1. Introduction
Although school violence and
convivencia escolar have become core concerns at the global level, there is not enough agreement in international literature to distinguish clearly the differences and meeting points between the two concepts.
Convivencia escolar can be defined as a form of peaceful and democratic coexistence of educational communities (
Sainz et al. 2023;
Urbina et al. 2020). On the one hand, school violence has been defined as a relationship of dominance that causes an imbalance of power (
Hernández and Saravia 2016;
Hughes et al. 2025;
Liu et al. 2025) and is associated with bullying, prejudice, discrimination, aggressive behaviors, and bodily harm in school, among others, either in person or in virtual spaces (
Ezenwosu and Uzochukwu 2025;
Moretti and Herkovits 2021;
Samara et al. 2024). When reviewing the different conceptualizations of school violence and its origins, the literature indicates that historically, it has been placed in opposition to school climate and
convivencia escolar. The English-speaking tradition has addressed the phenomenon of school climate as a preventive factor of violence, defining it as the positive or negative perception of school interactions (
Benbenishty et al. 2016;
Moore et al. 2023). On the other hand, although the concept of climate has also been addressed in Ibero-America, progress has been made regarding the concept of
convivencia escolar. Notwithstanding its development, disagreement still persists in the literature regarding a common definition (
Andrades-Moya 2020;
Fierro-Evans and Carbajal-Padilla 2019). The different research perspectives highlight that it is a complex reality whose approach involves different explanatory factors.
School violence has been linked to poverty, residential segregation, homophobia, neighborhood safety, type of school, social networks, media and family educational style, and external influences from society (
Duque-Sanchez and Teixido 2016;
Herrera-López et al. 2022;
Medina and Paredes 2021;
Puigvert Mallart et al. 2021;
Villardón-Gallego et al. 2023;
Zografova and Evtimova 2023). The
convivencia escolar construct emerged across the Latin American continent as a reaction to social violence that arose as a result of the military dictatorships during the 1990s. Thus, a conception of education for peace, citizenship, and democracy has developed based on the promotion of strata participation (
Carrasco-Aguilar et al. 2018).
The wide diversity of definitions of school violence and
convivencia escolar has repercussions for research, the formulation of educational policies, and the design of interventions (
Fierro-Evans and Carbajal-Padilla 2019), because the decisions and behaviors of educational communities are influenced by their perceptions of reality (
Andrades-Moya 2020;
Fierro-Evans 2013). In Chile, the literature has reported how
convivencia escolar policies, implemented for 20 years, have high contradictions and occur in a hybrid or dichotomous scenario between punitive and formative logics, configuring a sociopolitical context that strains both the meanings and actions of school violence and
convivencia. In the absence of clear political discourse, there is a risk of making more difficult the ability to outline and organize relevant and coherent experiences, actions, and knowledge at the school level (
Carrasco-Aguilar et al. 2018).
In the case of Chile, one of the key actors has been the Ministry of Education (Mineduc). As the ruling body of the state, it has the mission and responsibility to promote and guide the development of formal education at all levels. For this purpose, it uses different formal instruments: policies, plans, programs, and evaluation systems (
Álvarez-Sepúlveda 2023). In its task of guiding educational institutions in a sizeable and diverse country and because access to social networks has been expanding through citizenship, the Ministry of Education has chosen to disseminate information, interests, and stances in the face of certain facts and decisions through Instagram and Twitter, among other platforms (
Garrido-Cabezas et al. 2024). Studies conducted in recent years have shown the impact and influence caused by the dissemination and circulation of institutional public discourse through these media on the disposition of educational communities toward certain actions (
Jiménez 2021).
Public discourse is defined as beliefs issued by the state and its authorities and by national and transnational political organizations (
González 2007). To this end, studies on public discourse analyze the position of these bodies in the framework of critical and contextual junctures expressed in the media and social networks, which often aligns with media discourse or political discourse, whose interest lies in its impact on public perception (
Erokhin and Komendantova 2024;
Galimov et al. 2024). Thus, media and social networks shape public discourse by acting as agents of social reproduction that moderate or reconstruct society’s assumptions, meanings, and ways of acting (
Browne-Mönckeberg and Rodríguez-Pastene 2019).
1.1. School Violence and Convivencia Escolar in Public Policies in Chile
Internationally, the design and implementation of zero tolerance and violence control policies have persisted, despite the fact that they have been widely criticized due to their limited preventive impact on school life (
Cohen and Moffitt 2009;
Fierro-Evans 2013). In Latin America, these policies coexist with others promoted by
UNESCO (
2002), which has encouraged the citizenship and democratic education of students. This has led to the coexistence of multiple approaches to public policy in Latin America, including democratic, citizen security, child and youth mental health, and managerial perspectives of
convivencia escolar (
Morales and López 2019).
Particularly in Chile, the educational policy on
convivencia escolar and school violence has been dedicated to peace and nonviolence, driven by
UNESCO’s (
2002) initiatives, which sought to establish the association among
convivencia escolar, absence of violence, and a culture of peace. Based on this model, the country developed the first national school coexistence policy (
política nacional de convivencia escolar), in which
convivencia was associated with a perspective of rights with a formative approach, citizen and democratic development with ethical consistency, and an equality orientation (
Contreras et al. 2019). Subsequently and gradually, interactions in educational centers began to be regulated from laws and updates of this policy in 2011, 2015, 2019, and 2024. These changes have driven a rise of hybrid approaches to school violence and
convivencia, which feature the coexistence of punitive, formative, participatory and right-based logics. Likewise, these initiatives have sustained dynamics of bureaucratization and legalization of
convivencia, significantly affecting the actions and assumptions of educational communities (
Ascorra et al. 2019;
Carrasco-Aguilar et al. 2018;
Contreras et al. 2019).
In this sense, in recent years, studies have warned that
convivencia escolar is at risk of being represented as an ideal to be achieved, with an absence of conflicts and violence. This could have a profound impact, as it makes it harder to understand violence as a social construction with a mediating and communicative meaning, which in turn hinders its critical interpretation (
Kaplan and García 2009). Thus, it is relevant to explore the mechanisms used by the public policy to produce these effects.
1.2. The Subjective Theories Approach
Subjective theories (STs) are explanatory hypotheses built from interactions with the environment. They are composed of beliefs whose objective is to explain some aspects of the social world (
Sandoval and Cuadra 2018). The subjective nature is given by the opposition to systematically elaborated scientific theories, because they are constructed from a discourse created or transmitted by a certain community (
Catalán 2016). Thus, STs possess an argumentative structure that confers on them an explanatory quality (
Groeben and Scheele 2001) and can be expressed through different devices. Some STs are expressed publicly in socially legitimized platforms, modeling the explanations that audiences use to manage their social actions (
Semetko and Valkenburg 2000). Therefore, public discourse arguably contains STs, the analysis of which makes it possible to describe beliefs held by an organization that guides actions that are especially relevant in junctural crises. In the field of education in Chile, this is the Ministry of Education.
Considering the psychosocial consequences caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, this study may be a crucial approach to understand its extent. This is particularly significant because globally, there has been evidence of an increase in violence among peers and toward teachers since the return to face-to-face classes (
Anderman et al. 2024;
Patte et al. 2024). Chile has not been an exception, which has led the state to launch actions such as the
Seamos Comunidad (Let’s Be Community) strategy, which is part of the
Plan de Reactivación Integral Educativa (Comprehensive Educational Reactivation Plan) by the Ministry of Education (
INDH 2022). In addition, extensive media coverage of school violence has alarmed the public (
Troncoso 2022).
Studies on STs about school violence have described an interesting development in Chile. The emphasis has been mostly placed on school actors (teachers, principals, parents, and mothers) (
Retuert and Castro-Carrasco 2017). No studies have analyzed the STs of a governing body of educational policy, such as the Ministry of Education. In this context, this study analyzed the STs on school violence and
convivencia escolar in the public discourse of the Ministry of Education of Chile.
2. Methodology
This study used an inductive design of digital content analysis to analyze the STs on school violence and
convivencia in public posts issued through the Twitter account of the Ministry of Education of Chile. This type of social platform has become an important tool for the dissemination of information, interests, and positions of individuals, organizations, and social causes. Increasingly, the discourse broadcast through this channel has been used as an alternative for the public structuring of ideas and policies, among others. This social platform was chosen because in terms of violence, previous literature has shown that it is possible to access complex beliefs that promote public discourse at a systemic level, unlike other social media (
Austin et al. 2020).
The original corpus consisted of all posts published on Twitter by the Ministry of Education of Chile through its official account, @MINEDUC, during 2022—i.e., a year after the return to in-person classes in all schools in the country after the lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Likewise, in accordance with the definitions of public discourse offered in this study, the posts published on the Twitter account of the Chilean minister of education, @ProfMarcoAvila, were added to the corpus, given he was the highest authority on education.
The data collection process involved searching for posts issued by both accounts between 1 January and 31 December 2022. Then, those containing the words “violencia” (violence) and “
convivencia” (coexistence) were selected. Subsequently, posts containing the hashtag #SeamosComunidad (Let’s Be Community) were selected, because this is the national educational policy designed by the Ministry of Education aimed at addressing postpandemic school violence and
convivencia. All duplicate messages were deleted from the corpus, resulting in 66 posts: 50 tweets from @MINEDUC and 16 tweets from @ProfMarcoAvila.
Table 1 shows the number of posts identified during the search.
The selected posts were transferred to a registry table classifying their origin and date. Then, they were analyzed using grounded theory (
Flick 2020). This has been previously used for the study of STs in education, showing a wide effectiveness (
Caamaño-Vega et al. 2023). Grounded theory is oriented toward constructing theoretical categories from empirical data, without starting from a pre-established conceptual framework. This approach is characterized by an inductive, iterative, and comparative inquiry, which allows building substantial understanding in specific contexts. First, open coding was carried out: It began with a detailed reading of each post, identifying text segments with relevant meanings. These fragments were converted into initial codes that attempt to capture the essence of what was expressed, using descriptive labels close to the original text. This phase was exploratory and sought to maintain an analytic openness. Second, a constant comparison was made between fragments: As new posts were coded, they were compared with the previous ones, assessing whether they fit into existing codes or whether they required new codes. This practice of comparing each unit of analysis with others allowed for refining conceptual precision and capturing the variety and recurrence of meanings. Third, we moved toward grouping content into emergent categories. Codes were organized into broader categories, representing interpretative dimensions or thematic axes relevant to the study objectives. These categories were not assigned beforehand but emerged from the analysis, therefore maintaining a direct relationship with the data. These categories represented the STs that this study analyzed.
The analysis process was iterative because each time a new post was added, an assessment is made as to whether the STs adequately covered it or should be reformulated, subdivided, or expanded. This dynamism ensured that the STs were indeed supported by evidence. Finally, an axial coding process was carried out in which the STs were grouped into interpretative sets that shared a common explanatory orientation, allowing the identification of three major articulating axes of public discourse: (a) Although violence comes from outside, the schools must eradicate it; (b) educational policy works when schools implement what experts design; and (c) because the mental health of students has been damaged, the schools must implement measures to contain or repair the effects of violence.
Because these were public posts, the informed consent of the ministry or its minister was not required, although safeguards have been considered in this regard, such as omitting the names of schools and individuals, whenever appropriate.
In this article, the Results Section outlines the findings of the interpretative analyses accompanied by STs that have been grouped, along with sample tweets.
This study is situated within the interpretive paradigm (
Flick 2023). In line with this approach, the aim of the research process is to interpret the meanings present in the discourses of individuals, collectives, or documents. Thus, by analyzing the implicit and explicit subjective theories within messages communicated through the media, the research entails an act of double hermeneutics (
Bruhn-Jensen 2018). In this work, the researchers interpreted the subjective theories of the corpus from a position that acknowledges the coexistence of diverse explanations—both in the everyday discourse of society and in the educational literature—regarding
convivencia escolar (
Fierro-Evans and Carbajal-Padilla 2019) and school violence. This diversity of perspectives reflects different ways of understanding and addressing these phenomena.
Furthermore, we recognize that our professional and academic trajectories in the fields of education, psychology, and the social sciences shape the lens through which we approached this analysis. Our longstanding involvement in the study of convivencia escolar, school violence, and educational policies in Latin America informs both the selection of this topic and the interpretation of the data. By making this positionality explicit, we aim to provide transparency about the perspectives guiding our work and to strengthen the legitimacy of the study’s findings.
4. Discussion
The objective of this research was to analyze STs on school violence and
convivencia escolar present in the public discourse of the Ministry of Education of Chile. The analysis of tweets published during 2022 showed the coexistence of multiple STs that configured a dual representation of the phenomenon of school violence. On the one hand, they expressed structural social problems that surpassed the school level; on the other hand, they constructed school violence as a direct threat to the educational system that must be managed and eradicated from schools. This tension was expressed in a call to promote legal measures, thus framing educational action in a judicial approach. The first interpretative set of STs located the causes of violence outside the school space and aligned with previous research that explained school violence as a manifestation of macro social factors (
Herrera-López et al. 2022;
Medina and Paredes 2021;
Zografova and Evtimova 2023). However, the institutional emphasis on school intervention as the main suppression strategy strains this structural approach, shifting action to the institutional level with little problematization of the conditions that cause it. Likewise, the STs identified were mostly based on a definition of school violence centered on its physical or explicit dimension, mainly associated with events of interpersonal aggression. Although hinting at the existence of structural violence, the public discourse of Mineduc tended to omit other forms of violence recognized by critical research, such as symbolic or institutional violence (
Knoblauch and de Medeiros 2022;
Ngobeni et al. 2023;
Nogueira and Resende 2022). This conceptual limitation restricts the understanding of the phenomenon by focusing interventions on its visible expressions, weakly addressing the deeper mechanisms of exclusion and inequality that operate in school contexts.
In contrast, other STs presented
convivencia escolar as a significant component of educational development, especially associated with the strengthening of socioemotional skills. This association appeared to reflect efforts to improve the well-being of students and school communities. However, these STs did not explicitly link
convivencia escolar and school violence, contrasting with research that has highlighted this relationship (
Benbenishty et al. 2016;
Moore et al. 2023). Nor was there a clear discursive construction in the corpus that articulated
convivencia escolar with democratic principles or values such as participation, respect, or justice, as proposed by other scholars (
Ochoa Cervantes and Pérez Galván 2019;
Sainz et al. 2023;
Urbina et al. 2020). The public discourse described the pandemic as a factor that increased both school violence and
convivencia problems, highlighting that returning to in-person classes is important to rebuild
convivencia and positive relationships at school. This reinforced an ST that linked the improvement of
convivencia escolar with the return to in-person classes, valuing face-to-face school interactions as necessary for educational well-being.
Another set of STs suggested that the Ministry of Education prioritizes the voice of experts in addressing
convivencia escolar, excluding educational communities. These STs showed that the development of effective programs to address violence and strengthen
convivencia was associated with the validation of expert knowledge and technical design of solutions from key points, outlining a prescriptive approach to educational policy. Thus, the idea that the improvement of
convivencia escolar, associated in the discourse with face-to-face and positive interactions, must be managed through standardized programs defined by specialists was reinforced. In this sense, as the literature has warned (
Andrades-Moya 2020;
Fierro-Evans 2013;
Fierro-Evans and Carbajal-Padilla 2019), the definitions of
convivencia escolar that circulate in the public discourse have conditioned the type of educational intervention that is considered legitimate—in this case, with a low protagonism of school communities.
Nonetheless, the results of this study show that Mineduc has recognized in some tweets the need to adapt educational policy to the reality of schools, which suggests the coexistence of a more flexible dimension in a predominantly prescriptive discourse. This could reflect a hybrid way of operating, in line with the literature on Chilean policies in this area (
Ascorra et al. 2019;
López et al. 2014). Considering these findings, questions arise about the role that schools can play in the autonomous and critical definition of their own forms of action and the complexity involved in designing national policies while school communities are expected to interpret f the meaning of school violence and
convivencia in their contexts (
Kaplan and García 2009).
Finally, the third set of STs attributed the origin of mental health disorders to out-of-school social factors, even when their expression becomes visible at the individual and community level in schools. From this perspective, the school is understood as a context of manifestation and not creation—one of discomfort—so its response consists of modifying contextual conditions such as making the school day more flexible. These STs reinforced the logic already observed in the first set of STs: Phenomena that supposedly emerge outside the educational centers end up being managed from the schools. This pattern aligns with previous findings on the STs of teachers and principals, who also tend to attribute the causes of school violence to factors outside the schools (
Retuert and Castro-Carrasco 2017).
Although this study did not directly inquire about STs present in educational communities, it is worth asking to what extent the public discourse of Mineduc could influence its explanatory arguments. The analyzed STs moved away from more classical definitions of
convivencia escolar present in schools, so it is possible that the ministry’s posts also seek to influence public perception of the phenomenon, validating the need for educational policies implemented after the return to face-to-face classes (
Austin et al. 2020;
INDH 2022). In this framework, institutional communication on Twitter not only informs short-term actions but could also act as a mobilizing device for shared common sense, facilitating adherence to the proposed interventions.
This study focused exclusively on analysis of the public discourse of the Ministry of Education on Twitter during 2022, so its results do not allow the establishment of direct links with STs present in educational communities. Moreover, because the corpus was limited to a specific social network, the identified STs reflect a discursive construction mediated by the logics of this digital platform. Given these limitations, future research could comparatively explore the STs of public discourse and present among school actors such as teachers, principals, students, and families, considering different territorial and contextual scales. It would also be relevant to study how these STs circulate and are debated or reinterpreted in deliberative spaces in schools, along with the role of other communication devices of the state in the configuration of meaning regarding school violence and convivencia escolar.
5. Conclusions
This study highlights the role of public media as a strategic channel through which the Chilean Ministry of Education communicates and legitimizes its views on school violence and
convivencia escolar. The analysis shows that institutional discourse not only informs but also seeks to shape educational common sense, validate policies, and mobilize social support around specific interventions. The findings suggest that public communication by government authorities has become a central mechanism for addressing post-pandemic challenges in education, positioning social media as tools for policy dissemination and symbolic regulation. This trend aligns with international experiences where ministries of education and other public institutions have used digital media to frame social problems and propose solutions (
Austin et al. 2020;
Erokhin and Komendantova 2024).
From our perspective, this institutional strategy presents a double edge. On the one hand, it contributes to raising public awareness and generating shared discourses around urgent issues. On the other, it risks reducing the interpretive autonomy of educational communities by prescribing top-down frameworks and excluding other forms of knowledge, such as the experiences of teachers, students, and families.
Different researchers (
Ascorra et al. 2019;
Carrasco-Aguilar et al. 2018;
Benbenishty et al. 2016;
Moore et al. 2023) have warned that policies on
convivencia escolar are most effective when they integrate participatory logics and address structural forms of violence. As authors of this article, we believe that while the Ministry’s discourse advances relevant initiatives to promote
convivencia escolar, it remains insufficient to articulate a more democratic and inclusive approach that strengthens the agency of educational communities.
In conclusion, analyzing public discourse on social media makes it possible to understand how educational policies are not only designed but also symbolically constructed and legitimized. Future policies should balance the necessary technical and expert guidance with greater recognition of the voices and contextual knowledge of school actors. Only in this way will it be possible to build sustainable strategies to address school violence and promote convivencia escolar as a democratic and participatory process.