# Experts’ subjective theories: how did they explain post-pandemic school violence in their public discourse through digital media?

## TL;DR

This study explores how experts explain the rise in school violence after the pandemic through their public discussions on digital media.

## Contribution

It introduces three subjective theories (social, educational, psychological) that explain post-pandemic school violence and its implications.

## Key findings

- Three macro-level theories explain causes and interventions for post-pandemic school violence.
- Expert discourses shape public agendas and assign responsibility for addressing school violence.
- The theories highlight social inequality, mental health, and institutional issues as key factors.

## Abstract

In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, public communications have reported a rise in school violence. This study seeks to understand the collective subjective theories in the public discourse of experts on school violence after educational confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, it aims at understanding the causes, effects, intervention strategies and contextual conditions associated with the challenges of school violence.

Drawing on a documentary research design and qualitative methodology, we reconstructed subjective theories based on 109 public discourses on YouTube and Google News, by professionals in education, psychology, and other fields.

Three macro-level subjective theories were identified: Social subjective theory, Educational subjective theory, and Psychological subjective theory. These offer different explanations of the causes of violence, its consequences, and appropriate intervention strategies. Social Subjective Theory emphasizes exclusion, inequality, and systemic abandonment. Psychological Subjective Theory focuses on the deterioration of students’ mental health and emotional distress. Educational Subjective Theory highlights institutional fragmentation and policy contradictions.

The findings reveal that expert discourses, besides describing the problem, shape public agendas, justify interventions, and allocate responsibility. The study highlights the public role of expert knowledge in moments of micro and macro-level institutional uncertainty, showing how subjective theories function as interpretive frameworks of educational issues.