Assignment 2: Research Teaching and Learning

School modernisation and emerging technologies in school education provides Australian

educators the opportunity to reconceptualise teaching and learning in the 21st century.
Though, there are increasing challenges that face virtual classroom technologies and students.
Cyberbullying, a relatively recent phenomenon, has substantial consequences for young
peoples wellbeing due to technological affordance and social media. Described,
cyberbullying is as an intentional aggressive behaviour towards another person that is
performed through electronic means. The Australian Covert Bullying Prevalence Study
(Cross et al. 2009), was commissioned by the Australian Government, underlining growing
concerns of cyberbullying affecting Australian schools and students. In their article, rates of
cyber victimization and bullying among male Australian primary and High School students,
Sakellariou et al. (2012), investigate three independent boys schools in the greater cities of
Sydney and Brisbane, Australia. Discussing their findings in the small light to where limited
research had been undertaken to date. This article will be compared with Ockerman, Kramer
& Bruno (2014), From the school yard to cyber space, which examines cyberbullying
among middle school students in the United States. Both research projects base their research
on quantitative data, formulating idealistic results for teaching implications based on a variety
of questionaries and surveys. Although both studies have applied similar research concepts of
quantitative data. In this essay, both strengths and weaknesses from both studies will be
evaluated, based on relevance of research, analysis and findings produced. Further, associated
knowledge with teaching application for practice, adapting new teaching implications to be
considered will be conveyed.

Body of Essay
The purpose of Sakellariou et al. (2012) study was to extend on the limited
cyberbullying research previously conducted, the attempt was to make new discoveries in
conjunction towards cyberbullying and the complex multidimensional phenomenon which is
increasingly more prevalent today in schools. This hypothesis has also been undertaken by
the experimental study conducted from Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014), comparing
cyberbullying in the United States with implications for teachers. Sakellariou et al. (2012),
revealed that bullying in schools has been a major focus for the past 25 years, though minor
knowledge is known about the prevalence associated with the more insidious form that is
known as cyberbullying. Similarly, Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014), concur, prevalence
rates of cyberbullying tend to be broadly unknown due to the methodology of investigation

1
Assignment 2: Research Teaching and Learning

and the unwieldy nature of cyberbullying. Both studies conclude, cyberbullying is becoming
more common due to the emergence of technologies growing availability, with unfamiliarity
figures associated, student victimization and bullying related to the phenomenon of
cyberbullying are still unparalleled.

Literature Review
Both articles establish important justification for the literature reviewed, highlighting
the use of technology as a means for student cyberbullying. Additionally, both articles
combine contingent information and existing results from previous research discovered; Both
articles formulating informal literature, necessary in quantitative research (Maxwell, 2006).
From Sakellariou et al. (2012), literature presented interviews from various statistical
analogies from UK, Sweden, Australia, USA and Canada. This highlights the worldwide
global developments reporting on cyberbullyings rapid development. However, the research
conducted was primarily from the United states, this contrasts with Ockerman, Kamer &
Bruno (2014), who too focuses their research in the United States. Unpremeditated, the
research was primarily on white middle school students this therefore lacks diversity. In other
words, stated by Fowler, (2008), a measure might be valid and reliable for one population but
not another. Predominantly, if more effective literature was investigated on a global scale
with the phenomenon of cyberbullying, the determination and reliability of the studies
breadth would have enriched the results of cyberbullying on a larger, global diverse level.
Overall, both Sakellariou et al. (2012) and Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014), research
literature that is relative and well structured, through the study conducted, highlighted the
author made limited elucidation of research towards the topics focal point of male white
students and no other group types.

The data collection process was discussed in detail from both articles, involving
similar yet different approaches, both studies measuring and collecting data allowing the
researches to formulate comprehensive results. Despite the research topic similarities, data
was collected and measured similarly between both articles. Sakellariou et al. (2012) utilised
The Boys Bullying at School Questionnaire (BBSQ), where nine items measured prevalence
of victimization, bullying and duration of victimization. whilst, Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno
(2014) incorporate the RAPRI-BT instrument, designed to measure three target behaviours
physical, verbal, and social using a scale from 1-6, this was measured on the Cronbachs
alpha scale. Similarly, Sakellariou et al. (2012) measured on a 5-point scale, also featuring

2
Assignment 2: Research Teaching and Learning

the Cronbachs alpha (Ames & Myers, 2012). Sakellariou et al. (2012) provides a clear
scaffold of all questions utilised through the BBSQ questionnaire, non-the less, also provides
more reliable framework data collection. Whereas, Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014),
provides limited survey questions, each question showing similarities yet failing to provide
more detail. This limitation therefore confines with an open-ended question, providing less
awareness and understanding of the topic issue (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003). Overall, both
studies apply similar data collection process, where this helps to explain the outbreak of
cyberbullying, Though, in spite of information details provided and gained, further data
collection methods must be developed in order to increase more dependable assessments on
cyberbullying victimization.

Methodology
Both studies establish strong foundations for understanding the participants and
settings concerning cyberbullying, however, both studies show similarities regarding their
methodological approaches. Sakellariou et al. (2012), BBSQ surveyed a total of 1.530
students from primary and secondary male schools, two independent schools from Brisbane,
one being a primary school of 300 students and one independent high school in Sydney. This
provided a fair representation of the socio- economic milieu of the Australian capitals, testing
670 students from years 7-12 (Sydney), 560 male students from (Brisbane high school) and
300 male students from (Brisbane primary school). All independent schools with a mean age
of 13.8 years. On the other hand, Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014) used Adolescent peer
relation instrument (APRI), to measure US middle schools. Surveying two large Midwestern
urban cities, three inter-faith schools, one private, one secular and one co- educational middle
school. Students ranged from 10- 15 years with a similar mean age of 12.37. An important
aspect of Sakellariou et al. (2012) methodology noted, approval was previously obtained
prior from the Human Research Ethics Committee of the administering institutions, similarly,
Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014) used a convenience sample of schools, this included
involving permission from the school principal of each school with parental consent forms
for access. Obtaining ethical clearance is substantial when researching in any schools
concerning social issues, delicate as cyberbullying. Due to the nature of bulling, students
confidentiality is of most importance, previous events involving student bullying can
potentially bring back memories of distress and discomfort from questioning (Fried,2003).
Students who participated in Sakellariou et al. (2012) prior to the dissemination of the
BBSQ were informed about the nature of the study, assuring confidentiality and anonymity

3
Assignment 2: Research Teaching and Learning

of the questionnaire. Comparably, with Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014) study, this benefit
of confidentiality ensures the trust between students and researchers, most importantly to
ethical standards of student wellbeing (Fried, 2003). However, the limitations of Ockerman,
Kamer & Bruno (2014) study, exhibited tests only managing a small portion of American
schools. In conjunction to Sakellariou et al. (2012) a major part of the Australian schools
populations were involved. Despite these similarities, different methods and strategies need
to be adopted, this will allow enhanced results, linking wider populations and further
knowledge of diverse backgrounds, ethnicity, socioeconomic background, race, age and sex
to be examined.

Findings
The distinctions between both studies findings are investigated. Sakellariou et al.
(2012) reveal, the internet was the most common mode of cyberbullying experienced during
the school year. Langos (2012) mentions, there is similaritys concerning traditional bullying
and cyberbullying, where both can be direct and indirect, further, cyberbullying is more of an
acute problem during the compulsory years of schooling. Findings examined from
Sakellariou et al. (2012) explain, years 8-10 were significantly higher through mobile phones
and electronic images during school years, whereas Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014)
disclose, years 7-9 were more prominent from instant chat lines, comparably, Sakellariou et
al. (2012) age groupings were similar. The observation of student cyberbullying is accounted
through tables displaying developments and particular prevalence statistics rates from
different ICT technologies. From these findings, both studies wanted to look at understanding
why the prevalence rates of cyberbullying, and victimization by males and particular devices
are more common than others. By expanding on this research, applying qualitative data will
enable the studies to determine the why, what and how in the findings, this becomes more
specific research with an in-depth application for teaching implications. Furthermore, it
would be interesting to apply these results to constructive intervention groups and prevention
strategy classes. This would encourage positive qualities throughout school years and
highlight the awareness of the cyberbullying phenomenon while improving student attitudes.
Overall, the findings display the outcomes in well-structured graphs, establishing statistical
analyses of the results investigated and collected from the measure that were administered.

4
Assignment 2: Research Teaching and Learning

Teaching Implications
Both articles discuss the implications towards teaching practice. Sakellariou et al.
(2012) specify implications for strategies which can be applied to counteract cyberbullying.
Although, they reiterate their present research having limitations; nevertheless, Sakellariou et
al. (2012) makes attempts to present viable solutions for teaching implications to be
incorporated. Nevertheless, Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014) present implications for
teaching more in depth, focusing on three groups such as school counsellors, families and
administrators, establishing more information for teaching implications to be understood.
Although, Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014) study related to a wider student base in the
United States of both male and female, therefore provides more quantifiable varieties for
teaching implication strategies to be incorporated, Sakellariou et al. (2012), should consider
focusing on both groups of male and female, this would add more diversity in research and
finding associated, improving results.

The research approach used from both articles, aimed to increase the knowledge
concerning bullying and cyberbullying phenomena to solicit information about the
prevalence rate of student victimization (Andreou & Bonoti, 2010). This becomes valuable
knowledge to teachers as this not only illustrates what the prevalence of cyberbullying is
understood, though outlines the correlation between traditional forms of bullying and
cyberbullying. Traditional bullying and cyberbullying are closely related: those who are
bullied at school are bullied online and those who bully at school bully online (Hinduja &
Patchin, 2009). Both articles present findings which support the value of raising awareness
crucially recognising their limitations to research prior of the subject, disclosing issues
surrounding student victimization and technology is associated with more research (Kowalski
& Limber, 2007). Sakellariou et al. (2012) explain, responsibility becomes inherent among
educators being mindful and supportive about cyberbullying, applying standard 4.5.1, use of
ICT safely responsibly and ethically can develop the safe practice of ICT in the classroom
when applying professional teaching of ICT and lesson planning (AITSL, 2014). This is
supported from Ockerman, Kamer & Bruno (2014) describing, teachers must develop
necessary skills to understand about cyberbullying issues, professional development must be
developed to counter this epidemic. Not only does media in schools and home need to be
contemplated, nonetheless, schools and teachers need to modify policies ensuring all lesson
plans and procedures with regard to students use of technology are taught safely and
responsibly. This further emphasises the need of teachers to be aware of aggressive or

5
Assignment 2: Research Teaching and Learning

socially inappropriate behaviours with peers, when applying proficient strategies this can
then allow teachers to further improve on reporting bullying and behaviour (Mishna &
Solomon, 2009).

Non-the less, research into the cyberbullying phenomenon has been emphasised from
both articles. As mentioned, additional research needs to be applied, this enables teachers to
understand the logistics and patterns associated with cyberbullying. Additionally, studies into
multiple schools with diverse and qualitative research will enhance future research. Focus
groups, one to one interventions with bullies and finally pre- and post-test evaluations will
validate impacts towards students behaviour, attitude and academic achievement. Lastly,
developing valuable teaching knowledge for implications towards teaching practice
countering the cyberbullying phenomenon.

In conclusion both research articles contribute substantial knowledge of the phenomenon

topic of cyberbullying. Effectively, both studies captured the process of methodology and
implication strategies, both studies conclude on similar references for teaching implications
however, this can only be understood from two countries of quantitative research. Ultimately
due to the limitation of investigation prior, further investigation and qualitative research is
fundamental to clarify in depth knowledge of preventative strategies. Lastly, research into
strategies for teaching practice are primarily more necessary given that school students have
ease of technological access now more so on a global scale, increasingly this has become an
out of control of phenomenon more likely to increase in schools due to Australian school
adopting technology in school environments.

6
Assignment 2: Research Teaching and Learning

References

Ahn, S., Ames, A.J., & Myers, N. D. (2012). A review of meta- analysis in education:
Methodology strengths and weaknesses. Review of Educational Research, 83(2) 34-
66

Andreou, E., & Bonoti, F. (2010). Childrens bullying experiences expressed through
drawings and self-reports. School Psychology International, 31, 165-176

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2014). Australian professional
standards for teaching. Retrieved from Education services Australia Website:
http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers/standards/list

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2000). Qualitative Research for Education: An introductory
to theory and methods (3rd Ed)

Cross, D., et al. (2009) Australian covert bullying prevelance study. Perth: Edith Cowan
University.

Fred, J. (2003). Ethical Standards and Principals. In S. Komives, D. Woodward & Associates
(Ed.), Student Services: A handbook for the profession, 4th ed. San Francisco:
Retrieved from:
http://www.myacpa.org/article/ethics-student-confidentiality-

Gall, M.D., Gall, J.P., & Borg, W. R. (2015). Applying educational research: How to read,
do, and use research to solve problems of practice. (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Pearson
Education, Inc.

Hindja, S. & Patchin, J. W. (2009. Bullying beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and
Responding to Cyberbullying. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 44 (1) 176-
188

Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2007). Electronic bullying among middle school students.
Journal of adolescent Health 41, s22-s33. Retrieved from:

7
Assignment 2: Research Teaching and Learning

http://www.sccoe.org/depts/csh/docs/

Mishna, F., Saini, M., & Solomon, S. (2009). Ongoing and online: Children and youths
perceptions of cyberbullying. Children and Youth service review, 31, 1223-1227

Ockerman, M. S., Kramer, C., & Bruno, M. (2014). From the school yard to cyber space.,
Retrieved from: RMLE Online, 37(6), 1-18.

Sakellariou, T., Carroll, A., & Houghton, S. (2012). Rates of Cyber Victimization and
bullying among male Australian primary and high school students. School
Psychology International, 33(5), 533-549.