Bullying or counter‐connecting?: Two inclusive definitions for schools

Julia Badger; Atiyya Nisar; Nicolette W. T. Lee; Katerina Romanova

doi:10.1111/1467-9604.70006

Bullying or counter‐connecting? Two inclusive definitions for schools

Julia Badger, Atiyya Nisar, Nicolette W. T. Lee, Katerina Romanova

Department of Psychology

University of Oxford

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Rates of school bullying victimisation have been noted as high as 69% for children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) yet there remains neither an anti‐bullying programme specifically for use in special schools, nor a standardised definition of bullying. The most frequently used definition is not inclusive of SEND pupils' experiences, leading to difficulties for school staff to identify and resolve bullying situations. Pupils can be left without the support they require to maintain good mental health. After consultations with 14 special schoolteachers and parents of children with SEND, this paper suggests two inclusive definitions: a revised bullying definition to expand understanding of power imbalance and victimisation awareness, and the new counter‐connecting definition which highlights that bullying behaviour is not always intentional or only within the peer level. Schools should use both definitions to accurately identify and manage negative interactions at school to better support all pupils.

Original language	English
Journal	Support for Learning
Early online date	29 Apr 2025
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.70006
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 29 Apr 2025

Funding

Funded by the Department of Education, University of Oxford: Small Grants Committee.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1111/1467-9604.70006Licence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{4d63dc02913e4783be95bb11212bce5d,

title = "Bullying or counter‐connecting?: Two inclusive definitions for schools",

abstract = "Rates of school bullying victimisation have been noted as high as 69% for children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) yet there remains neither an anti‐bullying programme specifically for use in special schools, nor a standardised definition of bullying. The most frequently used definition is not inclusive of SEND pupils' experiences, leading to difficulties for school staff to identify and resolve bullying situations. Pupils can be left without the support they require to maintain good mental health. After consultations with 14 special schoolteachers and parents of children with SEND, this paper suggests two inclusive definitions: a revised bullying definition to expand understanding of power imbalance and victimisation awareness, and the new counter‐connecting definition which highlights that bullying behaviour is not always intentional or only within the peer level. Schools should use both definitions to accurately identify and manage negative interactions at school to better support all pupils.",

author = "Julia Badger and Atiyya Nisar and Lee, {Nicolette W. T.} and Katerina Romanova",

year = "2025",

month = apr,

day = "29",

doi = "10.1111/1467-9604.70006",

language = "English",

journal = "Support for Learning",

issn = "0268-2141",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bullying or counter‐connecting?

T2 - Two inclusive definitions for schools

AU - Badger, Julia

AU - Nisar, Atiyya

AU - Lee, Nicolette W. T.

AU - Romanova, Katerina

PY - 2025/4/29

Y1 - 2025/4/29

N2 - Rates of school bullying victimisation have been noted as high as 69% for children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) yet there remains neither an anti‐bullying programme specifically for use in special schools, nor a standardised definition of bullying. The most frequently used definition is not inclusive of SEND pupils' experiences, leading to difficulties for school staff to identify and resolve bullying situations. Pupils can be left without the support they require to maintain good mental health. After consultations with 14 special schoolteachers and parents of children with SEND, this paper suggests two inclusive definitions: a revised bullying definition to expand understanding of power imbalance and victimisation awareness, and the new counter‐connecting definition which highlights that bullying behaviour is not always intentional or only within the peer level. Schools should use both definitions to accurately identify and manage negative interactions at school to better support all pupils.

AB - Rates of school bullying victimisation have been noted as high as 69% for children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) yet there remains neither an anti‐bullying programme specifically for use in special schools, nor a standardised definition of bullying. The most frequently used definition is not inclusive of SEND pupils' experiences, leading to difficulties for school staff to identify and resolve bullying situations. Pupils can be left without the support they require to maintain good mental health. After consultations with 14 special schoolteachers and parents of children with SEND, this paper suggests two inclusive definitions: a revised bullying definition to expand understanding of power imbalance and victimisation awareness, and the new counter‐connecting definition which highlights that bullying behaviour is not always intentional or only within the peer level. Schools should use both definitions to accurately identify and manage negative interactions at school to better support all pupils.

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.70006

U2 - 10.1111/1467-9604.70006

DO - 10.1111/1467-9604.70006

M3 - Article

SN - 0268-2141

JO - Support for Learning

JF - Support for Learning

ER -