Examination of Witnesses (Questions 180-199)
MR STEVE
SINNOTT AND
PROFESSOR PETER
K SMITH
22 NOVEMBER 2006
Q180 Chairman: Do you trust schools
to do it on their own? I drew the comparison with teaching children
to read and having a system. I visited a school in Skipton on
Friday. They had circles where on a Friday afternoon the last
thing they do is pass a crystal ball and all the children talk
about what they would do if they were bullied or knew that a friend
would be bullied. I do not think that that system was invented
in the school; it is well known and used. It seemed to be a very
powerful tool especially for five to 11-year-olds because it prepares
them for knowing that bullying is inappropriate behaviour.
Mr Sinnott: Circle time is a fantastic
tool by which youngsters reveal a whole range of problems, worries
or concerns. I believe that that is an effective contribution
to teachers being able to understand what youngsters are doing.
We believe that the creation in every school of a school counsellor
is an important way to identify youngsters who need to relate
to an adult some of their concerns; or there is scope for other
youngsters who witness bullying to report it to an adult. Sometimes
a school counsellor is the appropriate person for youngsters to
turn to. I think it is important for all schools to have the resources
for a school counsellor. I think that your question had different
levels to it. I believe that the Government should give a lead
on these issues. It has done some great work on the anti-bullying
charter and a whole range of issues to do with discipline in schools,
because that is also linked with these issues. I believe that
the Government has done some terrific work in that area. We need
funding streams to assist in the proper professional development
of schools and give teachers the skills and expertise they need
to develop programmes with youngsters. I think that those measures
would help. Within local authorities there should be teams that
are able to deal with behaviour and promote good practice within
their areas. I believe that local authorities have a key role
to play. One then has the schools and their responsibility. It
is an important, key priority for schools to tackle issues to
do with behaviour but in a comprehensive way. Perhaps I may give
another example of how this should be dealt with in a comprehensive
way. I was interested in hearing the representative from the National
Autistic Society. As to bullying in relation to disability, we
believe that there is some evidence to show that if schools encourage
the employment of teachers with disabilities there is less likelihood
of that kind of bullying in those schools. Therefore, employment
practices are also important in relation to dealing with this
issue.
Q181 Mr Chaytor: I want to ask Professor
Smith about one issue on which we have not really touched: the
incidence of bullying among different social groups. In terms
of both victims and bullies, are the numbers evenly distributed
across social classes, or is there some skewing towards particular
socio-economic groups?
Professor Smith: There is not
a lot of evidence about that. My global response is that there
is not a great deal of difference; you can find bullying in any
kind of community and in any kind of school that has the wrong
ethos and approach. In the Sheffield project we compared schools
in different areas of socio-economic deprivation. There was a
modest 10% effect; in the more deprived schools rates of bullying
tended to be higher, but looking at the total the percentage is
not very great.
Q182 Chairman: There was the traditional
view—one remembers Tom Brown's School Days and Flashman—that
the classic institution where bullying took place was the public
school. Is that still the case?
Professor Smith: Public schools
have changed a lot since Tom Brown's School Days. There
is probably just as much bullying going on in public schools as
in state schools, but we do not have much evidence on it because
the DfES has not supported research in public schools, understandably.
Q183 Chairman: Flashman lives!
Professor Smith: It may well be.
Mr Sinnott: There is some evidence
from the National Consumer Council that youngsters from social
groups D and E, I believe, fear bullying in relation to clothes
and how they dress and they are more aware of logos and brands
and how they look. The fear of being bullied can be greater in
relation to one particular social class. As a result of that it
steers youngsters into a particular type of behaviour.
Q184 Mr Chaytor: Professor Smith,
in your submission you call for a substantial element of training
on bullying to be introduced into ITT. What is a "substantial
element"?
Professor Smith: Obviously, that
is open to discussion, but basically at the moment there is nothing.
Q185 Mr Chaytor: It is absolutely
zero?
Professor Smith: As far as I am
aware, yes. It may well be that there is some in-service training,
and there is quite a lot of such training going on but it is rather
haphazard. It is really a matter of chance whether one's school
or local authority provides that. I believe that many trainee
teachers and those in place feel that they would benefit from
that sort of training. We now know a lot about bullying; we have
15 or 20 years' research behind us. We know quite a lot about
the backgrounds from which bullies come. You asked about the rationale
for bullying. We know quite a lot about that and about the forms
it takes. We know quite a lot about the ways to deal with it.
None of them are perfect but a lot of them are helpful. There
is a whole range of schemes, as in the Don't Suffer in Silence
pack and others, so it is useful for teachers to be inducted into
ways of working with pupils, having peer support schemes and a
whole range of things that could be introduced.
Q186 Mr Chaytor: Mr Sinnott, your
submission does not mention ITT at all. Are you confident that
the existing arrangements work well?
Mr Sinnott: We are less than perfect.
We should perhaps have mentioned initial teacher training. I support
what Professor Smith said. We did mention in-service training
which I also regard as a very important area. In some respects
it is more important because schools can deal with that type of
training collectively. The best type of professional training
and development is often that which is done collaboratively. We
believe that this is a perfect area for collaborative training
by teachers collectively within the whole scheme.
Q187 Mr Chaytor: To go back to initial
teacher training, if the incidence of bullying is declining how
can you justify an argument which says that the initial training
on bullying should be increased?
Professor Smith: First, I think
that many teacher trainees and teachers ask for it; second, the
material is there to be provided; third, although bullying is
declining it is a modest decline and there is still a lot to do.
Bullying is still going on and we face new challenges, for example
cyberbullying where awareness-raising about the issue will be
important to everyone, including teachers.
Q188 Mr Chaytor: Mr Sinnott, on the
in-service side is there enough resource in the system to provide
adequately for the needs of continuing professional development?
Mr Sinnott: I do not think there
is. We find that access to professional development on the part
of teachers in primary schools is declining in relation to the
provision of PPA time in schools, so the opportunities for them
to go outside for professional development is declining. We think
that that is an important general issue. Specifically in relation
to professional development and training of teachers in bullying,
we believe that there needs to be separate and earmarked funding.
If we say that the first priority is to have schools where youngsters
feel safe then we think there should be a separate funding scheme
for this.
Q189 Mr Chaytor: Given all the pressures
on CPD time—at our previous inquiry into special needs the
NUT argued for more time for special needs training—where
would you place bullying in the list of priorities on a scale
of one to 10?
Mr Sinnott: Very high; we say
that it is the first priority.
Q190 Mr Chaytor: Higher than special
needs?
Mr Sinnott: Sometimes they are
connected, are they not? It is very high. It may be that different
schools have different priorities. In some schools it may be that
the priority is to deal separately with issues to do with bullying
but in another school there is a need to deal with special education
needs.
Q191 Mr Chaytor: In individual schools
do you tend to find all teachers using the same approach to bullying?
Is there a school model that all teachers are expected to follow,
or is it normal to find individual teachers using their own particular
approaches or picking from a range of different techniques according
to circumstances?
Mr Sinnott: In dealing with it
the best schools are the ones that follow a common approach, that
is, the ones that have a policy and procedures to deal with it
and undertake some in-service training maybe at school level.
The schools that deal effectively with bullying are those where
there is a consistent approach and youngsters understand what
is acceptable behaviour and what is not.
Q192 Mr Chaytor: Are you confident
that all NUT members can deal effectively with prejudice-based
bullying?
Mr Sinnott: I think we do a considerable
amount of work to raise those issues with NUT members. Are they
all effective in dealing with it? The answer must be no. We still
have more to do. The NUT has a responsibility to deal with these
issues, but so does everybody else involved in the education system:
government, local authorities, parents and youngsters themselves.
As part of any rights-based approach to these things we always
say that there is an issue of responsibility here for all those
actors but including the youngsters themselves.
Q193 Chairman: To follow that line
of reasoning, recently Lord Adonis gave evidence to us on the
question of citizenship. Evidence that we heard from others suggests
that what every school really needs is someone who is fully trained
pre-year in being the teacher in the school who leads on citizenship.
He argued that five days of continuous professional development
was not as good but it is pretty good stuff to substitute. As
we talk about bullying what is your opinion? Is this not what
should be imbedded in the whole citizenship agenda? Do you agree
that if you do citizenship training well in the school bullying
ought to be encapsulated in that?
Mr Sinnott: Yes, and we also say
that in our submission. Again, I believe that there was an under-resourcing
in the introduction of citizenship. I think there has been inadequate
access to professional development to deal with citizenship, but
citizenship within a school is not just something that goes on
in a lesson. In order for youngsters to have a school that deals
properly with citizenship it is about what they experience within
it. If youngsters in a school know that their voice is valued
and welcomed in lots of ways that is one of the best experiences
of good citizenship. If youngsters are expected to intervene appropriately
when they see bullying and are encouraged so to do that is a great
example of a school dealing effectively with citizenship.
Q194 Chairman: Do you think that
tackling bullying through citizenship is the best way? We went
to a school in Wales which had as its model a sort of Athenian
democracy—I will be criticised for this because the Athenians
did not give voting rights to women or slaves—with a forum,
a school council and real involvement by students. As Mr Sinnott
mentioned earlier, it said to us in effect that it did not have
a problem with bullying; it did not have an anti-bullying policy
because it did not arise and it was dealt with through decision.
Is that the best way to deal with it?
Professor Smith: I agree with
my colleague. Citizenship is a good way to bring in the general
issue of bullying, as long as it is not then forgotten and it
is still mentioned explicitly. Whenever I hear phrases such as
"no bullying goes on here" I greatly worry because we
know that in any situation it can happen; it is part of human
nature, as we discussed earlier. The issue then is: when it happens
are there effective procedures in place to deal with it to stop
it becoming too serious, and so on? I do not believe that citizenship
should be seen in any way as an alternative to dealing with bullying
but as a broader framework within which issues of bullying, human
rights and the sorts of things we have talked about—disability,
attitudes to minorities and so on—can be put in place. As
to the role of students, discussion of the anti-bullying policy
of the school is a way of involving pupils. Ideally, it should
be a policy developed through the school community. Ultimately,
the head teacher must have the final say, but consultation is
seen as a valuable part of that, as well as taking part in the
school council, peer support schemes and so on. There are many
ways of involving pupils directly.
Q195 Paul Holmes: Some people would
ask whether we are making too much fuss about bullying because,
as you say, it is part of human nature; it is an aspect of pack
behaviour. One sees it in packs of wolves and groups of chimps
in the jungle. There was bullying in the nineteenth century and
in the good old days of the 1930s. There was bullying when I was
in school in the sixties. Are we making too much fuss about it?
What are the long-term effects that are more serious for both
the bully and victim?
Professor Smith: I do not think
that we are taking something seriously that we should not because
it is a very serious issue. It is part of human nature; there
is always a temptation to be a bully and abuse a powerful situation.
If I can introspect, I can think of a time when I bullied someone
and when I was bullied. Probably most of us can do that, but it
is not desirable in a civilised society for that to be a prevalent
kind of behaviour. It is horrible for the victim especially if
it persists. We know of well-publicised suicides—that is
the extreme—due to bullying. For every one person who commits
suicide there must be hundreds who are having a really horrible
time at school but have not gone to the extent of taking their
lives. It can have very long-term effects. I have talked to people
in their forties and fifties and also people with disabilities.
For example, I did some work with people who stammered. Stammering
is a disability. It is very difficult to cope with bullying if
you stammer; it is difficult to respond. Immediately you start
to respond you are made fun of. These people had vivid memories
of being bullied 20 or 30 years ago sometimes, I am sorry to say,
by teachers as well as pupils. Hopefully, that has changed a lot
now.
Q196 Paul Holmes: In your written
evidence to us you give specific statistics on adults with criminal
convictions who have been identified as bullies way back when
they were eight-years-old.
Professor Smith: Of course, the
other side of it is: what happens to the people who are doing
the bullying? There is evidence about what happens if that is
not checked or changed. There is evidence from David Farrington's
work as a result of his longitudinal study of London's working-class
boys. They are more likely to have criminal convictions later
on. Studies in Norway have also shown that. I also cite a study
that we did with Cary Cooper in Manchester which found that children
who are both bullies and victims are particularly at risk. That
shows up later in the workplace.
Mr Sinnott: Nobody should go to
school with the fear at the back of his mind that he will suffer
harassment or violence as a result of gender, sexual orientation,
disability or nationality. That has real consequences for the
youngster's learning and self-image and the way in which he or
she can make a contribution to the school, or it will have an
impact throughout the individual's career and life. Therefore,
there is a responsibility on us all to tackle those things. Why
should we do it? All of the evidence shows that youngsters want
us to make this a priority. All the evidence—I quote Professor
John Macbeth—as a result of work that has been conducted
indicates that youngsters want schools to be made safe for them.
Sometimes it is the perpetrators who say those things as well.
One of the reasons they are bullying is that they feel that that
is a way of being tough and they are less likely to be bullied
and they become perpetrators.
Q197 Paul Holmes: As you said earlier,
there is bullying in the workplace as far as teachers are concerned,
or it can be in the print room of a newspaper office. It happens
everywhere and it should be dealt with everywhere.
Mr Sinnott: Perhaps I may say
something about the nature of schools. I believe that there has
been a change over the course of the past 15-20 years which is
detrimental to dealing effectively with bullying. When I was a
teacher and was asked what I taught I liked to give what I regarded
as the smart aleck remark "Children". What has changed
now is that the job of teachers has shifted away from teaching
children and teaching subjects; there is less focus on some of
the social, pastoral and emotional needs of children. We need
to tackle that. The best way to tackle it is to create space within
the schools for teachers to be able to refocus their work to look
at the wider needs of children.
Q198 Paul Holmes: I think that you
are talking in part about the pressures of the curriculum, SATS,
league tables and so on.
Mr Sinnott: Exactly.
Q199 Paul Holmes: You spoke earlier
about the need for school counsellors and so on, but the teacher
is the one who is in contact with the kids all the time and the
pay structure has shifted in recent years so that we no longer
pay people to be a head of year; we now reward only teacher learning
outcomes, not the pastoral side of things, so some schools appoint
other people to do that. Has the fact that schools have had to
move away from that side of the job been a problem in recent years?
Mr Sinnott: We resisted that because
we believed in the wider role of the teacher. There are other
people out there who have a say in these matters and who are not
supportive of our ideas in this area. We believe that that is
detrimental to our education system. To some extent we have won,
because in the shift from management allowances to teaching and
learning responsibilities there were those who wanted to have
that pastoral role undertaken by people who were not teachers.
We think that that is very damaging. We strongly believe that
the leader of pastoral issues within schools must be a teacher
well supported by others. But the Committee has had an influence
on some of these related issues in the past. Your report on special
education needs and your comments on SENCOs has had an impact
and changed the view within the DfES on these issues. There a
clear view that one did not need to be a teacher to be a SENCO.
I think that the Committee shifted the feelings on that issue.
| 
