Bullying and discrimination in schools. Perceptions and reactions of parents

📜🔗LINK to the source

1. ANALYTICAL SUMMARY

A continuum of rights violations, from the classroom to social media 

The survey interviews 5,030 people by phone (including 1,692 parents of children aged 6 to 23) about three types of harm experienced by their children over the past five years: bullying by peers, cyberbullying, and inequalities of treatment attributable to the School itself (p. 7, p. 9). The results show a high recognition of the phenomenon: 35% of parents report school bullying, 16% report cyberbullying among 11-18 year olds, and 32% report differences in treatment from teachers or the institution (p. 11-12). These harms are not isolated: 72% of parents who report one cite several, and 57% of parents reporting school discrimination also report bullying by peers (p. 15-16), suggesting a degraded school climate rather than isolated incidents.

Very unequal parental reactions depending on the type of harm 

The document highlights a major gap in reactions: in the face of discrimination attributable to the School, 92% of parents discuss it with their child and 71% contact the institution; in the case of bullying or cyberbullying by peers, these rates drop to 53% and 41%, and only 7% pursue institutional or legal recourse (p. 20-21). Parents' personal experience of discrimination plays a powerful amplifying role: it doubles the likelihood of identifying harm in the child and more than doubles the steps taken in cases of bullying (p. 18, p. 21-22). For field actors, this finding points to a concrete need: to specifically support the least mobilised families, particularly those who do not have personal experience of discrimination to refer to.

2. KEY POINTS OF THE DOCUMENT

1. School bullying is the most widely reported harm by parents : 35% report that at least one of their children has been targeted by other students in the last five years, a figure to be compared with the self-reported data from the students themselves, which is significantly lower (5% on average according to the DEPP) — a gap that questions how families define bullying (p. 11).
2. Cyberbullying remains underreported but is strongly correlated with in-person bullying. : 16% of parents of children aged 11 to 18 report it, and 81% of them also report classic school bullying, confirming that cyberbullying rarely extends an isolated situation (p. 12, p. 15).
3. A measurement tool for the accumulation of harms directly reusable in training. : Table 1 (p. 17) and graphs 5 to 8 precisely quantify the cross probabilities between school discrimination, bullying, and cyberbullying — a solid statistical support to illustrate the idea of a "continuum of institutional abuse" during a presentation.
4. Disability and health status are the primary factors of discrimination perceived by parents (32%)., ahead of origin or skin colour and physical appearance (25% each), with a marked over-representation in orientation decisions (42% of cases, p. 13-14) — a direct point of vigilance for those supporting families of children with disabilities.
5. Institutional or legal recourse remains marginal, regardless of the type of harm. : 16% for school discrimination, 7% for bullying/cyberbullying (p. 20-21), which confirms the primary role that the school itself plays as a first point of contact, rather than external agencies (Defender of Rights, justice, police).

3. ACTION TRACKS FOR LOCAL ACTORS

1. Use Table 1 (p. 17) and Graph 8 (p. 22) as animation support to help professionals visualise the statistical link between school discrimination and peer bullying, in order to justify a holistic approach to the school climate rather than a separate treatment of reports.
2. Prioritise targeting parents who have not themselves experienced discrimination in awareness-raising actions regarding children's rights, as they are the ones who, according to the survey, take action half as often when their child is found to be affected (p. 18, p. 21-22).
3. Integrate a specific focus on disability and school guidance in training for professionals in the medico-social field and local missions, based on the finding on p. 14: 42% of treatment inequalities related to disability concern guidance decisions.
4. Provide families with clear information on institutional recourse pathways (social services, Defender of Rights, lawyer), the very low rate of recourse (16% and 7%, p. 20-21) suggesting a lack of knowledge of the procedures rather than an informed choice not to act.
5. Rely on the operational definitions of bullying, cyberbullying, and discrimination (box p. 10) to standardise the vocabulary used in workshops or meetings with families, as these three concepts are often confused in practice.
6. Adapt prevention messages according to family profile : mothers, the youngest parents (18-34 years) and families in financial difficulty report significantly more cumulative incidents (respectively +40%, +68% and +64% relative risk, p. 20) — all groups to prioritise in the territorial network of actions.

Unmet need identified in the document : the survey does not allow for the identification of the child concerned within the sibling group nor to verify whether the reported bullying falls under discriminatory harassment in the legal sense, which limits the possibilities for fine targeting of prevention actions (p. 9, p. 16).

4. ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

🔍➕ For more information, see the articles referenced by "Health Practices" on the digital and AI theme ➡️🔗 https://pratiquesensante.odoo.com/2-6-intelligence-artificielle-numerique

1. DEPP, "National Day Against School Bullying: results of the students' self-assessment grid", Information Note No. 25.43, Ministry of National Education, July 2025. Complementary as it documents school bullying directly from students' statements (and not from parents), allowing for a direct comparison with EAD data. URL : https://www.education.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/2025-09/depp-ni-2025-43-441348.pdf
2. Ministry of National Education / éduscol, "Guide to administering and using questionnaires" — self-assessment grid on school bullying, November 2025. Methodological tool directly usable by educational teams to identify situations at the level of a class or institution, complementing the overall diagnosis proposed by the EAD. URL : https://eduscol.education.fr/document/53247/download
3. Ministry of National Education, "No to Bullying" — Educational file for the 2025 campaign, November 2025. Provides concrete animation tools (video supports, educational tracks on discrimination in schools) directly usable to extend the findings of the EAD through awareness-raising action in the classroom or training. URL : https://www.education.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/2025-11/dossier-p-dagogique-nah-2025-473918.pdf

5. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)

1. How many parents were surveyed and how were they selected? 5,030 people responded by phone between 10 October 2024 and 11 January 2025, from a representative random sample of the population aged 18 to 79 in metropolitan France; the analyses presented here focus on the 1,692 respondents who have at least one child aged 6 to 23 (p. 7-9).
2. Why are the results not comparable to the 2016 survey? The 'Children's Rights' section has been profoundly renewed compared to the first edition (new themes: school bullying, cyberbullying, reception procedures at police stations), making any statistical comparison between 2016 and 2024 impossible (p. 9).
3. What is the difference between school bullying and discriminatory bullying? School bullying is repeated violence exerted by one or more students; it becomes 'discriminatory' when it is linked to a reason prohibited by law (origin, disability, sexual orientation, etc.). The survey does not allow for the identification of this discriminatory dimension in reported cases of bullying, due to a lack of data on the reason (p. 16).
4. What is the main reason for school discrimination identified by parents? Health status or disability situation comes first (32% of concerned parents), followed by physical appearance and origin or skin colour (25% each), then social background (21%) (p. 13).
5. Do parents react differently depending on the type of harm? Yes, clearly: in cases of discrimination by the School, 71% contact the institution compared to 41% in cases of bullying or cyberbullying; institutional or legal recourse drops from 16% to 7% in the latter case (p. 20-21).
6. Does having experienced discrimination oneself change a parent's behaviour? Yes: parents who have themselves been discriminated against in the last five years are twice as likely to identify harm to their child and take significantly more action, particularly in cases of bullying (68% talk to the child compared to 42% of other parents) (p. 18-22).
7. Which profiles of parents are most at risk of reporting multiple types of harm for their children? Mothers (+40% risk compared to fathers), parents aged 18-34 (+68% compared to 45-54 years), families in financial difficulty (+64%) and parents of at least three children (+58%) (p. 20).

6. REWRITING IN EASY TO READ LANGUAGE

What is this document?

The Defender of Rights conducted a large survey. They asked questions to 5,030 people in France. They asked parents if their children had experienced problems at school.

What parents say

Many parents say that their child has been bullied. Bullying means: other students have harmed them, several times. 1 in 3 parents says that their child has been bullied. 1 in 6 parents says that their child has been bullied online. This is called cyberbullying.

Some parents also say that their child has been treated differently by the school. For example: the grades, the punishments, or the way teachers speak to the child. 1 in 3 parents say this has happened.

Why does this happen?

Parents often think it is because of:

• The child's health or disability
• The child's skin colour or origin
• The child's physical appearance
• The family's social background

What do parents do when this happens?

When the school treats a child poorly, parents often react. They talk about it with their child. They call the school.

When a child is bullied by other students, parents react less. This may be because they learn about it too late. This may be because they do not know what to do.

Very few parents seek help from the justice system or a lawyer. This happens for fewer than 2 parents in 10.

What to remember

Problems often accumulate: a bullied child may also be mistreated by the school. Parents who have themselves experienced discrimination react more quickly for their child. All parents need to be better informed about what they can do.

7. CROSS-ANALYSIS — VALUES OF HEALTH PRACTICES

• Literacy: The document does not provide any outreach tools for parents or children; it is a technical survey report aimed at professionals and decision-makers (p. 7-9).
• Empowerment: Parents are not involved in the design of the survey; they are only the respondents, asked about their perceptions and not consulted on the priorities to investigate (p. 8).
• Participation : No co-construction mechanism is described; the questionnaire was developed with academic researchers, without mention of consultation with the families or the children concerned (p. 7-8).
• Community health : The collective dimension is present through the analysis of the school climate as a factor promoting bullying, beyond individual situations (p. 16).
• Ethics : The document explicitly identifies a methodological bias: respondents tend to underestimate the discrimination they experience, which is acknowledged and discussed in the methodology section (p. 8).
• Human rights : The entire survey is anchored in the framework of the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, with an explicit reminder of the rights to non-discrimination and protection against violence (p. 5, p. 10).
• Intersectorality : The survey mobilised several research laboratories (CNRS, Ined, France Stratégie) but does not explicitly recommend operational partnerships between educational, social, and associative actors (p. 7-8).
• Partnership : No formalised collaboration model between the School, families, and external actors (associations, social services) is described in the body of the report.
• Fight against discrimination : The document directly addresses school discrimination related to disability, origin, physical appearance, social background, religion, nationality, gender, and sexual orientation, with quantified data by criterion (p. 13, p. 19).

8. EVALUATION OF THE RELIABILITY OF THE RESOURCE

Scientific relevance: The survey is based on a large and representative sample (5,030 respondents, Kish method, weighting on the sociodemographic characteristics of the census) and on a multidisciplinary scientific committee involving several CNRS laboratories (p. 7-8). The statistical analyses (risk ratios, significance tests) are documented with their thresholds (annex, p. 24). A methodological limitation is explicitly acknowledged by the authors: the survey relies on parental reports and not on the reports of the children themselves, which introduces a recognised underestimation bias in the text (p. 8-9), and prevents any comparison with the 2016 edition due to the evolution of the questionnaire (p. 9).

Operational relevance: The data can be directly mobilised to argue for awareness-raising or training actions, particularly through the graphs and the cumulative impact table (p. 15-22). However, the document remains a survey report and does not offer any educational tools, intervention protocols, or associated practical guides — a field professional will need to combine it with external operational resources (cf. section 4).