bullying affects lots of different people

not just targets of bullying;
Bullying can create long-term problems

for bullies, targets, and communities;
Bullying harms bullies, targets, other

school students, families and
communities; and
How hurtful bullying really is.
Why is Bullying a Serious Issue?
Bullying has made some children so unhappy that they cant have
fun anymore, or cannot go to school, or cannot enjoy their life.
1 in 6 students in Australian schools is bullied at least once a week.
1 in 10 Australian students bully other people a lot.
645
Discussion
Discuss with your class how the information on the opposite page helps us to
understand that bullying is a serious issue.
Film Viewing
Watch the segment of the film Beyond Bullying: New Successful Strategies to
Empower Children to Make a Real Difference where people talk about how bullying
affects people.
Discussion
Discuss with a friend or small group some of the ways people describe in the film
how bullying can affect people.
Song Lyrics
Gillian Reynolds wrote the song I wish I knew for the film you have watched.
Listen to the song. Below are the lyrics. What is the person in the song telling other
people about how bullying hurts them and what they wish for. Discuss your thoughts
with a friend. You might like to make notes here. Share what you thought with your
class.
I wish I knew by Gillian Reynolds
Sometimes my world gets lonely,

Sometimes my mind goes black
I think about those useless conversations I never want to go back
Sometimes my room gets lonely
Sometimes my thoughts go black
I freak about those useless confrontations Please don't ever send me back
I wish I knew just how to handle it
I wish I knew what makes them cold
A tug of war at school and in the streets I don't know what the fights are for
I never felt so alone before
So unsafe and insecure
My fears won't subside
I hide within my mind
I'm alone and so unsure
Sometimes the pain gets too much
Sometimes I just lose track
I think about those useless confrontations just let me lay here on the tracks
I wish I knew just how to handle it
I'm so unsafe and insecure
I wish someone could just reach out to me I wish they'd all just let me be
646
Poetry Reading
Read the poem below. How is bullying hurting this person?
Untitled by Gillian Reynolds
There's a little girl at school

she has many many friends
She won't let me sit with her
I'm on my own again
She teases me and pulls my hair

and gets her friends to laugh
It really hurts my feelings
How I wish this day would pass
There's a boy who sits alone

every day at lunch
The other boys poke fun at him
He's never with the bunch
I often see him crying

and I think it's oh so sad
Kids can be so mean
and bullying's so bad
Kids get told not to like me

Deep down I know they do
Cause when bully's not around
They'll play with me at school
Newspaper Reading
Read the newspaper article on the next page.
647
) *
' '
' +
' ,
' + - '
!"# & ,
&./
) 0
'
) ' + + ' '

' '
'
# ' ' + - +
' ' + '
+ 0 '
& , 1 +
'
2 - +
-
2 $ * '
+ & , + 1
' '
' '
% &
345
'
!"# $
% & $ '
(
Newspaper Source:
648
BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/education/6539989.stm
Published: 2007/04/10 05:12:25 GMT
Discussion
Discuss with a friend.
What can make cyber bullying cruel and relentless?

How can this affect people?
How are internet companies making excuses for
allowing mean things to be posted on the web?
Do you think this will help to prevent bullying in
society? Why?
Discussion
Discuss with your friend or group other ways that bullying affects people.
Write down here some of the ways people are affected by bullying.
E.g. Makes going to school hard for victims.
Targets Bullying can cause:
Painful physical injuries;

Emotional harm;
Feelings of anxiety and unhappiness;
Long-term problems such as not being able
to make friends or being able to feel good
about oneself as an adult.
It can also result in targets not being able to do

as well as they could have at school and so
limits victims life opportunities.
Bullies School bullies can continue to bully when

they become adults so much so that many
bullies end up in jail.
Bullies identified by age 8 are six times
more likely to be convicted of a crime by age
24 and five times more likely than non-
bullies to end up with a serious criminal
record by age 30.
Since bullies often dont know how to stop
their behaviour they also have difficulty later
in life making friends.
649
Other school students Students who see bullying taking place at
school can feel unsafe because they are
scared that it might happen to them.
Feeling unsafe at school can lead people to
feel frightened when they are in the
community as well so they cant enjoy their
lives fully.
Parents and families When a child has been a victim of bullying

parents and families are angered and hurt.
Parents and family members can be
distressed if they dont know how to work
with the school to stop bullying incidents.
Communities Bullies often continue their violent

behaviour in the community.
The community has to spend large amounts
of tax payers dollars on bringing bullies to
justice.
Bullying continues to affect victims, bullies, families, and the community after the
school years.
Matching
Table 1 is a list of people that are affected by bullying. Table 2 is a list of some of the
ways people are affected by bullying.
Cut out the cards and lay down the cards in Table 1 that list people who are affected
by bullying across the top of your desk.
Cut out the cards in Table 2. With a friend match each of the ways people are
affected by bullying to the person most likely affected in this way by sorting your
cards into the different piles. Discuss your answers with your class.
650
651
Table 1:
Targets Parents and families
Bullies Communities
Other school students
652
653
Table 2:
Painful physical injuries Often continue their violent

behaviour after they leave school
Many of these people end up in jail

When a child has been a target of
after they leave school
bullying these people are angered
and hurt
Not being able to do as well as they

Feel sad
could have at school
Can feel unsafe watching bullying

Can be very distressed if they dont
because they are scared that it
know how to work with the school to
might happen to them
stop bullying
Has to spend large amounts of

money on bringing bullies to justice Feel lonely
Have difficulty later in life

controlling their tempers, and
Feel worthless
making friends
654
655
Table 2 continued:
Six times more likely to be

Feel frightened when they are in the
convicted of a crime by age 24
community as well so they cant
enjoy their lives fully.
Long-term emotional problems such

Five times more likely to end up
as not being able to make friends or
with a serious criminal record by
being able to feel good about oneself
age 30
as an adult
Are frightened to trust other people

Often away from school
More people having emotional

Feel school is not safe problems
656
657
The Benefits of Addressing Bullying in Schools
Discussion
Discuss with friends some good ideas for addressing bullying and see if you can add
to the lists below.
It is a good idea to help bullies stop Learn to control their actions;

bullying so they can. Become aware that what they do is
bullying and is hurtful;
Avoid going to jail when they are
older;
Help to stop bullying and
encourage other bullies to stop
bullying;
_________________________
_________________________
It is a good idea to help targets deal Go to school and feel safe;

with bullying so they can Learning how to put a stop to
bullying;
Feel like they belong;
_________________________
_________________________
It is a good idea to show bystanders Know what to do to help stop

how to help prevent bullying so they bullying;
can Help all children feel safe at
school;
Protect the person being picked on
and support the bully in trying to
stop bullying;
_________________________
_________________________
658
Help them to contribute to stop
It is a good idea to encourage parents bullying;
and Families to be involved so they Encourage their children to prevent
can bullying;
Support their children in dealing
with bullying;
_________________________
_________________________
Help people feel safe in the

It is a good idea to involve the community;
community when preventing bullying Reduce violence in the community;
so _________________________
_________________________
Design a Brochure/Poster (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

Devise a brochure or poster that explains to others how bullying affects lots of
different people and that these effects often continue beyond the school years. Try to
include pictures to catch peoples attention. Put these in places around your school
where other students and visitors to your school can read them.
659
TOPIC 6:
What are the Myths and

Facts About Bullying?
660

italics)
Film Viewing and Beyond Bullying DVD. View chapter about Myths.
Discussion View 4 myths (ends with Seraya music clip).
Discussion Myth cards (provided in pack). Give one or two cards

to 2-3 students (or as many that will go around the
room until all cards are gone).
Match the Facts Myth cards (provided in pack), and Table 4 on next
pages.
Cartoon Interpreting On same page and next page.
Debate NA
Design a Poster NA
Make a Class
Newspaper or a NA
Website
661
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
What are the myths and facts about bullying?
(extension activity in italics) PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
Film Viewing and Discussion V2 TS3.1
V3 TS3.2 TS1
V4 RS3.5 TS15
COS3.1 RS3.6
Discussion TS3.1
V2
TS3.2 TS1
V3
RS3.5 TS15
COS3.1
RS3.6
Match the Facts V2
V3
TS1
COS3.1 TS3.1
TS15 35C6
INS3.3 TS3.2
TS16
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
Cartoon Interpreting WS3.9
VAS3.3
WS3.10
VAS3.4
WS3.11
Debate V1
V2
V3
TS1 DRAS3.1
V4 TS3.1
TS15 DRAS3.2 35C6
COS3.1 TS3.2
TS16 DRAS3.4
INS3.3
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
Design a Poster COS3.1 VAS3.1
INS3.3 VAS3.2
TS16 35C6
GDS3.9 VAS3.3
IRS3.11 VAS3.4
Make a Class Newspaper or a TS3.1
Website COS3.1 TS1
TS3.2
INS3.3 TS15 VAS3.1
WS3.9 35C6
GDS3.9 TS16 VAS3.2
WS3.10
IRS3.11 TS38
WS3.11
662
What are the Myths and
Facts About Bullying?
address bullying.
This activity will help you learn more about:
Some of the common myths that persist

about bullying;
The facts that debunk these myths; and
The causes of bullying.
Film Viewing
Watch the segment of the film Beyond
Bullying: New Successful Strategies to
Empower Children to Make a Real
Difference that looks at some of the
myths about bullying.
Discussion
Discuss with a friend or a small group which of the myths listed on the next page (in Table 3) were
discussed in the video. Put a circle around each one that was discussed.
663
Table 3:
Myth The Facts
Bullying is just for fun. Bullying is not done as a joke, it is done to hurt people.
Bullying is not fun, it hurts people and makes them feel

sad.
Bullying can hurt bullies, victims, and communities long

after children have left school.
Bullying is funny to People only watch and laugh at others being bullied
watch. because they are scared they will be bullied next and are
glad it is not happening to them.
Encouraging the bully is the wrong thing to do and

doesnt help stop bullying.
Only boys bully. Girls also bully boys and other girls.
Girl bullies are more likely to use non-physical bullying

behaviours than boy bullies.
Some girl bullies use physical bullying.
Bullies are tough. Bullies are cowards as they only pick on people who
cant defend themselves against them either physically or
verbally (e.g. younger students).
Bullies dont target people who are stronger than them,

can make a fool of them, or who have more friends than
they do.
Bullying is only A great deal of bullying is non-physical where bullies

bullying when you hurt others by calling them names or ruining their
keep physically hurting friendships.
someone.
Only individuals bully. Groups of students can also bully either individual
students or other groups of students.
664
Bullies dont know, or Bullies manipulate people to hurt them. They know what
are not smart enough they are doing.
to know what they are
doing. Bullies can be anyone from the smartest student in the
school to a less smart student.
Even students who are really smart at school work can be not
smart about knowing how to properly treat other people.
They were asking for People who get bullied dont want to be bullied, they
it. want friends just like everybody else.
Targets are chosen by bullies because they cant defend

themselves against them, they do not choose bullies to
bully them.
People who are not in positions of power do not ask to be

bullied, bullies have power over their targets.
Bullying is not about justice it is about picking on and

hurting other people.
There is no excuse for threatening or hurting another

person.
Bullies only pick on Bullies pick on anyone they see as not being able to
children who are defend themselves. Targets as do bullies come from
different. different backgrounds in all shapes and sizes.
People have to learn to A target who has experienced bullying for a long period
stand up for is unable to defend themselves against a bully.
themselves. Just hit the
bully back. Bullying is not character building or good for anyone in
any way.
It is impossible for a less powerful person to stand up to a

bully.
Trying to bully bullies back by hitting or verbally abusing

them can make matters a lot worse as the target is not in a
position to defend themselves.
665
It was just a bit of fun. Bullying always harms the target. It is not harmless.
No harm was done.
Bullies deliberately intend to harm others.
The harm that bullies can cause can make schooling and
life after school can be really hard for targets. It is not
fun.
Students learn to be Most parents try hard to teach their children to respect
bullies at home. There other children.
is nothing that can be
done at school. Some students can learn to bully others from members of
their family or from some of their friends. These students
can learn better ways of behaving from other members of
their family, other school friends, and teachers.
Some parents may not have the skills to teach their

children how to act with other children. These children
need to be helped by other students and teachers to learn
better ways of behaving both at school and at home.
Discussion
Read the myths and the facts from the myth card your teacher gives you (you may
also like to look at Table 3 above). Discuss with a friend how you would explain in
your own words the facts that debunk that myth to another person. Then explain this
to your class.
Match the Facts

Make 4 6 teams of students. Place all myth cards at the front of the room so everyone can see them,
and so that only the myth faces up (i.e. along the blackboard). Ask a person to be the game host. The
game host reads out one at a time the facts below in Table 4 in turn to each team. The team who has a
turn is asked to go to the front to decide what myth the facts debunk. One point is given by the game
host for each correct answer.
666
Table 4:
Girls also bully boys and other girls.
The harm that bullies can cause can make schooling and life after school hell on earth
for targets. It is not fun.
Some students can learn to bully others from members of their family or from some
of their friends. These students can learn better ways of behaving from other
members of their family, other school friends, and teachers.
Bullies pick on anyone they see as not being able to defend themselves. Targets as do
bullies come from different backgrounds in all shapes and sizes.
Bullies deliberately intend to harm others.
Bullies are cowards as they only pick on people who cant defend themselves against
them either physically or verbally (e.g. younger students).
Groups of students can also bully either individual students or other groups of
students.
Some parents may not have the skills to teach their children how to act with other
children. These children need to be helped by other students and teachers to learn
better ways of behaving both at school and at home.
Bullies dont target people who are stronger than them, can make a fool of them, or
who have more friends than they do.
Trying to bully bullies back by hitting or verbally abusing them can make matters a
lot worse as the target is not in a position to defend themselves.
A target who has experienced bullying for a long period is unable to defend
themselves against a bully. Bullying is not character building or good for anyone in
any way.
There is no excuse for threatening or hurting another person.
Targets are chosen by bullies because they cant defend themselves against them (e.g.
younger students), targets do not choose bullies to bully them.
Girl bullies are more likely to use non-physical bullying behaviours than boy bullies.
A great deal of bullying is non-physical where bullies hurt others by calling them
names or ruining their friendships.
667
Table 4 continued:
Bullies manipulate people to hurt them. They know what they are doing.
It is impossible for a less powerful person to stand up to a bully.
Most parents try hard to teach their children to respect other children.
Some girl bullies use physical bullying.
Bullying is not about justice it is about picking on and hurting other people.
Even students who are really smart at school work can be not smart about knowing
how to properly interact with other people.
Bullies can be anyone from the smartest student in the school to a less smart student.
Bullying always harms the target. It is not harmless.
People who are not in positions of power do not ask to be bullied, bullies have power
over their targets.
Cartoon Interpreting (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

Look at the following cartoons that display a myth about bullying. Write some points
under each one explaining the facts.
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
668
___________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Debate
Debate with a small group one of the myths from the myth cards.
Designing a Poster (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

Create a poster that debunks with facts one of the myths above about bullying. Try to
include a funny cartoon that helps to debunk the myth to catch peoples attention.
Hang your poster up in your school so that other students and visitors to your school
can learn the facts.
Make a Class Newspaper or a Website

Take one of the myths about bullying and write a newspaper story debunking
the myth. You may like to interview someone about the myth. If you have
made a poster, include your poster on the page. You may also like to put these
into a class newspaper or publish them on a website.
669
TOPIC 7:
What can children do to help

people feel good about
themselves?
670

italics)
Discussion On previous page.
Find the Key Points On same page.
Discussion On same and next page.
Using the Right
On next page.
Words
Role-Playing NA
Reading Book: Bully by Janine Amos. Inside this book is
Sharons Story.
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
What can children do to help people feel good about themselves?
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Discussion V2
V3 TS3.1
V4 TS3.2
COS3.1 RS3.5 TS1
35C6
DMS3.2 RS3.6 TS15
INS3.3 WS3.10
PSS3.5 WS3.11
IRS3.11
Find the Key Points DMS3.2
INS3.3 RS3.5
35C6
GDS3.9 RS3.6
IRS3.11
671
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Discussion V2
V3 TS3.1
V4 TS3.2 TS1
35C6
COS3.1 RS3.5 TS15
GDS3.9 RS3.6
IRS3.11
Discussion V2
V3
V4
TS3.1
COS3.1
TS3.2 TS1
DMS3.2 35C6
WS3.10 TS15
INS3.3
WS3.11
PSS3.5
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
Using the Right DMS3.2
TS3.1
Words INS3.3 TS1
TS3.2
PSS3.5 TS15 35C6
RS3.5
GDS3.9 TS19
RS3.6
IRS3.11
Role-Playing V1
V2
V3
V4 DRAS3.1
TS1
COS3.1 TS3.1 DRAS3.2
TS15 35C6
DMS3.2 TS3.2 DRAS3.3
TS16
INS3.3 DRAS3.4
PSS3.5
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
Reading GDS3.9 RS3.5
35C6
IRS3.11 RS3.6
672
What can children do to help
people feel good about
themselves?
address bullying.
Some bullies bully because they dont feel

good about themselves. These activities will
help you to:
Act in a respectful way towards others;

and
Help people feel good about themselves
Acting in a Way That Respects Others
An important way that students can help to address bullying in their school is by
acting in a way that respects others. This helps other students to feel good about
themselves and will make you feel good too as you know you have acted in a way to
respect other people. Importantly acting respectfully can help other students learn
how to act in this way also by watching you model how to act in an appropriate way.
You can also help people to understand when they are acting in a way that respects
others by telling them so when you see them acting in this way. Letting people know
they are acting in an appropriate way often helps them to understand what sorts of
behaviour other people value. When people are told that the way they are behaving
is appreciated it is also likely that they will repeat such behaviours.
If you can help teach people in your school to act respectfully towards one another
you can help reduce bullying as bullies often do not know how to act in appropriate
ways and need to be taught by others.
673
Discussion
Discuss with a small group of students some of the ways that you can show you act in
a way that respects others.
Write down some of your groups thoughts below. Share with your class your
groups thoughts.
e.g. Listening carefully when someone has something to say, even though you may
disagree with.
____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
To find out another way that students can help address bullying read
the information in the box below.
Helping Others Feel Good About Themselves
One of the main reasons bullies bully is because they dont feel good about
themselves in other areas of their school life. This leads bullies to try and make
themselves feel good about themselves by picking on people. This leads bullies
to have a false sense of power.
Being bullied also makes targets feel miserable. It can make a target feel bad
about themselves both immediately and for a long time after leaving school.
Helping all students in your school to feel good about themselves in relation to
what they do well can make your school a nicer place for everyone to be. It can
also help bullies to feel good about themselves in relation to something that
they do well that is valued by other students. This can help reduce bullying as
bullies do not feel the need to hurt others to feel good about themselves. They
can feel good in regards to something that they do well.
Helping targets of bullying feel good about themselves can also help them to
not take what bullies say to them seriously and help them feel better about
themselves.
Find the Key Points

Underline the key points in the box above that describe how helping other people to
feel good about themselves can help to address bullying.
674
Discussion
Can how people think about themselves influence their behaviour? Try to predict
with a friend or a small group why people act the way they do in the case studies
below. Share your thoughts with your class.
Case study 1
Gertrude's friends always ask her for help when thinking up new dances for
dance class. Her friends say that she is really good at thinking up new dance
routines. Gertrude enjoys helping her friends
to do this and always agrees to assist them
even when she is very busy.
Case study 2
Nathan enjoys playing soccer and always
plays for the local team. He is a good, steady
soccer player. Recently a bully in Nathans
soccer team kept telling him he was hopeless
at soccer after every game. This year Nathan has decided not to try out for the
local soccer team even though last year he scored at least 2 goals in every
game.
Case study 3
Michelle has always been told that she is
hopeless at school work. Michelle spends
her time at school bullying students
younger than her about them not being
very smart.
Discussion
Discuss with a friend the questions below and write your thoughts about how you
could make people with this sort of problem feel good about themselves.
What sort of things could you do to let a friend know that you think highly of
them when they:
* make a real effort to try to get along with someone they dont like very much.
675
receive an award for doing something well.
control their temper when dealing with someone else.
walk away from a bully.
Using the Right Words

There are some positive things you can say to help a bully stop bullying and there are
also some things that are disrespectful that can make things worse. On the next page
put a tick next to the helpful statements and a cross next to the unhelpful ones. You
can also add your own at the end of the table.
676
1 Why are you picking on Lisa? You know better than that.
2 Please dont say that about me it makes me feel very

unhappy.
3 You are so stupid.
4 Im cooler than you so leave me alone.
5 Does it make you feel good to make me so sad.
6 I dont want a friend that is a bully. I know you dont mean

to do it but please stop doing it.
7 If you keep saying that Im going to make you sorry.
8 You are making Alan unhappy when you keep teasing him
and it is making the rest of our group unhappy. Please think
about what you are doing.
9 I feel that you are being mean to me when you get other
children to laugh at me. I would like you to stop doing it.
10 I would like you to stop annoying me.
11 I dont like mean phone calls. If it continues my parents

will be reporting the phone number that dialled to the
police.
12
13
677
Role-Playing
Roleplay with your group or describe to your class a scenario about how you can act
in a respectful way towards others or how you could point out to others when they are
behaving in a way that respects others. For example, model how to agree to disagree
or walk away from an argument that is getting too touchy so that other students can
see problems can be solved without bullying.
Reading
Read Sharons Story by Janine Amos. How did the teacher help Sharon to feel good
about herself?
678
TOPIC 8:
What can we do to STOP

the bullying?
679

italics)
Reading and
Book: Stop picking on me by Pat Thomas
Discussion
Film Viewing Help! Im a Bully DVD (provided in pack). View entire
film.
Role-Playing NA
Writing a Big Book NA
Reading Book: Bully by Janine Amos. Inside this book is
Lis Story.
Sorting On opposite page.
Role-Playing NA
Letter Writing On same page.
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
What can we do to STOP the bullying?
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Reading and V2
Discussion V3
TS3.1
V4
TS3.2 TS1
COS3.1 35C6
RS3.5 TS15
INS3.3
RS3.6
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
680
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Film Viewing V2
V3 TS3.1
V4 TS3.2 TS1
35C6
COS3.1 WS3.10 TS15
INS3.3 WS3.11
IRS3.11
Discussion V2
V3
V4
COS3.1 TS3.1
TS1
DMS3.2 TS3.2
TS15 35C6
INS3.3 WS3.10
TS19
PSS3.5 WS3.11
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
SLS3.13
Role-Playing V1
V2
V3
V4
DRAS3.1
COS3.1 TS1
TS3.1 DRAS3.2
DMS3.2 TS15 35C6
TS3.2 DRAS3.3
INS3.3 TS16
DRAS3.4
PSS3.5
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
SLS3.13
Writing a Big Book DMS3.2 WS3.9
INS3.3 WS3.10
PSS3.5 WS3.11 TS16 35C6
GDS3.9 WS3.13
IRS3.11 WS3.14
681
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Find the Key Points
DMS3.2
INS3.3 RS3.5
35C6
IRS3.11 RS3.6
PHS3.12
Reading
V1
V2
V3
V4
TS3.1
COS3.1
TS3.2 TS1
DMS3.2 35C6
RS3.5 TS15
INS3.3
RS3.6
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
Sorting
V1
V2
V3
V4
COS3.1
TS3.1
DMS3.2 TS16 35C6
TS3.2
INS3.3
PSS3.5
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
682
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Discussion V1
V2
V3
V4
COS3.1
DMS3.2 TS3.1 TS1
35C6
INS3.3 TS3.2 TS15
PSS3.5
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
Role-Playing V1
V2
V3
V4
COS3.1 DRAS3.1
TS1
TS15 35C6
INS3.3 TS3.2 DRAS3.3
TS16
PSS3.5 DRAS3.4
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
Letter Writing V1
COS3.1
INS3.3
TS16 35C6
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
SLS3.13
683
What can we do to STOP
the bullying?

address bullying.
These activities will help you to:
Learn about what causes bullying;
Stop bullies acting hurtfully;
Help bullies help themselves; and
Help bullies to learn to be a good friend.
684
Reading
Read the book Stop Picking on Me by Pat Thomas.
Discussion
Discuss with your class some of the following statements from the book:
Bullies dont always hurt your body they can hurt your feelings as well.
A bully can make you feel like its your fault that they are picking on you, even
though this isnt true.
Bullies never have a good reason for hurting other people.
Bullies dont like themselves very much.
Hitting back or being cruel usually only makes the problem worse.
A good way to stop bullying is to talk to someone about it.
685
Film Viewing
Watch the film Help! Im a bully where bullies talk about why they bullied and how
they learnt to stop doing it (see summary below). As you watch the film put some
notes in the blank columns below. Discuss your thoughts with your class.
What was the bully What happened to make How did the bully
doing? the bully realise that change?
bullying had to stop?
Denise was spreading

rumours about Amy that
were not true.
His cousin Jimmy told him

he had hurt his feelings so
much he didnt want to be
friends anymore.
She realised what she was

doing was mean and hurt
others. She apologised.
Help! Im a Bully introduces three students who used to be

bullies. These students share their personal stories of how they
used to act, and each of them encourages viewers to change if
they have bullied in the past.
The three students are:

1) Denise who realised she was spreading rumours about Amy;
2) Nicky confesses he excluded people from games and sports
because he wanted to win; and
3) Lacey shares her story of how she used to make jokes about
other people by inventing nasty nicknames about them, just to
get a laugh.
686
Hoover, E. (2006). Bully Smart: Help! Im a bully. In D. Giachetti (Ed.), The Bully Proof Kit, Human
Media Relations, p.6.
Discussion
Discuss with your class some ways others might be able to help a bully to
stop bullying or how a bully can help themselves. You might like to note your
ideas below.
How others could help a bully to stop How a bully could help themselves to
bullying stop bullying
Role-Playing
With a small group write or act out a 1-2 minute roleplay that shows either how a
bully learnt to stop bullying or how a bystander helped to stop bullying. Either read
out loud or act out your scenario to your class. See if people in your class think your
ideas would help a bully to stop bullying.
Writing a Big Book (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

You might like to write a big book for younger children that tells a story about how a
bully stopped bullying or how other people helped a bully to stop bullying.
687
Helping Bullies to Stop Bullying
Bullies rely on other people not to do or say anything to anyone about their behaviour
towards others. Bullies bully because no-one more powerful than them stands up to
them. You can also help in a big way by:
Telling bullies to STOP what they are doing;
Showing bullies you disapprove of their behaviour. Let them know that their
behaviour is not appropriate by telling them so, walk away from them shaking your
head or give some other gesture to show disapproval.
Letting bullies know that teasing people is not OK or always teasing someone about
the same thing is not right.
Pointing out to people when they are acting like a bully and let them know you
dont want a bully as a friend.
Making sure you dont help bullies bully bullies tend to bully to attract other
students attention. Dont encourage them to bully, dont stand around and watch
them bully or do nothing. Always do something to stop bullying walk away to
show you dont approve, encourage the target to walk away with you, and make
sure you let a teacher know what is going on.
Not trying to counter bullying by bullying back. This only makes matters worse.
Show disapproval in other ways and get support from teachers.
Advising people you know who cant control their tempers to cool down and learn
to relax when they feel angry rather than taking their anger out on someone else.
BUT REMEMBER: Bullies are not bad people either. Sometimes they just do things
which are not very nice because they dont know any better. You can help a bully by
teaching them other ways of getting attention or having fun.
Find the Key Points

Underline the key points in the box above that describe what students can do to stop
bullies behaving badly.
688
Reading
Read Lis story by Janine Amos. Discuss the story with your class.
Why did Lis mum think he was a bully?
What did Lis mum teach him to do to stop bullying?
What do you think Li should do next time?
Sorting
Cut out the cards on the next page. With a friend sort the cards into 2 piles ways to
deal with bullies and ways not to deal with bullies. Discuss your answers with your
class.
689
690
Tell them to STOP bullying Hit the bully back
Ignore bullies Stand up for targets of bullying
Argue with the bully Encourage the bully to pick on a

target
Help the bully tease a target

HELP the victim get away from the
bully
Push the bully away Walk away from the bully
TELL someone you trust about the

Trade insults with the bully
bully
691
692
Discussion
Discuss with a friend how you could stop bullying in the scenarios below (Table 7).
Discuss your thoughts with your class.
Table 7:
A bully is pushing around a younger child trying to make the child give her his lunch
money. What can you do?
A bully continually teases a new girl at school about not having any friends. What
can you do?
A friend of yours is bullying a student in the playground. What can you do?
Students are gathering around and watching a bully physically hurt another student.
What can you do?
A friend of yours is trying to stop a bully from bullying them by bullying them back.
What can you do?
A friend of yours is having trouble controlling her temper and is about to bully
someone. What can you do?
Role-Playing
Roleplay or describe to your class an incident in which you attempt to STOP a bully
from bullying.
Letter Writing (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

Write a letter to a bully that explains how you feel about bullying and what the bully
should do instead of bullying.
693
Dear Bully,
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
694
TOPIC 9:
What can be done to

HELP?
695

italics)
Film Viewing Dont stand by DVD (provided in pack). View entire
film.
Reading On same page.
Advice Column On same page.
Film Viewing Five ways to stop a bully DVD (provided in pack).
View entire film.
Role-Playing NA
Song Music CD provided with 3 songs on it. Break Free is
the 2nd song. Lyrics on same page.
Posters NA
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
What can we do to HELP?
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Find the Key Points V1
V2
V3
V4 RS3.5
35C6
DMS3.2 RS3.6
INS3.3
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
696
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Film Viewing INS3.3 WS3.10
35C6
GDS3.9 WS3.11
Reading V1
V2
V3
V4
COS3.1 TS3.1
DMS3.2 TS3.2 TS1
35C6
INS3.3 RS3.5 TS15
PSS3.5 RS3.6
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
Discussion V2
V3
V4
COS3.1 TS3.1
DMS3.2 TS3.2 TS1
35C6
INS3.3 RS3.5 TS15
PSS3.5 RS3.6
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
Advice Column V2
V3 RS3.5
DMS3.2 RS3.6
INS3.3 WS3.9
PSS3.5 WS3.10 TS16 35C6
GDS3.9 WS3.11
IRS3.11 WS3.13
PHS3.12 WS3.14
SLS3.13
697
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Film Viewing V2
V3
DMS3.2
INS3.3 WS3.10
35C6
PSS3.5 WS3.11
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
Discussion V1
V2
V3
V4
COS3.1 TS3.1
TS1
DMS3.2 TS3.2
TS15 35C6
INS3.3 RS3.5
TS19
PSS3.5 RS3.6
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
Role-Playing V1
V2
V3
V4
COS3.1 DRAS3.1
TS1
TS15 35C6
TS16
PSS3.5 DRAS3.4
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
698
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Song V1
V2
V3
V4
TS3.1
COS3.1
TS3.2 TS1
DMS3.2 MUS3.4 35C6
RS3.5 TS15
INS3.3
RS3.6
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
Posters COS3.1
DMS3.2
INS3.3 VAS3.1
PSS3.5 VAS3.2
TS16 35C6
GDS3.9 VAS3.3
IRS3.11 VAS3.4
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
699
What can be done to help?
address bullying.
These activities will help you to:
Help targets of bullying; and
Stop others from supporting bullies.
Help Targets of Bullying
Students can help to make the world a much happier and safer place for
targets and help them to smile again.
Put a stop to the hurt targets experience by letting a teacher know what is
going on. Teachers cant be everywhere but students working together
can be.
Encourage targets of bullying to let a teacher or parent know what is

happening.
Advise targets of bullying not to try to hit or get back at the bully by
verbally abusing them. Bullies are more powerful than targets and this will
make things worse.
Let targets know that a useful way to prevent bullying is to ignore the
bullies by walking away or avoiding going to places in the school that
bullies hang out.
Watch for early signs of distress in other students, such as temper

outbursts, staying away form school or crying without apparent reason. If
someone comes to you for help do your best to get support for him or her.
You may not always have an answer, so seek advice.
Find the Key Points

Underline the key points in the box above that describe what students can do to help
targets of bullying.
700
Film Viewing
Watch the film Dont stand by. See if you can fill in the columns below as you
watch the film.
What was the bully What was done to make Did it work?
doing? the bully stop?
Sending an insulting email

to her classmate Penny.
Steffi helped the target

Amy to walk away from
the bullies.
Mark listened to what

Robbie had to say and
stopped picking on Kristin.
Three bullies were

planning to physically hurt
someone.
701
Reading
Read the following excerpt from the book Beast by Margaret Wild with a friend and
discuss.
Excerpt Source:
The Beast by Margaret Wild,
* Is challenge him to a fight a helpful technique to stop bullying? Why?/Why not?
* What could you do as a friend instead to help the situation better?
702
Discussion
Discuss with a friend how you could help targets in the scenarios below. Discuss your
thoughts with your class.
You are aware that a Year 3 student is constantly being bullied by a

Year 5 student in the playground near the lunch seats. What can
you do?
A student in your class is always being bullied by another student

when the teacher is not looking. What can you do?
You come across a person in the playground who is crying because

they are being bullied at school. What can you do?
A bully starts picking on someone that gets your bus home at the
bus stop. What can you do?
You see a target of a bully trying to hit the bully back and this is
making matters worse as the bully being stronger than the target is
hitting the target back harder. What can you do?
A friend of yours has been bullied and is upset that someone could
think of them in the way that the bully does. What can you do?
Someone comes to you for help because they are being bullied.
What can you do?
703
Advice Column (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)
Pretend you write for a childrens magazine. Children write in to you to ask you how
to deal with bullying. On the next page are 2 letters that you have received. Write
your response below.
Dear Bully Helper,
I am 8 years old and a boy who is older and bigger than me keeps taking my money
from me when I go the canteen. What can I do?
Yours,
Scared
Dear Scared,
Yours,
Dear Bully Helper,
I am 10 years old and I think I am a bully. Well actually, people tell me Im a bully.
But I dont think I really am. I tell jokes and call people funny names. I think its
funny, other people laugh too so they think Im funny too. Am I a bully and what can
I do?
From,
Bully
704
Dear Scared,
Yours,
Film Viewing
Watch the film Five ways to stop a bully (see summary below). As you watch the
film see if you can write down in your own words the 5 ways suggested to stop a
bully here.
1. ___________________________________
2. ___________________________________
3. ___________________________________
4. ___________________________________
5. ___________________________________
Five ways to Stop a Bully introduces viewers to 5 strategies for

stopping a bully.
The five strategies are:

1) Pretend the Bully Doesnt Bother You;
2) Tell the Bully to Stop
3) Stand Up Together
4) Ignore and Walk Away
5) Tell an Adult

Hoover, E. (2006). Bully Smart: Five ways to stop a bully.705
In D. Giachetti (Ed.), The Bully Proof Kit, Human
Media Relations, p.8.
Discussion
Discuss with a friend or your class some other ways that you can help to stop a bully.
You might like to make a note of these here.
Avoid going places that a bully is (e.g., walk home from school a
different way)
Tell a teacher, or an adult,
Never hit the bully back or argue with a bully.
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
706
Role-Playing
Roleplay or describe to your class an incident in which you attempt to help a target of
bullying.
Song: Break Free by Seraya Young

Listen to the song by Seraya Young the words are below. Discuss with your class
what this song is about and how you can help targets of bullying to break free.
Break Free by Seraya Young
Lately I've been drowning in a sea of once cherished dreams

Lately I've been drowning in a sea of once cherished dreams
Generation after generation of expectation pulls me under
pulls me under
Dragged along by the undercurrent of everyone's demands
Oh so many demands... but
I'm gonna break free, gonna let it loose tonight

You're gonna see there's more to me
I won't keep me hid inside
I'm gonna break free, gonna let it loose tonight
You're gonna see there's more to me
I won't keep me hid inside
I'm gonna make it to my new horizon state of mind

I'm gonna make it to my new horizon state of mind
There's peace to find
The beauty of pain is realised in the changes made
Let's celebrate, celebrate the time to break out
Now that I'm awake
Free, I'm gonna break free.. yeah..
Chorus
Posters (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

Make a poster to display in your school that teaches other students about what they
can do to help targets stop a bully.
707
TOPIC 10:
Why is it important to
TELL someone?
708

italics)
Film Viewing and Beyond Bullying DVD. View segment titled How can
Discussion we STOP Bullying. Stop film at end of program.
Role-Playing NA
Poetry Reading and
On same page.
Discussion
Write a Slogan,
NA
Poem, or Song
When Telling is Vital On same page.
Who can you Tell On same page.
Explaining Telling NA
Presentation NA
Posters NA
709
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
Why is it important to TELL someone?
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Film Viewing and V1
Discussion V2
V3
V4 TS3.1
COS3.1 TS3.2 TS1
35C6
DMS3.2 WS3.10 TS15
INS3.3 WS3.11
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
Role-Playing V1
V2
V3
V4
COS3.1 DRAS3.1
TS1
TS15 35C6
TS16
PSS3.5 DRAS3.4
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
Poetry Reading and V2
Discussion V3
TS3.1
V4 TS1
TS3.2
COS3.1 TS15 35C6
RS3.5
INS3.3 TS16
RS3.6
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
710
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Write a Slogan, V1
Poem, or Song V2
V3
V4
COS3.1 TS1
TS3.1 MUS3.1
DMS3.2 TS15 35C6
TS3.2 MUS3.2
INS3.3 TS16
PSS3.5
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
SLS3.13
When Telling is Vital WS3.10
IRS3.11 TS19 35C6
WS3.11
Who can you Tell IRS3.11
35C6
SLS3.13
Explaining Telling V3 WS3.9
COS3.1 WS3.10
DMS3.2 WS3.11 TS16 35C6
GDS3.9 WS3.13
IRS3.11 WS3.14
Presentation COS3.1 VAS3.1
DMS3.2 VAS3.2
TS16 35C6
INS3.3 VAS3.3
PSS3.5 VAS3.4
Posters COS3.1 VAS3.1
DMS3.2 VAS3.2
TS16 35C6
INS3.3 VAS3.3
PSS3.5 VAS3.4
711
Why is it important to tell
someone?
If you know someone who bullies other people,
make sure that you tell someone - like a teacher or
a parent so that the school can put a stop to it
once and for all. All reports of bullying will be
taken seriously by your school.
Film Viewing
Watch the segment How Can we Stop Bullying from the film Beyond Bullying:
New Successful Strategies to Empower Children to Make a Real Difference where
people talk about what can be done about bullying.
Discussion
In the film three key ways to deal with bullying were talked about. Discuss with a
small group what people in the video suggested could be done about bullying. Write
down below the things people suggested.
STOP
HELP
TELL
712
Role-Playing
Can you act out a scenario in which you show how to STOP, HELP, and TELL.
Poetry Reading
Read the poem Monster by Gillian Reynolds.
Monster by Gillian Reynolds
There's no monster under my bed

But there's a bully at my school
He scares me like a monster would
He make me look a fool
He pushes me in the hallway

and yells at me in the lou
He want's to meet me in the school yard
But I know what to do
It's time I STOP and TELL my teacher

I'll get some HELP along the way
Its time too bring along an adult
And send this bully on his way
It's time I STOP and TELL my teacher

This will HELP a lot
I'll bring along an adult
And bully will be caught
I find this bully frightens me

He breaks all the rules
He hurts me when teacher's back is turned
kids are pushed to think he's cool
But I know he's got problems

And I will not be afraid
I will run and get an adult
This time I must be brave
Discussion
What is this child going to do about bullying?
How is the target of the bully going to be brave and put a stop to this?
Write a Slogan, Poem, or Song (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

With a friend write a slogan, poem, or a song to help teach others how to STOP,
HELP, TELL. You might also like to design a logo to go with it. You might be able
to display these around your school.
713
When Telling Is Vital
Telling someone is always important to do. At times telling someone is the only way
to stop the bullying. Can you think of some scenarios when telling is the only way?
See if you can add to the list below.
When the bully is bigger, stronger, or more powerful than you.

When another person is planning on physically hurting someone.
When a bully wont stop teasing someone all of the time.
__________________________
__________________________
Who Can You Tell?

On this page fill in the names of people
you can go to for help.
Who I can get help from:
Family
Friends
Children at school
Friends
School Staff
Other Children I
know
Community
714
Explaining Telling
Some young children might think that telling someone is dobbing. Can you think of a
way to explain to young children that telling about a bully is not dobbing. Perhaps
you could write a story or a poem and share it with a younger child.
Presentation (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

Can you make a PowerPoint presentation or some other form of presentation so that
other people understand how to STOP, HELP, and TELL.
Posters (EXTENSION ACTIVITY)

Make a poster to display in your school that teaches other students to STOP, HELP,
and TELL.
715
TOPIC 11:
What else can we do to

stop bullying?
716

italics)
Discussion NA
Bring Your Idea to
NA
Life
717
CURRICULUM MAPPING:
What else can we do to stop bullying?
PDHPE ENG ST CA RE
italics)
Discussion V1
V2
V3
V4
COS3.1 TS3.1
TS1
DMS3.2 TS3.2
TS15 35C6
INS3.3 WS3.10
TS19
PSS3.5 WS3.11
GDS3.9
IRS3.11
PHS3.12
SLS3.13
Bring Your Idea to Depending on the idea this could be a range of many
Life curriculum standards.
718
What else can we do to stop
bullying?
To find out what students from other schools have done to address
bullying read the information in the box below.
Successful Strategies
Students from around the world have developed some successful ways to stop
bullying in their school. For example at one school students created a school
anti-bullying mascot. One of the Year 6 students dressed up in a hero costume
specially made by other students. The mascot would appear at assemblies to
resounding cheers from other students and talk to the students about how
bullying was not tolerated in their school and give them some tips on what to do
about it.
Another school sang a song about bullying at school assemblies to send a clear
message that bullies were not thought of very highly in their school. Students
from the school put dance actions to the words of the song that students in the
school could also copy as they sang the song.
A school council from another school set up a peer support program whereby all
students in Years K to 4 had an older student from Years 5 and 6 as a mentor
that they could talk to about problems at school they were experiencing.
Other schools have held an anti-bullying festival where groups of students create
a different kind of experience about what can be done about bullying that is
showcased in the school during an anti-bullying week or at each school
assembly. Experiences have included: anti-bullying songs, poems, art
competition, plays, shows, websites, posters, stories, sculptures, poems, films,
school newspaper/magazine etc.
719
Discussion
Discuss with your group other things that students at your school could do to help put
a stop to bullying. The best ideas for putting a stop to bullying come from students
like you as you know what happens in your school and how best to begin to deal with
it. Write your ideas here.
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Bring Your Idea to Life

Share your ideas with your class. Work out a way how you could make a start on one
of your ideas. You could make your own video about bullying, make a play, design a
website, or make a board game to help stop bullying. Remember ideas do nothing
unless they are put into action. (Please ensure an idea is followed through by students
in the final week).
720
LIST OF BEYOND BULLYING ACTIVITIES
Week Topic Activity Completed
st
1 What is bullying? Match-up
Film Viewing
Newspaper Reading and
Discussion
Letter to the Editor
Film Viewing
Quick Quiz
What are the different types of
Sorting
bullying?
Bully Snap
nd What are the differences between Finding the difference between
2
bullying and playful teasing? bullying and teasing
Role-Playing
What is my schools policy on bullying? Discussion
Letting others know
rd
3 Who is hurt by bullying? Discussion
Film Viewing and Discussion
Song Lyrics
Poetry Reading
Newspaper Reading and
Discussion
Discussion
Match-up
Discussion
Design a Brochure/ Poster
What are the myths and facts about
Film Viewing and Discussion
bullying?
Discussion
Match the Facts
Cartoon Interpreting
Debate
Design a Poster
Make a Class Newspaper or a
Website
th What can children do to help people
4 Discussion
feel good about themselves?
Find the Key Points
Discussion
Discussion
Role-Playing
Reading
721
Week Topic Activity Completed
th
5 What can we do to STOP the bullying? Reading and Discussion
Film Viewing
Discussion
Role-Playing
Writing a Big Book
Find the Key Points
Reading
Sorting
Discussion
Role-Playing
Letter Writing
th
6 What can we do to HELP? Find the Key Points
Film Viewing
Reading
Discussion
Advice Column
Film Viewing
Discussion
Role-Playing
Song
Posters
th
7 Why is it important to TELL someone? Film Viewing and Discussion
Role-Playing
Poetry Reading and Discussion
Write a Slogan, Poem, or Song
When Telling is Vital
Who can you Tell
Explaining Telling
Presentation
Posters
th
8 What else can we do to stop bullying? Discussion
Bring Idea to Life
Please return to:

Linda Finger
Centre for Educational Research (formally SELF Research Centre)
FAX: 02 9772 6432 Postal address:

Ph: 02 9772 6852 University of Western Sydney
Bankstown Campus (Building 1, Rm 112-
Email: l.finger@uws.edu.au 113)
Locked Bag 1797
Penrith South DC, NSW 1797
722
Bankstown Campus (Building 1, Rm 112-113)
Locked Bag 1797
Penrith South DC 1797
02 9772 6128
723
APPENDIX 9
Beyond Bullying Primary Schools DVD
See back inside cover for DVD
724
APPENDIX 10
Parent Brochure
725
726
727
APPENDIX 11
Parent and Child Brochure
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
APPENDIX 12
Flash Cards
738
739
It may seem like it starts off as minor, Bullies may appear tough. They may
but all severe behaviours start off be physically stronger, or have lots of
small. friends.
The truth is, bullying gets worse over But bullies only pick on people who
time. From the start of the year to the they know they can beat. They only
middle of the year, to the end of the pick on people who are not as strong,
year, bullying gets worse. or who do not have any friends to
back them up.
Students cannot be expected to deal

Bullying is a cruel behaviour with
with bullying on their own. serious short- and long-term
consequences that lead into
The best way to stop and prevent adulthood. It is important to stop
bullying is when everyone from the
bullying early, to prevent these
school community works to stop long-ranging outcomes.
bullying. This means, students,
parents and teachers all work
Its not just what kids do.
together to prevent bullying.
740
741
People only watch and laugh at People who are bullied are not weak
others being bullied, because they are at all. People may say they are weak
scared to be bullied, and they are just to make them more upset.
glad its not happening to them.
People who are bullied cannot be
Encouraging the bully is the wrong expected to stand up for themselves
thing to do and does not solve against a child or group of kids that
bullying. are more powerful than them.
People who are bullied dont want to Bullying hurts people. It is not just a
be bullied, they want friends like bit of fun. Bullies bully on purpose to
everybody else. intimidate, humiliate, and exclude
people. These things are not done in
People who are bullied have nothing fun.
to do with the bullying, it is the bully
who chooses to bully someone. Bullying has serious long-term
There are no good reasons to bully consequences that harm people,
anyone. even when they are adults.
742
743
There are many kinds of bullying
Girls bully too. which are not physical. Sometimes
these are hard to detect.
Girls are more likely to bully in
non-physical ways (i.e. like spreading They can include subtle forms of
rumours about someone), but they bullying like ruining friendships,
also bully in physical ways too. making fun of people just to get a
laugh, or putting people down.
Groups of people can also bully. Anyone can be bullied.
Watching the bullying, ignoring it, Bullies only pick on people who they
egging the bully on, and not doing think they can beat up on, make fun
anything to stop the bullying, is just of or exclude, and get away with it.
as bad as bullying. These all help They pick on people who may not
protect the bully. have many friends to back them up.
744
745
A person who has been bullied for a
long period of time cannot be
expected to stand up for themselves.
School can help students to act in
Trying to bully back or get revenge
more positive ways.
only makes things worse. It is
impossible for them to stand up for
The best way to stop bullying is at the
themselves when no-one is helping
school level where everyone works
them.
together to stop bullying.
746
APPENDIX 13
Poster
747
748
APPENDIX 14
List of Additional Resources
Story Books
Amos, J. (1995) Bully. New York: Benchmark Books.

Jennings, P. (1995). The Gizmo Again. Camberwell, Victoria: Penguin Group.
Thomas, P. (2000). Stop Picking on Me: A First Look at Bullying. United States:
Barrons.
Additional DVDs
Human Relations Media (2005). Are you a Bully [DVD]? Publication Unit, Human
Relations Media.
Human Relations Media (2005). Dont Stand By [DVD]. Publication Unit, Human
Relations Media.
Human Relations Media (2005).Five Ways to Stop a Bully [DVD]. Publication Unit,
Human Relations Media.
Human Relations Media (2005). Help! Im a Bully [DVD]! Publication Unit, Human
Relations Media.
749
APPENDIX 15
Newsletter Articles
750
Beyond Bullying in Our School
Students, teachers, parents, caregivers and members of the wider

school community have a shared responsibility to create a safe and
happy environment, free from all forms of bullying.
New South Wales, Department of Education and Training Policy for
Dealing with Bullying (2005).
Bullying is a serious concern for schools across Australia and around the
world. Aggression against peers in the school, or bullying, may be one of
these early behaviours that contribute to the development of antisocial
behaviour patterns. To prevent youth violence and contribute to reducing the
rate of crime, it is critical to address the early signs of antisocial behaviours.
This week our school will begin implementing a new intervention to prevent
bullying. The intervention is called Beyond Bullying: Primary Schools
Program and was developed by the University of Western Sydney. This
intervention is based on a successful high schools bullying program which
was shown to be one of the only stop-bullying programs in the world to
successfully reduce bullying. This intervention is focused on students in years
5 and 6, with elements of the intervention being integrated into the whole-
school. Our year 5 and 6 staff attended a specialised training day in
preparation for this program.
All forms of bullying are hurtful and can lead a child to become an adult with
serious life issues. Understanding what bullying is and how it affects students,
allows us to be better equipped to effectively stop bullying behaviours. As the
program progresses over the next 8 10 weeks, we will continue to post new
information about bullying and what you can do in our weekly newsletter. If
you have any queries about the program, please contact [insert name] who
will be able to answer any questions you may have.
751
Beyond Bullying Program: What is Bullying?
Acts of aggression which are repeated generate a deeper level of fear and
intimidation than an isolated event
Orpinas & Horne, 1996
Bullying is when deliberate actions of intimidation, humiliation, and submission

are repeated to overpower another person. Students who bully can overpower
because they are physically stronger, but strength is not a pre-requisite to
bullying. Strength can come in many forms. For example, a student may be
stronger because they have a lot of friends to back them up. They may also
have faster verbal skills which help them to overpower someone who is not
able to talk back quickly. This victimisation together with intentionally hurtful
and repeated behaviours, prevent the target from using effective coping
strategies to defend themselves.
Bullying is an intentional act designed to inflict physical and psychological

harm. It is repetitive whereby bullies continue to bully others. This may occur
in different ways, but it happens again and again. Bullying can happen in
physical, verbal, social or other ways.
Physical Bullying
Physical bullying is characterised by behaviours that involve hitting, kicking,
pinching, taking money and belongings, or throwing objects intended to hit
someone. Physical bullying is usually easy to identify and can cause visible
injuries (e.g., cuts and bruises). In its most subtle forms bullying can include
bumping into someone on purpose as they walk by.
Verbal Bullying
Verbal bullying can include behaviours such as name-calling, swearing,
making rude gestures or remarks, making jokes about someone, and sending
notes around class about someone.
Social Bullying
Social Bullying is characterised by the hurtful manipulation of peer friendships
to inflict harm on others. These behaviours can include social exclusion and
spreading rumours about someone so that no-one will be friends with them.
Cyber Bullying
Cyber bullying is a relatively new form of bullying, emerging with modern
technology. Although little research has been undertaken about the nature
and prevalence of this form of bullying, cyber bullying is as serious and
damaging as other forms of bullying. These can include making nasty phone
calls, sending nasty internet messages and deleting someone elses work
from a computer.
Features of Bullying include that it:

Is repetitive;
Is a conscious act of aggression and/or manipulation by one or more
people;
752
Is intended to physically or psychologically someone;
Is often organised and systematic;
Is sometimes premeditated and sometimes opportunistic;
Is sometimes directed towards one victim, and sometimes occurs
randomly;
Can last for short periods or can endure for years;
Can happen in different ways and with different severities; and
Is an abuse of power.
Bullying often occurs in a social setting where other students can see and
hear what is happening. This can be met with other students laughing about
what is happening, egging on the bully, or not doing anything to stop the
bullying. When witnesses watch or ignore the bullying, they are encouraging
the bully to keep hurting. You can help your child stop bullying in our school
by discussing with them how they can stop encouraging the bullying they see
at school, how they can help the person being bullied, and think of ways to
stop it happening again.
753
Beyond Bullying Program: What Bullying is Not
Bullying can often be confused with other social interactions between
students. Sometimes childrens play may be seen as rough by adults but is
playful in intention. For example bullying is not a one off physical fight.
Bullying is not:
A Criminal Activity
Exuberant Physical and Verbal Play
- Play-fights;
- Rough and tumble play;
- Verbal sparring; and
- Prosocial teasing.
One-Off Physical Fights
Constructive Conflict Between friends
The Nature of Teasing
Teasing may often be almost indistinguishable from bullying. Teasing can be

either playful or aggressive. Teasing can be carried out by name calling,
physical, and aggressive gestures and by playing games or pranks on
targets of the tease. The underlying purpose of teasing is often ambiguous.
Teasing is not only common in interpersonal interactions but it may also be

used as a positive way to relate to others. Teasing allows for polite ways of
pointing out social deviations in order to enhance an individuals group
membership success, therefore being a central aspect of socialisation.
Teasing also allows the enhancement of bonds between social, romantic, and
family members. Teasing may also allow individuals to learn about, negotiate,
and assume social identities. Teasing is a common social interaction between
individuals and it can be unhelpful to assume all teasing is bullying.
Sometimes it is difficult to determine whether subtle behaviours presented by

students are forms of bullying or teasing. There is independent evidence to
suggest that those involved in the bullying episode may hold totally different
views about what is happening in the interaction. Relative to targets, bullies
tend to minimise the negative impact of their behaviours, view their behaviour
more benignly, and perceive the behaviour as justifiable. Bullies often state
that they were just kidding or having fun and that no harm was intended. It
754
is possible that students may start out using non-hurtful behaviours, but these
can escalate into bullying or other aggressive behaviours.
Roberts and Morotti (2000) have proposed that although teasing behaviours
may have a normal developmental aspect, the manner, intensity and
incidence in which they are delivered to a target delineate between what can
be construed as normal and what could be labelled bullying. From this
perspective teasing should be perceived as bullying when it is high intensity,
repetitive, and decoded by the target as damaging. Teasing is more likely to
occur when the social desire is to increase affiliation and enhance the social
success of both the teaser and the target, whereas bullying aims to minimise
the social success of the target and enhance the social success of the bully.
Being able to determine exactly what is happening is crucial to accurately
assessing what type of situation it is, and how to deal with it most effectively. It
may be helpful to discuss the differences between bullying and teasing with
your child.
Constructive Conflict
Another type of common peer interaction which often gets mistaken for
bullying is constructive conflict. Conflict is a phenomenon that cannot be
avoided. Two types of conflict exist: constructive and destructive conflict.
Destructive Conflict can be viewed under bullying terms (i.e. threats and
intimidation) and is aimed to upset. Conversely, constructive conflict serves to
restore friendships. This occurs when disagreements between students
happen, but no bullying occurs.
What differentiates constructive from destructive conflict is the motive for it.
The essential difference being that with constructive conflict the students are
friends, and want to remain friends.
Incidents may trigger the struggle between friends for a number of different
reasons. For example, some conflict may appear because:
Something happened (i.e. a student copied their friends work);
There was a conflict of interest (i.e. one student wanted to play soccer
whereas the other wanted to play football);
There was a conflict of beliefs (i.e. each student believed they were right
and did not want to see the other persons point of view); or
There was a conflict of peer relations (i.e. triangle of peer relations where
one student likes two other students who dont like each other).
Whatever the reason, both are hurt by the experience, both students still want
to be friends, and they are not turning other students against each other.
755
Beyond Bullying Program: Why should we Stop Bullying?
Long-term effects of bullying begin in early childhood and develop into serious
adulthood issues for both the perpetrators of bullying and those who are
victimized by them. Bullying is a problem for bullies, victims, witnesses, others
at school, parents, families, and communities.
For bullies, aggression may persist into adulthood in the form of criminality,
marital violence, child abuse and sexual harassment. For example bullies
identified by age eight are six times more likely to be convicted of a crime by
age twenty four and five times more likely than non bullies to end up with a
serious criminal record by age thirty.
For victims, repeated bullying can cause psychological distress and many
related difficulties such as depression, that endure beyond the schooling
years. The extent of damage that bullying has on a young person's life has
begun to be elucidated by researchers. Rigby (1996) found that targets of
bullying:
reported twice as frequently as non-victims being depressed or having
suicidal thoughts;
had lower self-esteem,
were more anxious and depressed;
had poorer physical health;
have fewer friends; and
were absent from school more often than non-victims.
Other people who watch incidents of bullying and other students in the school
who have heard about such incidents can feel unsafe at school and this can
extend to feeling unsafe in the community. Bullying affects everyone. When
nothing is done to prevent bullying other students may feel scared that they
will be bullied next. This creates an environment of indifference, stops
students from speaking up about bullying and is what allows bullying to thrive
in schools. When students feel scared their academic work and attention is
also affected. Furthermore, a poor educational environment and even
increased occupational stress for staff can arise.
Additionally, the social and economic costs of violence and aggression are
quite significant in Australia. It is estimated that aggressive crime costs
Australian society $18 billion per annum or 4% of GDP (Walker, 1997). The
economic and social costs of bullying have not been directly studied,
however, the link between bullying behaviours at school and future criminality,
poor mental health and diminished school performance has been identified.
Given the adverse consequences, it is crucial that early intervention works to

decrease bullying, specifically during the early phases, before the cumulative
effects have an opportunity to commence.
756
What are the Benefits of Addressing Bullying in Schools?
For Bullies
Learning self-control;
Learning lifelong social skills to interact with others positively;
Learning societal expectations for appropriate social behaviour; and
Avoidance of long-term problems post-schooling years.
For Victims
Put a stop to the hell on earth some students experience at school;
Reducing youth suicide;
Ensure targets experience their right to experience the benefits of
schooling in a safe environment;
Ensure targets reach their full academic and emotional potential;
Reduce the long-term emotional disturbances which are associated
with being victimised; and
Learning skills to avoid being a target and reinforcing bullying
behaviours.
For Bystanders and Others

Reducing feelings of powerlessness;
Ensuring all students feel safe at school; and
Empowerment through knowing that they can do something about
bullying.
For Parents and Families

Reducing the adverse impact that bullying has on parents and families;
Empowerment through knowing how they can contribute to addressing
bullying at school;
Feeling assured that the school has a proactive policy to address
school bullying; and
Knowing how to work with the school on addressing bullying incidents.
For the Broader Community

Reduce the incidents of youth violence in the school and community;
and
Ensure students feel safe in the wider community.
757
Beyond Bullying Program: Our Stop-Bully School Policy
Bullying is a serious issue. Our schools stop-bully policy outlines what our school is doing to
actively prevent bullying in our school. The school bully policy forms the basis of the conduct
of student behaviour among peers and at school. The development of our school stop-bully
policy was the most important first step to creating a more positive and safe school
environment for all students. Some of our key points are outlined here.
Our schools policy on bullying aims to ensure:
intimidation;
strategies to prevent and address school bullying; and
bullying episodes in this school.
Our definition of bullying is:
They repeatedly verbally abuse a person or group by calling them unpleasant names, by
writing them nasty notes and/or messages or by using unpleasant gestures.
threatening physical harm or by destroying/taking their belongings without permission.
Bullying may take one, two or all of these forms. Repeatedly means that they do these things
to that person or group the majority of the time they talk about them see them or spend time
around them.
Why bullying should be stopped:

Bullying can lead to serious adulthood issues for students who are bullied, students who bully,
or students who witness bullying. Everyone is affected by bullying. All members of the school
community have the right to come to our school without the fear of being intimidated,
humiliated, threatened or harmed. Bullying denies this right to members of our school
community and as such bullying is not accepted in our school.
Our school expectations:

Our school holds the following expectations of all members of our school community to
ensure our school is safe for everyone:
those differences.
This policy outlines the responsibilities of all staff and students and how parents can assist, to
ensure that our school is beyond bullying and safe for everyone.
What we can do to prevent bullying in our school:

Key roles of our School:
To adopt the Beyond Bullying program and remain committed to the aims of the program,
working toward long-term goals; and
758
To actively seek to ensure the program is run effectively within the school (i.e. all teachers
have resources and are working toward school objectives).
Key roles of our Staff:
Model positive relationships in their day to day dealings with members of the school and
model pro-social ways of resolving disputes;
contents of this policy; and
Respond immediately, decisively, and consistently to cases of bullying brought to their
attention by students, parents and/or colleagues.
Key roles of our Students:
Contribute to a safe learning environment by being respectful of others and resolve
disputes in pro-social ways;
Be aware that bullies rely on other people not to do or say anything to anyone about their
behaviour towards others so it is important to address bullying by offering to help the
target of the bully, or being vocal or ignoring bullies to show disapproval of bullying, and
reporting bullying incidents to teachers; and
Reporting all bullying incidents to a trusted adult so that all incidents of bullying can be
addressed seriously.
How you can help (role of parents):
Encourage your child to interact positively with other people in their day to day dealings
and enact pro-social ways of resolving disputes;
Contact your childs teacher as early as possible if you suspect your child is being bullied
or is bullying other children, and discuss how you are able to assist our school to resolve
the situation; and
appropriate to approach alleged bullies or targets.
How our schools deals with incidents of bullying:
All suspected bullying incidents will be taken seriously and investigated. Addressing bullying
can take different approaches depending on the severity and nature of the incident. Some of
these approaches include:
Students may be asked to consider their behaviour and the consequences of their
actions;
Meetings with parents to discuss how they can assist our school in resolving the issue, or
if there is a need for referral to professionals for assessment and intervention; and
Exclusion from school activities if the behaviour persists.
Please note: If we have contacted you to let you know your child may have been involved in
bullying someone, do not assume that we are out to get him/her. We will give you and your
child every opportunity to discuss the facts with us, and if needed, make the necessary
changes in their behaviour so that we can reach a solution. Please assist us by making
yourself available for these interviews if requested.
If you would like a copy of our full school stop-bully policy, please contact our school
administrative staff. If you have any further questions they can contact one of our staff
members who may be able to assist you.
759
Beyond Bullying Program: Debunking Bully Myths
Myths about bullying are created as excuses not to intervene, or excuses to blame
the person being bullied. Stopping bullying is difficult, it takes time, and there are no
magic overnight fixes available. Often it is easy to listen to general beliefs about
bullying and be tempted to believe them without thinking about what they really
mean. This week we debunk some of the most common myths about bullying.
MYTH: Its only a minor event, theyll get over it

FACT: The truth is bullying gets worse over time. Although some incidents may start
out small, research has shown bullying becomes more frequent over time. Doing
nothing to counter its effects unfortunately only leads to longer ranging, more severe
incidents.
MYTH: Ignore the bullying and it will go away

FACT: Bullying will not just go away. Ignoring it will only make it worse and can result
in the person bullying trying harder to get attention, to humiliate, and to intimidate.
Bullying in this instance is not being solved, it is fuelling the problem.
MYTH: Bullies are tough

FACT: Bullies may appear tough. They may be tall, they may have lots of friends to
support them, or they may have a tough look on their face. But, bullies are not
tough. They only attack people less powerful than themselves to ensure they win, to
make themselves feel more powerful, or to make themselves feel better.
MYTH 7: Its up to kids to deal with it or Victims need to learn to stand up

for themselves and not take it
FACT: This type of myth assumes that targets are at fault and they need to deal with
it by themselves. While children do play an important role in reinforcing bullying, as
well as being able to influence their social group and stop the bullying, they cannot
be expected to deal with bullying on their own. Students who take on this role tend to
deal with situations using revenge tactics which can inflame the situation.
The whole-school community is responsible for stopping bullying. It is vital that staff
and parents are there to support students and to follow through with school-devised
policy procedures. Students are unable to deal with bullying on their own. They need
guidance, assistance, support, and adults who take bullying seriously and actively
intervene. Research clearly shows that a one sided approach to bullying (i.e. it is only
up to students) is ineffective. It takes a community of people to stop bullying.
MYTH: Theres only ever one bully doing the bullying

FACT: People who bully tend to bully in a social setting. Even if they are bullying
alone, the person bullying tends to have a group of helpers at hand. Some witnesses
may see bullying happen and want to stop it but do not because they are scared they
will be bullied next. Others watch and laugh, or support the person who bullies. In this
way, the people who bully are not alone. They have supporters, they have power,
and they know that no-one will get them into trouble. People can bully alone or in a
group and these people can also bully an individual or a group of individuals.
MYTH: Its the kids who are different who get picked on the most
FACT: This myth supports the notion that the persons being bullied are to blame for
the bullying. It suggests that something is wrong with the person being picked on and
theres nothing anyone can do to stop it. In some cases students are picked on
760
because of their appearance. However, it is more likely that this happens due to the
sense of vulnerability perceived by the person bullying.
The person bullying seeks someone who they can have power over. They seek
students with not as many friends, students who may be physically smaller, or
students who may be unable to retaliate. If a child is small but has many friends, they
are unlikely to be perceived as vulnerable. In addition, a child who is quick to retaliate
with a clever comment or joke is also unlikely to be perceived as vulnerable. In
essence, being different does not necessitate being bullied. It is the way in which
vulnerability is perceived that bullying eventuates.
In addition, Dan Sweetman from Network Tens Toasted tv says It can happen to
anyone.
MYTH: Its just a bit of fun

FACT: Students who say they are just having fun are likely to be taking part in
antisocial forms of teasing to get a laugh from peers. They may not realise their jokes
are seriously harmful, or they may find the social appeal for making hurtful jokes is
more rewarding and justified. These students may also be resilient to change
because they do not see the seriousness of the issue and they enjoy the social
rewards they get. Sayings such as its all a bit of fun prevent bullying from being
taken seriously.
MYTH: Bullying happens at all schools in all countries. Isnt it just what kids
do?
FACT: Bullying is not normal childhood behaviour. Its intended to harm others and
has lasting negative consequences that prevail into adulthood. Negative
consequences of bullying happen not only for those who bully or who are bullied, but
they can also have a significant effect on schools and communities at large. When
nothing is done to prevent bullying school safety issues, distrust amongst students,
formation of gangs, a poor educational environment, and even increased
occupational stress for teachers can arise. Given the adverse consequences, early
intervention becomes more crucial to tackle bullying before the cumulative effects
commence.
Myths provide the easy option for people not to do anything for those
situations which are difficult to deal with or they believe cannot be helped.
Ignorance is bliss, so they say.
761
Beyond Bullying Program: What Parents can do
It takes a community of people to stop bullying. There are a number of things
you can do to support our school in preventing bullying. If your child is being
bullied, is bullying other students, or witnesses bullying at school you can:
Be aware of what bullying is and how to prevent it. You can find out about
our schools behaviour management system, including the schools policy
on bullying.
Watch for warning signs such as: physical injuries; reluctance to go to

school; mood swings; few if any friends; or unexplained health problems.
Listen to and believe your child. Be calm and optimistic when supporting
your child. Do not judge the feelings as good or bad, try to listen carefully.
Keep a written record of bullying including who, what, when and where.
Encourage your child to tell a Teacher and to help others who are being
bullied, telling the bully to stop. Do not encourage your child to respond in
an aggressive way. This can make matters worse. Under no circumstance
attempt to contact the alleged bully, the parents of the bully, or the person
being bullied by yourself.
Encourage your child to invite others home to help her/him make friends.
Take an interest in your child's social life at school.
Tell our school. Our school is serious about preventing and stopping
bullying. If you find out your child is being bullied, do not assume that we
also know.
If we have contacted you to let you know your child may have been
involved in bullying someone, do not assume that we are out to get
him/her. We will give you and your child every opportunity to discuss the
facts with us, and if needed, make the necessary changes in their
behaviour so that we can reach a solution. Please assist us by making
yourself available for these interviews if requested.
If you would like more information, please see our www.parra.catholic.edu.au

website or contact our school.
762
Beyond Bullying Program: STOP, HELP, & TELL
Bullying is NOT acceptable at this school. Because bullying happens in the
social group and thrives in secrecy, one of the key ways in which we will
empower students to make a real difference is to empower students to stand
up for others who are being bullied.
This is where you can also make a difference. You can empower your child to
prevent bullying by teaching them to become active contributors to prevent
bullying.
Our 3 student strategies to prevent bullying within this school are to: STOP,
HELP, & TELL.
Students can stop the bullying by saying Stop to the bully if they see
someone being bullied or are being bullied themselves. In addition, when
students realise that they are the ones bullying other people, they can stop
what they are doing.
Pip Russell from Network Tens Toasted tv says students can HELP:
If you see it happening to someone, or its happening to one of your friends,

you need to help them out.
Students can help by taking someone being bullied to a safe place, helping to
stop the bullying they see, not encouraging the bully and standing up for the
person being bullied.
Furthermore, students can help out by telling someone about it. Students are
encouraged to talk about whats happening and not keep it a secret. Bullying
thrives in secrecy. When students talk about whats happening and tell
someone about it, bullying can be stopped. Students can tell a teacher, can
talk with the school counsellor, or can tell anyone they fell comfortable talking
to. You can encourage your child to tell by taking an interest in their school
social life.
We take bullying acts very seriously. Our schools stop-bully policy reflects
this. Those who bully others will be given every opportunity to change their
behaviour, reflect on the consequences of their actions on others, and to
choose more acceptable ways of behaving.
763
Beyond Bullying Program: Congratulations
Our Beyond Bullying Program has now been successfully implemented over
the last 10 weeks. We have launched our new anti-bullying policy; we have
set clear expectations for behaviour with our students; we have held training
sessions with our staff relating to preventing bullying within our school; our
year 5 and 6 students have learnt about what bullying is, why it happens and
how to stop it; and we have distributed information via newsletters etc to
parents on how they can support our schools beyond bullying initiative.
Students, parents and teachers have all been working together to prevent
bullying in our school. While the initial phase of the intervention is now
complete, we will continue to actively prevent bullying within our school, work
towards the goals of our school policy, work together with parents to prevent
bullying, continue the positive work with our students, and strive to manage
bullying effectively. Congratulations to everyone on helping to prevent bullying
and making a real difference within our school. Thank you for the time and
effort you have made for our school. Keep up the good work!
764
APPENDIX 16
Scale Items and Corresponding Factors
765
APRI-BT: BULLYING
Bully Physical
Pushed or shoved a student
Hit or kicked a student hard
Crashed into a student on purpose as they walked by
Got into a physical fight with a student because I didn't like them
Threw something at a student to hit them
Threatened to physically hurt or harm a student
Bully Verbal
Teased them by saying things to them
Made rude comments at a student
Made jokes about a student
Said things about their looks they didnt like
Made fun of a student by calling them names
Called them names they didnt like
Bully Social
Got my friends to turn against a student
Ignored a student when I was with my friends
Ignored a student by turning my back on them
Ignored a student by pretending they were not there
Got other students to ignore a student
Left them out of activities or games on purpose
766
APRI-BT: TARGET
Target Physical
I was pushed or shoved
I was hit or kicked hard
Students crashed into me on purpose as they walked by
My property was damaged on purpose
Something was thrown at me to hit me
I was threatened to be physically hurt or harmed
Target Verbal
I was teased by students saying things to me
A student made rude comments at me
Jokes were made up about me
Things were said about my looks I didnt like
I was embarrassed by students saying things to me
I was called names I didnt like
Target Social
A student wouldn't be friends with me because other people didn't like me
A student ignored me when they were with their friends
A student got other students not to have anything to do with me
A student ignored me by turning his or her back on me
A student got their friends to turn against me
I wasnt invited to a students place because other people didn't like me
767
APRI-PR: PARTICIPANT ROLES
Active Reinforcer
I would join in myself
I would urge others to join in
I would join in by calling the student being bullied names
I would give suggestions on how to pick on the student
I would join in by laughing at the student being bullied
I would help those who are doing the teasing
Passive Reinforcer
I would stay to watch what happens
I would not join in but call others to come and watch
I would enjoy watching but not join in
I would just watch but not join in
I would watch and laugh but not join in
I would find it entertaining but not join in
Ignore/Disregard
I would pay no attention to it
I would move away from them
I would ignore it because its none of my business
I would walk away
I would ignore it
I would mind my own business
Advocate
I would get my friends to help me stop it
I would stop it
I would try and protect the student being picked on
I would get help for the student being picked on
I would let someone know who could help stop it
I would take the student being picked on to a safe place
768
SDQI-E: SELF-CONCEPT
Physical Appearance
I am good looking
I like the way I look
I have a pleasant looking face
I am a nice looking person
Other kids think I am good looking
I have a good looking body
I am better looking than most of my friends
I have nice features like nose, and eyes, and hair
Physical Ability
I can run fast
I like to run and play hard
I enjoy sports and games
I have good muscles
I am good at sports
I can run a long way without stopping
I am a good athlete
I am good at throwing a ball
Peer Relations
I have lots of friends
I make friends easily
I get along with kids easily
I am easy to like
Other kids want me to be their friend
I have more friends than most other kids
I am popular with kids of my own age
Most other kids like me
769
Opposite and Same-Sex Peer Relations
I am not very popular with members of the opposite sex
It is difficult to make friends with members of my own sex
I make friends easily with boys
I make friends easily with girls
I have lots of friends of the opposite sex
Not many people of my own sex like me
I do not get along very well with boys
I do not get along very well with girls
I make friends easily with members of my own sex
Parental Relations
My parents understand me
I like my parents
My parents like me
If I have children of my own, I want to bring them up like my parents raised me
My parents and I spend a lot of time together
My parents are easy to talk to
I get along well with my parents
My parents and I have a lot of fun together
Emotional Stability
I am a nervous person
I often feel confused and mixed up
I worry more than I need to
I get upset easily
I worry about a lot of things
770
Honesty/Trustworthiness
I sometimes cheat
I often tell lies
I am honest
I always tell the truth
I sometimes take things that belong to other people
I sometimes tell lies to stay out of trouble
Math
I hate MATHEMATICS
Work in MATHEMATICS is easy for me
I look forward to MATHEMATICS
I get good marks in MATHEMATICS
I am interested in MATHEMATICS
I learn things quickly in MATHEMATICS
I like MATHEMATICS
I am good at MATHEMATICS
I enjoy doing work in MATHEMATICS
Verbal/ English
I get good marks in READING
I like READING
I am good at READING
I am interested in READING
I enjoy doing work in READING
Work in READING is easy for me
I look forward to READING
I learn things quickly in READING
771
General Schooling
I am good at all SCHOOL SUBJECTS
I enjoy doing work in all SCHOOL SUBJECTS
I get good marks in all SCHOOL SUBJECTS
I learn things quickly in all SCHOOL SUBJECTS
I am interested in all SCHOOL SUBJECTS
I look forward to all SCHOOL SUBJECTS
Work in all SCHOOL SUBJECTS is easy for me
I like all SCHOOL SUBJECTS
General Self-Esteem
I do lots of important things
In general, I like being the way I am
Overall, I have a lot to be proud of
I can do things as well as most other people
Other people think I am a good person
A lot of things about me are good
I am as good as most other people
When I do something, I do it well
772
ACSI: COPING STRATEGIES
Avoidance
I avoid the problem by spending more time alone
I avoid the problem by watching television more than usual
I avoid the problem by sleeping more than usual
I avoid the problem by pretending that there is no problem
I avoid the problem by staying away from other people
I avoid the problem by wishing that people would leave me alone
Problem Solving
I develop a plan about how to solve the problem before doing anything
I set goals for myself to deal with the problem
I make a plan about what I will do
I try different ways to solve the problem until I find one that works
I think about what needs to be done
Support Seeking
I go to a friend for advice on how to solve the problem
I go to a friend to help me feel better
I tell my fears and worries to a friend
I ask my friends to support me
773
pASBS: SCHOOL BELONGING
Support
I can get good support from my school
I can count on help and support, if I need it, from my school
I get lots of support from my school
I am confident that I am well supported by my school
Rule Acceptance
I accept the rules and procedures set by my school
I agree that there are useful rules and procedures set by my school
I accept the rules of my school
Our school rules and procedures are sensible
Attachment
I feel good about being in my school
I feel the best when I am at my school
I feel that I have a good relationship with my school
I feel like I belong at my school
774
BBPS: BEYOND BULLYING FIDELITY MEASURE
Knowledge
I have learnt about what kinds of bullying there are
I have learnt about the difference between bullying and teasing
I have learnt the myths and facts about bullying
I have learnt about how bullying affects the bully
I have learnt about how bullying affects the victim
I have learnt about how bullying affects the rest of the school
Action
I have stopped people from encouraging the bully
I have told a bully to stop bullying
I have stopped bullying from happening
I have helped to stop bullying in my school
I have helped a person who was being bullied
I have helped a bully stop bullying other people
775
CDI-10: DEPRESSION
I am sad once in a I am sad many

1 1 2 3 I am sad all the time
while times
I am not sure if
Nothing will ever Things will work out
2 1 2 things will work 3
work out for me for me OK
out for me
I do most things I do many things I do everything

3 1 2 3
OK wrong wrong
4 1 I hate myself 2 I do not like myself 3 I like myself
I feel like crying I feel like crying I feel like crying

5 1 2 3
every day many days once in a while
Things bother me Things bother me Things bother me

6 1 2 3
all the time many times once in a while
There are some bad

7 1 I look Ok 2 things about my 3 I look ugly
looks
I feel alone many I feel alone all the

8 1 I do not feel alone 2 3
times time
I have some friends

I have plenty of I do not have any
9 1 2 but I wish I had 3
friends friends
more
Nobody really I am not sure if I am sure that

10 1 2 3
loves me anybody loves me somebody loves me
776
APPENDIX 17
Example of CFA Output for Each Critical Group: APRI-BT
(Latent Factor Loadings and Correlations)
777
BULLYING AND TARGET (APRI-BT)
FIRST-ORDER
TOTAL SAMPLE
LAMBDA-Y
BULPHY BULVER BULSOC TARPHY TARVER TARSOC

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
T1BUL3 0.662 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL6 0.663 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL10 0.650 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL14 0.637 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL23 0.633 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL25 0.667 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL1 - - 0.706 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL5 - - 0.795 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL9 - - 0.737 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL15 - - 0.702 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL20 - - 0.828 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL24 - - 0.803 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL7 - - - - 0.560 - - - - - -
T1BUL8 - - - - 0.690 - - - - - -
T1BUL13 - - - - 0.707 - - - - - -
T1BUL17 - - - - 0.644 - - - - - -
T1BUL19 - - - - 0.609 - - - - - -
T1BUL26 - - - - 0.664 - - - - - -
T1TAR3 - - - - - - 0.708 - - - -
T1TAR6 - - - - - - 0.652 - - - -
T1TAR10 - - - - - - 0.689 - - - -
T1TAR13 - - - - - - 0.667 - - - -
T1TAR19 - - - - - - 0.719 - - - -
T1TAR22 - - - - - - 0.756 - - - -
T1TAR1 - - - - - - - - 0.776 - -
T1TAR5 - - - - - - - - 0.801 - -
T1TAR9 - - - - - - - - 0.757 - -
T1TAR14 - - - - - - - - 0.773 - -
T1TAR17 - - - - - - - - 0.714 - -
T1TAR24 - - - - - - - - 0.802 - -
T1TAR4 - - - - - - - - - - 0.739
T1TAR7 - - - - - - - - - - 0.746
T1TAR8 - - - - - - - - - - 0.811
T1TAR11 - - - - - - - - - - 0.764
T1TAR12 - - - - - - - - - - 0.821
T1TAR15 - - - - - - - - - - 0.683

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
BULPHY 1.000
BULVER 0.877 1.000
BULSOC 0.794 0.780 1.000
TARPHY 0.387 0.348 0.282 1.000
TARVER 0.303 0.333 0.239 0.833 1.000
TARSOC 0.236 0.239 0.278 0.790 0.841 1.000
778
Grade 5 Sample
Completely Standardized Solution
LAMBDA-Y

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
T1BUL3 0.647 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL6 0.659 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL10 0.670 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL14 0.717 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL23 0.610 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL25 0.685 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL1 - - 0.676 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL5 - - 0.811 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL9 - - 0.741 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL15 - - 0.706 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL20 - - 0.788 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL24 - - 0.776 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL7 - - - - 0.585 - - - - - -
T1BUL8 - - - - 0.680 - - - - - -
T1BUL13 - - - - 0.717 - - - - - -
T1BUL17 - - - - 0.624 - - - - - -
T1BUL19 - - - - 0.648 - - - - - -
T1BUL26 - - - - 0.674 - - - - - -
T1TAR3 - - - - - - 0.728 - - - -
T1TAR6 - - - - - - 0.682 - - - -
T1TAR10 - - - - - - 0.703 - - - -
T1TAR13 - - - - - - 0.707 - - - -
T1TAR19 - - - - - - 0.754 - - - -
T1TAR22 - - - - - - 0.796 - - - -
T1TAR1 - - - - - - - - 0.720 - -
T1TAR5 - - - - - - - - 0.786 - -
T1TAR9 - - - - - - - - 0.759 - -
T1TAR14 - - - - - - - - 0.782 - -
T1TAR17 - - - - - - - - 0.733 - -
T1TAR24 - - - - - - - - 0.776 - -
T1TAR4 - - - - - - - - - - 0.736
T1TAR7 - - - - - - - - - - 0.729
T1TAR8 - - - - - - - - - - 0.804
T1TAR11 - - - - - - - - - - 0.798
T1TAR12 - - - - - - - - - - 0.804
T1TAR15 - - - - - - - - - - 0.726
Correlation Matrix of ETA

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
BULPHY 1.000
BULVER 0.929 1.000
BULSOC 0.832 0.819 1.000
TARPHY 0.440 0.395 0.340 1.000
TARVER 0.339 0.319 0.275 0.880 1.000
TARSOC 0.342 0.296 0.335 0.827 0.906 1.000
779
Grade 6 Sample
LAMBDA-Y

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
T1BUL3 0.669 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL6 0.670 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL10 0.637 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL14 0.571 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL23 0.655 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL25 0.651 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL1 - - 0.723 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL5 - - 0.779 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL9 - - 0.723 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL15 - - 0.693 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL20 - - 0.858 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL24 - - 0.822 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL7 - - - - 0.537 - - - - - -
T1BUL8 - - - - 0.696 - - - - - -
T1BUL13 - - - - 0.694 - - - - - -
T1BUL17 - - - - 0.659 - - - - - -
T1BUL19 - - - - 0.572 - - - - - -
T1BUL26 - - - - 0.654 - - - - - -
T1TAR3 - - - - - - 0.686 - - - -
T1TAR6 - - - - - - 0.614 - - - -
T1TAR10 - - - - - - 0.675 - - - -
T1TAR13 - - - - - - 0.605 - - - -
T1TAR19 - - - - - - 0.678 - - - -
T1TAR22 - - - - - - 0.702 - - - -
T1TAR1 - - - - - - - - 0.824 - -
T1TAR5 - - - - - - - - 0.809 - -
T1TAR9 - - - - - - - - 0.759 - -
T1TAR14 - - - - - - - - 0.762 - -
T1TAR17 - - - - - - - - 0.704 - -
T1TAR24 - - - - - - - - 0.830 - -
T1TAR4 - - - - - - - - - - 0.743
T1TAR7 - - - - - - - - - - 0.761
T1TAR8 - - - - - - - - - - 0.821
T1TAR11 - - - - - - - - - - 0.726
T1TAR12 - - - - - - - - - - 0.836
T1TAR15 - - - - - - - - - - 0.634

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
BULPHY 1.000
BULVER 0.844 1.000
BULSOC 0.758 0.769 1.000
TARPHY 0.338 0.343 0.210 1.000
TARVER 0.272 0.343 0.207 0.802 1.000
TARSOC 0.132 0.213 0.216 0.736 0.792 1.000
780
Male Sample
LAMBDA-Y

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
T1BUL3 0.628 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL6 0.656 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL10 0.653 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL14 0.627 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL23 0.631 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL25 0.689 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL1 - - 0.687 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL5 - - 0.813 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL9 - - 0.778 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL15 - - 0.724 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL20 - - 0.820 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL24 - - 0.799 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL7 - - - - 0.607 - - - - - -
T1BUL8 - - - - 0.726 - - - - - -
T1BUL13 - - - - 0.693 - - - - - -
T1BUL17 - - - - 0.661 - - - - - -
T1BUL19 - - - - 0.632 - - - - - -
T1BUL26 - - - - 0.679 - - - - - -
T1TAR3 - - - - - - 0.711 - - - -
T1TAR6 - - - - - - 0.688 - - - -
T1TAR10 - - - - - - 0.699 - - - -
T1TAR13 - - - - - - 0.663 - - - -
T1TAR19 - - - - - - 0.738 - - - -
T1TAR22 - - - - - - 0.796 - - - -
T1TAR1 - - - - - - - - 0.736 - -
T1TAR5 - - - - - - - - 0.773 - -
T1TAR9 - - - - - - - - 0.789 - -
T1TAR14 - - - - - - - - 0.754 - -
T1TAR17 - - - - - - - - 0.710 - -
T1TAR24 - - - - - - - - 0.817 - -
T1TAR4 - - - - - - - - - - 0.730
T1TAR7 - - - - - - - - - - 0.775
T1TAR8 - - - - - - - - - - 0.800
T1TAR11 - - - - - - - - - - 0.751
T1TAR12 - - - - - - - - - - 0.840
T1TAR15 - - - - - - - - - - 0.688

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
BULPHY 1.000
BULVER 0.869 1.000
BULSOC 0.827 0.791 1.000
TARPHY 0.299 0.299 0.270 1.000
TARVER 0.291 0.348 0.243 0.861 1.000
TARSOC 0.260 0.258 0.283 0.833 0.877 1.000
781
Female Sample
LAMBDA-Y

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
T1BUL3 0.593 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL6 0.582 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL10 0.572 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL14 0.643 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL23 0.529 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL25 0.484 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL1 - - 0.711 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL5 - - 0.715 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL9 - - 0.645 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL15 - - 0.646 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL20 - - 0.808 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL24 - - 0.765 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL7 - - - - 0.450 - - - - - -
T1BUL8 - - - - 0.597 - - - - - -
T1BUL13 - - - - 0.738 - - - - - -
T1BUL17 - - - - 0.622 - - - - - -
T1BUL19 - - - - 0.584 - - - - - -
T1BUL26 - - - - 0.587 - - - - - -
T1TAR3 - - - - - - 0.670 - - - -
T1TAR6 - - - - - - 0.561 - - - -
T1TAR10 - - - - - - 0.672 - - - -
T1TAR13 - - - - - - 0.662 - - - -
T1TAR19 - - - - - - 0.673 - - - -
T1TAR22 - - - - - - 0.673 - - - -
T1TAR1 - - - - - - - - 0.816 - -
T1TAR5 - - - - - - - - 0.826 - -
T1TAR9 - - - - - - - - 0.717 - -
T1TAR14 - - - - - - - - 0.806 - -
T1TAR17 - - - - - - - - 0.721 - -
T1TAR24 - - - - - - - - 0.786 - -
T1TAR4 - - - - - - - - - - 0.743
T1TAR7 - - - - - - - - - - 0.717
T1TAR8 - - - - - - - - - - 0.820
T1TAR11 - - - - - - - - - - 0.786
T1TAR12 - - - - - - - - - - 0.798
T1TAR15 - - - - - - - - - - 0.687

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
BULPHY 1.000
BULVER 0.875 1.000
BULSOC 0.753 0.741 1.000
TARPHY 0.439 0.329 0.240 1.000
TARVER 0.366 0.323 0.230 0.841 1.000
TARSOC 0.314 0.272 0.308 0.822 0.815 1.000
782
Grade 5 male Sample
LAMBDA-Y

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
T1BUL3 0.575 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL6 0.636 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL10 0.672 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL14 0.705 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL23 0.613 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL25 0.694 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL1 - - 0.656 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL5 - - 0.809 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL9 - - 0.769 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL15 - - 0.738 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL20 - - 0.776 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL24 - - 0.764 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL7 - - - - 0.647 - - - - - -
T1BUL8 - - - - 0.736 - - - - - -
T1BUL13 - - - - 0.693 - - - - - -
T1BUL17 - - - - 0.610 - - - - - -
T1BUL19 - - - - 0.663 - - - - - -
T1BUL26 - - - - 0.708 - - - - - -
T1TAR3 - - - - - - 0.724 - - - -
T1TAR6 - - - - - - 0.665 - - - -
T1TAR10 - - - - - - 0.726 - - - -
T1TAR13 - - - - - - 0.711 - - - -
T1TAR19 - - - - - - 0.785 - - - -
T1TAR22 - - - - - - 0.830 - - - -
T1TAR1 - - - - - - - - 0.681 - -
T1TAR5 - - - - - - - - 0.802 - -
T1TAR9 - - - - - - - - 0.807 - -
T1TAR14 - - - - - - - - 0.766 - -
T1TAR17 - - - - - - - - 0.732 - -
T1TAR24 - - - - - - - - 0.818 - -
T1TAR4 - - - - - - - - - - 0.725
T1TAR7 - - - - - - - - - - 0.761
T1TAR8 - - - - - - - - - - 0.786
T1TAR11 - - - - - - - - - - 0.780
T1TAR12 - - - - - - - - - - 0.806
T1TAR15 - - - - - - - - - - 0.730

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
BULPHY 1.000
BULVER 0.931 1.000
BULSOC 0.883 0.858 1.000
TARPHY 0.363 0.357 0.338 1.000
TARVER 0.292 0.312 0.282 0.910 1.000
TARSOC 0.325 0.306 0.344 0.849 0.934 1.000
783
Grade 6 male Sample
LAMBDA-Y

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
T1BUL3 0.664 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL6 0.675 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL10 0.635 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL14 0.585 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL23 0.645 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL25 0.678 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL1 - - 0.689 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL5 - - 0.802 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL9 - - 0.776 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL15 - - 0.699 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL20 - - 0.850 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL24 - - 0.827 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL7 - - - - 0.571 - - - - - -
T1BUL8 - - - - 0.697 - - - - - -
T1BUL13 - - - - 0.693 - - - - - -
T1BUL17 - - - - 0.711 - - - - - -
T1BUL19 - - - - 0.610 - - - - - -
T1BUL26 - - - - 0.658 - - - - - -
T1TAR3 - - - - - - 0.705 - - - -
T1TAR6 - - - - - - 0.731 - - - -
T1TAR10 - - - - - - 0.659 - - - -
T1TAR13 - - - - - - 0.575 - - - -
T1TAR19 - - - - - - 0.661 - - - -
T1TAR22 - - - - - - 0.746 - - - -
T1TAR1 - - - - - - - - 0.796 - -
T1TAR5 - - - - - - - - 0.738 - -
T1TAR9 - - - - - - - - 0.770 - -
T1TAR14 - - - - - - - - 0.739 - -
T1TAR17 - - - - - - - - 0.696 - -
T1TAR24 - - - - - - - - 0.816 - -
T1TAR4 - - - - - - - - - - 0.735
T1TAR7 - - - - - - - - - - 0.793
T1TAR8 - - - - - - - - - - 0.821
T1TAR11 - - - - - - - - - - 0.710
T1TAR12 - - - - - - - - - - 0.880
T1TAR15 - - - - - - - - - - 0.626

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
BULPHY 1.000
BULVER 0.822 1.000
BULSOC 0.772 0.769 1.000
TARPHY 0.249 0.291 0.185 1.000
TARVER 0.295 0.378 0.192 0.807 1.000
TARSOC 0.224 0.261 0.215 0.811 0.818 1.000
784
Grade 5 female Sample
LAMBDA-Y

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
T1BUL3 0.704 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL6 0.648 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL10 0.637 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL14 0.709 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL23 0.529 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL25 0.585 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL1 - - 0.700 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL5 - - 0.776 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL9 - - 0.694 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL15 - - 0.662 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL20 - - 0.795 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL24 - - 0.767 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL7 - - - - 0.494 - - - - - -
T1BUL8 - - - - 0.549 - - - - - -
T1BUL13 - - - - 0.763 - - - - - -
T1BUL17 - - - - 0.639 - - - - - -
T1BUL19 - - - - 0.609 - - - - - -
T1BUL26 - - - - 0.586 - - - - - -
T1TAR3 - - - - - - 0.724 - - - -
T1TAR6 - - - - - - 0.688 - - - -
T1TAR10 - - - - - - 0.654 - - - -
T1TAR13 - - - - - - 0.697 - - - -
T1TAR19 - - - - - - 0.671 - - - -
T1TAR22 - - - - - - 0.705 - - - -
T1TAR1 - - - - - - - - 0.770 - -
T1TAR5 - - - - - - - - 0.764 - -
T1TAR9 - - - - - - - - 0.682 - -
T1TAR14 - - - - - - - - 0.817 - -
T1TAR17 - - - - - - - - 0.757 - -
T1TAR24 - - - - - - - - 0.721 - -
T1TAR4 - - - - - - - - - - 0.738
T1TAR7 - - - - - - - - - - 0.697
T1TAR8 - - - - - - - - - - 0.822
T1TAR11 - - - - - - - - - - 0.828
T1TAR12 - - - - - - - - - - 0.804
T1TAR15 - - - - - - - - - - 0.735

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
BULPHY 1.000
BULVER 0.929 1.000
BULSOC 0.752 0.755 1.000
TARPHY 0.518 0.394 0.293 1.000
TARVER 0.461 0.334 0.263 0.867 1.000
TARSOC 0.467 0.319 0.356 0.891 0.873 1.000
785
Grade 6 female Sample
LAMBDA-Y

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
T1BUL3 0.465 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL6 0.501 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL10 0.489 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL14 0.546 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL23 0.561 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL25 0.372 - - - - - - - - - -
T1BUL1 - - 0.717 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL5 - - 0.674 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL9 - - 0.585 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL15 - - 0.634 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL20 - - 0.817 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL24 - - 0.765 - - - - - - - -
T1BUL7 - - - - 0.402 - - - - - -
T1BUL8 - - - - 0.653 - - - - - -
T1BUL13 - - - - 0.725 - - - - - -
T1BUL17 - - - - 0.611 - - - - - -
T1BUL19 - - - - 0.554 - - - - - -
T1BUL26 - - - - 0.587 - - - - - -
T1TAR3 - - - - - - 0.613 - - - -
T1TAR6 - - - - - - 0.408 - - - -
T1TAR10 - - - - - - 0.695 - - - -
T1TAR13 - - - - - - 0.624 - - - -
T1TAR19 - - - - - - 0.709 - - - -
T1TAR22 - - - - - - 0.615 - - - -
T1TAR1 - - - - - - - - 0.844 - -
T1TAR5 - - - - - - - - 0.874 - -
T1TAR9 - - - - - - - - 0.741 - -
T1TAR14 - - - - - - - - 0.801 - -
T1TAR17 - - - - - - - - 0.702 - -
T1TAR24 - - - - - - - - 0.841 - -
T1TAR4 - - - - - - - - - - 0.745
T1TAR7 - - - - - - - - - - 0.733
T1TAR8 - - - - - - - - - - 0.819
T1TAR11 - - - - - - - - - - 0.751
T1TAR12 - - - - - - - - - - 0.794
T1TAR15 - - - - - - - - - - 0.639

-------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
BULPHY 1.000
BULVER 0.854 1.000
BULSOC 0.752 0.727 1.000
TARPHY 0.298 0.274 0.160 1.000
TARVER 0.297 0.323 0.200 0.842 1.000
TARSOC 0.097 0.243 0.244 0.734 0.790 1.000
786
APPENDIX 18
Item Parcelling
Item Parcelling was conducted on:

(1) The factorial invariance testing for SDQI-E
(2) Wave 1 Battery of Instrumentation
(3) Wave 2 Battery of Instrumentation
This was conducted because there were a larger number of parameters to be estimated
than there were participants to estimate the parameters. Item parcelling was deemed
the most appropriate and useful tool to overcome this. Item parcels were created by
randomly selecting two or three items per factor to create one parcel.
For example: for the Physical Appearance factor of Self-Concept, three item parcels
were created (APPR1, APPR2, APPR3). The first item parcel (APPR1) consisted of I
am good looking, I am a nice looking person, and I am better looking than most of
my friends. The second item parcel (APPR2) consisted of I like the way I look,
Other kids think I am good looking, and I have nice features like nose, and eyes,
and hair. The third item parcel (APPR3) consisted of I have a pleasant looking face,
and I have a good looking body.
787
APPENDIX 19
Means and Standard Deviations
788
Table A
Means and Standard Deviation for Male Year 5 Students
W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
BULPHY 0.250 1.145 0.269 1.181 -0.029 0.895 -0.006 0.943 -0.050 1.017
BULVER 0.055 1.018 0.065 1.006 -0.183 0.862 -0.197 0.770 -0.272 0.776
BULSOC 0.080 1.112 0.048 1.096 -0.069 0.900 -0.207 0.828 -0.418 0.719
TARPHY 0.301 1.302 0.215 1.153 0.024 1.029 -0.016 0.963 -0.184 0.791
TARVER 0.023 1.088 0.021 1.027 -0.009 1.060 -0.164 0.898 -0.173 0.954
TARSOC 0.078 1.140 -0.044 1.008 0.083 1.247 -0.236 0.725 -0.236 0.949
BULTOT 0.136 1.127 0.136 1.099 -0.119 0.845 -0.166 0.834 -0.288 0.841
TARTOT 0.132 1.217 0.063 1.081 0.025 1.145 -0.169 0.888 -0.226 0.935
PRAREI 0.094 1.134 0.074 1.084 -0.052 0.893 0.080 1.134 0.093 1.191
PRPREI 0.028 1.026 0.054 1.099 -0.025 1.002 -0.187 0.893 -0.213 0.858
PRIGNO 0.006 1.052 -0.036 1.041 0.043 1.068 -0.226 1.013 -0.174 1.004
PRADVO 0.197 0.979 -0.135 1.048 0.213 0.932 0.203 1.001 0.062 1.007
SDQAPP -0.115 1.064 0.005 1.032 0.126 1.115 0.406 0.859 0.530 0.734
SDQPHY 0.188 0.884 0.209 0.928 0.362 0.760 0.350 0.830 0.445 0.763
SDQPEE -0.174 0.963 0.020 1.029 0.006 1.116 0.259 0.937 0.406 0.830
SDQPNT 0.021 0.941 0.011 1.016 0.138 0.931 0.181 0.935 0.302 0.843
SDQMAT 0.064 1.114 0.274 0.946 0.172 1.009 0.205 1.013 0.230 1.001
SDQVER -0.073 1.118 -0.089 1.076 -0.172 1.081 -0.177 1.128 -0.010 1.081
SDQSCH -0.157 1.156 -0.052 1.014 -0.038 1.088 -0.115 1.113 0.104 1.090
SDQGEN -0.139 1.099 -0.068 1.032 0.036 1.000 0.186 1.026 0.426 0.883
SDQOSE -0.255 0.985 -0.145 1.002 -0.327 0.986 -0.048 1.068 0.254 1.016
SDQSSE -0.161 1.021 -0.001 0.933 -0.197 1.145 0.170 0.933 0.274 0.791
SDQEMO 0.161 0.966 0.063 0.996 -0.071 0.937 0.137 0.995 0.370 0.995
SDQHON -0.084 0.963 -0.103 1.032 -0.068 1.001 -0.032 1.024 0.109 0.924
COPAVO 0.116 1.053 0.100 1.099 0.334 1.102 0.072 1.140 -0.119 1.189
COPPSL 0.017 1.032 -0.084 0.962 0.233 0.963 -0.013 1.093 0.002 1.194
COPSSF -0.112 0.972 -0.245 1.016 -0.048 0.985 0.027 1.000 -0.180 1.046
SBSSUP 0.056 1.007 -0.140 1.038 0.143 0.978 0.059 0.920 0.142 1.040
SBSACC -0.147 1.089 -0.221 1.113 0.105 0.869 -0.098 1.092 0.005 1.060
SBSATT -0.008 1.001 -0.199 1.067 0.014 1.017 -0.082 0.991 -0.042 1.040
SBSTOT -0.031 1.059 -0.214 1.096 0.098 0.985 -0.044 1.012 0.041 1.108
DEPRES -0.007 0.987 -0.050 1.002 -0.061 1.049 -0.054 1.124 -0.246 0.930
KNOWL -0.170 1.059 0.560 0.558 0.553 0.652
ACTION -0.085 1.040 0.092 1.037 0.272 1.052
Note. BULPHY=Bully Physical; BULVER=Bully Verbal; BULSOC=Bully Social; TARPHY=Target
Physical; TARVER=Target Verbal; TARSOC=Target Social; PRAREI=Active Reinforcer;
PRPREI=Passive Reinforcer; PRIGNO=Ignore Bullying; PRADVO=Advocate for Target;
SDQAPP=Physical Appearance; SDQPHY=Physical Ability; SDQPEE=Peer Relations; SDQPNT =Parent
Relations; SDQMAT=Math; SDQVER=Verbal; SDQSCH=General Schooling; SDQGEN=General Self-
Esteem; SDQOSE=Opposite-Sex Relations; SDQSSE=Same-Sex Relations; SDQEMO=Emotional
Stability; SDQHON=Honesty/Trustworthiness; COPAVO=Avoidance; COPPSL=Problem Solving;
COPSSF=Support Seeking; SBSSUP=Support; SBSACC=Rule Acceptance; SBSATT=Attachment;
SBSTOT=Total School Belonging; DEPRES=Depression; KNOWL= Knowledge about bullying;
ACTION= Action to prevent bullying
789
Table B
Means and Standard Deviation for Female Year 5 Students
W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
BULPHY -0.301 0.727 -0.391 0.629 -0.405 0.631 -0.378 0.693 -0.517 0.556
BULVER -0.324 0.799 -0.360 0.693 -0.468 0.583 -0.386 0.699 -0.511 0.604
BULSOC -0.103 0.838 -0.106 0.900 -0.179 0.756 -0.189 0.798 -0.427 0.709
TARPHY -0.056 0.906 -0.123 0.767 -0.145 0.960 -0.226 0.793 -0.366 0.638
TARVER -0.038 0.913 -0.032 0.872 -0.047 0.974 -0.031 0.995 -0.230 0.788
TARSOC 0.170 1.087 0.001 0.873 0.124 1.150 -0.118 0.879 -0.192 0.835
BULTOT -0.287 0.792 -0.334 0.713 -0.415 0.643 -0.371 0.712 -0.557 0.605
TARTOT 0.023 0.982 -0.053 0.803 -0.033 1.028 -0.133 0.915 -0.294 0.744
PRAREI -0.286 0.658 -0.210 0.748 -0.170 0.716 -0.186 0.594 -0.278 0.549
PRPREI -0.247 0.665 -0.255 0.686 -0.147 0.841 -0.337 0.659 -0.392 0.692
PRIGNO 0.003 0.933 0.169 1.030 0.285 1.003 -0.138 1.029 -0.123 1.042
PRADVO 0.241 0.770 0.069 0.941 0.271 0.862 0.224 0.927 0.227 0.902
SDQAPP 0.056 0.942 0.164 0.916 0.126 0.960 0.273 0.893 0.409 0.768
SDQPHY -0.205 1.051 -0.134 1.012 -0.229 1.132 -0.245 1.163 -0.153 1.117
SDQPEE -0.033 0.978 -0.039 0.980 -0.076 1.096 -0.004 1.181 0.207 0.980
SDQPNT 0.038 0.924 0.063 0.957 0.045 0.915 -0.050 1.141 -0.021 1.128
SDQMAT -0.093 0.979 -0.034 0.982 -0.171 1.146 -0.144 1.105 -0.079 1.077
SDQVER 0.143 0.915 0.258 0.811 0.357 0.824 0.274 0.886 0.362 0.942
SDQSCH 0.127 0.940 0.184 0.866 0.160 1.026 0.153 0.989 0.219 1.018
SDQGEN 0.011 0.948 0.120 0.941 0.032 0.958 0.018 1.101 0.288 0.940
SDQOSE -0.020 1.003 -0.036 0.999 -0.145 1.068 0.111 1.077 0.277 1.052
SDQSSE -0.016 0.962 -0.047 1.115 -0.083 1.082 -0.038 1.189 0.180 0.931
SDQEMO -0.169 0.989 -0.080 1.067 -0.161 1.028 -0.184 1.024 0.030 1.051
SDQHON 0.207 0.920 0.232 0.934 0.110 0.909 -0.007 1.110 0.150 0.951
COPAVO 0.016 0.975 0.014 1.009 0.101 1.028 -0.093 1.002 -0.071 1.078
COPPSL 0.018 0.949 -0.039 1.056 0.169 0.966 0.127 0.989 0.205 0.980
COPSSF 0.260 0.835 0.316 0.950 0.444 0.871 0.443 0.946 0.554 0.941
SBSSUP 0.169 0.867 0.024 0.886 0.160 0.980 0.154 0.944 0.214 0.931
SBSACC 0.174 0.862 0.178 0.934 0.316 0.831 0.417 0.710 0.425 0.744
SBSATT 0.192 0.929 0.042 0.929 0.172 0.909 0.059 1.023 0.168 0.938
SBSTOT 0.206 0.877 0.087 0.927 0.243 0.917 0.227 0.928 0.299 0.905
DEPRES 0.044 0.982 0.041 1.141 0.265 1.248 0.082 1.240 -0.066 1.105
KNOWL -0.265 1.140 0.651 0.450 0.676 0.440
ACTION -0.231 0.936 -0.087 1.106 0.053 1.196
790
Table C
Means and Standard Deviation for Male Year 6 Students
W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
BULPHY 0.405 1.155 0.386 1.168 0.145 0.983 0.062 0.972 -0.031 0.986
BULVER 0.530 1.265 0.378 1.177 0.017 0.898 -0.123 0.827 -0.164 0.891
BULSOC 0.179 1.188 0.018 1.009 -0.123 0.845 -0.271 0.782 -0.280 0.900
TARPHY 0.225 1.087 0.149 1.052 0.049 1.034 -0.026 0.965 -0.230 0.780
TARVER 0.144 1.060 0.085 1.063 -0.176 0.922 -0.190 0.891 -0.361 0.805
TARSOC -0.031 1.051 -0.147 0.840 -0.128 1.010 -0.331 0.719 -0.360 0.721
BULTOT 0.443 1.231 0.311 1.112 0.014 0.905 -0.130 0.862 -0.184 0.945
TARTOT 0.127 1.077 0.036 1.001 -0.117 1.011 -0.216 0.889 -0.370 0.786
PRAREI 0.356 1.294 0.290 1.288 -0.001 1.010 -0.046 0.892 -0.008 1.069
PRPREI 0.200 1.096 0.253 1.195 0.079 1.193 -0.149 0.915 -0.108 1.073
PRIGNO -0.090 0.955 0.013 1.052 -0.240 1.006 -0.273 1.013 -0.344 1.068
PRADVO -0.132 0.998 -0.427 1.242 -0.118 1.109 -0.024 1.038 -0.307 1.305
SDQAPP -0.017 0.994 0.192 0.830 0.146 1.077 0.275 0.999 0.454 0.825
SDQPHY 0.199 0.853 0.233 0.831 0.272 0.876 0.247 0.825 0.314 0.831
SDQPEE -0.068 1.064 0.086 1.012 0.130 0.969 0.287 0.868 0.430 0.825
SDQPNT 0.076 0.873 -0.020 1.046 0.000 1.088 0.064 1.006 0.001 1.071
SDQMAT 0.247 0.934 0.197 0.892 0.149 0.960 0.091 1.015 0.155 0.921
SDQVER -0.247 1.099 -0.121 1.019 -0.131 1.089 -0.061 1.083 -0.024 1.068
SDQSCH -0.064 1.001 -0.049 0.969 -0.121 1.011 -0.033 1.064 0.082 1.027
SDQGEN 0.046 0.929 0.106 0.997 0.120 0.960 0.155 1.000 0.368 0.843
SDQOSE -0.070 0.990 0.224 0.954 0.160 0.995 0.315 0.993 0.472 1.005
SDQSSE -0.098 0.999 0.030 0.955 0.107 0.935 0.227 0.815 0.267 0.822
SDQEMO 0.057 0.914 0.355 0.900 0.248 0.952 0.253 1.049 0.345 1.046
SDQHON -0.166 1.068 -0.051 0.955 -0.066 1.016 -0.044 1.036 -0.007 1.045
COPAVO 0.082 0.941 0.003 1.034 0.091 1.088 -0.119 1.068 -0.260 1.130
COPPSL 0.191 0.942 0.034 0.973 -0.074 0.990 0.112 1.076 -0.118 1.260
COPSSF -0.213 0.974 -0.308 1.000 -0.250 1.018 -0.107 1.002 -0.273 1.154
SBSSUP -0.038 0.935 -0.112 1.106 -0.215 1.044 -0.107 1.073 -0.200 1.259
SBSACC -0.076 0.867 -0.197 1.051 -0.325 1.068 -0.292 1.188 -0.403 1.306
SBSATT -0.001 1.032 -0.125 0.971 -0.285 1.084 -0.208 1.034 -0.314 1.234
SBSTOT -0.041 0.920 -0.164 1.055 -0.314 1.071 -0.228 1.119 -0.347 1.326
DEPRES 0.005 0.928 -0.094 0.897 -0.104 1.065 -0.208 0.941 -0.220 1.106
KNOWL 0.018 1.011 0.538 0.613 0.512 0.679
ACTION 0.090 1.018 0.185 1.022 0.172 1.220
791
Table D
Means and Standard Deviation for Female Year 6 Students
W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
BULPHY -0.353 0.592 -0.315 0.700 -0.409 0.641 -0.473 0.537 -0.533 0.491
BULVER -0.257 0.787 -0.159 0.873 -0.384 0.769 -0.408 0.654 -0.495 0.587
BULSOC -0.177 0.754 -0.105 1.000 -0.224 0.790 -0.423 0.557 -0.432 0.641
TARPHY -0.246 0.801 -0.257 0.841 -0.411 0.494 -0.388 0.603 -0.390 0.619
TARVER -0.060 1.058 -0.060 1.104 -0.243 0.733 -0.220 0.757 -0.223 0.872
TARSOC 0.024 1.115 -0.099 0.961 -0.233 0.778 -0.272 0.655 -0.171 0.920
BULTOT -0.298 0.708 -0.215 0.810 -0.392 0.742 -0.493 0.552 -0.557 0.519
TARTOT -0.097 1.014 -0.143 0.935 -0.329 0.633 -0.324 0.672 -0.292 0.821
PRAREI -0.203 0.688 -0.137 0.870 -0.254 0.730 -0.208 0.759 -0.244 0.689
PRPREI -0.150 0.841 0.006 1.014 -0.276 0.696 -0.337 0.686 -0.295 0.846
PRIGNO -0.082 0.963 0.078 0.967 0.052 1.036 -0.196 0.958 -0.251 1.036
PRADVO 0.234 0.775 -0.071 0.989 0.126 0.841 0.218 0.879 0.158 0.966
SDQAPP -0.118 0.957 -0.226 1.113 0.165 0.963 0.344 0.863 0.364 0.875
SDQPHY -0.271 1.062 -0.269 1.056 -0.191 1.055 -0.092 1.043 -0.049 0.958
SDQPEE 0.033 0.898 0.049 0.976 0.111 0.942 0.346 0.785 0.436 0.754
SDQPNT 0.114 0.853 -0.069 1.125 0.094 0.932 0.068 0.952 0.089 0.948
SDQMAT -0.215 0.909 -0.160 0.871 -0.068 0.987 -0.054 0.919 -0.070 0.985
SDQVER 0.101 0.909 0.150 0.799 0.231 0.826 0.282 0.783 0.325 0.838
SDQSCH 0.039 0.866 0.026 0.895 0.221 0.867 0.302 0.860 0.296 0.930
SDQGEN -0.039 0.960 -0.005 1.056 0.200 0.928 0.337 0.840 0.407 0.818
SDQOSE 0.079 0.936 0.194 0.953 0.215 0.946 0.435 0.946 0.557 0.937
SDQSSE 0.129 0.901 0.127 0.980 0.142 0.944 0.298 0.787 0.314 0.814
SDQEMO -0.179 0.939 -0.063 1.047 0.037 1.091 0.191 1.061 0.287 1.104
SDQHON 0.141 0.921 0.149 0.945 0.228 0.860 0.345 0.867 0.397 0.833
COPAVO -0.033 0.965 -0.152 0.974 -0.150 0.931 -0.270 0.971 -0.221 1.127
COPPSL 0.210 0.879 -0.011 0.972 -0.063 0.850 0.149 1.000 0.065 1.121
COPSSF 0.309 0.910 0.320 0.916 0.243 0.916 0.480 0.880 0.386 0.970
SBSSUP 0.156 0.925 0.047 1.043 0.084 0.920 0.172 0.875 0.224 0.876
SBSACC 0.417 0.653 0.242 0.900 0.264 0.749 0.233 0.807 0.290 0.870
SBSATT 0.212 0.942 0.086 0.934 0.084 0.847 0.134 0.842 0.124 0.905
SBSTOT 0.292 0.849 0.136 0.931 0.158 0.842 0.203 0.851 0.239 0.870
DEPRES 0.002 0.924 0.098 1.252 -0.101 1.043 -0.217 0.915 -0.209 0.968
KNOWL 0.212 0.756 0.652 0.475 0.631 0.501
ACTION 0.171 0.935 0.323 0.851 0.302 0.922
792

View Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

View Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program:

Implementing an Effective Whole-School Program to Manage Bullying,

A thesis submitted to the University of Western Sydney in fulfilment of the

Linda R. Finger 2009

I would like to thank my supervisors, Professor Rhonda G. Craven, Professor Herbert

TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume I ............................................................................ i

CHAPTER 3 Risk Factors to Involvement in Bullying, and Strengthening

CHAPTER 4 The Beyond Bullying Primary Schools Program ............................ 86

CHAPTER 6 Methodology ..................................................................................... 149

CHAPTER 7 Study 1 Results: Psychometric Assessment of Instrumentation.. 184

CHAPTER 8 Study 2 Results: Impact of the Beyond Bullying Primary Schools

CHAPTER 9 Discussion.......................................................................................... 349

CHAPTER 10 Summary......................................................................................... 376

Figure 4.1. Beyond Bullying Primary Model .............................................................. 88

Appendix 1 Teacher Manual.................................................................................. 401

been bullied before and its not fun.

Australian Primary School Student (personal communication,

November 24, 2005)

pervasive in Australia, and internationally. In Australia for example, research has

(Deater-Deckard, 2001), delinquent behaviour (Rigby & Cox, 1996), criminality

(Eron, Huesman, Dubow, Romanoff, & Yarmel, 1987), psychological disturbance

& Salmond, 2002), depression (Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpela, Marttunen, Rimpela, &

Generals Department, whose Australian National Crime Prevention Strategy (1999),

bullying in primary schools, and to prevent long-term and wide-ranging socio-

economic and community costs (Nansel et al., 2001).

A whole-school approach to preventing school bullying is considered to be the

most effective means of decreasing bullying within schools (Salmivalli, 2001). A

involvement in bullying others and victimisation were reduced by 50% or more

effectiveness of whole-school approaches can be partly attributed to methodological

utilisation of longitudinal control-group designs; and (d) inadequate implementation

and reporting of the whole-school approach.

intervention approach to design an effective secondary whole-school bullying

the developments included: (a) capitalising on recent advances in theory

psychometrically sound multidimensional measures of bullying and its correlates; (b)

(c) whole-school approaches to preventing bullying (e.g., Griezel, 2007; Griezel,

2006). Key features of this intervention included: a whole-school policy, a

teacher-managed whole-school program, specific behaviour management strategies

added to the international literature by providing a rare, baseline-control versus

experimental empirical study that evidences the effectiveness of this intervention in

addressing bullying. Currently, only a small number of studies in secondary schools

primary school research that has addressed these issues as yet.

The primary purpose of the present investigation is to apply recent advances in

aims of this study include to:

1) Demonstrate that each of the instruments used in the current study is a

A well-developed, theoretically grounded, and thoroughly tested whole-school

intervention to combat bullying is critical for assisting schools to manage bullying

behaviours effectively. This research project is a longitudinal multi-cohort

intervention should significantly reduce school bullying, increase awareness of what

experienced by students, increase students sense of belonging to their school,

increase important multidimensional self-concept factors that contribute to protecting

these primary aged students.

primary school bullying, as well as to inform interventions. Key strengths of the

present investigation include: (a) the inclusion of a longitudinal control-group

(c) the use of developmentally appropriate, multidimensional, and psychometrically

on distinct psychosocial outcomes (e.g., bullying, being bullied, self-concept, school

belonging, depression, and coping strategies).

Primary School Bullying: Definitional Issues, Methodological

Research Gaps, and Measurement

A bully is not a special kind of person with some kind of pathology

that matter, a victim... The part of a bully, or of a victim, draws upon

with enough accuracy to enable predictability without an unacceptably

high mistake rate.

Chapter 2 provides an overview of the literature and methodology underlying