The serious impact of bullying incidents on the physical and mental health of primary and secondary school students and campus order, as well as the obstacles to the cultivation of socialist builders and successors, were discussed. Analyzed the relevant policy documents issued by China to prevent and control campus bullying, emphasizing the importance of strengthening teacher responsibility. It is pointed out that the prevention and control of campus bullying in China is still in its infancy, and there is a gap between it and the goal of building a safe and harmonious campus. There is an urgent need for further research on macro policy regulation, school prevention and control mechanisms, teacher authority positioning, and legal responsibilities. Explored the positioning of teachers' authority in preventing and controlling campus bullying, clarified the constituent elements of corresponding legal responsibilities and exemption reasons.

1、 Theoretical basis for teachers' authority to prevent and control campus bullying

Explored the role and theoretical basis of teachers in preventing and controlling campus bullying. The role of teachers is positioned as educators, propagandists, executors, managers, coordinators, communicators, appeasers, and punishers. By imparting legal knowledge, regulating student behavior, intervening in bullying behavior in a timely manner, and coordinating home school cooperation, they prevent and stop school bullying from the source. National education policies and legal texts provide normative basis for teachers' authority to prevent and control campus bullying, such as policy documents such as the "Guiding Opinions on the Prevention and Control of Bullying and Violence among Primary and Secondary School Students", as well as provisions on teachers' obligations and rights in the "Teacher Law". At the same time, the chapter also provides theoretical clarification on the definition of the legal status of teachers, pointing out that the study of teacher authority in the context of the traditional dichotomy of rights and powers between public and private is limited, and should be understood in the context of the restoration of teachers' public attributes, breaking through the theoretical constraints of the traditional dichotomy.

2、 The practical dilemma of teachers exercising their power to prevent and control campus bullying

The practical difficulties faced by teachers in exercising their power to prevent and control campus bullying were discussed, mainly reflected in the unclear positioning of their power and incomplete legal responsibility provisions. Although the authority of teachers to prevent and control campus bullying has been confirmed in policies and laws, the specific content, boundaries, operational methods, and application principles are still unclear. The legal status of teachers is unclear, and there are differences in the academic community regarding the positioning of their powers, which leads to theoretical constraints when teachers exercise their powers and pursue legal responsibilities. Although the "Teacher Law" and the "Teacher Law (Revised Draft)" have established a special chapter on legal responsibility, there are insufficient provisions on the legal responsibility of teachers for failing to fulfill their prevention and control powers, and there are problems such as semantic ambiguity and unclear scope. In addition, the responsibility structure does not conform to the main position of civil liability advocated by the academic community, resulting in differences between the current law and the theoretical direction. These difficulties and differences are not conducive to teachers exercising their prevention and control powers, and also deviate from the purpose and value pursuit of campus bullying prevention and control work.

3、 The standardized construction of teachers' authority to prevent and control campus bullying

Discussed the construction of power norms for teachers in preventing and controlling campus bullying, including power recognition, power type classification, and legal protection. In the recognition of authority, teacher authority is divided into flexible authority and rigid authority. Flexible authority includes educating students involved, comforting bullied students, and organizing communication and coordination, while rigid authority includes disciplinary action and serious discipline. The division of powers is based on the time, scene, outcome, and fault of campus bullying, including prevention and persuasion, intervention and mediation, punishment and appeasement, etc. In terms of legal protection, emphasis is placed on the legal confirmation and procedural safeguards of teachers' authority, ensuring that the exercise of authority is on the track of the rule of law. Through procedural mechanisms such as hearings and appeals, teachers' behavior is regulated to protect the legitimate rights and interests of students.

4、 Construction of legal responsibility for teachers' failure to fulfill their authority to prevent and control campus bullying

Explored the legal responsibilities that teachers bear when they fail to fulfill their authority to prevent and control campus bullying. Legal liability includes the adverse legal consequences that teachers should bear due to illegal or breach of contract, aimed at preventing teachers from performing their duties improperly. The legal liability of teachers can be divided into three forms: civil, administrative, and criminal. Civil liability involves tort liability, administrative liability includes punishment such as warning to dismissal, and criminal liability corresponds to criminal behavior. The application principle of legal liability is to prioritize civil liability, supplement administrative liability, and extreme criminal liability. The constituent elements of a teacher's legal liability include objective incompetence, harmful consequences and causal relationships, as well as subjective intentional or negligent mentality. Exemption reasons include exemption reasons stipulated by departmental laws such as force majeure and justifiable defense, as well as special exemption reasons such as inability to perform duties due to physical reasons.