CCL Home > Reports & Data > Survey of Canadian Attitudes toward Learning
Bullying is an important issue in Canada and around the world. [1] According to the World Health Organization's Health Behaviour in School-aged Children survey, rates of bullying and victimization exceed 65% in some countries. [2] Canada's bullying rate, although not the highest, still sits above the international average. [3] In fact, with bullying rates exceeding 40%, Canada ranks ninth out of 35 countries for the highest bullying rate among 13-year-old children. [4]
SCAL resources
Results from SCAL 2007 suggest that a large majority of Canadians are concerned about bullying and that, far from diminishing in importance, this is an issue requiring greater public attention. In addition, SCAL data suggest that rates of bullying are quite high across the country and among all Canadians.
There is abundant research about bullying, much of which is dedicated to examining the consequences of bullying. The research is remarkably consistent in its findings and conclusions: being bullied is related to various forms of maladjustment, including depression, loneliness and low self-esteem. The available evidence indicates that bullying is an issue requiring dedicated and widespread attention. [5]
1. Physical bullying
2. Relational bullying
3. Verbal bullying
4. Electronic or “cyber” bullying
Although bullying can take many forms, researchers and experts in the field generally agree that bullying behaviour includes three key criteria:
Harmful actions can include any physical or verbal action that is intended to cause distress on the part of the victim. Bullying can be direct, such as physical contact, or it can take more indirect forms, such as making mean faces or gestures, spreading rumours, or intentionally excluding someone from a group.[10] Regardless of the form it takes, inappropriate behaviour turns into bullying when the intention is to cause physical, emotional or social harm. Research suggests that the cycle of bullying is particularly difficult to break because prolonged exploitation of power inequities by bullies tends to lead to the solidification of power imbalances and a sense, among victims, of increasing inability to defend oneself. [11] It is not surprising that such victimization can have long-lasting effects on children.
More than 80% of Canadians agree or strongly agree that bullying is one of the most serious issues affecting students today. These sentiments do not vary substantially with age or parental status, although non-parents and younger Canadians are less likely to feel as strongly about the issue (see figures 23 and 24).
Figure 23: Percentage of parents and non-parents who agree or strongly agree that bullying is one of the most serious issues affecting students today
Source: Canadian Council on Learning. Survey of Canadian Attitudes toward Learning, 2007
Figure 24; Percentage of respondents in each age group who agree or strongly agree that bullying is one of the most serious issues affecting students today
Canadians also appear relatively united in their belief that no particular group is currently doing enough to address bullying issues. More than half of Canadians disagree or strongly disagree that school officials, teachers, parents or students are doing enough to address or prevent bullying. Canadians appear to see preventing and addressing bullying as a widely distributed responsibility, a belief that is not affected strongly by parental status or the age of the respondent, although younger Canadians are particularly likely to suggest that students should do more to prevent and address bullying (see figures 25 and 26).
Figure 25: Percentage of parents and non-parents who disagree or strongly disagree that each group is doing enough to address or prevent bullying
Figure 26: Percentage of respondents in each age group who disagree or strongly disagree that each group is doing enough to address or prevent bullying
When asked to recall their own experiences, 35% of Canadian adults indicate that they were bullied in school (25% occasionally; 10% frequently). Nearly half (49%) of parents with children aged five to 24 years report that their child has been bullied at school (32% occasionally; 17% frequently).
These results match the findings of other studies on bullying. As part of the 2001-2002 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children survey (an international collaborative survey conducted on behalf of the World Health Organization in 35 countries), Canadian youth between the ages of 11 and 15 were asked to indicate how often they had been the victims of bullying. Twenty-seven per cent of girls and 34% of boys reported being bullied at least once during the previous two months, whereas frequent victimization, defined as having occurred at least twice in the five days prior to taking part in the study, was reported by 18% of girls and 17% of boys. [12]
In a more recent study, children in grades one through 12 were asked to report whether they had been bullied in the two-month period preceding the investigation.[13] This study found that rates of perceived bullying were highest in the early grades and generally dropped off as children matured, with the exception of a noticeable spike in Grade 9.
A logistic regression (see text box) was performed to determine the characteristics of parents who report that their children, aged five to 24 years, had ever been bullied in school. The predictor variables included home language, country of birth, parental educational attainment and household income. The outcome was parental reports of bullying among children.
Logistic regression
Logistic regression is used to predict the likelihood of particular outcomes, such as the likelihood that a parent will report homework-related stress. It also helps determine how certain characteristics of the respondents might change the likelihood of a given outcome. Because many demographic factors tend to interact, logistic regression is useful in separating out the influences of factors that tend to interact or covary. For example, since people with higher levels of education tend to earn higher incomes, it is useful to know whether homework-related stress is affected primarily by income or education, or both.
In households where French is the language most frequently spoken, parents are almost half as likely (.53 times as likely) to report that their children have been bullied, compared to English speaking households. None of the remaining predictor variables were very strongly linked to parental reports of bullying.
These findings suggest that parental indicators are not strongly predictive of their reporting bullying. Although parental reports of bullying may not reflect actual prevalence of bullying in their children, these findings indicate that parental characteristics or family background may be less related to bullying than children's characteristics. For example, victims of bullying have typically been characterized as submissive, inhibited, less likely to get involved in aggressive play (i.e. rough-and-tumble play) and less socially competent. [14],[15],[16] SCAL data do not identify the gender of the children associated with parental reports of bullying; however, it is possible to examine the gender of respondents who reported having been bullied when they were children. Results suggest that while males experience victimization at school more often than females, females who are victims of bullying experience it more frequently the male victims (see Figure 27).
Figure 27: Percentage of respondents who report having been bullied
These findings are mirrored by other research on bullying. [17] For example, a number of studies have shown that boys are more likely than girls to bully or be bullied. [18],[19],[20] Research on gender differences also suggests that there are differences in the most common forms of bullying engaged in by girls and boys. Girls are more often involved in relational or verbal bullying whereas boys tend to engage more frequently in physical bullying.
As noted previously, the results of SCAL 2007 reveal an overwhelming proportion of Canadians who feel that bullying is one of the most serious issues faced by students. In addition, between 50% and 69% of Canadians are not satisfied with the level of effort made to address bullying by school administrators, teachers, parents or students. However, it is worth noting that more than 60% of Canadians agree that schools are either meeting or exceeding their expectations for teaching students problem-solving skills and how to be good citizens. Parents of children who have been bullied feel roughly the same, reporting 58% for problem-solving and 63% for good citizenship skills.
If Canadians are satisfied with schools in how they are teaching students the skills that are central to reducing bullying and victimizing behaviours, then where does the prevention answer lie? Perhaps Canadians feel that bullying is not simply a school issue, but rather one that requires a consolidated effort on behalf of all Canadians. Some bullying researchers suggest that such a concerted effort is in fact the best method of addressing bullying. [21]
Significant empirical research exists about bullying and violence prevention programs and a number of national, provincial and school-district bully prevention programs have been developed. [22] Owleus is acknowledged as being the first researcher to identify the alarming rates of bullying occurring in schools, and is credited with inspiring researchers worldwide to address the issue in their own countries. [23] The Owleus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP) is one of the most widely recognized and adapted programs that exists. Owleus found a 50% reduction in bullying behaviour two years after he implemented his bullying prevention program in his home country of Norway. [24] Since then other countries, including Canada, have attempted to implement OBPP and found mixed results. Recently, researchers found no overall effect when they assessed 10 Seattle middle schools implementing the OBPP. [25]
Wilson and colleagues conducted a meta-analysis of studies that assessed school-based programs designed to prevent or reduce aggressive behaviour. [26] They discovered that studies evaluating programs designed and implemented by researchers reported larger effect sizes than studies examining existing school programs—a result that typically reflects biased over-estimation of the impact of programs implemented and evaluated by the same researcher, but also suggests that the fidelity of program implementation is critical to the success of prevention programs. Wilson and colleagues also noted that different types of programs generally demonstrate the same overall level of effectiveness, as long as the integrity of program implementation was high. Research by Whitter and Dupper supports this conclusion and adds that a common mistake made by school administrators and staff is the partial implementation of prevention programs due to time and resource constraints. [27] They argue that watered-down, incomplete or inadequate implementation of prevention programs often leads to ineffective or diluted results.
Many of the studies attempting to evaluate prevention programs have documented common challenges across settings. Because no two schools are exactly the same, and school personnel often implement prevention programs differently, assessing the effectiveness of any given prevention program in a particular location is very challenging. Part of the difficulty associated with creating truly effective bullying prevention programs lies in the fact that bullying and victimization cross all social and demographic boundaries—there is no single or easily addressed issue underlying the problem of bullying. SCAL data, along with a large and growing body of research, suggest that children from all walks of life can be victims of bullying, irrespective of gender, ethnicity or socio-economic background.
[2] Currie, C., Roberts, C., Morgan, A., Smith, R., Settertobulte, W., Samdal, O. &Rasmussen, V. B. (2004). Young People’s Health in Context. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
[3] Currie et al., 2004.
[4] Craig, W. M. & Harel, Y. (2003). Bullying, physical fighting and victimization. In Currie et al. (2004).
[5] Hawker, D. & Boulton, M. (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.
[6] Baldry, Anna C. & Farrington, David P. (2007) 'Effectiveness of Programs to Prevent School Bullying', Victims & Offenders, 2:2, 183 – 204.
[7] Berger, K. (2007) ‘Update on Bullying at School: Science forgotten?’, Developmental Review; 27, 90-126.
[8] Craig, W. M. (2004). Bullying in Canada in the Canadian World Health Organization Report on the Health of youth in Canada. Health Canada.
[9] Owleus, D. (1995). Bullying or Peer Abuse at School: Facts and Intervention. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 4(6), 196-200.
[10] Owleus, D. (2003). A Profile of Bullying, Educational Leadership: Mar., 12-17.
[11] Craig, W & Pepler, D. (2003). Identifying and Targeting Risk for Involvement in Bullying and Victimization. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48(9). 577-582.
[12] Craig & Pepler, 2003.
[13] Craig, W.M., Pepler, D.J., Jiang, D., & Connolly, J. (in preparation). Victimization in Children and Adolescents: A developmental and relational perspective. Retrieved on October 10 from http://prevnet.ca/Bullying/BullyingStatistics/tabid/122/Default.aspx
[14] Owleus, 2003
[15] Toblin, R. L.,Schwartz, D., Hopmeyer Gorman, A. & Abou-ezzeddine, T. (2005). Social-Cognitive and Behavioral Attributes of Aggressive Victims of Bullying. Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, 329-346.
[16] Unnever, J. (2005). Bullies, Aggressive Victims, and Victims: Are The Distinct Groups? Aggressive Behavior, 31, 153-171.
[17] Craig & Harel, 2003.
[18] Owleus, 1995.
[19] Craig & Pepler, 2003.
[20] Berger, 2007.
[21] Craig & Pepler, 2003.
[22] Public Safety Canada – National Strategy on Community Safety and Crime Prevention; BC Government; Department of Justice; British Columbia School Trustees Association.
[23] Berger, 2007.
[24] Bauer, N. S., Lozano, P. & Rivara, F. P. (2007) The Effectiveness of the Owleus Bullying Prevention Program in Public Middle Schools: A Controlled Trial. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, 266-274.
[25] Bauer, 2007.
[26] Sandra Jo Wilson, S. J., Lipsey, M. W., & Derzon, J. H. (2003). The Effects of School-Based Intervention Programs on Aggressive Behaviour: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71(1), 136-149.
[27] Whitted, K. & Dupper, R. (2005). Best Practices for Preventing or Reducing Bullying in Schools. Children & Schools, 27(3), 167-175.
Top