Helen Asokan

18042085

Research Teaching and Learning

Assignment 2- Critical Analysis of Research

Technological advances have found common ground in work places, homes and more

importantly, educational institutions. These changes can prove to be either a challenge for

teachers and their students’ learning ability or a success. The immeasurable benefits of

technology cannot be argued; however, a dim side has appeared for the purposes of bullying,

a term coined as cyber bullying. Access to technology is becoming increasingly significant in

the education system as they evaluate all possible strategies to utilise such a tool to enhance a

positive learning environment for the students. Australia, in particular, has utilised these

advances in classrooms and became an unwitting victim of cyber bullying. Even though

technology has been welcomed by schools and classroom for the purpose of learning,

students have found a way to use technology to exploit and harm other students or peers.

Cyberbullying involves the use of technology to threaten or irritate others. In the article

“Rates of cyber victimization and bullying among male Australian primary and high school

students”, Sakellariou and Carroll (2012) evaluate the predominance and the nature of

cyberbullying by carrying out a questionnaire among the participants. This article will be

compared to “Uncovering the structure of gender and developmental differences in

cyberbullying”, where Griezel, Finger, Bodkin-Andrews, Craven and Yeung (2012) identify

and analyse the foundation of cyberbullying across two variables’ gender and grade. Both

studies take on a similar approach to the research method and implement the same topic of

cyber bullying. In this essay, both articles will be critically analysed for the strengths and

weaknesses in according to the relevance of the research analysis. Overall, the findings of

each article will provide an insight towards cyber bullying and how this applies to good

teaching practice to provide a safe and positive learning environment.

 Helen Asokan
18042085
The purpose of Sakellariou and Carroll’s (2012) study was to identify the rate at which

cyberbullying spreads among male students, with respect to victimisations and the bullying

itself. The idea was extended in the study by Griezel et al. (2012) where they focused on

comparing both genders instead of just males and comparison of grades as well. Sakellariou

and Carroll (2012), acknowledge the extensive use of Information and Communication

Technology (ICT) by teachers in classrooms and male students have experienced cyber

bullying either through email or SMS text, whereas, Griezel et al. (2012) discovered that boys

engaged in physical forms of bullying, in comparison to girls who were involved in verbal

and cyber bullying. Both studies concluded that bullying itself left all forms on psychological

effects on the victims and suggest for further research to seek prevention of this critical social

issue as classrooms become more and more technologically advanced.

The literature used within both articles establish a comprehensive review of the chosen topic,

thus assuring the validity and reliability of their findings. Both articles comprise of

background information and or introduction, results, discussion and implication in future, all

of which are mandatory in a literature review (Webster & Watson, 2002). Both articles,

however, both studies have referenced finding from different countries thus the relevance of

those articles can be questioned. Sakellariou and Carroll (2012) also mentioned that their

main limitation was the inclusion of only males in their research, whereas both studies came

forward to mention that the sample size was too small. They have both used other research

articles to either support or create room for further research. This gives rise to critical

thinking and high order work ethic thus proving to be competent in writing a literature

review. Overall, the review of the literature was well structured and contains information

that is mostly relevant to their study.

 Helen Asokan
18042085
The data collected was discussed well and in detail throughout both studies and the

researchers were able to appraise their findings comprehensively. Both studies utilised

questionnaires and provided a thorough knowledge of their findings in clearly labelled tables

and graphs. Griezel et al. (2012) provided a good layout of their Revised Adolescent Peer

Relations Instrument- Bully/Target (RAPRI-BT) whereas, Sakellariou and Carroll (2012) did

not provide any survey questions. Although they discuss the questions asked throughout the

discussion, failure to provide the actual questionnaire is seen as a weakness in their study and

can possibly prevent future researchers from further testing their work (Panda & Gupta,

2014). There is no transparency regarding the questions and as a result, other researchers will

be able to distort the results towards their own conventions and deductions. Overall, both

studies have shown competent data collections and resourcing skills to describe the main

effects of cyberbullying and what it means for the education sector.

Here, the differences between both studies have been explored. Sakellariou and Carroll

(2012), state that within their research, 90 percent of male students reported that they had

never been bullied online. The rest mentioned that they had been victimised via the internet,

SMS text messaging and email. This data is evidence for Nathan’s (2009), where the author

states that cyber bulling is the least reported form of bullying. Sakellariou and Carroll (2012),

do mention the limitation of their study is that they only concentrated on male students, but

do recognize that their work validated the fact that cyberbullying does pose a problem within

schools. Griezel et al. (2012), worked across multiple variables such as gender, grade and

gender by grade to present the developmental differences in cyberbullying. Their study found

that boys engaged and were the victims of physical bullying whereas girls involved in verbal

and cyberbullying. Their work can be compared with other research (Parada, 2006) where

boys, in most cases, were found to be the bully and the victim. Griezel et al. (2012), also state
 Helen Asokan
18042085
the inconsistency among the gender differences with cyber bullying, citing various other

research that shows girls, in most cases being both the bully and the victim. Both studied did

prove to construct a well thought out method to investigate their aims. In saying that, they

have acknowledged their limitations due to time and participants interest. Overall, both

studies show relevance and validity do that their findings can contribute to a strong

foundation in the development for more effective research at seeking prevention to the

growing critical issue in this century.

Both studies have clearly identified that technology used within education can not only have

a positive effect on the children but also assert negative repercussions. Griezel et al. (2012)

fail to discuss the implications for educators and only provide a generalised notion of the

consequences of cyberbullying, unlike Sakellariou and Carroll (2012), who provided a clear

and concise section for the implications for educators. Nevertheless, it is still important to

raise the significance of the implications for the teaching practice. It is evident that

technology has been advantageous towards enhancing the learning ability of a learner, as they

are able to learn from technology and learn with technology (Reeves, 1998). Research also

shows that children and adolescents use the internet more than any other age group thus it has

quickly become a fundamental part of their lives (Bremer, 2005). The Australian government

has also supported the use of technology within classrooms citing that the schools are

preparing students to learn and live in a digital world (Department of Education and Training,

2016). From interactive Smart-boards (whiteboards) personal devices that are government

issued have grown increasingly in the last few years. Online discussion forums and e-learning

have become a necessity for the proper functioning of a classroom (Department of Education

and Training, 2016).

 Helen Asokan
18042085
Both studies did not make any correlation between cyber bullying and the use of technology

within classrooms. Sakellariou and Carroll (2012), however; provided means of preventing

such behaviour and promoting a positive learning environment in the classroom. It is evident

that adult awareness is necessary for the prevention of cyber bullying. Raising awareness

requires a standard of professional development, as stated by Sakellariou and Carroll (2012),

where they suggest joining hands with educational psychologists to develop collaborative

interventions which involve students, teachers and the parents. This can help to ensure that

students will be confident enough to report any incident of cyber bullying which can lead to

proper consequences for the parties involved. This latter is essential as it takes away the fear

from victims and brings in a new sense of hope, thus reducing the acts of cyber bullying

completely. With technology advancing everyday, supervision is an obligation that parents

and teacher must be aware of. Establishing and implementing anti cyberbullying programs

can help to keep the school safe. This can require proper professional development seminars

for teachers and administrators so that they are also trained to be alert and detect any issues in

relation to cyberbullying (Beale & Hall, 2007). The students must be aware of the policy set

out by the NSW Government to prevent and respond to student bullying. The policy also

states that bullying/ cyber bullying off school premises is also included in the policy as there

is a close association between the school and the behaviour of the student (NSW Department

of Education, 2016). Policies and procedures must be clearly implemented and managed in

schools and classroom, with the consequences, as laid out by the school are ready at hand if

the rules are broken by students. Cyberbullying is budding as one of the most challenging

issues faced by students and school staff. Teachers themselves cannot prevent such behaviour

alone. They need the support of students who are ready to report such incidents so that proper

consequences are laid out for the bullies. With a vast array of technology at hand, educators

must implement proper work ethic to students and constantly monitor their work within
 Helen Asokan
18042085
classrooms. Educators must realise that they have a responsibility to “create and maintain

supportive and safe learning environment”, for their students, as per the Australian

Professional Standards for Teachers (Australian Institute for Teaching and School

Leadership, 2014, standard 4). As research into this experience develops, the education

system must be prepared to manage the technological advances and the disadvantages that

come with it in order to uphold these standards.

In conclusion, both articles have contributed to extending the knowledge in the field and have

suggested ways prevent cyberbullying, while promoting a safe learning environment at

schools. While only Sakellariou and Carroll (2012), provided implications for educators, both

studies concluded on similar recommendations on the prevention methods. Overall, it can be

said that teachers play a significant role in controlling student behaviour in the classroom and

online. The increase in the sophistication of technology allows for more ways to bring harm

to students. Therefore, it is evident that further research into educational strategies and issues

such as cyberbullying and preventative methods are vital so that a positive and quality

learning environment remains as successful as possible.

 Helen Asokan
18042085

References

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2014). Australian Professional

Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from: https://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-

standards-for-teachers/standards/list

Beale, A. V. & Hall, K. R. (2007). Cyberbullying: What school administrators (and parents)

can do. The Clearing Hall: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 81(1), 8-

12. Doi: 10.3200/TCHS.81.1.8-12

Bremer, J. (2005). The internet and Children: Advantages and Disadvantages. Child and

Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 14, 405-428. Doi:

10.1016/j.chc.2005.02.003

Department of Education and Training. (2016). Technology in Schools. Retrieved from:

https://www.education.gov.au/technology-schools

Sakellariou, T. & Carroll, A. (2012). Rates of victimization and bullying among male

Australian primary and high school students. School Psychology international, 33(3), 533-

549. Doi: 10.1177/0143034311430374

Griezel, L., Finger, L. R., Bodkin-Andrews, G. H., Craven, R. G. & Yeung, A. S. (2012).

Uncovering the structure of and gender and development differences in cyber bullying. The

Journal of Educational Research, 105(6), 442-455. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2011.629692

 Helen Asokan
18042085
Nathan, E. (2009). Reputational orientations and aggression: Extending reputation

enhancement theory to upper primary school aged bullies (PhD thesis). Retrieved from

http://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/reputational-orientations-and-

aggression-extending-reputation-enhancement-theory-to-upper-primary-school-aged-

bullies(6d778269-0fbf-44e0-935e-057b5eeea5a1).html?uwaCustom=thesis

NSW Department of Education. (2016). Bullying: Preventing and Responding to student

Bullying in Schools policy. Retrieved from https://education.nsw.gov.au/policy-

library/policies/bullying-preventing-and-responding-to-student-bullying-in-schools-policy

Panda, A., & Gupta, R. K. (2014). Making academic research more relevant: A few

suggestions. IIMB Management Review, 26(3), 156–169. doi:10.1016/j.iimb.2014.07.008

Reeves, T. C. (1998). The Impact of media and Technology in Schools. The Bertelsmann

Foundation. Retrieved from:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/30758321/The_Impact_of_Media_by_Be

rtelsmann_Fdtn.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1495251

638&Signature=KWAuLdmzYGxr87w%2B1isVzSceMyc%3D&response-content-

disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DThe_impact_of_media_and_technology_in_sc.pdf

Webster, J. & Watson, R.T. (2002). Analysing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a

literature Review. Management Information Systems Research Centre, 26(2), 13-23.

Retreived from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4132319.pdf