Introduction ANOVA The analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to compare the mean difference between two or more groups having same dependent variable. The analysis of variance is better than the t-test in the comparison of the mean sample of different groups. In this study, we are interested in determining if the bullying basis in terms of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, citizenship/immigration status, religion, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, disability or weight. The ANOVA will be used to determine the difference in mean of the bullying in different type of the schools. Once it’s established that there is a significant difference between the samples means of different type of schools the turkey method is usually used to determine which pairs of these means have a significant difference. For the descriptive portion of this analysis, I first examine race of students in New York City schools as a bullying basis. This is a constant variable, as it is used throughout my research paper. Results indicate harassment and bullying were not only practiced by students but also by the teachers in school. There are cases where a teacher bullies hate for a student just because a student is of a certain religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, ethnicity, or color. The statistical data were collected in relation to students being suspended from school for no mistake or for minor reasons just because of one of the above mentioned causes. And later the School Board confirmed the collected data after following up on the situation as shown in the racial disparities.
Literature review
According to Sikh Coalition, AALDEF, & NYCLU, (2011) bullying is associated much with the race gender and physical disability; this has been attributed to poor academic and school dropout. According to Limber. S, (2012) bullying is high schools and middle school is on greater rise than is any other institution of learning. According to limber 2012, the most affected institutions are the high schools that even the student dropout rate is high. There is physical bullying, verbal bullying, cyber bullying, intimidation, and sexual bullying. Physical bullying is the most open bullying in these schools (Sampson, 2008). Here, children use physical actions to harm their fellow children in schools. Students hurt or injure one another by punching, kicking, shoving, and slapping plus other physical assault forms. According to Sampson, 2012, a greater percentage of the middle school students (26.8%) than the high school student (15.6%) were grouped as victims of bullying. Research shows that bullying can be significantly reduced through comprehensive, school-wide programs designed to change group norms and improve school climate (Olweus, D. 1993). Students with disabilities are subjected to more bullying, physical abuse, verbal abuse, and social rejection than other students (Carter, B. B., & Spencer, V. G. (2006).
When the analysis of variance indicates that there is a difference existing between the means of the different type of schools, we will need to perform some follow-up tests to isolate the specific difference. Different multiple comparison methods, such a fisher’s LSD method, turkey method, and could be used for this purpose The Sikh Coalition, AALDEF, & NYCLU, 2010). In the turkey, any pair the different type of school will be examined to determine if there is any significant different between each pair of the type of the school and the bullying based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, disability, weight, citizenship, immigration status, or color (The Sikh Coalition, AALDEF, & NYCLU, 2010). The analysis of variance data is usually conducted when the data is normally distributed. In this study, we examine if the data is normally distributed so that the analysis of variance can be justified to be the appropriate type of analysis of the test of hypothesis.
The hypothesis
There is significant difference in the type of school and the bullying in the New york schools based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, disability, weight, citizenship, immigration status, or color. This includes name-calling and joking about the student’s gender, ethnicity, family background, and religion. Students use words to gain power over the target student or a child. Verbal bullies often use insults to demean, belittle, and harm the other children in school, often making threats to other students and against their property like schoolbags, pencils, books, and other school items. Verbal bullying is based on the way the target looks, behaves, or acts. It is common for children to verbally attack their peers who have special needs. This bullying is not easy to identify, unlike the physical bullying. It can happen around adults, and they will not find it disturbing since there is a perception that whatever a kid says to the other is not significant. In this study, we will investigate the difference in mean of the bullying in different types of school based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, disability, weight, citizenship, immigration status, or color. From each of the school type, the difference in the means will be compared to determine using the turkey method and the pair of mean with significant different will be noted.
Residua analysis of the data
The analysis of variance (ANOVA)
Results
One-way ANOVA: 11d. How often is the following versus school type?
Source DF SS MS F P
Error 1064 1523.60 1.43
Total 1072 1546.84
S = 1.197 R-Sq = 1.50% R-Sq(adj) = 0.76%
Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on
Pooled StDev
Level N Mean StDev ----+---------+---------+---------+-----
ECC 29 6.966 1.239 (-*--)
ES 366 7.069 1.240 (*)
ES/MS 89 6.980 1.405 (-*)
ES/MS/HS 1 4.678 * (--------------*---------------)
HS 265 6.941 1.159 (*)
HST 40 6.594 1.245 (--*-)
MS 199 7.137 1.097 (-*)
MS/HS 65 6.985 1.069 (-*-)
YABC 19 7.530 1.035 (--*---)
----+---------+---------+---------+-----
3.0 4.5 6.0 7.5
Pooled StDev = 1.197
Grouping Information Using Tukey Method
YABC 19 7.530 A
MS 199 7.137 A
ES 366 7.069 A
MS/HS 65 6.985 A
ES/MS 89 6.980 A
ECC 29 6.966 A
HS 265 6.941 A
HST 40 6.594 A
ES/MS/HS 1 4.678 A
Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
Tukey 95% Simultaneous Confidence Intervals
All Pairwise Comparisons among Levels of school type
Individual confidence level = 99.80%
ES -0.613 0.103 0.820 (-*-)
ES/MS -0.781 0.014 0.808 (-*-)
ES/MS/HS -6.066 -2.288 1.490 (---------*----------)
HS -0.752 -0.025 0.702 (-*-)
HST -1.278 -0.372 0.534 (--*--)
MS -0.567 0.171 0.910 (-*--)
MS/HS -0.810 0.020 0.849 (-*-)
YABC -0.532 0.564 1.660 (---*--)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
-3.5 0.0 3.5 7.0
ES/MS -0.528 -0.089 0.350 (-*)
ES/MS/HS -6.111 -2.391 1.329 (---------*----------)
HS -0.428 -0.128 0.171 (*
HST -1.093 -0.475 0.144 (-*)
MS -0.259 0.068 0.395 (*)
MS/HS -0.584 -0.084 0.416 (-*)
YABC -0.413 0.461 1.335 (-*--)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
-3.5 0.0 3.5 7.0
ES/MS/HS -6.037 -2.302 1.434 (---------*----------)
HS -0.494 -0.039 0.416 (*)
HST -1.092 -0.385 0.322 (-*-)
MS -0.316 0.158 0.631 (*-)
MS/HS -0.600 0.006 0.612 (-*-)
YABC -0.388 0.550 1.489 (--*-)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
-3.5 0.0 3.5 7.0
type Lower Center Upper ---------+---------+---------+---------+
HS -1.459 2.263 5.985 (---------*----------)
HST -1.844 1.916 5.677 (---------*----------)
MS -1.265 2.459 6.183 (----------*----------)
MS/HS -1.436 2.307 6.051 (----------*---------)
YABC -0.959 2.852 6.663 (----------*----------)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
-3.5 0.0 3.5 7.0
type Lower Center Upper ---------+---------+---------+---------+
HST -0.977 -0.347 0.284 (-*-)
MS -0.152 0.196 0.545 (*)
MS/HS -0.470 0.045 0.559 (*-)
YABC -0.293 0.589 1.471 (--*-)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
-3.5 0.0 3.5 7.0
type Lower Center Upper ---------+---------+---------+---------+
MS -0.101 0.543 1.187 (-*)
MS/HS -0.355 0.391 1.138 (-*-)
YABC -0.099 0.936 1.971 (--*--)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
-3.5 0.0 3.5 7.0
type Lower Center Upper ---------+---------+---------+---------+
MS/HS -0.682 -0.152 0.379 (-*)
YABC -0.499 0.393 1.285 (-*--)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
-3.5 0.0 3.5 7.0
type Lower Center Upper ---------+---------+---------+---------+
YABC -0.424 0.544 1.513 (--*-)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
-3.5 0.0 3.5 7.0
Dissection:
Recommendation and Conclusion
The multivariate analysis has suggested that the bullying in the middle schools and the high school is very common in the New York schools. The results of this study are consistence with the rest of the findings in the previous studies. In this study, high rate of bullying is much associated with the race, color, ethnicity, national origin, citizenship/immigration status, religion, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, disability or weight. Research shows that bullying can be significantly reduced through comprehensive, school-wide programs designed to change group norms and improve school climate.
It has been found out that there are various effects from bullying in the New York City schools. The effects affect the bullies themselves, the victims, and to the member of the school community schools. The bullied children are the most affected. These children experience physical, mental, and emotional breakdowns. They feel disconnected from the schools and its activities. Their grades are often poor due to the abuse they experience in the schools. This has led to the children having nightmares while asleep. All this may lead to the children committing suicide, which is the worst effect of it all. The study identified that the bullies have been affected by their bullying behavior. They are mainly engaged in violence, drug abuse, stealing and dropping out of school. In New York City, most school bullies have dropped out of school and do engage in risky behaviors once outside. The bullying has a very bad side effect the children who are bullied. This is because all the environment of the bullied children appears to be hostile and even lack and concentration of whatever task the student is assigned. From the above analysis, it can be advice that the bullying especially is school should be abolished to provide good and friendly environment to the students.
References
Sampson, R. (2008). Bullying in schools (Updated Jan. 2008. ed.). Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
Sampson, R. (2011). Bullying in high schools and middle schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
The Sikh Coalition, AALDEF, & NYCLU. (2010). Bullying in New York City Schools
educators speak out.
Retrieved from http http://aaldef.org/Bullying%20Report.pdf
Limber, S. (2002). Addressing Youth Bullying Behaviors. Paper presented at the
American Medical Association’s Educational Forum on Adolescent Health,
Washington, DC.
Limber, S. (2012). The Bullying Behaviors. Paper presented at the
American Medical Association’s Educational Forum on Adolescent Health,
Washington, DC.
Olweus, D. (1993a). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Oxford,
UK: Blackwell
Carter, B. B., & Spencer, V. G. (2006). The fear factor: Bullying and students with
disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 21(1),11-23
Appendix
The following are the tables used in the analysis of the research
