Suchergebnisse

Despite 40 years of significant national research on various aspects of bullying (Espelage, & Swearer, 2004), and although past research has intentionally spent time examining bullying in specific populations, one population ignored in the research is the gifted student population (Peterson & Ray, 2006a, 2006b). The limited research available indicates gifted students may be vulnerable or are at risk of being targets of bullies, may become the bullies, or may even be bully-victims (Cross, 2001a, 2001b; Peters & Bain, 2011; Parliament of Victoria, 2012; Roddick, 2011; Schroeder-Davis, 2012). While educators and administrators play an integral role in the development and safety of the gifted child, the research is clear; school counselors are best suited to serve the unique developmental needs of gifted students (Bauman, 2008; Philips & Cornell, 2012). The study was conducted to understand how versed and skilled counselors perceive their abilities to be in addressing gifted and bullying at the elementary, middle school, and high school levels. Data was collected through interviews of 9 Minnesota counselors who serve gifted students, 3 at elementary, 3 at middle school and 3 at high school. Data showed bullying is a concern at the elementary and middle school level. Gifted students were identified as a targeted group at the elementary and middle school level. Most elementary and middle school counselors did not feel confident in serving the unique social and emotional needs of gifted students. The study found counselors did utilize numerous strategies to address bullying, more at the elementary level with fewer utilized at the high school level. Most counselors in the study reported an anti-bullying program is being utilized, with four counselors reporting no program being used. Counselors overall perceive the strategies utilized by administrators were effective for reducing bullying. The themes of the dissertation include: the concept of giftedness, the unique social and emotional needs of gifted students, the evolving role of the counselor in serving gifted students, and the information about bullying and prevention and intervention. The study contributes to the body of research on bullying by providing more information for those who work toward understanding the healthy development of gifted youngsters. Also, the study sheds light on preparedness of counseling programs at colleges and universities preparing counselors to meet the unique needs of gifted students.

Bullying is considered to be a significant public health problem with both short- and long-term physical and social-emotional consequences for youth. A large body of research indicates that youth who have been bullied are at increased risk of subsequent mental, emotional, health, and behavioral problems, especially internalizing problems, such as low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and loneliness. Given the growing awareness of bullying as a public health problem and the increasing evidence of short- and long-term physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral health and academic consequences of bullying behavior, there have been significant efforts at the practice, program, and policy levels to address bullying behavior. This article summarizes a recent consensus report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Preventing Bullying Through Science, Policy, and Practice, and what is known about the consequences of bullying behavior and interventions that attempt to prevent and respond to it.

The context of bullying : definition, prevalence and controversies -- Individual, family, and social factors associated with bullying -- Theories that help to understand bullying -- Pinning the tail on the donkey: conceptualizing, identifying, and responding to bullying -- The school : multiple levels and systems -- Cyber bullying in a cyber world -- Bullying within friendships -- Challenges and obstacles : intervention and treatment -- Intervention and treatment : relationships -- Treatment intervention, collaboration, and consultation

High profile media reports of young people committing suicide after experiencing bullying have propelled a national conversation about the nature and scope of this problem and the means to address it. Specialists have long known that involvement in bullying in any capacity (as the victim or as the perpetrator) is associated with higher rates of suicidal ideation and behaviors, but evidence about which bullying subtype is at greatest risk is more mixed. For instance, some studies have shown that the association between suicidal ideation and bullying is stronger for targets of bullying than perp.

The article focuses on school bullying, which is rather spread in different countries of the world and is considered to be actual social and pedagogical and psychological problem nowadays. Being serious and massive phenomenon bullying needs solving, from clear definition of the notion to working-outs of practical recommendations for its prophylaxis and neutralization. In the article definitions and characteristics of forms and variants of school bullying development, which constantly are changing, adopting to certain circumstances; for example, the development of such new modern variant of aggression as cyberbullying are given. Bullying happens at all ages, in all countries, between children, teenagers and grown-ups. It happens mostly between the ages of 10-14. No form of bullying should be tolerated. Bullying in schools must be dealt with as a serious issue; it is not a normal behaviour and it can bring serious damage to the further development of the individuals being aggressed. To increase the level of this negative social phenomenon the experience of Canada in antibullying measures can be taken into consideration. The bullying problem is very actual in Canadian schools. Schools of Canada are aimed at more constructive principles of preventive character in bullying overcoming and neutralization. Anti-bullying work has harmonious mechanism and means school cooperation with students and their parents, public organizations, members of community and is supported by government institutions. Studies have shown that a higher percentage of children engaged in bullying behaviour is in middle school and high school than in elementary school. But, the percentages of children victimized gradually decreases with age. ; Стаття акцентує увагу на шкільному булінгу, який є досить поширеним у різних країнах світу і вважається актуальною соціально-педагогічною і психологічною проблемою сьогодення. Як серйозні і масове явище булінг потребує вирішення, від чіткого визначення самого поняття до розробок практичних рекомендацій з його профілактики та протистояння. У статті даються визначення і характеристика форм та видів прояву шкільного булінгу, які постійно змінюються, пристосовуючись до нових обставин; наприклад, поява такої нової сучасної форми агресії як кібербулінг. Зниженню рівня цього негативного соціального явища може слугувати досвід Канади щодо антибулінгових заходів. Питання булінгу є дуже актуальним у канадських школах. Школи Канади націлені на біль конструктивні принципи превентивного характеру до подолання і протистояння булінгу. Антибулінгова робота є злагодженим механізмом і передбачає співпрацю школи з учнями та їх батьками, громадськими організаціями, членами громади і має підтримку державних інституцій. Булінг не зникне сам по собі, але його можна взяти під контроль – за умови, якщо не буде байдужих і всі разом почнуть працювати, щоб захистити від нього дітей. Це просто має стати обов'язком кожного, хто задіяний у цьому процесі, – зупинити булінг. Дослідження показали, що таке негативне явище як цькування найчастіше трапляється серед учнів середніх і старших класів, а його відсоток у початкових класах значно нижчий. Прояви булінгу зустрічаються у різному віці, у різних країнах між дітьми і підлітками. Вони наносять серйозну шкоду подальшому розвитку особистостей, які відчули його на собі, і тому необхідна повна підтримка на всіх рівнях, щоб допомогти їм зрозуміти непристойність на неприпустимість такої поведінки і звернути увагу на важливість поваги у стосунках з іншими і вміння знаходити шляхи самоствердження через позитивне лідерство.

Despite the amount of attention that activists, educators, psychologists, and the media place on bullying and bullying prevention, there has been no sustained philosophical reflection on bullying, nor has there been a feminist analysis of the growing literature on bullying. This essay seeks to satisfy those two needs. The first section is a broad introduction to the literature on bullying. I define bullying and distinguish it from teasing, sassing, roughhousing, and other more benign interactions. I also outline two common solutions to bullying: zero‐tolerance policies and "ecological" interventions. The second section uses feminist ethics of care to analyze the effectiveness of each approach. I argue that ecological approaches to bullying are preferable to zero‐tolerance policies because they operate on a relational model of the self and identity‐formation. I elaborate a notion of affirmation as the mechanism that stabilizes and solidifies our sense of self across time. I then use affirmation to analyze three things: why people bully one another, the specific harm inflicted by bullying, and why ecological approaches are more effective in reducing bullying. The third section uses my account of affirmation to critique the scientism and troublingly gendered assumptions that underlie much of the work on bullying.

Cyber-bullying led a Rutgers University student to commit suicide, which led the Federal government and institutions of higher education to take a closer look at bullying and cyber-bullying on college campuses. Congress introduced the Tyler Clementi Higher Education Anti-Harassment Act (Tyler Clementi Act) that would require institutions that receive Federal financial aid to provide anti-bullying programming on their campuses. This study examined the bullying related policies and practices at five public research universities. Specifically, interviews were conducted with both the Chief Student Affairs Officer and Chief Conduct Officer at each institution to examine their perceptions of the judicial and programmatic efforts to reduce bullying and cyber-bullying on their campuses. In addition, the research asked about their preparedness if the Tyler Clementi Act would become law. Significant research has been conducted on bullying at the K-12 level but there is very little research on the prevalence of bullying at the college level. This study indicates that administrators perceive, and have even witnessed, bullying on their campuses. Despite recognizing the existence of bullying on their campus, only one institution has instituted any type of proactive efforts to address bullying on their campus. The other four institutions are more reactive. In addition, very little change occurred following the death of Clementi, yet all administrators interviewed believe strongly that their institution would be in compliance with the basic components of the Tyler Clementi Act if it were enacted. After a review of current practices at each of these five campuses, several recommendations are suggested to improve anti-bullying efforts at institutions of similar size, including, but not limited, to: an institutional-wide effort to provide proactive programming efforts for all sub-groups of the student population, formal assessment and stronger awareness and involvement of the Chief Student Affairs Officer.

The phenomenon of bullying in educational institutions represents a threat to the entire educational endeavor and can manifest itself both physically and verbally, socially or online. The protagonists of bullying are: the aggressor, the victim and the observer. The typical profile of the aggressor is that of an irritable person, with poor self-control, vindictive, rigid, and the typical profile of the victim is that of a vulnerable, silent, solitary, insecure person, there being the submissive and defiant victim category. The effective prevention of bullying actions is possible in a multidisciplinary team effort, and the process must take place on multiple levels: individual, family, school, class, relational, curricular, by involving all professional and civil organizations, interest groups and companies that have a relationship with the school and students, including social services and organizations dealing with health and crime.