Memorandum submitted by The British Psychological
Society
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
— More sensitive definitions of bullying
may be needed to ensure that indirect aggression or relational
bullying are reported, particularly in the light of an increase
in cyber-bullying.
— Schools should be encouraged to use
systematic assessment procedures, including peer and self reports,
to collect more accurate figures for the incidence of bullying.
— Being a victim of bullying is associated
with poor physical and mental health and many adults report long
term effects. Children who bully are also at an increased risk
of depression and may be at a high risk of later criminal convictions.
— Research evidence suggests that children
from ethnic minority groups and young people attracted to others
of the same sex are at higher risk of bullying than others.
— Procedures to tackle bullying need
to be implemented thoroughly and consistently throughout the school
community. Parents should be involved in policy formulation and
review and should be given information about the school's anti-bullying
policy.
— Schools need to have clearly defined
and articulated procedures and policies for dealing with racism
and homophobia embedded within bullying policies.
— Where there are unresolved issues
relating to bullying, we would support the development of a personalised
anti-bullying plans with clear review procedures.
— Educational psychologists are well
placed to provide an understanding of the impact of bullying and
lead developments in local authorities.
SUBMISSION
1.1 The British Psychological Society welcomes
the opportunity to submit information to the Committee's inquiry
into Bullying. The British Psychological Society is the learned
and professional body, incorporated by Royal Charter, for psychologists
in the United Kingdom. The Society has a total membership of over
42,000 and is a registered charity.
1.2 The key Charter object of the Society
is "to promote the advancement and diffusion of the knowledge
of psychology pure and applied and especially to promote the efficiency
and usefulness of members by setting up a high standard of professional
education and knowledge".
1.3 The Society is authorised under its
Royal Charter to maintain the Register of Chartered Psychologists.
It has a code of conduct and investigatory and disciplinary systems
in place to consider complaints of professional misconduct relating
to its members. The Society is an examining body granting certificates
and diplomas in specialist areas of professional applied psychology.
It also has in place quality assurance programmes for accrediting
both undergraduate and postgraduate university degree courses.
1.4 This submission is based upon evidence
provided by the Division of Educational and Child Psychology (DECP).
Educational and child psychologists work with children from 0-19
across all areas of disability. They are concerned with the application
of psychological research and theory to the enhancement of children's
learning, psychological well-being and development. They have
skills in psychological and educational assessment, intervention
techniques and methods for helping children and young people who
are experiencing difficulties in learning or social adjustment.
1.5 Educational psychologists collaborate
with other key professionals in the early identification of difficulties
a child or young person may be experiencing and through psychological
assessment and intervention. In particular, Educational Psychologists
work closely with other colleagues in education (for example educational
welfare officers and behaviour support and pupil development staff),
as well as other professionals in agencies like social services
and the health service.
1.6 Uniquely, educational psychologists
are trained and have responsibilities and involvement in every
phase of education, including early years work, thus allowing
them to see the long-term impact of government decisions relating
to bullying. Educational psychologists also inform social and
educational policy within local authorities in relation to children's
well-being, learning and development and centre their work around
multi-agency assessments and interventions. Their professional
knowledge base is founded upon day-to-day practices, a clearly
articulated working knowledge of psychological theory and research,
and a strategic perspective which illuminates both strengths and
weakness of the past and current policies and practices relating
to children's social and emotional development and responses to
bullying.
1.7 Bullying has been an issue of widespread
concern worldwide for many decades. A vast number of studies contribute
towards outlining the nature of bullying and the problems it causes
(Rigby, 2002; Thompson et al., 2002; Smith, 2004). Bullying
is a social phenomenon which results in a person being psychologically
harmed. Usually, the act of harming is deliberate and results
in a person's personal identity being eroded and diminished. Unfortunately,
the psychological impact of bullying is often underestimated.
EXTENT AND
NATURE OF
THE PROBLEM
How bullying should be defined
2.1 Many studies outline the nature of bullying,
yet there is no universal agreed definition of bullying or methods
to assess it (see Arora, 1996; Smith, Cowie, Olafsson, & Liefooghe,
2002 for a review). Thus, the rate of prevalence reported in studies
of victimization and bullying behaviour is in part dependent on
the type of definition used. Early work on bullying focused on
physical bullying referring to group violence or direct verbal
taunting (Olweus, 1978). Subsequent studies have distinguished
between direct and indirect aggression. For example, a study done
in Finland by Bjrkqvist, Lagerspetz, & Kaukiainen (1992) distinguished
between direct physical aggression (such as punching), direct
verbal aggression (including name calling), and indirect aggression.
Indirect aggression is of a covert nature where there may be use
of third parties in order, for example, to spread nasty rumours
to socially exclude individuals. This has also been termed relational
bullying where the bully deliberately targets the victim's relationships
and attempts to exclude them from membership of a social group
(Crick, Casas, & Mosher, 1997; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995;
1996; Rivers & Smith, 1994). Relational bullying has been
defined by Crick and Grotpeter (1995) as the hurtful manipulation
of peer relationships/friendships that inflicts harm on others
through behaviours such as "social exclusion" and "malicious
rumour spreading". If not specifically prompted to consider
other types of bullying children are more likely to restrict their
interpretations to incidences of direct bullying (Naylor, Cowie,
and Cossin, 2006).
2.2 Nevertheless the most widely used definition
of bullying is that developed by Olweus (1989, 1993, 1999) and
slightly extended by Whitney and Smith (1993, p 7).
"We say a child or young person is being
bullied, or picked on when another child or young person, or a
group of children or young people, say nasty and unpleasant things
to him or her. It is also bullying when a child or a young person
is hit, kicked, threatened, locked inside a room, sent nasty notes,
when no-one ever talks to them and things like that. These things
can happen frequently and it is difficult for the child or the
young person being bullied to defend himself or herself. It is
also bullying when a child or young person is teased repeatedly
in a nasty way. But it is not bullying when two children or young
people of about the same strength have the odd fight or quarrel".
2.3 Definitions such as that used by Olweus
(1999) strongly emphasise direct bullying and aggressive actions.
Research reports looking at interactions between gender and forms
of bullying suggest that more sensitive definitions maybe required
for children to reports on female forms of bullying or more indirect
forms of bullying (Owen, Slee, & Shute, 2001). This may be
of particular importance in the light of an increase in cyber-bullying
eg using emails and mobile phones to socially isolate children
(Smith, Mahdavi, Carvalho & Tippett, 2006). For instance,
Charlton (2002) found that nearly half of her sample of 351 primary
school children had mobile phones and of those 11% admitted to
receiving either a rude message or a threat. Oliver and Canappa
(2002) report that 4% of Year 8 pupils received nasty text messages
and 2% nasty e-mail messages.
The extent and nature of the problem of bullying
in schools
3.1 Prevalence rates vary according to the
method used to assess bullying and victimisation. Five methods
are commonly used: 1) children's self-reports (or adult retrospective
reports), 2) teacher reports, 3) observational studies, 4) parental
interviews/reports, and 5) peer nominations. The most commonly
used method of assessing victimisation is from self-report (eg,
Wolke, Woods, Bloomfield, & Karstadt, 2000). These are most
frequently based on questionnaires but may involve interviews.
Self-report measures ask youngsters themselves to report whether
they have been victimized or bully others. Using self report measures
the prevalence of both physical and verbal victimization combined,
in primary schools has been estimated to range from 8% to 46%
(Smith & Shu, 2000; Wolke & Stanford, 1999; Wolke, Woods,
Stanford & Schulz, 2001). In the UK, Whitney, Rivers, Smith
and Sharp (1994) found that lower proportions of pupils were self-reporting
victimization in secondary schools than in primary schools (20%
as opposed to 46%). Slightly lower rates of self reported victimization
and bullying were also found in Norway at secondary school level
(Solberg & Olweus, 2003). Recent research indicates that a
proportion of victims are also bullies at other times, ranging
from 1% to 19% in primary and secondary schools (see Eslea, Menesini,
Morita, O'Moore, Mora-Merchan, Pereira & Smith, 2003 for a
review).
3.2 Self-reports tend to result in higher
estimates of victimization than peer ratings (eg, see Graham &
Juvonen, 1998; Osterman et al., 1994) and there is a suggestion
that self-report maybe overestimated due to "paranoid' reports
of victimization (Graham & Junoven, 1998). More recent studies
have used peer nomination procedures where children name classmates
who fit behavioural descriptions of victimization (eg, Alsaker
& Valkanover, 2001; Boulton & Smith, 1994; Egan &
Perry, 1998; Graham & Juvonen, 1998; Perry et al.,
1988; Ladd & Kochenderfer-Ladd, 2002). Peer assessments can
be administered quickly to a whole class group, increasing reliability
through the increased number of opinions received on any one child,
even when a single item-scale is used (Naylor, Cowie & Del
Rey, 2001; Salmivalli, 1998). The advantages associated with peer
reports have meant that they have become an increasingly commonly
used method of investigation in research studies.
3.3 When spontaneous self reporting of bullying,
as opposed to self report through use of assessment instruments
other factors may influence whether a student reports being bullied.
For example, Unnever & Connell (2004) report when surveying
2, 437 students in USA middle schools that 25% of victims said
that they had not told anyone that they were being bullied and
40% had not told an adult. The chances of reporting were increased
as chronicity of victimization increased, if the child was female
and if they were younger. Reporting was less likely when the child
perceived the school climate as tolerant of bullying and the home
environment as using coercive discipline.
3.4 When surveys distinguish between bullying
that has been short term (for a few months) and long-term (more
than one year), it is found that the incidence of the latter in
secondary schools is between 4-8%; in large schools this adds
up to a large number of children (Thompson et al, 2002).
It is likely that relying on figures from schools on the number
of pupils who seek help for bullying from staff members, or on
teacher estimates of bullying are likely to underestimate prevalence.
Schools should be encouraged to use systematic assessment procedures,
particularly those involving peers as well as self report, on
a whole school basis annually. Pellegrini and Bartini (2000) recommend
that ideally multiple informants should be used so that peer,
self and teacher are involved and parent views sought.
3.5 The main problem in asking pupils whether
they have been bullied is that their definition of bullying may
vary, so accurate figures are difficult to obtain. In order to
address this, Arora (1999) devised a Bullying Index based on pupils'
definitions, which has been widely used in British schools and
abroad. The prime use of the "Life in School" checklist
is self-monitoring by schools over successive years of the effectiveness
of their anti-bullying policies. One Junior school has consistently
used this method for their annual survey of bullying over a period
of 12 years and has managed to reduce bullying in their school
as a result of this monitoring.
The Extent of homophobic and racist bullying
4.1 Globally there has been very little
research looking at ethnic variables in the context of bullying
or victimization risks. There is evidence that children from ethnic
minority groups are at a much higher risk of being bullied than
others. Testimonies from 7,066 teenagers who had taken part in
media-based surveys suggested that 12 to 13% had experienced severe
bullying, but this rose to 25% for children from ethnic minority
groups (Katz et al, 2001). Racial bullying generally takes
the form of placing an individual in a category and then insulting
them. The insult then is not only directed at them, but at all
those with whom they share similar characteristics, which generally
includes their family and friends. Most incidents of racial bullying
take place within an institution for example a school, hospital,
or a place of work. The context is important, because in many
respects it becomes the barrier to identifying and addressing
the problem. In part, difficulties arise because of the reluctance
of many institutions to accept that this behaviour is occurring
within their portals. Thus many institutions fail to recognise
that there is a clear relationship between individualised racial
bullying and institutional racial bullying. Small-scale studies
undertaken by teachers in the central region in the mid 1990's
highlighted that racial bullying began at quite an early stage
and in Primary Schools a "Them and us" culture had already
been established (Gillborn, 1995).
4.2 Similarly, very little research has
been conducted into homophobic bullying in schools. Homophobic
bullying is often not what it appears to be, in schools at least.
The word "gay" is often used as a general epithet meaning
"weak" and not confirming to the usual "macho"
standards of behaviour expected from adolescent boys. Used like
this, it does not suggest that the victim has any homosexual tendencies
in the real sense (Duncan, 1999). However there is evidence that
young people who see themselves as "gay" suffer from
bullying more frequently than those who identify themselves with
the heterosexual majority (Rivers, 2000c). A review by Warwick
et al (2004) found estimates of 30 to 50% of young people attracted
to others of the same sex in secondary schools having experienced
homophobic bullying; 82% of teachers were aware of verbal homophobic
bullying and 26% of physical homophobic incidents. Ellis and High
(2004) reported that about 31% of respondents indicated teasing,
37% had been verbally abused and 15% had been physically assaulted.
The results of studies in the UK, focusing on the experiences
of a sample of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people who were
victimized by their peers at school because of their actual or
perceived sexual orientation has identified some of the long lasting
problems associated with bullying (Rivers 1995a, b; 1996; 2000a,b;
2001). The results suggested that participants' experiences of
victimization at school were both long-term (mean duration of
five years), and systematic, and were perpetrated by groups of
peers rather than by individuals. Significant gender differences
were also found with lesbian and bisexual women reporting far
more incidents of indirect and relational aggression when compared
to gay and bisexual men. Data would suggest that in the intervening
twenty years, homophobic bullying has increased rather than decreased.
4.3 A UK study by Clarke, Kitzinger, &
Potter (2004) interviewed gay parents on children's experiences
of bullying. A particularly prominent concern of parents was a
fear of reporting bullying to schools or authorities due to raising
issues of bad parenting or accountability.
Why some people become bullies and why some people
are bullied
5.1 There is considerable debate about the
reasons why some people are more likely to be bullied or at greater
risk of victimization than others. It has been found in some studies
that victims have significantly greater social skills problems
compared to non-victims, whether rated by peers or by teachers
(Fox & Boulton, 2005). Egan and Perry (1998) investigated
poor social skills as a mediator for reduced self-concept in victims
at primary school age and found a child's self-perceived social
competence was significantly linked to self-regard both of which
mediated a greater risk of victimization in these children (Egan
& Perry, 1998).
5.2 Higher levels of bullying and victimization
of pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN) are increasingly
being reported. This is the case whether victimization is assessed
through pupil self report, peer report or teacher report (Nabuzoka
& Smith, 1993; Whitney, Smith, & Thompson, 1994). Whitney
et al. (1994) found that the proportions of pupils with
SEN that self-reported victimization were similar for both primary
and secondary school age (59% in secondary and 63% in primary).
In contrast, non-SEN children showed a decline in victimization
with age. Furthermore De Monchy et al. (2004) report data
from peers and teachers which suggest that primary school teachers
substantially underestimate the extent to which pupils with SEN
are victimized in school. Thompson, Whitney, and Smith (1994)
identified two possible reasons for the higher incidence of victimization
among pupils who have SEN: these pupils are different from others
in noticeable ways that may provide a focus for teasing and bullying
and/or they have fewer friends and so are less well integrated
and protected.
5.3 Friendship and social status have been
another area where evidence suggests both a protective factor
and a risk factor. Victims are often at greater "social risk"
as they lack supportive friends at school and tend to be more
rejected by their peers (Hodges, Malone & Perry, 1997; Ladd,
Kochenderfer & Coleman, 1997). However, profiling of secondary
pupils has shown that children that continue to be victimized,
irrespective of gender, also became more likely to be involved
in bullying others (Smith, Talamelli, Cowie, Naylor, & Chauhan,
2004). It has also been traditionally argued that bullies are
socially unskilled (Hazler, 1996; Randall, 1997). However, more
recent studies challenge this assumption. Kaukiainen et al.,
(2002) found that 11-12-year-old bullies tended to fall into two
groups; socially skilled and socially unskilled. Similar findings
had also been reported some years previously in 7-10-year-old
children (Sutton, Smith & Swettenham, 1999).
5.4 Bullies may also share certain personality
characteristics such as being generally more aggressive. They
may come from home backgrounds with generally less affection,
more violence and low parental monitoring and where they are exposed
to models of parenting that generally encourage aggression and
bullying as a means to achieving power (Olweus, 1999). The literature
suggests that there are various individual characteristics commonly
found in bullies such as a tendency to perceive behavior as provocative
(when non-bullies would place a neutral interpretation on it),
a need to appear tough in the peer group, a fear of being bullied,
little awareness of other's feelings (Boulton & Underwood,
1992) and possibly low levels of anxiety or guilt (Hawker &
Boulton, 2000; Smith & Sharp, 1994).
SHORT AND
LONG-TERM
EFFECTS
The effect of bullying on academic achievement,
physical and mental health, and social and emotional wellbeing
6.1 Links between poor attainment outcomes at
school and persistent self-reported victimization by peers have
been found in western countries at primary school age (Juvonen,
Nishina, & Graham, 2000; Kochenderfer & Ladd, 1996), and
secondary school age level (Sharp,1995). Rigby (1999) examined
the relationship between peer victimisation and physical and mental
health levels in children at secondary school using a longitudinal
study. It was found that the degree of reported victimisation
in early years of secondary schooling predicted poor physical
health of children (both boys and girls) 2 years later, and poor
mental health for girls.
6.2 Being bullied has been linked with low
self-esteem, anxiety, impaired concentration, truancy, depression
and suicidal thoughts. Hawker and Boulton (2000) carried out a
meta-analysis of all cross-sectional studies published between
1987 and 1997 and found that victims of bullying experience more
negative feelings, and thoughts about themselves than their non-bullied
peers. This was the case for both sexes, in all age groups and
from diverse population.
6.3 Reid (1989) investigated reasons for
truancy and found that 15% of persistent truants said they had
stayed away from school initially because of being bullied and
19% continued to stay away from school because of this.
Whether and how the effects of being bullied persist
into adult life
7.1 Hugh-Jones & Smith (1999) used retrospective
studies from adults that suffered stuttering at school age to
determine long-term effects. The majority of these adults reported
being victimized as children. The majority reported immediate
negative effects from being victimised with also 46% reporting
long-term effects of being bullied. More detailed analysis showed
that long term effects were predicted by severity of bullying
and the protective effects of factors such as friendship making.
The effect of bullying on those who bully
8.1 Not many studies have appeared on the
effects of bullying on those who bully. A large study in Finland
of more than 16,000 teenagers found that children who bully are
at an increased risk of depression, to the same extent as victims
of bullying. Suicidal thoughts, moreover, occurred more amongst
those who bully (Kaltiala-Heino et al. 1999). Children
who bully may be at a high risk of criminal convictions in later
life: 25% of adults identified by peers at age 8 as "bullies"
had criminal records, as opposed to 5% who hade not been identified
as such (Olweus, 1993).
TACKLING THE
PROBLEM
How schools deal with bullying
9.1 Studies may target the victimized child
(eg by trying to improve aspects such as assertiveness), attempt
to change in the bullies behaviour or work with the peer group
to reduce bystander and supporter behaviour that create a permissive
attitude towards bullying (Cowie & Sharp, 1994; Pepler et
al., 1994; Salmivalli, 1999; Salmivalli et al., 1996;
Stevens, Van Oost, & De Bourdeaudhuij, 2000; Sutton &
Smith, 1999). Other studies have focused on school policy issues.
For example, Adams, Cox & Dunstan (2004) reported that out
of 19 schools surveyed in the UK none of them specifically mentioned
sexual orientation in the anti-bullying policies. Adams et
al., suggest that raising awareness of homophobic bullying
and informing whole-school development on such issues is needed.
9.2 School based bullying intervention programmes
have been carried out in various countries worldwide, with mixed
findings. The first large-scale Norwegian intervention project,
in Bergen (Olweus, 1991), was the most successful with reductions
in victimization and bullying rates of 50% or more and in other
measures of antisocial behaviour, and an increase in children
reporting feeling more satisfied at school. Despite the success
of the original Norwegian study only one intervention programme
(Ortega & Lera, 2000), carried out in Seville, Spain, has
reported comparable declines in bulling behaviour (a change of
57%). Most studies that have used the school based approach have
reported more moderate effects. For instance, Whitney et al.,
(1994) reported that victimization decreased by 14% in primary
schools with a 7% reduction in secondary schools. In addition
to these more modest intervention effects there are some studies
that report few positive outcomes (eg, Pepler et al., 1994)
and others that report possible negative effects (eg Munthe, 1989;
Whitaker, Rosenbluth, Valle & Sanchez, 2004). More longitudinal
designs with follow-up evaluation are required to further identify
long-term as well as short-term effects of such programmes (Pepler,
Smith, Rigby, 2004).
9.3 Successful programmes in schools are
characterised by high involvement by both staff and pupils, by
an emphasis on addressing the problem at an individual, group
and whole school level, by a system of sanctions as well as encouragement
of prosocial behaviour and by an emphasis on trusting and respectful
relationships both between pupils and between pupils and staff
(Olweus 1993, Arora, 1994). One difficulty for schools is that
having an anti-bullying policy is just one of a continuous series
of initiatives that need their involvement and attention. Even
when a school has put an anti-bullying policy in place, regular
reviews soon cease to be a priority and often disappear altogether
(Thompson, 2004).
9.4 One type of initiative that has had
positive impact is when LAs (now Children's Services) have been
the prime movers in trying to reduce bullying in their schools.
An example of this is Derbyshire's ABC Scheme, which involves
more than 200 schools who work towards a series of indicators
leading to awards. An evaluation of this suggested that the scheme
helped to create a safe environment in which pupils would "tell"
and that bullying had been reduced in a large number of schools
(Gibson, 2003).
How parents can help if their children are being
bullied or are bullying others
10.1 Parents can help their own children
to develop social skills and confidence, by encouraging their
children to express their own needs appropriately without hurting
others with whom they come into contact. Social learning such
as this, is just as relevant at home as it is at school (Randall
1996). Many children don't tell their parents that they are being
bullied, so parents need to take the possibility of their child
being bullied into account if there are signs such as regular
loss of pocket money or dinner money, torn clothes, unexplained
upset, truancy, reluctance to go to school or other, sudden, negative
changes in behaviour (Besag, 1989).
10.2 Parents have key role to play in protecting
not just their own children but other children who they might
hear are the victims of bullying. It is important for schools
to create a facility where parents can have immediate access to
a highly trained professional who understands the signs and symptoms
of bullying, the nature of psychological harm and what action
should be undertaken. As well as skilled school staff, parents
should be made aware of the availability of an educational psychologist,
an education welfare officer or Parent Partnership services. Parents
should be given information about the school's anti-bullying policy,
and kept informed about how their child is being helped as well
as agreeing dates to review the situation. If they hear that the
bullying continues or commences again after a period of time,
they should be encouraged to contact the school immediately (Thompson
et al, 2002). This will avoid a scenario in which the school
staff assume that the bullying has stopped, when it is still happening.
10.3 As part of an anti-bullying strategy
(across all age groups, educational settings and Children's Services)
it is critical that parents are provided with accurate up-dated
information about bullying, its signs and symptoms and what they
can do to help their child (or another person's child). In building
confidence for parents to approach an educational setting, information
and support should be provided to enable parents to remain calm,
whilst keeping a record of events and actions to inform and facilitate
intervention.
10.4 It would be appropriate to have a specific
"anti-bullying" personalised learning plan for students
where there appears to be an unresolved issue relating to bullying.
The British Psychological Society would support the development
of a targeted process where the parents and child would participate
fully in the construction of the anti-bullying plan with clear
review procedure. Parent Partnership organisations can go a long
way in coordinating strategic responses to patterns of bullying
across a local authority, and by working collaboratively with
educational settings and other services ensure that the experiences
of parents contribute to the overall policy.
What support and guidance the DfES provides to
schools and to those affect by bullying, and how effective they
are.
11.1 For more than a decade, the Government
has taken serious steps to try to reduce bullying. The initial
DfEE publication called Don't Suffer in Silence (DfEE 1994)
was sent to all schools alongside the expectation that all schools
would have an anti-bullying policy, which should be reviewed at
regular intervals. The pack was updated in 2000 and revised in
2002. This time schools had to request the pack, so fewer schools
(5,000) received it. A few years later, questionnaires completed
by a quarter of a 10% sample suggested that in half of these schools
bullying had reduced and none of the schools reported that it
had increased (Smith and Samara, 2003). This relatively successful
outcome is likely to be because this was a highly motivated group
of schools which used many of the suggestions in the pack. In
2003, more emphasis by the Government on anti-bullying policies
in Ofsted inspections helped to alert all schools to the need
to have these in place. An Ofsted report described good practice
in tackling bullying in Secondary schools (Ofsted, 2003). The
British Psychological Society supports these strategies, as well
as more recent initiatives such as Promoting Emotional Health
and Well being (Healthy Schools, 2004), Developing Emotional Health
and Well being: a whole school approach to improving behaviour
and attendance (2005). The distribution of the SEAL materials
to schools is another good DfES initiative. There are plenty of
materials in the package on anti-bullying approaches which could
form a very helpful base for staff training and further developments
in the school.
11.2 Given that bullying causes psychological
harm, anti-bullying policies and initiatives need to be constantly
up-dated and remain as a standing priority within any educational
setting. Organisational psychology highlights the need for constant
monitoring and formative evaluation in order for the anti bullying
strategies to be effective. The use of highly trained experts,
such as educational psychologists, to support schools' anti bullying
policies would go a long way towards ensuring that school environments
were attuned (DfES, 2002). Procedures need to be implemented thoroughly
and consistently throughout the school community. It is this widespread
community involvement in the process, backed up by specific procedures
at class and individual level, which appear to be the critical
factor in achieving significant shifts in levels of bullying behaviour.
(Thompson, Arora and Sharp, 2002)
The role of other organisations, such as non-governmental
12.1 The Anti-Bullying Alliance was founded
by NSPCC and NCB in 2002, and brings together over 50 national
organisations from the voluntary and private sectors, local authorities,
professional associations and the research community. It aims
to reduce bullying and create safer environments in which children
and young people can live, grow, play and learn. The Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development held a conference in
Stavanger in 2004 on school bullying and violence and there is
international co-operation in researching bullying (Smith et
al, 2004).
To what extent schools can be responsible for
bullying that takes place off their premises and how they can
deal with it
13.1 Schools are part of the community in
which they are located and from which they receive their pupils.
By attending the school, pupils bring the community into the school.
Legally schools may not have a duty to stop bullying by and against
their pupils outside their premises, but it makes moral and practical
sense to try and influence interactions within the community in
a positive way (Randall, 1996). Often, bullying incidents in school
may have been triggered by events outside the school, and carry
on outside school hours, so it is very difficult to draw the line
as to when staff should not try to exert a positive influence.
With community support actively encouraged and written into the
school's anti-bullying policy, it will be easier for the school
to reduce bullying amongst its pupils.
Whether particular strategies need to be used
to tackle homophobic and racist bullying
14.1 Homophobic bullying in teenagehood
attacks a person who is already vulnerable in trying to establish
a sexual identity for themself which is not shared by the majority
of others of their age. In both cases, self-esteem may suffer
even more than in other cases of bullying. Hence, sensitive support
for the victim is necessary. It is also necessary for schools
to strive to discuss matters of sexual orientation in an open
and positive manner, so that a more accepting climate can be established.
Local authority support service staff need to ensure that they
are fully aware of issues related to psychosexual development
in childhood and adolescents and that they have appropriate policies
and codes of conduct and practice in place. Ryan (2001) points
out that, with few exceptions, most support staff working with
schools lack knowledge about LGB people, are usually ambivalent
about the needs of LGB people, and may hold stereotyped attitudes
and beliefs.
14.2 Educational psychologists are well
placed to provide an understanding of the psychological impact
of bullying and lead developments in local authorities through:
— raising the issue of homophobic behaviour
and its implications;
— Providing advice and guidance, consultation,
individual, group and family based work and training in order
to raise awareness among school staff, school governors and parents/care-givers
of the needs of LGBT students;
— Supporting the development of comprehensive
equal opportunities and pastoral care policies;
— Advising on materials and resources
that lead to a greater understanding of discrimination against
LGBT pupils;
— Setting up and running group support
programmes such as that described by Monsen and Bailey (in press—2007)
for those young people who are finding it particularly difficult
to develop a positive sense of themselves;
— Encouraging schools to work with
appropriate and relevant LGBT community support groups.
14.3 Racist bullying and harassment constitutes
an attack on the person's identity as part of a group and therefore
can also be very hurtful. Good community relationships are vital
for influencing the pupils in the school to respect each other's
culture and religious practices. The Hampton report (1998) enquired
of young people the strategies they felt which might be employed
to usefully address racial bullying. 72% of the 12-20-year-olds
were of the opinion that teachers and pupils needed to begin to
tackle this at pre school level. In addition there needs to be:
— Training for staff to raise their
awareness.
— Clearly defined and articulated procedures
in place to challenge racism.
— Support for those who face racism.
In addition to the above recommendations, we
would suggest the following strategies as important in tackling
homophobic and racist bullying:
— Having a standing agenda item on
the school council.
— Eliciting the views of parents.
— Responding to individual incidents
in a rigorous way to assess and address any trends that may be
developing.
October 2006
REFERENCES
Adams, N, T Cox, and L Dunstan (2004). "I Am
the Hate that Dare Not Speak its Name: Dealing with homophobia
in secondary schools." Educational Psychology in Practice,
20, 3, 259-69.
Alsaker, F D and Valkanover S (2001). Early Diagnosis
and Prevention of Victimization in Kindergarten. Eds J &
Graham S Juvonen. Chapter 7, 175-95.
Arora, C M J (1996). Defining Bullying. Towards a
Clearer General Understanding and More Effective Intervention
Strategies. School Psychology International, 17, 4, 317-29.
Arora, T (1994). Is there any point in trying to
reduce bullying in secondary schools? Educational Psychology
in Practice, 10, 3.
Arora, T (1999). Levels of Bullying Measured by British
Schools Using the Life in School Checklist: A Case for Benchmarking?
Pastoral Care in Education, 17, 1, 17-22
Austin, S and S Joseph (1996). Assessment of bully/victim
problems in 8 to 11-year-olds. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 66, 447-56.
Besag, V (1989). Bullies and Victims in Schools.
Milton Keynes: OUP
Bjrkqvist, K, Lagerspetz, K M J and Osterman, K.
(1992). Direct and indirect aggression scale (DIAS).
Boulton, M J and P K Smith (1994). Bully/Victim Problems
in Middle School Children: Stability, Self-perceived competence,
Peer Perceptions and Peer Acceptance. British Journal of Developmental
Psychology, 12, 3, 315-29.
Buhs, E S and G Ladd (2001). Peer Rejection as an
Antecedent of Young Children's School Adjustment: An Examination
of Mediating Processes. Developmental Psychology, 37, 4, 550-60.
Cernkovich, S A and P C Giordano (1992). School bonding,
race, and delinquency. Criminology, 30, 2, 261-91.
Charlton, C (2002) Mobile telephone ownership and
usage among 10-and 11-year-olds: participation and exclusion.
Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 7, 3, 152-163.
Clarke, V, C Kitzinger, and J Potter (2004). Kids
are just cruel anyway': Lesbian and gay parents' talk about homophobic
bullying. British Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 3, 531-50.
Cowie, H & Sharp, S (1994). Tackling bullying
through the curriculum. In P K Smith and S Sharp (eds). School
bullying: Insights and perspectives. London Routledge, 84-107.
Crick, N R, J F Casas, and M Mosher (1997). Relational
and overt aggression in preschool. Developmental Psychology,
33, 4, 579-88.
Crick, N R, & Grotpeter, J K (1995). Relational
aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child
Development, 66, 710-722.
Crick, N R, & Grotpeter, J K (1996). Children's
treatment by peers: Victims of relational and overt aggression.
Development and Psychopathology, 8, 367-380.
de Monchy M, S J Pijl, and T Zandberg (2004). Discrepancies
in judging social inclusion and bullying of pupils with behaviour
problems. European Journal of Special Needs Education,
19, 3, 317-30.
Department for Education and Employment (1994). "Don't
suffer in silence". DfEE, London
Department for Education and Employment (2000). "Don't
suffer in silence" (second edition). DfEE, London.
Department for Education and Employment (2001). Promoting
Children's Mental Health within Early Years and School Settings.
DfES 0121/2001
Department for Education and Skills (2005). Developing
emotional health and well being: a whole-school approach to improving
behaviour and attendance: behaviour and attendance training materials—Core
Day 4. DfES 0182—2005 G.
Duncan, N (1999) Sexual Bullying: Gender conflict
and Pupil Culture in Secondary schools. London: Routledge.
Egan, S and D G Perry (1998). Does low self-regard
invite victimization? Developmental Psychology, 34, 2,
299-309.
Eslea, M, Menesini, E, O'Moore, M, Mora-Merchan,
P, Pereira, P and Smith, P (2003) Friendship and Loneliness Among
Bullies and Victims: Data From Seven Countries. Aggressive
Behavior, 30, 1, 71-83.
Fox, C L and M J Boulton (2005). The social skills
problems of victims of bullying: Self, peer and teacher perceptions.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 313-28.
Gibson, C (2003). An Evaluative Study of Derbyshire's
Anti-Bullying Commitment (ABC) Quality Assurance Scheme. Unpublished
MSc Dissertation. Sheffield University.
Gillborn, D. (1995). Racism and Anti-racism in Real
schools. Open University Press.
Graham, J and J Juvonen (1998). Self-blame and peer
victimization in middle school: An attributional analysis. Developmental
Psychology, 34, 3, 587-99.
Hazler, R J (1996). Breaking the cycle of violence:
Interventions for bullying and victimization. Washington,
DC: Accelerated Development.
Hampton, K (1998) Youth and Racism: Perception
and Experiences of Young People in Glasgow. Scottish Ethnic
Minorities Research Unit: Glasgow Caledonian University.
Hawker, D S J & Boulton, M J (2000). Twenty years'
research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment:
A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies. Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 4, 441-455.
Healthy Schools (2004) Promoting emotional health
and wellbeing through the National Healthy School Standard.
Crown Copyright: DoH and DfES.
Hodges, E V E, M J Malone, and D G Perry (1997).
Individual Risk and Social Risk as Interacting Determinants of
Victimization in the Peer Group. Developmental Psychology,
33, 6, 1032-39.
Hugh-Jones, S and P. K Smith (1999). Self-reports
of short- and long-term effects of bullying on children who stammer.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 2, 141-58.
Juvonen, J, Nishina, A, & Graham, S (2000). Peer
harassment, psychological adjustment, and school functioning in
early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92,
349-359.
Katz, A Buchanan, A & Bream, V (2001). Bullying
in Britain: Testimonies from Teenagers. East Molesey: Young
Voice.
Kaukiainen, A, Salmivalli, C, Largerspetz, K, Taminen,
M, Vaura, H, & Poskiparta, E (2002). Learning Difficulties,
Social Intelligence, and Self-Concept: Connections to Bully-Victim
Problems. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 43, 269-278,
Kaltiala-Heino, R, Rimpela, M, Marttunen, M, Rimpela,
A and Rantanen (1999). Bullying Depression and suicidal ideation
in Finnish adolescents: school survey. British Medical Journal,
319, 348-351.
Kochenderfer, B J, & Ladd, G W (1996). Peer victimization:
Cause or consequence of school maladjustment? Child Development,
67, 1305-1317.
Ladd, G W, B J Kochenderfer, and C C Coleman (1997).
Classroom Peer Acceptance, Friendship, and Victimization: Distinct
Relational Systems That Contribute Uniquely to Children's School
Adjustment? Child Development, 68, 6, 1181-97.
Ladd, G W and B Kochenderfer-Ladd (2002). Identifying
Victims of Peer Aggression From Early to Middle Childhood: Analysis
of Cross-Informant Data for Concordance, Estimation of Relational
Adjustment, Prevalence of Victimization, and Characteristics of
Identified Victims. Psychological Assessment, 14, 1, 74-96.
Monks, C P, P K Smith, and J Swettenham (2003). Aggressors,
Victims, and Defenders in Preschool: Peer, Self-, and Teacher
Reports. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 4, 453-69.
Munthe, E (1989). Bullying in Scandinavia. In E Roland
& E Munthe (Eds), Bullying: An international perspective.
London: David Fulton. 66-78.
Mynard, H, & Joseph, S (1997). Bully/victim problems
and their association with Eysenck's personality dimensions in
8- to 13-year-olds. British Journal of Educational Psychology,
67, 51-54.
Nabuzoka, D and P K Smith (1993). Sociometric Status
and Social Behaviour of Children with and without Learning Difficulties.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 34, 8, 1435-48.
Naylor, A, H Cowie, and F Cossin (2006). Bullying
still too narrowly defined by some teachers. British Journal
of Educational Psychology, 76, 553-76.
Naylor, P, H Cowie, and R del Rey (2001). Coping
Strategies of Secondary School Children in Response to Being Bullied.
Child Psychology and Psychiatry Review, 6, 3, 114-20.
Nguy, L and C Hunt (2004). Ethnicity and bullying:
A study of Australian high-school students. Educational and
Child Psychology, 21, 4, 78-94.
Ofsted (2003) Bullying: Effective Action in Secondary
Schools. London: Ofsted.
Olweus, D (1978). Aggression in the schools: Bullies
and whipping boys. Washington, DC: Hemisphere (Wiley).
Olweus, D (1989). Prevalence and incidence in the
study of antisocial behavior: definitions and measurements. In:
Klein M W, (Eds), Cross-national research in self-reported
crime and delinquency. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Olweus, D (1993). Bullying at school: What we
know and what we can do. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Olweus, D (1991). Bully/victim problems among school
children: Basic facts and effects of a school-based intervention
program. In D Pepler and K Rubin (eds), The development and
treatment of childhood aggression. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum,
411-448.
Olweus, D (1999). Sweden. In P K Smith, Y Morita,
J Junger-Tas, D Olweus, R Catalano, & P Slee (Eds.), The
nature of school bullying: A cross-national perspective. 7-27.
New York: Routledge.
Ortega, R and M J Lera (2000). The Seville anti-bullying
in school project. Aggressive Behavior, 26, 113-23.
Osterman, K, Bjorkqvist, K, Lagerspetz, K,
Kaukiainen, A, Juesmann, R, & Fraczek, A (1994). Peer and
self-estimated aggression and victimization in 8-year-old children
from five ethnic groups. Aggressive Behavior, 20, 411-428.
Owen, L, Slee., P & Shute, R (2001). Victimization
among teenage girls. What can be done about indirect harassment?
In J Juvonen and S Graham. (eds). Peer harassment in schools.
The plight of the vulnerable and victimized. New York, Guilford
Press.
Pellegrini, A, & Bartini, M (2000). A longitudinal
study of bullying, victimization, and peer affiliation during
the transition from primary school to middle school. American
Educational Research Journal, 37,3, 699-725.
Pepler, D J, W M Craig, and A Charach (1994). An
evaluation of an anti-bullying intervention in Toronto schools.
Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 13, 2, 95-110.
Pepler, D J, J D Smith, and K Rigby (2004). Looking
Back and Looking Forward: Implications for Making Interventions
Work Effectively. In P K Smith, D Pepler, and K Rigby (Eds).
UK: Cambridge University Press, 307-24.
Perren, S and F D Alsaker (2006). Social behavior
and peer relationships of victims, bully-victims, and bullies
in kindergarten. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
and Allied Disciplines, 47, 1, 45-57.
Perry, D G, S J Kusel, and L C Perry (1988). Victims
of Peer Aggression. Developmental Psychology, 24, 6, 807-14.
Randall, P (1996). A Community Approach to Bullying.
Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books.
Randall, P (1997). Adult bullying: Perpetrators
and victims. London: Routledge.
Reid, K (1989). Bullying and Persistent Absenteeism.
In D Tattum and D Lane (eds) Bullying in Schools. Stoke
on Trent: Trentham Books
Rigby, K (1999). Peer victimisation at school and
the health of secondary school students. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 69, 95-104.
Rivers, I (1995a). The victimization of gay teenagers
in school. Pastoral Care in Education, 13, 1, 35-41.
Rivers, I (1995b). Mental health issues among young
lesbians and gay men bullied at school. Health and Social Care
in the Community, 3,6, 380-383.
Rivers, I (1996) Young, gay and bullied. Young
People Now, 81 (January), 18-19.
Rivers, I (2000a). School exclusion, absenteeism
and sexual minority youth. Support for Learning: British Journal
of Learning Support, 15, 1, 13-18.
Rivers, I (2000b). The long term consequences of
bullying. In C Neal and D Davies (Eds), Issues in Therapy with
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Clients: Pink Therapy
Volume III. Buckingham: Open University Press, pp 146-159.
Rivers, I (2000c) Retrospective reports of bullying
at school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology,
18, 20-27
Rivers, I (2001). The bullying of sexual minorities
at school: Its nature and long-term correlates. Educational
and Child Psychology, 18, 33-46.
Rivers, I, & Smith, P K (1994). Types of bullying
behaviour and their correlates. Aggressive Behaviour, 20,
359-368.
Robinson, J A (1998). The Impact of Race and Ethnicity
on Children's Peer Relations. In P T Slee and K Rigby (eds).
London, New York: Routledge, 76-88.
Salmivalli, C (1999). Participant role approach to
school bullying: implications for interventions. Journal of
Adolescence, 22, 4, 453-59.
Salmivalli, C, Lagerspetz, K, Bjorkqvist, K, Osterman,
K, & Kaukiainen, A (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant
roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive
Behavior, 22, 1-15.
Salmivalli, C, Lagerspetz, K, & Lagerspetz, K
M J (1998). Stability and change of behaviour in connection with
bullying in schools: a two-year follow-up. Aggressive Behaviour,
24, 205-218.
Salmivalli, C and E Nieminen. (2002). Proactive and
reactive aggression among school bullies, victims, and bully-victims.
Aggressive Behavior, 28, 30-44.
Schuster, B (1996). Rejection, exclusion, and harassment
at work and in schools. Eur Psychologist, 1, 293-317.
Sharp, S (1995). How much does bullying hurt? The
effects of bullying on the personal wellbeing and educational
progress of secondary aged students. Educational and Child
Psychology, 12, 81-88.
Smith, P, Mahdavi, J, Carvalho, M, & Tippett
(2006). An investigation into cyberbullying, its forms, awareness
and impact, and the relationship between age and gender in cyberbullying.
A report for the Anti-Bullying Alliance.
http://www.anti-bullyingalliance.org.uk
Smith, P K, Pepler, D K and Rigby, K (eds.) (2004).
Bullying in schools: How successful can interventions be?
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, P K and Samara, M (2003). Research Brief:
Evaluation of the DfES anti-bullying pack. London: Goldsmith's
College.
Smith, P K, & Sharp, S (Eds) (1994). School
bullying: Insights and perspectives. London: Routledge.
Smith, P K and S Shu (2000). What good schools can
do about bullying. Findings from a survey in English schools after
a decade of research and action. Childhood, 7, 2, 193-212.
Smith, P K, Talamelli, L, Cowie, H, Naylor, P, &
Chauhan, P (2004). Profiles of non-victims, escaped victims, continuing
victims and new victims of school bullying. British Journal
of Educational Psychology, 74, 565-81.
Smith, P K (2004). Bullying: Recent Developments.
Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 9, 3, 98-103.
Smith, P K, Cowie, H, Olafsson, F R, and Liefooghe,
A P D (2002). Definitions of bullying: A comparison of terms used,
and age and gender difference, in a Fourteen-Country international
comparison. Child Development, 73, 4, 1119-33.
Solberg, M E and D Olweus. (2003). Prevalence estimation
of school bullying with the Olweus bully/victim questionnaire.
Aggressive Behaviour, 29, 239-68.
Stevens, V, I De Bourdeaudhuij, and P Van Oost. (2000).
Bullying in Flemish schools: An evaluation of anti-bullying intervention
in primary and secondary schools. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 70, 195-210.
Sutton, J and P K Smith. (1999). Bullying as a group
process: An adaptation of the participant role approach. Aggressive
Behaviour. 25, 97-111.
Sutton, J, Smith, P K and Swettenham, J (1999). Social
cognition and bullying: Social inadequacy or skilled manipulation?
British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17, 435-50.
Thompson, D, I Whitney, and P K Smith. (1994). Bullying
of children with special needs in mainstream schools. Support
for Learning, 9, 9, 103-06.
Thompson, D Arora, T and Sharp, S (2002) Bullying.
Effective Strategies for long-term improvement. London: Routledge
Falmer.
Thompson, D (2004). Anti-bullying policies: Worth
the paper they are written on? ACCP Occasional Papers no 23.
Bullying in Schools: 27-34.
Unnever, J D and D G Cornell. (2004). Middle School
Victims of Bullying: Who Reports Being Bullied? Aggressive
Behavior, 30, 5, 373-88.
Whitaker, D J, Rosenbluth, B, Valle, L A, & Sanchez,
E (2004). Expect Respect: A School-Based Intervention to Promote
Awareness and Effective Responses to Bullying and Sexual Harassment.
In D L Espelage and S M Swearer (eds). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, 327-50.
Whitaker, P (2004). Fostering communication and shared
play between mainstream peers and children with autism: approaches,
outcomes and experiences. British Journal of Special Education,
31, 4, 215-22.
Whitney, I, Rivers, I, Smith, P K, & Sharp, S
(1994). The Sheffield Project: Methodology and Findings.
In P K Smith and S Sharp (eds). London; New York: Routledge, 1994.
20-56.
Wolke, D, Woods, S, Bloomfield, L & Karstadt,
L (2001). Bullying involvement in primary school and common health
problems. Archives of Diseases in Childhood, 84, 3, 197-201.
Wolke, D and K Stanford. (1999). Bullying in School
Children. In D Messer and S Millar (eds). London, Sydney,
Auckland: Oxford University Press Inc, 1999. 342-60.
Wolke, D, Woods, S, Bloomfield, L & Karstadt,
L (2000). The Association between Direct and Relational Bullying
and Behaviour Problems among Primary School Children. Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 8, 989-1002.
Wolke, D, Woods, S, Stanford, K Schulz, H (2001).
Bullying and victimization of primary school children in England
and Germany: prevalence and school factors. British Journal
of Psychology, 92, 673-696.
|
