Bullying in Schools: Speech Language Pathologistsâ Responses to SpecificBullying Incidents

Abstract

Objective: The perceptions of school-based Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) about the seriousness of different bullying incidents, the likelihood of their intervention, and their selection of management strategies were examined. The following hypotheses were tested: 1) SLPs view all four types of bullying of children with SLI (Speech Language Impairment) as equally serious, 2) SLPs are equally likely to intervene in all four types of bullying of children with SLI, and 3) SLPs are likely to use similar intervention strategies in all four types of bullying of children with SLI. Methods: A mailed survey describing 4 types of bullying (physical, verbal, relational and cyber) of students with Specific Language Impairment was completed by 436 SLPs (93.1% female; mean age=45.6 years, SD=13.9). Results: A majority (89%) of SLPs perceived the bullying as serious, and 87% were likely to intervene. SLPs consistently rated relational bullying as less serious than the other types of bullying. There was a significant positive correlation between two constructs; the more likely an SLP perceived the bullying vignette as serious, the more likely s/he reported some intervention. A factor analysis of 14 bullying management strategies found 3 main factors: (1) reporting the incident and consulting with other personnel, (2) teaching the child self-defense strategies, and (3) reassuring and comforting the victim. Conclusions: The SLPs, as a group, did not view all four types of bullying of children with SLI as equally serious. They also were not equally likely to intervene in all four types of bullying of children with SLI or report using similar intervention strategies in all four types of bullying of children with SLI. As a group, they responded with management strategies that assisted the child in reporting the incident, sharing information with other school personnel, bystanders and parents.