I. Introduction to Bullying
Bullying has been rampant in many primary and post primary schools in many countries prompting many governments to set up anti-bullying policies and laws to put the situation under control. Teachers are responsible for taking care of bullying incidents arising in schools to ensure that every student has an ample learning environment (Baldry, 2003). However, sometimes teachers meant to offer protection to students turn to be bullies. Students who become bullying victims are prone to suffering negative consequences that affect their education performance and in some instances their normal life. According to Baldry, (2003) among the effects of bullying include depression, stress, low performance in school, lack of concentration, suicidal thoughts which might actually lead to suicide and anger among others.
What is Bullying?
The definition of bullying behavior extends beyond the classical stereotyping of older boys harassing and beating up their smaller juniors. Bullying involves a multifaceted behavior varying with the prevailing situation, individuals involved, context and time. From the definition provided by the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, bullying involves the unnecessary and belligerent conduct witnessed among school-aged children involving real and perceived social power imbalances (Axford, et al., 2015). The aggression involves a repeated conduct or likely to recur over time. Bulling feature multiple factors flagged by all behaviors not welcomed by the victims. Although bullying is associated with harassment amongst peers, the actual definition extends beyond the demographic unit. It involves situations where the bully has more power manifested in strength, age, bigger and taller, et cetera, that yields real power imbalances (Baldry, 2014).
Bullying involves repeat behavior and conduct that appears likely to access the victim, hence capability of staging recurrence. Bullying entails beyond the physical harassment easily recognized to capture quiet and covert occurrences responsible for causing emotional damage. Such cases rely upon the power dynamics that place one individual over peers. Perhaps it involves a woman possessing wider reach using vicious words or older boys influencing their juniors in soccer teams or senior boys in high school settings (Gentry & Whitley, 2014). The positions of dynamic power may not cause harm though possible to stimulate differentials. The primary aspects of bullying arise from its real emotional and psychological influence varying with the situation to hurt, expose, harass, and humiliate the victims.
Bullying occasionally turns to cause harassment when oriented to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and national origin that orients bullying to illegality issues. The probability disputes the overtly stated association with bullying intent to harm the target. Such experiences are not obvious with bullying victim feeling hurt and exposure to behavior not intended to make them feel in such manner (Allen, 2017). The perception of repeat cases may not arise since bullying is capable of becoming a one-off action. Bullying occurs anywhere in and near schools or public places where adult supervision appears insufficient or nonexistent expanding areas of bullying to include cafeteria, playground, locker rooms and public transport. As a result, it determines when bullying takes place harder than where bullying incident happens (Calbom, 2012). The determination of when in life that individuals will experience bullying appears to change with the age as noted of declining physical aggression with age despite its high start. To the contrary, harassment occurring through electronic medium rises with age despite its meager start.
Causes of bullying
According to Kim, Leventhal, Koh, Hubbard, & Boyce, (2006) there is a relationship between bullying and youth violence. In addition, social norms and gender inequality are some of the causes of bullying in schools where in many communities, men are considered to bully more compared to women. Smith (2004), notes that in many families, as children grow, they adopt the tradition and take it to schools where boys show violent behaviors to girls. There is also a possibility of bullying happening depending on the environment an individual is exposed to. For example in schools, if it happens that there is boredom in some classes, students will result to disturbing or bully behaviors as a way of becoming (Smith, 2004).
Berger, (2007), conducted a research on bullying practices and concluded that teachers were part of the problem confirming the findings of Smith (2004) that there are poor anti-bullying practices where teachers do not react to bullying cases or there is a poor ratio of teachers to students which makes it difficult to control the situation. Lack of care by teachers or other staff in schools makes the bullied student feel unwanted which consequently affects a child’s academic performance (Smith, 2004). The background of an individual can also be a cause of bullying. For instance, if a student is brought up in a society where violence is rampant the same behavior could occur in schools since the individual takes the practice as a part of their culture.
Statistics of bullying in the United States
Wang, Iannotti&Nansel, (2009) acknowledges in their study that one in four kids are bullied in schools regularly a trend that was confirmed by Hinduja, & Patchin, (2010) in their study of the relationship between cyberbullying and suicide where they stated that bullying behaviors were common across the United States. The statistics translate to approximately thirty percent of the students who are bullied regularly as victims, bullies or both. Verbal bullying is the most common in the United States with an influence of 77% among the students (Wang et.al, 2009). The types of bullying classified under verbal bullying in the United States include yelling and rumors. Studies show that out of the 77%, 14% react in severe, aggressive or abusive manner (Wang et.al, 2009). One out of five students admitted that they were responsible for bullying their peers in hidden places such as bathrooms where the school administration could not protect them. The biggest challenge in the United States is that out of the 85% cases that are reported, the teachers do not make an effort to stop the bullying or take measures to make sure that it does not happen in future (Wang et.al, 2009). Another prevalent type of bullying is cyberbullying where studies have shown that about 80% of the student’s encounter bullying online (Wang et.al, 2009). Blake, Lund, Zhou, Kwok, & Benz, (2012), concluded that cases of bullying were evident in many states more than before. Wang et.al, (2009) had argued that while bullying cases are prevalent in many of the United States schools and have shown a rising trend annually, many of the strategies adopted by schools and policy makers are deemed insufficient. Therefore, the problem of bullying practiced by many students might be a problem within the United States society where young children see and learn from the behaviors of adults.
Facts about bullying
According to Cohn & Canter, (2003) bullying has become prevalent in the society today with around 30% of the students in schools being involved. 11% of the student’s report cases of being bullied by others, 13 percent agree to the fact that they bully others and 6% admit that they are either victims or bullies. Additionally, 8% of the students say that they are victimized at least once in a week (Cohn & Canter, 2003). Juvonen, (2005) conducted a research to establish the facts and myths of bullying and found that it was related to cases of school dropout. The confirmed the findings by Cohn & Canter (2003) that as bullying increases in schools, the drop out cases also increase especially in the 11th and 12th grades. Additionally, in another research, Kevorkian, & D’Antona, (2008) sought to find out the truth about bullying and differentiate it from myths. The study confirmed the fact that both genders practice-bullying behavior however, boys act as both bullies and victims that means that they are the most affected. Bullying is different by gender where in boys, it involves more aggression and physicality and in girls, it involves isolation or exclusion from various activities (Cohn & Canter, 2003).
Characteristics of bullies and victims to bullying
A bully has an aggressive behavior and particularly picks on individuals who are smaller than them or are unable to defend themselves (Veenstra, Lindenberg, Oldehinkel, De Winter, Verhulst&Ormel, 2005). Ma (2011) observed that bullies took time when identifying their victims majorly based on their physical appearance. Bullies engage themselves in activities and actions which harm their peers such as calling names, teasing and intimidating them. Moreover, bullies like to demonstrate their dominance by fighting their victims. In their research, Smokowski, & Kopasz, (2005) noted that bullies can be recognized from a tender age. Most bullies lack advise and supervision from adults and may be unable to control the condition in future if necessary actions are not taken (Veenstra et.al, 2005).
Victims might be bullied due to their physical appearance or certain weaknesses (Veenstra et.al, 2005). According to Smokowski, & Kopasz, (2005) most victims have a physical appearance resembling a small or weak person. The fact that victims are unable to defend themselves from stronger bullies makes them easy targets. Victims tend to stay with people who can protect them such as teachers in schools and avoid isolated places such as restrooms to avoid bullies as much as possible (Veenstra et.al, 2005).
II. Effects of Bullying
The consequences of bullying stretch beyond victims to include perpetrators and witnesses to bullying (Gentry & Whitley, 2014). The effect arises from adverse outcomes associated with its occurrence including mental health, suicidal attempts, and substance abuse. However, individuals perceive bullying as part of their conventional life. People think they are a needful part of their growing up the process and providing them an opportunity to persevere and stand up for themselves. While some individuals naturally will openly reject bullying and stand against such, others lack the brevity and often crumble in such circumstances (Gentry & Whitley, 2014). Such experiences results in loneliness, frightened and anger alongside lost confidence and interest in social gatherings. Bullying experiences yield adverse effects on victims, perpetrators, and bystanders though at varying levels.
Dowling (2015) states that the American society might have ignored bullying behaviors and hence the prevalence. Bullying appears mean-spirited regardless of the context and the sanitization attached to the process. From an adulthood point of view, bullying seems pointless despite certain societal parts viewing it as a regular element in childhood. Indeed, some adults appear stuck in bullying culture as they often belittle others and push them around (Dowling, 2015). However, present media spotlight on bullying and increased public outcry force educators, policymakers, administrators and parents to step up their input in ending the vice. As witnessed in the public discourse, bullying attracts confusion, misconception, and misunderstanding with people posing more questions than solutions. The study aims at correcting this misinterpretation and mistakes on the effect of bullying with an examination of where it occurs, those victimized and those affected by its occurrence (Morcillo, et al., 2015). As a result, this extends to examining the psychological and physical impacts emerging in the existence of bullying, hence a need to separate facts from myths.
Types of bullying in schools
Bullying is a behavior conducted by groups or individuals and is repeated severally with the intention of hurting another group or individual emotionally or physically (Baldry, 2003). Baldry, (2003) states that for a certain action to be considered as bullying, it must include hostility, provocation, power imbalance, repetition of the act and distress. There are different definitions of bullying depending on the type of bullying involved. They include; first is the physical bullying which according to Jacobsen, & Bauman, (2007) is when a person uses physical power to cause harm or violence against another individual. Bullying is the most common in schools and has the most serious effects (Baldry, 2003). Secondly, there is the verbal bullying where the bully uses violent words to hurt another individual (Baldry, 2003). Finally, there is relational bullying which according to Bauman, &Del Rio, (2006) is characterized by exclusions. Baldry (2003) defines it as when a group of people excludes others in certain activities or groups and spread rumors and gossips about them. In addition, Bauman, &Del Rio, (2006) states relational bullying requires creative strategies to prevent it because of its nature. Baldry, (2003) observes that this type of bullying has long-term effects on the victim and is hard to control because it can happen online or in places where teachers are not available to serve the necessary remedy.
Who Is Bullied?
Predicting victims of bullying is impossible given the different basis including age, race, class, sexual orientation and national origin which leaves bullying with a probability to occur to multiple people within the listed categories. The implication of this is that no single combination of personal traits is capable of guarantee exemption from bullying. Nevertheless, frequent victims do demonstrate shared characteristics in their personality including shyness, lower self-confidence, anger, anxiety, and introversion (Nazir & Nesheen, 2015). Bullying appears to shift by sexual and racial orientation. Although females and males report experiencing physical intimidations, the former have more significant changes to suffer relational bullying including teasing, emotional aggression alongside electronic bullying (Nazir & Nesheen, 2015). Again, bullies share common personalities including mean, aggressive, spiteful and confrontational as the basis to manipulate their way from their short fuses and exhibition of impulsive conduct (Baldry, 2014). For instance, while children will often push their peers, they may embrace name-calling and physical hostility even to their teachers and parents. Bullies lack empathy features observed in their peers a reason they fail to feel for their would-be victims (Baldry, 2014).
Who is harmed when bullying occurs?
Bullying experiences have the lasting impact on the healthy development that erodes the psychological well-being of the victims, bullies, and bystanders. Bullying experiences leave the victims with a feeling of emotional withdrawn which is evidence of where the victim was quiet and shy. Such individuals often become even more quiet and self-contained which brings them challenging experiences when interacting with colleagues (Hatzenbuehler, Schwab-Reese, Ranapurwala, Hertz, & Ramirez, 2015). The continued exposure to harm and humiliation translate into social isolation and notification to sink further into a set of their choosing. The unique world degenerates into a feeling of anxiety, depression, and loneliness. Victim children suffer secondary damage particularly in sleeping and eating with a feeling of alienation from activities they once enjoyed. Because of this, their academic performances is affected leading to absenteeism and possible school dropouts. The children tend to develop anger and rage as their emotional response to the bullies (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015). Such is reflected in the school shootings where perpetrators are found to be victims of bullying lodged by their peers.
Children appear overly anxious and develop a tendency of avoiding areas characterized by frequent bullying. Their secluded life leaves them to lead a course they seem more likely to fall sick. The victims often lead to isolated lives from former friends. The isolation increases suicidal risk as the social life appears challenging to tolerate (Ceron Trevisol & Uberti, 2015). Bullying effects are not temporal since they may create a lasting psychological impact into adulthood thatemerges from recurring isolation and ridicule which progressively yield consistent bullying. The occurrence of anxiety and depression define their emotional outlook beyond the bullying days where this feeling extends into their adulthood and lifelong when chronic. Eating, sleeping, exercising and social gatherings becomes more difficult to sustain despite being the hallmarks that characterize full balanced life (Baldry, 2014). It may prove challenging to sustain friends and inability to persevere in their relationships with partners.
Bullying results in lasting emotional harm with mass devastation than physical harm and it alsodamages the self-image leaving it as permanently weak. Bullying instill fear, self-loathing and eroded confidence. Becoming a constant target of bullying incidents erodes one’s views of positivity in one’s image. Such victims fail to view themselves as desirable and capable hence unable to trust themselves (Nazir & Nesheen, 2015). It arises when the victims are considered too week and hopeless to fit within the ordinary social class. The lack of true perseverance affects their capability to cope with life situations demanding persistence to overcome the challenges. The victims are unable to trust others hence reducing their occupational opportunities as they grow into adulthood often becoming loners. They appear to have fewer positive choices in their defense actions owing to perceived insufficiency in overcoming childhood bullying (Nazir & Nesheen, 2015).
Bullies find it challenging to express their sorry to kids they intentionally meant to harass them and watch them squirm. Unfortunately, this conception places the bullies into likely risk of short and long lasting emotional challenges similar to children, they victimized. They experience trouble interacting with peers as others perceive them as violent, controlling, cruel and lacking empathy (Pitlick, 2015). As a result, this casts them as generally unpleasant therefore having little friends that put up with their conduct. While it is possible for the bullies to be members of a large social circle, such experiences breakups when their behavior becomes unbearable amidst themselves. It remains unclear to the extent which bullying engagement yields emotional challenges and what can be simply termed as symptomatic of existing troubles. Nevertheless, membership to large bullying social circle places them at greater risk for substance abuse within their adolescence period (Suski, 2014).
The group mentality may stimulate them into infighting within such groups for supremacy reasons. Besides fights, the social circle units may orient bullies into further hardcore acts including vandalism and school dropouts and criminal gangs. It worsens where bullying victims become bullies themselves often arising in adulthood when they experience long-lasting psychological effects that appear more severe than what they encountered during their adolescence (Gentry & Whitley, 2014). They become unhappy adults unable to work well in their adulthood given that the society shuns quick tempers and violent conduct that makes it difficult to hold onto jobs, retain friends and lead romantic relationships. Such developments leave bullies considering suicidal thoughts were owing to their antisocial personality disorders.
Observers
The effect of bullying on bystanders is crucial despite the continued misconception that excludes them from such events. They assume the essential role in bullying completeness. Since bullying happens in isolated places, other events frequently occur within playgrounds with other children including schoolyard, buses, and classrooms. It makes their witness critical to the bully behavior since they become the target audience to accomplish the task of humiliating others(Calbom, 2012). Often, bystanders abstain from interfering with the situation to avoid endearing themselves as next target.
The decision for inaction by the bystanders barely implies a passive input to the vice. Doing nothing amounts to actively choosing to ignore or pretend nothing is happening or watch the incident with amusement. Observing while not intervening results to more harm to the bully and victim. The aftermath of the events such as suicide in the victim may cause anxiety, depression and further self-pity for their inaction (Nazir & Nesheen, 2015). Such feelings may orient them into substance abuse and school dropout that may grow further into creating long-lasting psychological impacts.

III. Key State and Federal Court Cases Regarding Bullying
The spirited fight against bullying is evident in the state legislature to supplement the provisions in the federal regulations. Their enactment and implementation have brought clarity in criminalizing harassment. These attempts manifest themselves in state and federal court cases. Among them, Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) heard before the U.S Supreme Court (Rivara&Menestrel, 2016). The case facts involved the dispute over the authority and responsibility of school administrators. The court held that suspending three students for the armbands, they wore to protect the country’s involvement in Vietnam War. Suspending them violated the provision in the First Amendment provisions for Free Speech. The case had two features namely; the context of the incident being on campus and besides, the behavior of the student was considered flaccid and hence was not threatening. Prohibiting the students to express their opinion appears to be without evidence of interfering with the institutionalism discipline. Such suspensions were not permissible within the provisions of the First and Fourteenth Amendments and as a result, the Supreme Court held that school personnel should demonstrate student behavior and speech translated into or likely to cause substantial interference (Holben&Zirkel, 2014). Today, this ruling is regarded as the default standard used to evaluate in the misbehavior for students.
The case involving J.S. v Bethlehem Area School District (2000) brought before the Common Wealth in Pennsylvania involved an incident where the school administrators barred J.S from school upon the discovery of his webpage that captured derogatory and threatening. The court provided clarity in its determining this case that schools have authority to conduct disciplinary against students when their articulated speech and conduct disrupts the learning environment despite its context being off-campus. The court observed how violence and overlooked students conduct posed serious threats and bullying trends. As a result, this became evident in the Kowalski v Berkeley County Schools (2011) where the senior student appeared to disparage a colleague. The school suspended Kowalski citing the violation of anti-harassment, intimidation and anti-bullying policy. Attempts to sue the school turned futile despite citing the violation of free speech rights. The lower court upheld the suspension, a stance upheld by the Fourth U.S Circuit Court of Appeal (Hatzenbuehler, Schwab-Reese, Ranapurwala, Hertz, & Ramirez, 2015). Both observed that Kowalski orchestrated the attack on the fellow student and doing so interfered with the school discipline while colliding with rights of classmates.
Courts have in the past supported school administrators when they implement reasonable disciplinary actions against students found to bully others. There arise several instances where the court has opposed administrators who overstepped authority to issue unproductive discipline. In Emmet v Kent School District (2000), the District Court located in Washington’s Western District. The punishment imposed through suspension for a student emerged for creating Unofficial Kentlake High Home Page (Hinduja&Patchin, 2015). The page allowed colleagues to vote for colleagues who would die next, hence allowing them mock obituaries of others. The court poked concern over the failure by the school administrator to show the intent of threats on the website to threaten. Hence, the suspension violated the student since the webpage did not manifest any violent tendencies.
In the J.S v Blue Mountain School District (2011) the lower court supported schools policy and decision to suspend the students involved in the MySpace profiling their principal. The court ruling stated that schools had an authority to start disciplinary action against students because of their off-campus behavior regardless of whether their conduct at the particular time caused disruption (Hinduja&Patchin, 2015). The Third Circuit Court of Appeals observed that the institution violated the First Amendment- speech rights for suspending J.S for a speech without causing the substantial disruption. The position adopted by the courts reveals support for First Amendment Rights in students’ free expression. However, the court appears not to protect students and support school interventions and discipline where the behavior substantially disrupts learning, interferes with the educational process. In Gendelman et al. v Glenbrook North High School (2003), the court made a revocation of the restraining order because of the fact that the discipline has been based on the tiny recognized embargo of secret societies where everybody was aware of the annual powder puff event (Stuart-Cassel, Bell, & Springer, 2011).
The court input tasks the school personnel with a responsibility to intervene in bullying cases capable of denying the student safe learning experiences. The mandate stretches to off-campus activities capable of disrupting safe learning to the student. The case involving Zeno v Pine Plains Central School District (2012) maintained the position where the court awarded $1 million (Hinduja&Patchin, 2015). The court observed that the high school student was a victim of harassment and threats for his the race. Although the institutions took remedial steps to discipline the perpetrators, it was liable since it failed to do enough. Its indifferent response allowed continued harassment rather than do everything within their power to stop such conduct when they learn of them. Simple disciplining could not resolve the mess and ensure the safety of the target individual. Zeno proved the school failed to offer the comprehensive solution rather than the immediate responses.
The court has on several occasions observed liability in the learning institution and administrators such as in Gebser v Lago Vista Independent School District (1998) where the Supreme Court concluded in its judgment that the school had no liabilityfor sexual harassment by a schoolteacher though off-campus. The ruling observed no deliberate indifference arose in the case, thus exonerated the school from liability (Suski, 2014). A year later, the Supreme Court found the defendant in Davis v Monroe County Board of Education (1999) liable where the court evoked the Education Amendments of 1972 to demonstrate the student was within the statutorily protected class. The harassment was severe and pervasive in the offense, and the school was indifferent to harassment. It was different from D.J.M. v Hannibal Public School District (2011) where the student was suspended for thethreats that alleged he wanted to shoot other colleagues. The Eighth Circuit found such statements unprotected in the First Amendment as the true threat but was something serious (Pitlick, 2015).

IV. Key state & federal legislation regarding Bullying
State legislation regarding bullying
Bullying and violence were rampant in the early 2000’s in many American schools where shootings occurred in high profile schools. According to Limber & Small, (2003) many victims claimed that they felt insecure, persecuted, bullied and threatened by other students. The events made school leaders feel the need to address the learning environment and did so by introducing bullying prevention statutes. Georgia become the first state to introduce bullying laws in 1999 and by 2003, there were other fifteen American states that had enacted similar laws that aimed at addressing the bullying problem (Limber & Small, 2003). The need to establish bullying prevention laws grew among the other states and today, all the 50 states have enacted the bullying legislations (Cornell & Limber, 2015).
Limber & Small, (2003) states that laws that focus on bullyingare based on isolation or exclusion from others, forms of physical aggression and ignoring indirect acts. In 2003, there was a nationwide survey regarding the prevention of bullying in schools where researchers came up with five elements to be used as states statutes for bullying prevention. First, the schools were encouraged to develop bullying prevention policies. Secondly, the school administration was advised on how to implement the policies. Thirdly, the school employees were taught on how to intervene in bullying cases. Additionally, the students were educated on the need to report bullying cases and finally the schools were given the go ahead to punish bullying perpetrators (Limber & Small, 2003).
Most of the state laws enacted in various states in America aim at increasing penalties on any cases which relate to bullying such as harassment, menace, assault, criminal trespass or mischief racism, and gender discrimination among others. In 2010, the Education Secretary in the United States explained that anti-bullying laws and policies were not necessarily meant to prevent bullying but to send a message to all bullies and perpetrators that the behavior would not be tolerated under any circumstances(Cornell & Limber, 2015).
Examples of state laws include: the Texas law which explains that bullying is any act verbal or physical that creates an intimidating, abusive or threatening environment for the individual(Cornell & Limber, 2015). The state of Arizona leaves the laws enhancement to school districts to ensure that bullying policies and procedures are followed(Cornell & Limber, 2015). The Washington state explains that bullying is any written, verbal, physical or electronically transmitted act that interferes with the student’s concentration and education (Cornell & Limber, 2015). Although the states may have different anti-bullying laws, they all aim at preventing bullying and other related behaviors that disrupt the peace of the students and people such as public humiliation, stalking and teasing among others.
Federal legislation regarding bullying
In the United States, bullying overlaps with harassment where it is based on discriminatory behaviors such as the race, religion, age and sex among others(Cornell & Limber, 2015).In addition, the reason bullying is an overlap with harassment is because the United States lacks a federal law that directly addresses bullying matters(Jordan & Austin, 2012). However, federally funded schools have been given the responsibility to control any harassment cases in schools (Jordan & Austin, 2012).
The lack of federal laws to address bullying does not mean that bullying is permitted in schools. As a result, schools have been authorized by the U.S department of justice, education and civil rights to address the following behaviors: first schools should address any hostile behaviors that prevents students from getting benefits from the learning institution, the government or any other positive opportunities offered to enhance their success(Jordan & Austin, 2012). Secondly, the issue of discrimination based on color, origin, sex, religion, gender, disability or national origin should be addressed(Jordan & Austin, 2012). Finally, students should be protected from any severe or pervasive behaviors(Jordan & Austin, 2012). The United States Education Department, the Department of Justice and the Federal Civil Rights are responsible for enforcing civil rights. Schools which fail to address harassment cases of students break the following federal civil rights laws: The Title IV and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)(Cornell & Limber, 2015).
The public and students alike are advised to report harassment and bullying cases to schools where the schools administration has been given the federal right to take the following actions. First, the school should take immediate action to investigate the exact action that took place. Additionally, the school has been given the mandate to seek enquiries on the case from any witnesses on the incident place. Moreover, interviews and written documentations should be sent to collect enough evidence on the situation as well as communication with the victim to enquire more information about the incident and talking with the suspects to ensure that the harassment stops (Cornell & Limber, 2015). However, basing on the federal civil rights stated by the government, the school should take necessary action if the investigation reveals that bullying took place. The school is responsible to prevent any other forms of harassment in future and protect the victim from further bullying.

V. Vocabulary terms regarding bullying
Bullying- Has been defined as using force, coercion, or threat to intimidate, or abuse others with an aim of having domination over them.
Cyber-bullying- Defined as taking advantage of Information Technology to cause harassment or harm to other people intentionally, over and over again and in a antagonistic manner.
Bully- An individual who threatens to hurt or hurts another person especially someone weaker or smaller
Bystander- A person who watches the proceedings without being part of it
Physical bullying- Defined as bullying that hurts an individual’s body or results in damaging of their possession.
Verbal bullying- Referred to the use of words in a negative manner such as teasing or insults
Victim- A person injured, harmed because of the bullying behavior

CHAPTER 3

Method
The study will employ a phenomenological inquiry to examine the perception of new school superintendents’ on the bullying topic. The following prompts will be presented to selected study respondents of school superintendents sampled using the purposive technique.
1. In the role you play as a superintendent, how can you describe your experiences with bullying?
2. In the role you play as a superintendent, what would be your description on experiences with physical bullying?
3. In the role you play as a superintendent, what would be your description on experiences with cyberbullying?
Validation
The validation section provides for a description of the tests that I will employ when making evaluation of the data to be collected. Tests will include member checking, peer debriefing, inter-transcriber agreement and finally triangulation.
The immediate action that I will take after completing each of the interviews with the superintendent is playing back their response for each of the asked questions with an aim of providing a chance for participants to hear their responses and make clarifications or additions. Therefore, an opportunity tolisten back to the comments during the interview session for purpose of clarity will be granted. In addition, two weeks after conducting the interviews, each research respondent will receive a transcribed copy of the interview for two reasons. First, they will need to confirm the accuracy of the transcription by acknowledging its content. Secondly, I will send it to the respondents to allow them add some comments or information. The entire process will aim at earning the trust of the respondents by member checking.
The study will also utilize the services of a non-participant superintendent who will act as a peer debriefer. I will engage the superintendent in discussions with an aim of getting assistance to improve the accuracy of data collected a well as the analysis process. I will set an appointment with the superintendent who will be an experienced scholar twice that is before collecting data and after. The meetings will allow us to discuss potential limitations and procedures that are pivotal in collecting accurate data a procedure is known as the ‘Epoche’ process and was suggested by Moustakas (1994, p. 116) which he emphasized should begin before implementing the research. Apart from this, peer debriefing will be used to make a discussion of biases. As a result, it will be an attempt to have the primary researcher refrain from making judgments that might negatively influence the data collected and eventually the results. During the first meeting, the agenda will be to address the technique of interviewing to be used, the data collection accuracy as well as the overall transcription process. Consequently, the meeting to be arranged after data collection will be used in discussing selection of significant statements, emergence of themes, and accuracy of transcription. The end goal of the meetings will be to ensure that 100 percent inter-coder reliability is achieved.
Moreover, the inter-transcriber agreement will be done by engaging two experienced scholars from outside. They will serve the purpose of listening and checking all the transcriptions from the respondents to check for their accuracy. A review of the transcriptions will be done to ensure that 100 percent is achieved. Maxwell (2012) stated that triangulation is achievable by having the conclusions crosschecked using multiple sources and methods. To adhere to the specific requirement, I will have to check the transcription agreement by engaging two expert scholars in addition to checking the code agreement through two other different experts. Therefore, experiential cognizance tied with decisive subjectivity will help during the process of inquiry.
Phenomenology
According to Bogdan & Biklen (2007), researchers adopt a phenomenological inquiry in an attempt to understanding the meaning of shared interactions and events of ordinary individuals in specific situations. Phenomenology has been defined as the study of lived experiences and at its core, this form of inquiry is based on the postulation that there is an arrangement and quintessence to the experiences shared (Marshall &Rossman, 2006). An influential philosopher, Edmund Husserl, the first person to put across the transcendental phenomenology theory, in a lecture in Paris, France stated, “, “I cannot live, experience, think, value, and act in any world which is not in some sense in me, and derives its meaning and truth from me” (Husserl, 1998, p. 8). Sokolowski, (2000) states that what phenomenology studies is the truth and its limitations.
Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill (2009), state that a research philosophy has critical assumptions that underpin a study’s research in addition to the methods that have been selected to be part of it. Burrell & Morgan (2017) stated that in essence, a philosophy is a belief on the way a study’s data is undertaken, analyzed and interpreted. Saunders et, al. (2009) a research philosophy has three epistemological approaches specifically realism, positivism and interpretivism. First, the positivism approach is adopted by researchers who have preference in working with a social reality that is observable with an aim of finding facts or the causes of business or social events using logical reasoning like objectivity and precision as the investigation methods (Burrell & Morgan, 2017). The positivism philosophy puts emphasis on a methodology that is highly structured to enable replications. The philosophy is more suited in conducting a quantitative research and hence not pertinent for the study. The second type of research philosophy is realism that is based on the connotation that objects are independent of human consciousness however; knowledge is a creation of the social environment (Saunders et al. 2009). Realism is more concerned with the kind of things available and their behavior. Nonetheless, it accepts that reality can exist regardless of observation or science and hence there is validity when there is recognition of realities that are claimed to act or exist whether true or false (Saunders et, al. 2009). Final type of research philosophy is the interpretivism approach where studies associated with this method are characterized by prioritizing of social-political and subjective meanings in addition to symbolic action in the process where humans reconstruct and construct their reality. The emphasis of the study is conducting a study amongst people instead of objects. Based on the characteristics, interpretivism approach is the best for the study having that the purpose is to find out the bullying experiences amongst schools superintendents (Saunders et al. 2009). One of the important aspects of interpretivism is phenomenology that as explained is considered a philosophical tradition that seeks to have an understanding of the world by having a direct experience of the phenomenon.
In the phenomenological inquiry that the researcher will be involved, the kind of data to be collected is primary data. Primary data has been defined as the data that originates initially and originally from the researcher through direct experience and efforts with an aim of addressing a research problem (Bryman, 2004). Primary data is sometimes referred to as raw or firsthand data. I will collect primary data using interviews either personal or via the telephone depending on the choice of the research respondents. Primary data is relevant in the study because it will allow the researcher to take control over the process of collecting the information. One of the critical benefits that primary data offers for the study is ensuring that there is no doubt in regards to the quality of the information considering the researcher was directly involved in the process (Bryman, 2004).
Additionally, the phenomenological inquiry will involve adherence to research ethics. While conducting the study, a number of ethical considerations will be followed to ensure that everything is done ethically without infringing on the rights of any respondents. First, I will obtain the necessary authorization to carry out the study from the University’s Committee on Ethics. Obtaining permission will be after filling an ethics form to guarantee the University that I will show integrity and professionalism when collecting the data. It will also affirm the purpose of the study and timelines in which it should be completed. Importantly, it confirms the learning institution’s commitment to following ethical guidelines when conducting studies (Saunders et al., 2009). The second ethical consideration will be obtaining the consent from the research respondents. Once a respondent is identified through purposive sampling, I will embark on a process to have each participant sign a consent form with an aim to obtain permission from the respondents and make them officially part of the sample (Saunders et al., 2009). However, before asking them to sign the consent form, I will provide a detailed explanation on why the research needs to be conducted. It will be an opportunity to answer prospect respondent’s possible questions regarding the study and their involvement. Respondents will be enabled to make informed decisions on whether to become part of the sample. I will also inform the respondents on their withdrawal right and having that the research will offer no incentives to the respondents participation is voluntary and once they agree to be included in the study, I will have them sign the consent form (Bryman, 2015).
As part of conducting an ethical research, confidentiality and privacy of the researcher’s identity will be ensured (Saunders et al., 2009). The respondents to be involved in the study will remain anonymous. The recordings will not contain their names, as I will not ask them to identify themselves by name. Additionally, when transcribing, I will conceal the identity of the respondents. Any personal information related to the respondents will be kept private only accessible to the researcher (Bryman, 2004). On the other hand, the collected data through the recordings as well as the transcriptions will be safely kept under a lock and key. The materials will be labeled confidential to ensure that no unauthorized persons get hold of this information (Saunders et al., 2009).
Qualitative research
Moustakas, (1994) wrote that a qualitative research is majorly inspired by the curiosity and excitement of a researcher on a specific topic area. The study stems from my experiences with bullying as a principal at Tupelo High School where I served for five years. Therefore, the study will focus on gaining a better understanding of the bullying experiences by other people in the same role as I was.
According to Saunders et al., (2009), qualitative research is an inquiry method that is applied in various academic disciplines including natural sciences and social sciences but also it is applied in non-academic disciplines such as business and market research. The qualitative research design focuses on the opinions and words rather than the quantitative information or data that emanates from a quantitative study (Bryman, 2004). The critical objective of the quantitative research is achieving an understanding by having the investigation centre on the facts. The most common method that the research will utilize in the generation of data for a qualitative research is interview that might be unstructured, structured, and semi-structured.
However, other ways can be employed by the researcher to collect the data such as observations, focus groups, group discussions or texts. In this case, the researcher will utilize semi-structured interviews (Bryman, 2004). In particular, semi-structured interviews is when the researcher develops a list of questions which he or she poses to the research participants but neither is limited to these questions. The research questions to be used as a guide during the interview sessions will be three, them being the major questions that the researcher seeks to explore (Saunders et, al. 2009).
Using qualitative research to explore the bullying experiences of some school superintendent is advantageous for a number of reasons and one of the significant benefits of this type of research is that it provides emphasis on the value of having to look at variables in their natural environment where the researcher plays a critical role during the investigation (Bryman, 2004). The in-depth involvement of the researcher during a qualitative study provides an opportunity for having the data collected and the results of the study to be more accurate. Additionally, the researcher has a clear vision on how the study should be conducted and what to expect which means that data is collected in a genuine manner without bias. The process of qualitative study instills trustworthiness and credibility because the subjects and issues covered are evaluated in detail and depth (Cresswell, & Plano Clark, 2011). Additionally, the neither the respondents will be limited to the three research questions. There will be an opportunity for the researcher to ask follow-up questions as a method of seeking more clarity to the issues to do with bullying. Qualitative research is also beneficial because it depends on the experience of human beings which is more powerful and compelling compared to the data collected using quantitative research (Saunders et al. 2009).
In this qualitative study, the technique that will be used in selecting the respondents will be purposive sampling. Purposive sampling is synonymous with qualitative studies and it is widely used in identifying and selecting of quality information to take full advantage of the little resources (Patton, 2002). Purposeful technique involves the identification and selection of people who have deep knowledge, experience, or understanding of the topic under study (Cresswell & Plano Clark, 2011). Additionally, the choice of purposive technique is critical in increasing the willingness and availability to be part of the research, the capability to speak out opinions and experiences in the most eloquent, reflective and expressive way. Purposive sampling is a non-probability method where the elements included in the research sample are chosen by the researcher’s judgment (Bryman, 2004). One of the common perceptions among researchers when using purposive technique is that it possible to obtain a representative sample when sound judgment is applied as the result is saving money and time. At times, purposive sampling proves to be important and effective in situations where there are only limited individuals who can serve as research respondents because of the research questions’ nature as well as the adopted research design.
When using this sampling technique, a number of benefits will be derived including cost savings, time-effective as well as selection of the right respondents who will provide accurate data (Bryman, 2004). However, it is critical for the researcher to exercise caution when utilizing this sampling technique because of the possible shortcomings. One of the possible shortcomings is its’ vulnerability to errors in the researcher’s judgment, high level of bias, low level of reliability and the inability to have the outcome of the research generalized. Another challenge that faces the sampling technique is the fact that the range variant in the sample from which a purposive sample is selected is unknown before or after the completion of the research (Palinkas, et al., 2015). Thus, utilizing purposive sampling technique in the qualitative study will ensure that the results and conclusions I make on bullying experiences help in preventing and solving the problems across schools in the United States.

Participants
The research respondents to be selected as a sample of the study will be approximately 5-10 public school superintendents. The respondents will have to be new, in particular, be in their superintendent capacity that they should have served within five years.
Procedure and data collection
Data for the study will be gathered using interviews; specifically, I will conduct face-to-face interviews or phone interviews; the choice will be left to the respondents depending on their schedule and availability. Each of the interviews will last for a period that each of the respondents will take to fully and comfortably answer the 3 study questions. As a result, no respondent will be limited to say what he or she would want. The entire interview sessions with the research respondents will be recorded using a digital recording device. During the qualitative interviews, the researcher will utilize two Olympus VN-6000 Digital Recorders as it has the capability of providing approximately over 600 hours recording continuously. The decision to use two digital recorders rather than one is as a preventive measure in an attempt to ensure that if one malfunctioned the other would contain the necessary data for transcription purposes. Importantly, I will inform the research respondents prior to the interviews that I will be recording the interviews. In doing so, it will show my commitment to conducting an ethical research whose results can be utilized by policy makers to develop guidelines to prevent bullying behaviors in schools.
Data Analysis Procedures
After concluding the interviews, the process that will follow will be transcription through Microsoft Word through a personal laptop in addition to the Olympus VN-6000 Digital Recorder containing the recordings. Each interview will be listened multiple times before transcription is done. To ensure accuracy of the data transcribed I will utilize the playback option of the recorder until I am satisfied it is the right content. Apart from this, I will engage an experienced scholar who will listen to the recordings and compare to the transcribed materials to ensure accuracy is achieved. The process will go on until 100 percent inter-transcriber agreement on the transcriptions accuracy has been achieved. After the process of transcribing all the data is complete, I will embark on exploring data with an aim of developing broad trends in addition to developing a preliminary database understanding. The result after reviewing the data should be significant quotes and statements that will provide an understanding of how the research respondents in particular, superintendents, experience the bullying phenomenon. In other words, the results will be presented using quotes and themes. According to Moustakas (1994), the process is known as horizontalization. The final step that to undertake will be coding the transcripts with a purpose of finding an intern-coder agreement.

References
Allen, W. T. (2017). Bullying and the Unique Socioemotional Needs of Gifted and Talented Early Adolescents: Veteran Teacher Perspectives and Practices. Roeper Review;, 39(4), 269-283.
Axford, N., Farrington, D. P., Clarkson, S., Bjornstad, G. J., Wrigley, Z., & Hutchings, J. (2015). Involving parents in school-based programmes to prevent and reduce bullying: what effect does it have?. Journal Of Children’s Services, 10(3), 242-251.
Baldry, A. (2014). ‘What about bullying?’ An experimental field study to understand students’ attitudes towards bullying and victimisation in Italian middle schools. British Journal Of Educational Psychology, 74(4), 583-598.
Baldry, A. C. (2003). Bullying in schools and exposure to domestic violence. Child abuse & neglect, 27(7), 713-732.
Bauman, S., & Del Rio, A. (2006). Preservice teachers’ responses to bullying scenarios: Comparing physical, verbal, and relational bullying. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 219.
Berger, K. S. (2007). Update on bullying at school: Science forgotten?. Developmental review, 27(1), 90-126.
Blake, J. J., Lund, E. M., Zhou, Q., Kwok, O. M., & Benz, M. R. (2012). National prevalence rates of bully victimization among students with disabilities in the United States. School Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 210.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Fieldwork. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theories and Methods: International Edition,.Boston: Allyn & Bacon, Inc.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods. Oxford University Press, USA. pp. 12-35
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (2017). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis: Elements of the sociology of corporate life. United States. Routledge.
Calbom, L. M. (2012). School Bullying: Legal Protections for Vulnerable Youth Need to Be More Fully Assessed. Testimony before the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.
Ceron Trevisol, M. T., & Uberti, L. (2015). Bullying at School: A Student’s Understanding the Role of Witness. Psicologia: Teoria E Prática, 17(3), 164-176.
Cohn, A., & Canter, A. (2003). Bullying: Facts for schools and parents. National association of school psychologists.
Cornell, D., & Limber, S. P. (2015). Law and policy on the concept of bullying at school. American Psychologist, 70(4), 333.
Cresswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed method research. 2nd Sage. Thousand Oaks, CA.
Dowling, R. (2015). Clarifying Incident-to-Bulling. Medical Economics, 92(15), 45-56.
Gentry, R. H., & Whitley, J. E. (2014). Bulling in Graduate School: Its Nature and Effects. Qualitative Report, 19(36), 1-18.
Hatzenbuehler, M., Schwab-Reese, L., Ranapurwala, S., Hertz, M., & Ramirez, M. (2015). Associations between antibullying policies and bullying in 25 states. JAMA Pediatrics, 169(10), 1–8.
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archives of suicide research, 14(3), 206-221.
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2015, January). Cyberbullying Legislation and Case Law: Implications for School Policy and Practice. Cyberbullying Research Center.
Holben, D., & Zirkel, P. (2014). School bullying litigation: An empirical analysis of the case law. Akron Law Review, 47(299), 299–328.
Husserl, E. (1998). The Paris Lectures. In The Paris Lectures(pp. 1-39). Springer Netherlands.
Jacobsen, K., & Bauman, S. (2007). Bullying in schools: School counselors’ responses to three types of bullying incidents. Professional School Counseling, 11(1), 1-9.
Jordan, K., & Austin, J. (2012). A review of the literature on bullying in US schools and how a parent–educator partnership can be an effective way to handle bullying. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 21(4), 440-458.
Juvonen, J. (2005). Myths and facts about bullying in schools. Behavioral Health Management, 25(2), 36-40.
Kevorkian, M., & D’Antona, R. (2008). 101 facts about bullying: What everyone should know. R&L Education.
Kim, Y. S., Leventhal, B. L., Koh, Y. J., Hubbard, A., & Boyce, W. T. (2006). School bullying and youth violence: causes or consequences of psychopathologic behavior?. Archives of general psychiatry, 63(9), 1035-1041.
Limber, S. P., & Small, M. A. (2003). State laws and policies to address bullying in schools. School Psychology Review, 32(3), 445-456.
Ma, X. (2001). Bullying and being bullied: To what extent are bullies also victims?. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 351-370.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing Qualitative Research (4 th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). London, Sage publications.
Morcillo, C., Ramos-Olazagasti, M. A., Blanco, C., Sala, R., Canino, G., Bird, H., & Duarte, C. S. (2015). Socio-Cultural Context and Bulling Others in Childhood. Journal Of Child And Family Studies, 24(8), 2241-2249.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. London, Sage.
Nazir, T., & Nesheen, F. (2015). Impact of school bullying on psychological well-being of adolescents. Indian Journal Of Health & Wellbeing, 6(10), 1037-1040.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533-544.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd edn Sage. Thousand Oaks, California.
Pitlick, N. (2015). Alternatives to Zero Tolerance Policies Affecting Students of Color: A Systematic Review. St. Catherine University. Master of Social Work Clinical Research Papers.
Rivara, F., & Menestrel, S. (2016, September 14). Preventing Bullying Through Science, Policy, and Practice. Law and Policy. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US).
Saunders, M. L., & Lewis, P. (2009). P. and Thornhill, A.(2009). Research methods for business students. London, Sage pp. 46-61
Smith, P. K. (2004). Bullying: recent developments. Child and adolescent mental health, 9(3), 98-103.
Smokowski, P. R., & Kopasz, K. H. (2005). Bullying in school: An overview of types, effects, family characteristics, and intervention strategies. Children & Schools, 27(2), 101-110.
Sokolowski, R. (2000). Introduction to phenomenology. London, Cambridge University Press.
Stuart-Cassel, V., Bell, A., & Springer, J. F. (2011). Analysis of State Bullying Laws and Policies. Law & Policy.
Suski, E. (2014). Beyond the schoolhouse gates: The unprecedented expansion of school surveillance authority under cyberbullying laws. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 65(1).
Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Oldehinkel, A. J., De Winter, A. F., Verhulst, F. C., &Ormel, J. (2005). Bullying and victimization in elementary schools: a comparison of bullies, victims, bully/victims, and uninvolved preadolescents. Developmental psychology, 41(4), 672.
Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., &Nansel, T. R. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent health, 45(4), 368-375.
Court Cases on Bullying
1. Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
2. J.S. v Bethlehem Area School District (2000)
3. Kowalski v Berkeley County Schools (2011)
4. Emmet v Kent School District (2000).
5. J.S v Blue Mountain School District (2011)
6. Gendelman et al. v Glenbrook North High School (2003).
7. Zeno v Pine Plains Central School District (2012).
8. Gebser v Lago Vista Independent School District (1998)
9. Davis v Monroe County Board of Education (1999)
10. D.J.M. v Hannibal Public School District (2011)