Prevalence and predictors of staff victimization of students in Kosovo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Student victimization by school staff members has important potential consequences for students’ academic achievement and physical and psychological outcomes. Several studies have shown that such victimization exists in multiple contexts and there is considerable variation in prevalence among contexts. This study examined the prevalence of student victimization in public schools by staff members and its relationships with other school-related factors in the context of Kosovo. The sample was designed to represent all students from Grades 6–9 in 13 of Kosovo's 38 municipalities. The sample consisted of 12,040 students from 100 schools, 49.2% of whom were female. They were equally divided between Grades 6 to 9. Overall, more than a quarter of the students reported that a staff member victimized them in the last month. The least prevalent victimization type was sexual—touched or tried to touch you in a sexual manner (2.3%). The most prevalent physical behavior was slapping (15.8%); 12.7% reported being offended or humiliated by a staff member and 8.3% indicated that a staff member cursed them. Boys were victimized significantly more than girls for all types of victimization. The strongest predictors of staff victimization of students were students’ involvement in peer-to-peer victimization and risky behaviors, which were correlated with school climate. Future research should examine each type of staff victimization of students (emotional, physical, sexual) separately and test comprehensive models that include multiple predictors, including contextual and school-level variables and staff characteristics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".