A QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANTI-VIOLENCE PROGRAMS IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS FOR BULLYING PREVENTION
Bilah Samping Artikel
Isi Artikel Utama
Abstrak
Violence and bullying in school remain a critical issue within Indonesia’s educational system, despite the implementation of various anti-violence programs. This study aims to explore the dynamics of bullying practices and evaluate the effectiveness of anti-violence education from the perspectives of survivors, parents, and teachers. This study employs a qualitative descriptive approach supported by simple descriptive quantitative data. The qualitative data were obtained through in-depth interviews and documentation, while the quantitative data were drawn from a short descriptive questionnaire used to complement and strengthen the narrative findings. This design allows the researcher to describe participants’ experiences holistically while validating emerging patterns through basic numerical trends. The findings reveal that the most prevalent form of bullying is verbal abuse (40%), followed by social exclusion (30%), threats or intimidation (20%), and cyberbullying (10%). Thematic analysis indicates that victims often experience bullying because they are perceived as “different”—academically superior, introverted, or socially isolated—and that a permissive school culture and lack of empathy education contribute to the persistence of bullying. Approximately 80% of survivors reported intensified bullying after their parents lodged complaints, demonstrating the weakness of institutional empathy and protection mechanisms. These findings support the power imbalance theory (Olweus, 1993) and symbolic violence framework (Bourdieu, 1991), positioning bullying as a manifestation of social hierarchy and structural inequality within schools. The study underscores the need for empathic and restorative education that cultivates moral awareness rather than relying solely on administrative sanctions. Policy recommendations include the formation of school anti-violence task forces, integration of emotional literacy into the curriculum, and teacher training based on a humanistic pedagogical approach. Theoretically, this study contributes to the discourse on empathy-based anti-violence education, while practically it offers a conceptual model for developing a safe, inclusive, and humanizing educational ecosystem.
Rincian Artikel
Artikel ini berlisensiCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Referensi
Bauman, S., & Del Rio, A. (2006). Preservice teachers’ responses to bullying scenarios: Comparing physical, verbal, and relational bullying. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.219
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Harvard University Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S. M. (2010). Bullying in North American schools: A social-ecological perspective on prevention and intervention. Routledge.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.
Goleman, D. (2006). Social intelligence: The new science of human relationships. Bantam Books.
Guest, G., Namey, E., & Chen, M. (2020). A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PLoS ONE, 15(5), e0232076. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232076
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help? Appleton-Century Crofts.
Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for character: How our schools can teach respect and responsibility. Bantam Books.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Blackwell Publishing.
Permendikbud Republik Indonesia Nomor 82 Tahun 2015 tentang Pencegahan dan Penanggulangan Tindak Kekerasan di Satuan Pendidikan.
Rigby, K. (2020). Bullying interventions in schools: Six basic approaches (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80’s. Merrill.
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (2001). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge University Press.
Swearer, S. M., & Hymel, S. (2015). Understanding the psychology of bullying: Moving toward a social-ecological diathesis-stress model. American Psychologist, 70(4), 344–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038929
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall.
Thornberg, R. (2015). School bullying as a collective action: Stigma processes and identity struggling. Children & Society, 29(4), 310–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12064
UNESCO. (2019). Behind the numbers: Ending school violence and bullying. UNESCO Publishing.
Zehr, H. (2015). The little book of restorative justice (Revised and updated). Good Books.