Development and maintenance of victimization associated with bullying during the transition to middle school: The role of school-based factors
Year: 2020
Type: article
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to examine the trajectory of bullying victimization from third through sixth grade, as well as the role that school-based factors play in predicting victimization in grade six.Victimization is associated with negative social, emotional, educational, behavioral, and psychological short term and long-term outcomes (Hawker & Boulton, 2000;Swearer, Grills, Haye, & Cary 2004).National survey research suggests that about 20% of youth ages 12 to 18 report being victimized at school, with school being the most common place for victimization to occur (Musu, Zhang, Wang, Khang, & Ouderkerk, 2019).Rates of prevalence tend to increase as students transition from elementary to middle school (Dinkes, Kemp, Baum, & Snyder, 2009).There has been limited research that closely examines the school-based factors that may be associated with the increase in victimization as students transition to middle school.This study utilized data collected as a part of a national study of youth development to explore victimization and associated factors during the later elementary years.A generalized linear mixed model examined the stability of the victim role in from third to sixth grade.A McNemar's test compared victimization prevalence in grades five and six.A binary logistic regression explored the predictive role of school-based factors on victimization in the sixth grade.Results suggest role instability from grades three to six, a non-significant difference in overall victimization for grades five and six, and the importance of teacher-focused factors in predicting victimization in sixth grade.districts in the mandatory creation of district-wide policy (Ohio Revised Code § 3313.666).These district policies must include appropriate definitions; actions to disseminate policy and disciplinary information; as well as procedures for investigating, documenting, reporting, notifying families of, and responding to incidents of bullying (Ohio Revised Code § 3313.666).If state and federal funds are allocated for the provision of prevention efforts, districts in Ohio should provide staff members with training regarding "harassment, intimidation, and bullying" (Ohio Revised Code § 3313.667,para.2).Federal law.There are currently no federal laws that regulate bullying (U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, n.d.a).However, school districts are required to respond to serious and repeated harassment of students that are members of protected classes.Such requirements are noted under (a) the Civil Rights act of 1964, (b) the Educational Amendments of 1972, (c) the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (d) the Americans with Disabilities Act, and (e) the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, n.d.a).In this case, bullying a child or adolescent because of their race, color, national origin, sex, disability, or religion could be severe enough to be considered harassment and require further action by the school district (U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, n.d.a).Taken together, these laws, policies, codes, and regulations provide support for school-based programs in order to (a) measure prevalence and assess the severity of bullying, (b) increase awareness and knowledge about bullying, (c) teach and improve skills for intervening and preventing bullying incidents, and (d) decrease the prevalence How much can you do to make students enjoy coming to school?How much can you do to get students to trust teachers?How much can you do to enhance the collaboration between teachers and the administration to make the school run effectively?How must can you do to get students to believe they can do well in schoolwork?Note.Adapted from the Teacher Self Efficacy Scale (Bandura, 1986) Teacher Disciplinary Self-Efficacy was measured by the Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale (Bandura, 1986).This scale measured teacher self-efficacy for instruction, discipline, creating a positive school climate, and a total self-efficacy score.Teachers were asked to rate their efficacy for 21 items on a nine-point Likert scale (1= Nothing, 3 = Very Little, 5 = Some Influence, 7 = Quite a Bit, 9 = A Great Deal).For the purpose of understanding teacher self-reported efficacy for classroom discipline, the Teacher Disciplinary Self-Efficacy score was utilized as the measure for the variable titled, Teacher Disciplinary Self-Efficacy.The Disciplinary Self-Efficacy score was computed
Author: Abel, Leah A
Institution: Kent State University
Language: English
Subfield: Social Psychology
Field: Psychology
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W7037223394