校园欺凌是青少年成长过程中的一个常见问题，理解欺凌的成因是社会工作者进行欺凌干预的基础。既有研究以生态系统理论为基本框架，试图将微观－中观－宏观的系统因素，不同主体对于青少年欺凌行为的可能作用均纳入到研究之中，再利用各种过程性理论（发展理论、进化理论、社会学习与社会认知理论、社会文化理论等）对不同系统主体之间作用机制的解释，建立了综合性的解释模型，检验筛选各种风险性或保护性因素，为社会工作者干预欺凌参与者及其相关系统中的问题提供循证基础。然而，这种模式一方面造成研究整体的病理化后果，不同系统、不同主体的影响被以单独分隔的方式纳入解释，研究大多关注便于观测的、有问题的个人特质及相关微－中观系统缺陷，成为一种病理学的诊疗过程，既缺少对于宏观影响的分析，也忽视贯穿于不同系统层次，支配不同主体行动的一致性逻辑。其次，该模式难以解释校园欺凌中权力不平等关系的成因，即不能够回答欺凌背后的权力不平等关系作为社会构建本质的生产过程。欺凌被简单视为有问题的个人特质或系统功能缺陷的产物，其实质是对欺凌发生的具体过程的忽视，对权力生产问题的回避，也是对权力背后更广泛的社会过程以及一致性逻辑的回避。这使得校园欺凌的成因囿于简单化、碎片化。本研究试图从欺凌发生的具体过程出发、回答三方面的问题，一是校园欺凌中存在哪些不平等的权力关系？二是这种关系是如何生成与再生产？三是在权力关系背后的社会基础与社会过程是怎样的？
基于对W中学两组欺凌事件的深入调查，本研究利用权力技术的分析方法，藉由空间的安排之差异分析欺凌之中的不平等关系生产与再生产的路径。空间的安排被老师与学生赋予了多重意义，反映了学校纪律与规范对于学生的分级与塑造过程。这个过程一方面直接影响青少年群体的互动与结构变动，导致群体内部出现不平等关系；另一方面纪律与规范本身也在不断地利用规范化手段制造等级制度。二者参与到欺凌的生产与再生产过程，塑造了欺凌的实施者与受害者对于欺凌现状的接受。这说明在欺凌、学校纪律与规范中存在内部的逻辑一致性，欺凌中的不平等关系的生产与再生产是整个学校纪律与规范体系的必然后果也是维持体系运转的必要组成，欺凌本质上是这个体系的产物。本研究发现这套体系的成立与维持根植于更广泛意义上的社会过程及意识形态，家庭、学校、社会大众对于“出路”问题的迷恋与追求为学校纪律与规范体系的运转奠定了基础，是欺凌关系生产与再生产的社会根源。
基于欺凌的发生过程，本研究首先指出空间在学校活动与欺凌行为中具有的多重意义与重要影响，超越了既有研究对空间的均一化与单一化倾向。其次，本研究回应了既有群体关系视角，通过将学校纪律规范引入到青少年群体过程之中，超越了既有研究仅仅关注青少年群体间互动的视角；再次，本研究指出了欺凌关系中的不平等根源于青少年所处的纪律与规范体系，从而摆脱了将欺凌视为个人问题与系统缺陷的病理化视角；最后，通过对于欺凌背后“出路”问题探讨，本研究提出欺凌关系的生产与再生产根植于更广泛的社会过程与意识形态。社会工作者的干预一方面需要更加细致、深入空间与群体之中，去寻找欺凌发生的细微之处；又要着眼于学校的纪律与规范体系，为那些“出路”不佳的孩子寻找新“出路”。

School bullying is a common problem in adolescent development. Researches on the cause of bullying a foundation for further intervention. Applying the Ecosystem Theory as a framework, prior researches attempt to involve factors in micro-meso-macro system and different subjected related to adolescents’ behaviors. Then theories on process are employed (developmental theory, evolutionary theory, social learning and social cognitive theory, socio-cultural theory, etc.) to explain the mechanisms between different systemic or subjects and bullying behaviors and to develop a comprehensive explanatory models. Risk or protective factors are screened and examined to provide an evidence-based basis for further intervention on the adolescents and related system by social workers or child welfare workers. However, this model has leaded to results of pathologization, with the influences of different systems and subjects being screened and examined in isolation while the researches commonly focused on observable problematic individual traits and related factors in micro-meso system. The influences of macro-system and the internal logical consistency across muti-level systems and subjects are little discussed. Secondly, this model could not explain the power inequality in school bullying, i.e. it could not offer an account on the production of unequal power relations as  social construction. Bullying is defined as a consequence of problematic individual traits or systemic dysfunctions, which in essence ignores the specific processes through which bullying occurs and further leads to the ignorance on the power inequality in school bullying and social process and context behind school bullying. This has confined the causes of school bullying to simplicity and fragmentation. Base on the specific process of school bullying, this study aims to answer three questions : first, what are the unequal power relations that exist in school bullying? Secondly, how are these power relations produced and reproduced? Thirdly, what are the social context and social processes behind the power relations?
Based on an in-depth investigation of two cases of bullying at W Secondary School, this study employs a power-technique method to analyse the production and reproduction of power relations in bullying through a lens of spatial management and difference. The space is given multiple meanings by teachers and students, reflecting the process of school discipline and norm to screening, categorizing, and shaping students’ behaviors. This process, on the one hand,  directly affects the interaction, causes the structural changes in students’ group, and products unequal relations within the group. On the other hand, discipline and norms themselves are a constant normative process, which aims to elaborately product hierarchies and power inequality. Both of them are involved in the production and reproduction of bullying, shaping the acceptance of the status quo of bullying by both bullying perpetrators and victims. This suggests that there is an internal logical consistency across bullying, school discipline and norms. The production and reproduction of unequal relationships in bullying is not only an inevitable consequence of the whole system of school discipline and norms, but also a necessary component in maintaining the system. Bullying is a necessary products of the function. This study finds that rationality and legality of this system is rooted in broader social processes and ideologies. The addiction and pursuit of a ‘prospect' by families, schools and public provide the basis for the functioning of school discipline and norms and is also the social foundation of the production and reproduction of bullying relationships.
Based on the process of bullying, this study firstly identifies the multiple meanings and importantce of space in school discipline and bullying rather than view it as homogeneous in prior researches. The second contribution is the introducing the school discipline and norms into adolescent group processes, moving beyond the perspective of focusing solely on inter-group interactions among adolescents. Finally, by exploring the discourse 'prospects' , this study suggests that the production and reproduction of bullying and unequal relationships is rooted in broader social processes and ideologies. Social workers' interventions need to be more nuanced, reaching into the subtle spaces and groups, while also considering the disciplinary and normative systems of schools to find new prospects for those children who have no ‘prospect’.