A critique of anti bullying week within schools

Bullying, the act of deliberately intimidating or persecuting those who are weaker (Oxford English Dictionary, 2002) has become a frequently used word in relation to our schools. It is a phenomenon that attracts a great deal of political and media interest and which is a high priority (if not the highest) for educational establishments to tackle.
Bullying in schools is the concern of pupils, teachers, parents and communities alike due to its wide reaching effects and potentially devastating consequences. It is difficult to tell whether there has been a significant increase in bullying over recent years or whether there is just greater awareness, either way the problem of bullying is now something everyone is alert to and encouraged to take responsibility for eradicating.
Ways in which to tackle the problem of bullying has become almost an industry in itself; a brief internet search for anti-bullying interventions will return thousands of resources offering ways in which the problem can be attended to from charities, government bodies, academics and commercial organisations. Whilst there is a vast range of interventions currently in practice in the UK, very little empirical research exists into their effectiveness.
Approaches to bullying across the education sector vary significantly, whilst all schools have been legally obliged to have an anti-bullying policy since 1999, the content and implementation is down to the school. Some measures employed by schools are explained below:
Pastoral Care: Pastoral care refers to the personal and social development of pupils. Its effectiveness is based on the relationships between education personnel and students. Examples of good pastoral care are a comprehensive induction for new starters at school, offering accessible information as to where to go for help and the allocation of a designated member of staff to whom a pupil can go to for advice (often being someone not directly involved in their academic progress).
The Bullying Box: A simple strategy where pupils can post their concerns anonymously. The school’s response to such postings are key to its success, to use a method like the bully box, pupils have to be confident in its effectiveness.
Peer Mentoring: Responsible pupils are identified and trained to act as support for the victims of bullying, this may include befriending of pupils who are new or struggling to fit in, or mediation whereby young people are trained in conflict resolution to attend to problems as they occur. This is now a widely used scheme and has received financial support from the government to enable comprehensive training programmes to be developed and accessed (Department for Children Schools and Family, 2007).
Mediation: With help of an experienced mediator the bully and the bullied talk over the situation, the victim sharing their feelings with their tormentor and the bully the reason for his/her actions. This can be very uncomfortable for both pupils, it not always easy for young people to express their feelings, and it may leave the victim feeling even more vulnerable having disclosed their emotions and, potentially, given the bully more ammunition (BullyingUK, 2008).
There are many more methods used in schools to tackle bullying, including punishment-based sanctions, their effectiveness dependent on the individual situation, the particular school and a variety of other variables. For a very small primary school serving a small, close knit community the dynamics of bullying will be different to a large inner city secondary school where anonymity is easy to achieve. For this reason a standardised approach to bullying is impossible to implement hence the national drive to highlight the problem, share solutions and involve all stakeholders in attending to the issue.
Anti-bullying week within schools was introduced as a national initiative in 2004. It was the brainchild of the Anti-bullying Alliance (www.anti-bullyingalliance.org.uk) and was created to raise awareness of bullying and promote ways in which it can be combated. Spearheaded by campaigns involving celebrities and sports personalities, the first anti-bullying week saw numerous children’s charities, schools and other concerned organisations hosting events to attend to the issue of bullying. National anti-bullying week has now become an annual event and adopts a theme each year based on current trends.
There is no doubt that anti-bullying week serves a purpose in raising awareness of bullying amongst the population but does it actually act to reduce the problem? Effective intervention must be consistently reinforced to ensure long-term effect (such arguments can be found in both behavioural and cognitive psychology where behaviour change is only successful through structured, step-by step processes which are consistently reinforced; for further reading see Grazebrook & Garland, 2005; Gross, 1996). With a lot of money, time and resources invested in the one week a year event anti-bullying week is very successful at reminding people of the consequences of bullying and the part we must all play in tackling the problem. It is less clear however how long the message lasts and whether the investment would be better spent on lower profile consistent messages throughout the year. The week-long activities and promotion of the problem may well make the victim feel empowered and supported and the bully contemplative of their actions but these positive outcomes are likely to be short lived unless consistently reinforced. It would be helpful if an evaluation of the effectiveness of anti-bullying week could be undertaken.
A single week cannot possibly attend to the array of different reasons some people bully. Anti-bullying week must recognise its limitations and must certainly steer clear of bolstering stereotypes and condoning the attachment of labels. Much of anti-bullying week looks at coping strategies for victims and consequences for bullies. It does not spend much time looking at the reasons people bully. Anti-bullying week can be seen to polarise victims and perpetrators and to use the labels ‘victim’ and ‘bully’ throughout its campaign. The roles of victim and bully are not mutually exclusive and an individual can often be both. Labelling can actually make it more difficult for people to change their behaviour and as such should be avoided.
It is clear that there is still much to be done in the campaign against bullying, one key issue being the lack of agreed definition. Whilst it initially seems easy to draw up a list of behaviours and actions that constitute bullying it is not actually that simple. Situational factors have to be taken into account and it may be that the pupil caught hitting a classmate is actually just responding to bullying behaviours from the perceived ‘victim’.
Whilst it is essential that ‘victims’ are not made to feel in anyway responsible for the bullying they are subjected to it may be possible to obviate the problem in some instances by identifying potential victims of bullying. The majority of interventions look to alter the behaviour of bullies but, in some circumstances, it may be equally effective to empower victims with the skills to confront bullies themselves (e.g. assertiveness training or cognitive behavioural therapy to attend to negative self statements etc). This is perhaps a controversial suggestion and must be treated with great sensitivity, applying the label of victim can be self-perpetuating and as destructive as the bullying itself.
The main focus of anti-bullying practice is on the social environment in which bullying occurs. More attention needs to be given to the physical environment of schools and whether they deter bullying. Schools are extremely expensive to build and therefore when demands change, we rarely have the resources to build anew, we simply adapt and extend old buildings. Bullying can often be the scourge of the opportunist and as such we have an obligation to ensure that the physical environment of schools is non-conducive to bullying.
It is clear that bullying is an age-old problem that is now recognised more and more in situations throughout a person’s life (including the workplace) and not just in the playground. Whilst it is essential that anti-bullying practice and policy remain in the public eye to ensure a continued and concerted effort to reduce the problem, it is equally important to establish the most effective methods of intervention through evidence based research. It is also essential that we remain alert to the changing dynamics of bullying (e.g. cyber-bullying) and proactive in developing new and effective measures to combat such changes.