Workstream 1 Research on good practices of bullying prevention targeting children in preschool and elementary school Objectives

Smith, P., Smith, C. Osborn, R. & Samara, M. (2008). A content analysis of school anti‐bullying policies: progress and limitations. Educational Psychology in Practice: theory, research and practice in educational psychology Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 1-12

schools have never received any specific training on how to prevent and respond to homophobic bullying. over half of primary school teachers (55 per cent) say their schools do not have a policy that explicitly addresses homophobic bullying. Two thirds of primary school teachers (63 per cent) have not addressed issues of sexual orientation in their classrooms.

Ringrose, J., Gill, R., Livingstone, S. & Harvey, L.(2012). A qualitative study of children’s and young people’s ‘sexting.’ London: NSPCC.

This qualitative study of 8 and 10 year old children explored the prevalence of the phenomenon of ‘sexting’ through focus group interviews with 35 young people years 8 and 10 in two inner city London schools. The interviews showed a great diversity of experiences.

Sexting does not refer to a single activity but rather to a range of activities which may be motivated by sexual pleasure but are often coercive, linked to harassment, bullying and even violence. There is no easy line to be drawn between sexting and bullying, for instance, and much may be learned from anti-cyberbullying initiatives to address the problem of sexting. Girls are most affected.

In terms of intervention the researchers recommend that to overcome the culture of silence, adult embarrassment, and a paralysing uncertainty over changing sexual norms, the adults who variously provide for youth – teachers, parents, industry, commerce and others – should develop an explicit discourse that recognises, critiques and redresses the gendered sexual pressures on youth. Sexting may only reveal the tip of the iceberg in terms of these unequal and often coercive sexual pressures, but they also make such pressures visible, available for discussion and so potentially open to resolution.

Between September and December 2011, Her Majesty’s Inspectors visited 37 primary schools and 19 secondary schools for the main part of the survey. The schools were located in both urban and rural areas and varied in size and type. At their previous Ofsted inspection none had been judged to be inadequate. Altogether, inspectors held formal discussions with 1,357 pupils and 797 staff.

Inspectors found that the schools visited could be broadly split into three groups. In the best schools, the culture and ethos in the school were very positive. The schools’ expectations and rules clearly spelled out how pupils should interact with each other. Respect for individual differences had a high profile. In these schools pupils developed empathy, understood the effect that bullying could have on people, and took responsibility for trying to prevent bullying. The way in which these schools planned and delivered the curriculum helped a great deal to bring about these positive attitudes because it gave pupils a wide range of opportunities to develop their knowledge and understanding of diversity and an assortment of strategies to protect themselves from bullying. These schools recorded bullying incidents carefully and analysed them to look for trends and patterns. They then used this information to plan the next steps. The action they took was firm and often imaginative. If pupils had been bullied then they felt very confident that action was taken and it stopped promptly. Governors were well informed and questioning about bullying.

The second and largest group of schools shared many of the features described above and had many strengths. These schools had a positive culture and most pupils were considerate of each other. Many of the schools had developed a range of effective strategies for pupils to learn about moral and social issues. However, their practice was not as consistent as that of the strongest schools and on occasion had areas of relative weakness. Sometimes the curriculum was not as well structured or opportunities to teach about diversity were missed. Sometimes the analysis of behaviour and bullying was not as sharp as it should be to enable the school to see exactly what the issues were or what actions needed to be taken next.

In the third small group of schools, the culture and the curriculum did not effectively develop pupils’ understanding about diversity or help them to develop sufficient empathy for each other. Behaviour in these schools was more variable and interactions between pupils were not as positive. Incidents were dealt with when they happened but the preventative work was not as effective. In some of these schools pupils expressed some concerns about bullying.

Training for staff was an important aspect of the schools’ work to prevent and tackle bullying. The training that the majority of schools had provided on bullying tended to be general and did not always focus on the different types of bullying that could occur and the implications of these. This led to some staff not feeling wholly confident to tackle all types of incident. At its best, training left staff very knowledgeable about the different forms of bullying that could be faced by pupils and feeling confident to deal with different forms of discrimination.

Global programs include: the “No estás solo” (“You are not alone”) program in the Canary Islands, which offers materials and resources for all members of the education community, together with a prevention and support service specially designed with victims of school intimidation and their families in mind; Cuento contigo” (“I’m Counting on You”); in Catalonia and Andalusia materials for families, teachers and children have been produced with guidelines for detecting and combating school harassment (Collell and Escudé, 2004 and 2005; Ortega et al, 1998); in the Balearic Islands there is the “Programa de Competencia Social y Mediación Escolar” (“Social Competence and School Mediation Program”), and in Castilla y Leon there is the “Plan de Convivencia Escolar” (“Plan for Convivencia at School”). Lines or services implemented to provide support in bullying situations include: the first help line, called “El Teléfono Amigo” (“The Telephone Friend”) (Ortega, Kulis and Ortega, 2001) which was created in Andalusia and has evolved into a service providing guidance in issues related to convivencia at school; the NGO “Protégeles” (“Protect them!”) which has as its objective to provide support and guidance for children and adolescents who are being subjected to cyber harassment or intimidation, drawing on the help of psychologists, education experts, social workers, lawyers and specialists in child safety; the "Pantallas Amigas" (“Friendly Screens”) association, which promotes the safe, healthy use of ICTs to avoid risk and minimize negative consequences; the Asociación Contra el acoso escolar de Catalunya (“Anti-Bullying Association of Catalonia”), which offers parents information about specific forms of conduct which may indicate that their children are being intimidated, together with a guide on what to do if this is the case. Many web sites also offer information about courses, lectures, articles, action strategies, guides, forums, etc., two examples being: http://www.acosomoral.org/indexbully.htm and http://convivenciaeducativa.blogspot.com/index.html.

Spain also has different associations made up of education sector professionals and research teams dedicated to studying intimidation. Many of these offer the resources they themselves have developed as part of their research. The material available includes questionnaires, reports and even didactic aids and materials for combating school harassment for use by families and educators. Examples include: Proyecto Atlántida (“the Atlantis Project”), which promotes democratic values in education and carries out innovative programs in schools; the Consejo Educativo de Castilla y León (“Education Council of Castilla y Leon”), a Pedagogical Renewal Movement which has egalitarian education as its main objective; the Laboratorio de Estudios sobre Convivencia y Prevención de la Violencia (LAECOVI – Laboratory for Studies into Convivencia and Violence Prevention), which offers documents, reports and questionnaires for identifying, preventing and combating problems involving cyber harassment and intimidation; the Web site of Jordi Collel and Carme Escudé (http://www.xtec.es/~jcollell/), which has information about intimidation, teaching suggestions and guidelines for people working in schools and guides and advice for parents; WebQuest on Bullying, highly motivating strategies for talking about the problem of bullying with adolescents; and the II Daphne program, a trans-national project run by Arcigay (Italian Association of Gays and Lesbians) in collaboration with Madrid aimed at eradicating homophobic bullying.

Since only a small number of these programs have been evaluated with any degree of scientific rigor, it is difficult to find scientific criteria which will allow us to identify which programs or which specific measures in each of them are really useful. Ttofi and Farrington (2011) carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of anti-intimidation programs, which were evaluated using a control group. The following programs were evaluated as good practices: “Maltrato Cero” (“Zero abuse”), an initiative run by the Dirección General de Ordenación Académica de la Consejería de Educación y Ciencia del Principado de Asturias - Academic Planning Office, Education and Science Department of the Principality of Asturias, 2006; “Maltrato entre Iguais” Peer Abuse Sensitization Program, Consellería de educación e ordenación universitaria. Xunta de Galicia - Department of Education and University Planning, Regional Government of Galicia; “Guía de maltrato entre iguales” (“Guide to Peer Abuse”), Department of Education, Regional Government of Extremadura; “Guía de actuación en los centros educativos ante el maltrato entre iguales” (“Peer Abuse Action Guide for Schools”), Departamento de Educación, Universidades e Investigación, Gobierno Vasco - Department of Education, Universities and Research, Basque Regional Government, 2007; “Convivencia escolar: qué es y cómo abordarla (programa educativo entre compañeros y compañeras)” (“Convivencia at School: What it is and How it should be Addressed (classmates education program)” (Ortega et al., 1998). The material in this program was published by the Andalusian Regional Government as part of the Programa Educativo para Prevenir el bullying (Education Program for the Prevention of bullying), the initiative having been launched by the Andalusian Regional Government’s Department of Education and Science; “Plan de prevención y tratamiento de conflicto (materiales para su puesta en marcha en un centro de secundaria)” (“Plan for Conflict Prevention and Management (materials for setting up the plan in a secondary school)”, Pérez Casajús (2005), implemented by a work group made up of teachers; “Plan PREVI. Plan de Prevención de la Violencia y Promoción de la Convivencia en los centros escolares de la comunidad Valenciana” (“PREVI Plan. Plan for the Prevention of Violence and the Promotion of Convivencia in the Valencia Region”), an initiative implemented by the Consellería de Cultura, Educación y Deporte de la Comunidad Valenciana, - Department of Culture, Education and Sport, Valencian Regional Government (2004); “Proyecto de convivencia y éxito educativo” (“Project for Convivencia and Educational Success”), Departament d’Educació, Generalitat de Catalunya – Department of Education, Regional Government of Catalonia (2009).

• 
  Definition of bullying or cyberbullying: Explicit definition about bullying and/or cyberbullying.
  
• 
  Detection protocol: Guidelines to identify when bullying/cyberbullying is happening and/or who is involved in bullying episodes.
  
• 
  Intervention protocol: Guidelines about how to act when bullying/cyberbullying happens.
  
• 
  Help-line/counseling: Advise service (based on distance/virtual advice – e.g. telephone, chat, email – or face to face advice – e.g. counselor) focused on people involved (students, parents and teachers).
  
• 
  Parent training/meetings: Parent training sessions focused on bullying/cyberbullying.
  
• 
  Playground supervision: Specific proposals about how to supervise playground.
  
• 
  Disciplinary methods: Develops disciplinary measures to respond to bullying/cyberbullying episodes (aimed at students involved).
  
• 
  Classroom management: Includes a specific dynamic of management in class lessons (e.g. how to organize class activities).
  
• 
  Teacher training: Teacher training sessions focused on bullying/cyberbullying.
  
• 
  Classroom rules: Includes specific rules about how students should behave in classroom (e.g. decalogue of good behaviors).
  
• 
  Whole-school anti-bullying policy: All the educative stakeholders are involved in the intervention proposal (students, parents, teachers, other staff).
  
• 
  School conferences: Promotes conferences about bullying/cyberbullying addressed to the school community.
  
• 
  Information for parents: Develops specific information about bullying/cyberbullying for parents (e.g. brochures).
  
• 
  Cooperative group work: Applies cooperative dynamics in students work in classroom.
  
• 
  Videos: Use of videos (or multimedia material) for arise awareness about bullying/cyberbullying or training.
  
• 
  Peer support: Introduces peer support proposals to help in bullying/cyberbullying episodes (e.g. any form where students help other students).
  
• 
  Intensity teachers (10 h. or more): Number of hours of teacher programmes/training.
  
• 
  Duration for teachers (4 days or more): Length of teacher programmes/training.
  
• 
  Intensity children (20 h or more): Number of hours of the interventions carried out with students.
  
• 
  Duration for children (at least one academic year): Length of the interventions carried out with students.
  
• 
  Development of curricular material to be applied in the classroom.
  

The Danish research mentioned under section 3 provides a range of evidence on successful programmes, taking into account:

• 
  Topic of the training,
  
• 
  Teaching methods used,
  
• 
  Special educational approaches toward target groups,
  
• 
  Didactic materials and tools.
  

The “Free of Bullying” programme is presented as an example of best practice. This anti-bullying program is grounded in four basic human values: tolerance, respect, care and courage.

The selected preschool institutions and schools themselves formulate what these values mean for the everyday activities among the children and school pupils, between the adults and between the adults and children.

Inspiration is drawn from The Alannah and Madeline Foundation in Australia, which uses a special teddy bear (“buddy-bear”) as the mascot for the campaign.

The teddy bear is a figure that transcends generations and cultures. The teddy bear has an aura of security, comfort and friendship, and the figure ought to remind children in preschool and kindergarten to take good care of one another – to be a good friend.

The big teddy bear is the property of the kindergarten, and the children can take turns borrowing it to take it home. The little teddy bear, on the other hand, is given to each child.

The teddy bear also serves as a brand in the general material for the campaign.

The anti-bullying program is implemented by establishing a number of small, good social practices aimed at reinforcing the sense of solidarity among the children. The general ambition of the project is for these good practices to become culturally reinforced actions that carry over to school when the children start there.

Examples of the “small social practices” are:

• 
  Bodyguard arrangements. The older children help the younger children with a number of specific things, e.g. helping them put on their outdoor clothing, holding their hand while on excursions, etc.
  
• 
  Massaging. Children learn to give one another tactile massages. Special stories and songs are written for the massage programs, where the children take turns massaging one another’s backs.
  
• 
  The children are encouraged to get involved when a friend is forced out of the group interaction.
  
• 
  Drawing. The children draw and talk about their experiences and opinions regarding friendship. The parents are subsequently invited to an exhibition of the children’s drawings.
  

• 
  Childcare workers are encouraged to use the program in their everyday pedagogical practice. The personnel group is also encouraged to work with the social environment within the personnel group.
  
• 
  Parents are encouraged to support the program from home by assuming positive attitudes towards other children and other children’s parents.
  
• 
  Children the victims of teasing and bullying are the real target of all of these efforts; the program seeks to guarantee a healthy environment in the inpidual childcare institution and school. In order to attain this objective, the efforts aim at activating the entire group of children, including the “passive spectators”, who constitute an important aspect of the teasing and bullying patterns.
  

A group of researchers from Roskilde University, headed by Professor Jan Kampmann, has followed the project “Free from Bullying” from start to finish (2007-2009), describing its implementation, progress and results in a series of reports

games); a second module involved pupils in deciding and controlling respect for social rules for different places in which they live (school, classroom, playground, home) and to plan the reorganisation of the playground.

Elements of this program are:

• 
  A 40 minutes long “Courage to be friendly” interactive session in schools for 5^th – 9^th grade.
  
• 
  Help for schools to create anti-bullying strategies aimed at preventing bullying and creating intervention plans in cases of school bullying before something serious happens.
  
• 
  Forum theater approach – an interactive method (for 5^th – 12^th grade) to understand the problem of bullying and look for the ways to solve it. It helps participants to analyze, show empathy and search for solution.
  

It‘s mission is to improve the psychosocial school environment, to promote relationships based on mutual respect and cooperation between children, parents, teachers and school administration.

It has created a competition for teachers and a collection of best “classroom hour” examples:

ww.bti.gov.lv/lat/draudziga_skola/labaka_klases_audzinasanas_stunda/

Good practices and experiences on bullying interventions and prevention programs from the consortium countries (Spain, Finland, Ireland and Romania) in ARBAX project – Against Racial Bullying and Xenophobia

(http://www.schoolbullying.eu/doc/ARBAX_report_on_good_practices.pdf).
CAN YOU ADD THE KEY FINDINGS HERE PLEASE?

5f) England
In its guidance to schools the Department for Education stresses the need for schools to have a clear policy on the matter, with an emphasis on prevention, clear and clearly communicated rules and procedures. According to the DfE, successful schools:

- involve parents

- involve pupils

- regularly evaluate policies and practices

- implement disciplinary sanctions

- openly discuss differences between pupils that could motivating bullying

- use specific organisations or resources for help with particular problems

- provide effective staff training

- work with the wider community

- create an inclusive environment

- celebrate success
An important source of information on best practise comes from the studies of Samara and Smith mentioned above, which gives an overview of what is done at the school and local authority in the UK.
Farrington, D. and Tfoti, M’s (2010) Campbell collaboration review, School-Based Programs to reduce Bullying and Victimization (Campbell collaboration) also provides a very useful overview. They found that, overall, school-based anti-bullying programs are effective in reducing bullying and victimization (being bullied). On average, bullying decreased by 20% – 23% and victimization decreased by 17% – 20%.
Various program elements and intervention components were associated with a decrease in

both bullying and victimization. The most important program elements that were associated with a decrease in both bullying and victimization were parent training/meetings, disciplinary methods, the

duration of the program for children and teachers and the intensity of the program for children and teachers. Least effective was work with peers, which led to an increase in victimisation. Results show that the intensity and duration of a program is directly linked to its effectiveness, and other researchers (Olweus, 2005; Smith, 1997) also found a ‘doseresponse’ relationship between the number of components of a program that were implemented in a school and its effect on bullying. For example, both the duration (number of days) and intensity (number of hours) of teacher training were

significantly related to the reduction of bullying and victimization. Similarly, the duration (number of days) and intensity (number of hours) of the program for children were significantly related to the reduction of bullying and victimization. Playground supervision was one of the elements that were

most strongly related to program effectiveness. Disciplinary methods (i.e. firm methods for tackling bullying) were an intervention component that was significantly related to both bullying and victimization. Perhaps surprisingly, establishing a whole-school anti-bullying policy was

significantly related to effect sizes for bullying but not for victimization (being bullied). Nor was individual work with bullies or victims. The authors recommend that more efforts should be made to implement effective programs with individual bullies and victims, perhaps based on child skills training programs.

• 
  The need to address a range of actors, including pupils, parents and teachers
  
• 
  The need to address the whole school or institution in developing anti-bullying strategies
  
• 
  The need to focus on relationships, values and school and class climate
  
• 
  The need for interactive and varied activities that allow pupils to develop their understanding through active learning and discussion
  
• 
  The need to develop clear rules for detection and disciplinary procedures when incidents occur
  
• 
  The need for monitoring behaviour outside the classroom, e.g. on the playground and outside of school.
  

A range of European projects in which participating countries were involved exist that have targeted bullying. These include:

• 
  The project “Friends across the borders”, funded by Save the children Sweden, 2009-2011, Baltic Sea region. The project aims were to ensure that children are able to go to school without feeling neglected or scared of being bullied, increase the knowledge of the general public on the problem of bullying and the mechanisms by which children are affected, make sure that successful working-methods in preventing bullying are spread throughout the Baltic Sea region. And show how a society which respects human rights is a better society for all.
  
• 
  The project “The support system for victims of crime in Latvia”, European Commision, implemented by Center of public policy “Providus”, 2011-2013. One of the activities is to provide support circles for parents of children who have been victims of bulling or violence.
  
• 
  The “European Campaign against bullying”, a Daphne III project, 2011-2013 (Greece, Italy, Latvia, Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania), in Latvia implemented by Child and Youth Hotline. Created an interactive learning tool for reducing violence in schools http://www.e-abc.eu/files/1/PDF/Research/E-ABC_MANUAL_Latvian.pdf
  
• 
  Daphne program project “Creating bulling free schools in Lithuania and Latvia”, 2008. The project’s aims were to address bullying in schools and to develop preventive methods. The project transferred the international experience of effective bullying prevention in schools. The project implementators analyzed the experience of European countries in bullying prevention. The international conference 'Creating bullying-free schools' was a forum for exchange and sharing of good practices. The project used several methods to tackle bullying behavior. 
  The training program was prepared for school communities and the 50 training seminars 'Developing school anti-bullying policy' for school staff and parents were carried out in Lithuania and Latvia. The Lithuanian partners trained their Latvian counterparts in effective bullying prevention in schools.
  
• 
  The project “Skills in Communication. Performance in Education” – a topic within the project „Strategies for class safety and effectiveness: preventing bullying” - cofinanced from the European Social Fund, The Sectoral Operational Programme for Human Resources Development 2007 – 2013 (is running between October 2010 - September 2013) involves the professional training of 2000 teachers.
  
• 
  The COMENIUS project “Stop Bullying. Brave enough to be kind” (2010-2012) (Partners: Romania, Portugal, Bulgaria, Italy, Poland). The project’s objectives were to promote the discussion on the “bullying issues” in the schools between teachers, managers and students; to provide psychological, pedagogic and sociological competencies to fight bullying; to encourage and to promote a comparison to an international level that could define the problematic dimension of the phenomenon as well as its range; to encourage the creation of a group for study and intervention (peer counselling) to research solutions and strategies of intervention; to create an Anti-bullying Campaign in the context to stop violence; to promote the acquisition of knowledge’s for students to intervene respecting people's safety in defence of the victims but also against a macro-phenomenon of large dimension. Over the two year period, partners exchanged ideas and tried out new strategies and tactics to improve their own organization’s adult learner retention rates.  The findings of the two year research project were disseminated through publications and web sites (here are some results: http://cnmv.ro/comenius/product.html).
  
• 
  Project Cyber bullying – EuKidsOnline – here you can find data for Europe and Romania (http://www2.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/research/EUKidsOnline/ParticipatingCountries/PDFs/RO%20Bullying%20Rom.pdf)
  
• 
  The project “Quality in education through mediation and restorative practices” implemented by the Centre for Legal Resources (CRJ) in partnership with the Ministry of Education, Research, Youth and Sport, cofinanced by the European Social Fund through the Sectoral Operational Programme for Human Resources Development 2007 – 2013, according to the financing agreement POSDRU/17/1.1/G/37259 (http://www.crj.ro/Noutati/Medierea-si-practicile-restaurative-solu%C8%9Bii-eficiente-pentru-prevenirea-%C8%99i-combaterea-violen%C8%9Bei-in-%C8%99coli/). In 12 educational units in the Bucharest – Ilfov region, school counsellors, students, principals and members of the Board of Directors of the educational units were trained in order to create a harmonious environment and to properly respond to conflicts and cases of violence by using mediation and restorative practices, and more than 200 students benefited from mediation services and restorative practices. The project has offered new work tools to school counsellors in order to prevent and fight conflicts and violence, also contributing to the analyses necessary to ground some policies and regulations of the authorities in the educational field.
  
• 
  The project for the Professional Development of Teachers through Mentorship (2008 - 2011) / cofinanced by the European Social Fund through the Sectoral Operational Programme for Human Resources Development 2007-2013 / has as objective to offer to the 29.000 teachers and the 2.720 schools included in the project teaching and learning resources in order to improve the ethos and the institutional culture of schools (promoting behavioural values and reducing violence in schools, properly developing a curricular offer at the school’s convenience and reinforcing the school-community connection, immediately applying the principles of inclusive education).
  
• 
  The project “I’m not scared” intends to identify the best European strategies to prevent and combat bullying. The purpose of the project is to involve vocational education teachers, directors, pupils, parents, counsellors and key policy makers in the field of education in a common reflection on the issues related to school violence (http://iamnotscared.pixel-online.org/reports_transnational.php). 
  
• 
  The project “The Museum of School Violence” conducted within the Social Involvement through Art, platform, took place between October 2009 –June 2010, for the youth in Bucharest, the general public. A key target group was students in the high schools in the 4^th district of Bucharest. The project was carried out by the Raţiu România Foundation within the Social Involvement through Art platform and comprosed awareness campaign for a frequent and current social problem in Romania, namely school violence, but also an educational campaign specific to the group age 15 – 19 years.
  
• 
  “An investigation into new forms of bullying” (2007-2009) involved five EU countries led by the University of Bologna in a Daphne-funded project which was the first comparative study on the diffusion of bullying and cyberbullying across Europe, in collaboration with leading researchers in this area.
  
• 
  The project “Cyberbullying in adolescence: investigation and intervention in six European Countries”, also led by the university of Bologna, dealt with the phenomenon of bullying and cyberbullying and the validation of interventions in schools in 16 European countries (see section concerning the national research)
  
• 
  The COST Project Network (ISCH Action IS0801 “Cyberbullying: Coping with Negative and Enhancing Positive Uses of New Technologies, in Relationships in Educational Settings”), coordinated by prof. P.K. Smith (Goldsmith College, London) and wherein Bologna University was a representative of the 4 Italian members, has been dedicated to develop a web of collaboration among researchers in the area of cyberbullying, defining its special characteristics in comparison with traditional bullying, and evaluating intervention strategies for policy makers and stakeholders.
  
• 
  The EU Daphne project on designing evidence-based strategies and actions to face bullying by considering socio-ethnic diversities in school populations and evaluating their effects was a five country project (Cyprus, Greece, UK, Netherlands, Belgium) aimed to develop an evidence-based and theory-driven approach to deal with bullying in schools by integrating research on bullying with a theoretical model which provides a dynamic perspective on the functioning and effects of education (see Creemers & Kyriakides, 2007).
  
• 
  "CyberTraining: A research-based training manual on cyberbullying", funded by Leonardo Leonardo programme.
  
• 
  "Violence in Schools Training Action-On line Courses for teachers in Europe (VISTOP-)", funded by Socrates-Comenius 2.1 programme.
  
• 
  "Visionaries-net: Online-Networks of experts engaged in Violence Prevention in School", funded by Socrates-Minerva.
  

A significant number of EU projects on bullying and school violence have taken place in participating countries over recent years, focussing on a range of issues from mapping the problem to broad or more specific interventions and overviews of existing evidence.

7. 
   Recommended national bibliography and webgraphy
   

Aramendi, P. y Ayerbe, P. (2007). Aprender a convivir: Un reto para la Educación Secundaria Obligatoria. Madrid: Wolters Kluwer.

Ararteko-IDEA (2006). Convivencia y conflictos en los centros educativos. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Ararteko.

Avilés, J.M. (2006). Bullying: el maltrato entre iguales. Agresores, víctimas y testigos en la escuela. Salamanca: Amarú.

Caruana, A. (Coord.) (2010). Evaluación del maltrato entre iguales en alumnado de Educación Infantil y primer Ciclo de Educación primaria. En Gázquez, J.J. y Pérez, M.C. (eds.), Investigación en Convivencia Escolar: Variables relacionadas (pp.31-38). Granada: Editorial GEU.

Cerezo, F. (1997). Conductas agresivas en la edad escolar. Madrid: Pirámide..

Cerezo, F. (2006a) Violencia y victimización entre escolares. El bullying: estrategias de identificación y elementos para la intervención a través del test BULL-S. Revista de Investigación Psicoeducativa, 4 (2), 106-114.

Cerezo, F. (2006b). Análisis comparativo de variables socioafectivas diferenciales entre los implicados en el bullying. Estudio de un caso de víctima-provocador. Anuario de Psicología Clínica y de la Salud, 2, 22-34.

Cerezo, F., y Ato, M. (2010). Social status, gender, classroom climate and bullying among adolescents pupils. Anales de Psicología, 26, 137-144.

Collel, J. y Escudé, C. (2006). El acoso escolar: un enfoque psicopatológico. Anuario de psicología clínica y de la salud, 2, 9-14.

Defensor del Pueblo (2006). Informe del Defensor del Pueblo sobre la violencia escolar: el maltrato entre iguales en la Educación Secundaria Obligatoria 1999-2006. Madrid: Ministerio del Interior.

Del Rey, R., y Ortega, R. (2001). La formación del profesorado como respuesta a la violencia escolar. La propuesta del modelo Sevilla anti-violencia (SAVE). Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 41, 59-71.

Díaz-Aguado, M. J. (2006). El acoso escolar. Claves para prevenir la violencia desde la familia. Madrid: Comunidad de Madrid.

DP-CAPV. Ararteko. (2006) Convivencia y conflictos en los centros educativos. Informe extraordinario del Ararteko sobre la situación en los centros de Educación Secundaria de la CAPV. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Ararteko.

Garaigordobil, M. y Oñederra, J. A. (2008). Bullying: Incidence of peer violence in the schools of the Autonomous Community of the Basque Country. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 8 (1), 51-62

Garaigordobil, M. y Oñederra, J.A. (2010). La violencia entre iguales. Revisión teórica y estrategias de intervención. Madrid: Pirámide.

Gázquez, J. J., Pérez, M. C., Cangas, A. J. y Yuste, N. (2007). Situación actual y características de la violencia escolar. Almería: Grupo Editorial Universitario.

Iborra, I., Rodríguez, A., Serrano, A. y Martínez, P. (2011). Informe de la situación del menor en la Comunidad Valenciana. Serie 18 documentos: Centro Reina Sofía.

Justicia, F., Benítez, J.L., Fernández Cabezas, M., Fernández de Haro, E. y Pichardo Martínez, M.C. (2008). Aprender a convivir: programa de prevención do comportamiento antisocial na educación infantil. Cadernos de psicología, 32, 37-47.

Oñederra, J.A., Martínez, P. y Ubieta, E. (2005). El maltrato entre iguales, bulling en Euskadi. Educación Secundaria. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Gobierno Vasco.

Orte, C. (2003). Los problemas de la convivencia en las aulas. Análisis del bullying. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 6 (2).

Ortega, R. (1997). El proyecto Sevilla antiviolencia escolar. Un modelo de intervención preventiva contra los malos tratos entre iguales. Revista de Educación, 313, 143-161.

Ortega, R. (1998). La convivencia escolar: qué es y cómo abordarla. Sevilla: Junta de Andalucía.Consejería de Educación.

Ortega, R. (coord.) (2010). Agresividad injustificada: bullying y violencia escolar. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.

Ortega, R. y Monks, C. (2005). Agresividad injustificada entre preescolares. Psicotherma, 17, (3), 453-458.

Piñuel, I. y Oñate, A. (2006a). Estudio Cisneros X: Violencia y acoso escolar en España.

Rodríguez, X. (2005). La convivencia en los centros educativos de Secundaria de la Comunidad Autónoma Canaria. Tenerife Instituto Canario de Evaluación y Calidad Educativa (ICEC).

Serrano, A. e Iborra, I. (2005). Violencia entre compañeros en la escuela. Valencia: Centro Reina Sofía para el estudio de la Violencia.

Berdondini L., Fonzi A. (1999), “Tecniche osservative per la verifica dell’efficacia di un intervento anti-bullismo”. Età Evolutiva, 6, 414-23.Brighi A., Guarini A., Melotti G., Galli S., Genta M. L. (2012a), “Predictors of victimisation across direct bullying, indirect bullying and cyberbullying”, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 17, 375-388.

Brighi A., Melotti G., Guarini A., Genta M.L., Ortega R., Mora-Merchán J., Smith P.K., Thompson F. (2012b), “Self-esteem and loneliness in relation to cyberbullying in three European countries”. In Li Q., Cross D., Smith P.K., eds., Cyberbullying in the global playground: Research from international perspectives (pp. 32 - 56). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Costabile, A., Palermiti, A.L., Lo Feudo, G., Tenuta, F. (2000) ‘Modelli di intervento e lavoro cooperativo in Calabria’ [Models of intervention and co-operative work in Calabria]. In E. Menesini, Bullismo: che fare? Prevenzione e strategie d’intervento nella scuola. Firenze: Giunti

Costabile A., a cura di, (2008), Insieme contro il bullismo. Percorso educativo da attivare nelle scuole. Falco Editore, Cosenza. Eurispes, Telefono Azzurro, (2009), 10° Rapporto Nazionale sulla Condizione dell’Infanzia e dell’Adolescenza, Eurilink, Roma,

Eurispes-Telefono Azzurro (2009). 10° Rapporto Nazionale sulla condizione dell’Infanzia e dell’Adolescenza. Sintesi per la stampa, testo disponibile al sito: http://www.eurispes.it/index.php?option=com_contentandview=articleandid=881:10d-rapporto-nazionale-sulla-condizione-dellinfanzia-e-delladolescenzaandcatid=40:comunicati-stampaandItemid=135, 5 ottobre 2012.

Eurispes-Telefono Azzurro (2011). Indagine conoscitiva sulla condizione dell’Infanzia e dell’Adolescenza in Italia 2011. Documento di Sintesi. Testo disponibile al sito: http://www.eurispes.it/index.php?option=com_contentandview=articleandid=2596:sintesi-indagine-conoscitiva-sulla-condizione-dellinfanzia-e-delladolescenza-in-italia-2011andcatid=40:comunicati-stampaandItemid=135, 5 ottobre 2012.

Fonzi A., a cura di, (1997), Il bullismo in Italia. Il fenomeno delle prepotenze a scuola dal Piemonte alla Sicilia, Giunti, Firenze.

Fonzi A., Genta M.L., Menesini E., Bacchini D., Bonino S., Costabile A. (1999), Italy. In: Smith PK, Morita Y, Junger-Tas J, Olweus D, Catalano R, Slee P, eds., The nature of school bullying. A cross-national perspective, London, Routledge. p 140–156.

Genta M. L. (2002). Il bullismo. Bambini aggressivi a scuola, Carocci editore, Roma.

Genta M. L., Berdondini L., Brighi A., Guarini A. (2009), “Il fenomeno del bullismo elettronico in adolescenza”, Rassegna di Psicologia, XXVI, 141-161.

Genta M.L., Brighi A., Guarini A., eds. (2009a), Bullying and Cyberbullying in Adolescence, Carocci editore, Roma.

Genta M. L., Brighi A., Guarini A., a cura di, (2009b), Bullismo elettronico: Fattori di rischio connessi alle nuove tecnologie. Carocci editore, Roma.

Genta, M.L., Brighi, A., Guarini, A. (2009c), “ European Project on Bullying and Cyberbullying Granted by Daphne II Programme”, Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 217, 233.

Genta, M.L., Smith, P.K., Ortega, R., Brighi, A., Guarini, A., Thompson, F., Tippett, N., Mora-Merchan., J., and Calmaestra, J. (2012), Comparative aspects of cyberbullying in Italy, England and Spain: Findings from a DAPHNE project, in Li Q., Cross D., Smith P.K., eds., Cyberbullying in the global playground: Research from international perspectives (pp. 15 - 31), Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Genta M. L., Brighi A., Guarini A., eds., (2013). Cyberbullismo. Ricerche e strategie di intervento. Milano, FrancoAngeli.

Guarini A., Brighi A. and Genta M.L. (2009), Traditional bullying and cyberbullying in Italian Secondary schools. In M.L. Genta, A. Brighi and A. Guarini, eds., Bullying and Cyberbullying in Adolescence: Carocci editore, Roma (pp. 77-96).

Guarini A., Brighi A., Genta M.L. (2010), Cyberbullying among Italian adolescents. In Mora-Merchan J., Jaeger T., eds., Cyberbullying: A cross-national comparison, 114-130. Landau: Verlag Emprische Padagogik.

Menesini E., ed. (2003), Il bullismo: le azioni efficaci della scuola, Erickson Edizioni, Trento

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, 1-14.

Menesini E., Sanchez V., Fonzi A., Ortega R., Costabile A. Lo Feudo G. (2003), “Moral emotions and bullying: A cross-national comparison of differences between bullies, victims and outsiders”, Aggressive Behavior, 29, 515-530.

Menesini, E., Nocentini, A. (2008), “Le traiettorie del bullismo in adolescenza”, Età Evolutiva, 90, 78-87.

Menesini E., Nocentini A., Palladino B.E. (2012), “Enhancing student’s responsibility against bullying and cyberbullying: evaluation of an Italian peer-led model”, International Journal of Conflict and Violence .

Povilaitis; J.Smilte Jasuļone; A.Kuriene; D.Pūrs; Ž. Arlauskaite; E.Petkute; J.Čižauskaite; V.Valantins Skola bez terora, Rīga, 2008

ww.bti.gov.lv/lat/draudziga_skola/labaka_klases_audzinasanas_stunda/

The Anti-Bullying Alliance: http://www.anti-bullyingalliance.org/

Department for Education bullying pages: http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/pupilsupport/behaviour/bullying

Childline: http://www.childline.org.uk/Explore/Bullying/Pages/CyberBullying.aspx

Anti-bullying week: http://www.antibullyingweek.org/dox/resources.html?gclid=CKC56Z27nbcCFRMQtAodTyoAyw

Family Lives: http://www.bullying.co.uk/

Kidscape: http://www.kidscape.org.uk/

Beat Bullying: http://www.beatbullying.org/

The Diana award: http://diana-award.org.uk/anti-bullying
Publications:
Bowes, L., Arseneault, L., Maughan, B., Taylor, A., Caspi, A., Moffitt,T (2009). School, Neighborhood, and Family Factors Are Associated With Children's Bullying Involvement: A Nationally Representative Longitudinal Study, Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 48(5), 545-553
Farrington, D. and Tfoti, M’s (2010) Campbell collaboration review, School-Based Programs to reduce Bullying and Victimization (Campbell collaboration)
Guasp, A. (2008). Homophobic bullying in Britain’s schools. London: Stonewall.
Kyriakides, L., Muijs, D., Papadastiou, P., Pearson, D., Reekers-Mombers, L., & van Petegem, P. (2013). Using the Dynamic Model of Educational Effectiveness to Design Strategies and Actions to Face Bullying. Accepted for publication in School Effectiveness and School Improvement
OFSTED (2012) No Place for Bullying. How schools create a positive culture and prevent and tackle bullying. Manchester: Ofsted.

Ringrose, J., Gill, R., Livingstone, S. & Harvey, L.(2012). A qualitative study of children’s and young people’s ‘sexting.’ London: NSPCC.

Smith, P., Smith, C. Osborn, R. & Samara, M. (2008). A content analysis of school anti‐bullying policies: progress and limitations. Educational Psychology in Practice: theory, research and practice in educational psychology 24(1), 1-12

Thompson, F. & Smith, P. K. (2010). The Use and Effectiveness of Anti-Bullying Strategies in Schools. London: Department for Education.