Use of the Support Group Method to Tackle Bullying, and Evaluation From Schools and Local Authorities in England

Abstract

The Support Group Method (SGM), formerly the No Blame Approach, is widely used as an anti‐bullying intervention in schools, but has aroused some controversy. There is little evidence from users regarding its effectiveness. We aimed to ascertain the use of and support for the SGM in Local Authorities (LAs) and schools; and obtain ratings of satisfaction with its use; sources of evidence for such ratings; and comments on how it is used in practice. Questionnaires were sent to LAs and schools in England, and were available on a website; useful replies were obtained from 57 LAs and 59 schools. Some two‐thirds of LAs were supportive of the SGM in general terms, although fewer said they had sufficient evidence to judge effectiveness. The modal rating when given was ‘satisfactory’. Most schools had used SGM for 1–5 years, often across the whole school. Two‐thirds received direct training in the method. Over one‐half of schools gave a rating of effectiveness, based on teachers, pupils and parents; the modal rating was ‘very satisfactory’. Responses and open‐ended comments revealed that details of use varied considerably and that some schools had substantially modified the method. In summary, a majority of LAs and schools that responded were satisfied or very satisfied with SGM. However, some confusion about the ways of implementing SGM was evident; this might explain some hostile comments reported elsewhere. Issues of parental involvement, and backup availability of sanctions, were commonly mentioned. Further research based directly on pupils and parents would supplement the findings of this survey.

Fourth Graders Confront an Injustice: The Anti-Bullying Campaign—A Social Action Inquiry Project

“…Vaughn and Obenchain examined classroom and school anti-bullying programs (Bickmore 2011;Brown, Low, Smith, and Haggerty 2011;Hunt 2007;Flanagan, Hoek, Ranter, and Reich 2012;Marshall, Caldwell, and Foster 2011;Rubin-Vaughan, Pepler, Brown, and Craig 2011;Smith, Howard, and Thompson 2007). To remediate the oppressive acts of bullying, several different approaches have been taken, including a multitude of character education programs that emphasize the reinforcement of moral behaviors Marshall, Caldwell, and Foster 2011), such as respect, honesty, and responsibility (Westheimer and Kahne 2004), while enforcing punitive measures for students who do not abide by these socially normative behaviors (Smith et al 2007;Walton 2011).…”

“…In addition, social skills interventions (Albayrak, Yildiz, and Erol 2012;Hunt 2007;Smith et al 2007) and even Web-based bullying prevention games have been implemented (Rubin-Vaughan et al 2011). While these programs and approaches have been inconsistent and ineffective Hunt 2007;Smith et al 2007;Walton 2011), they also deprive students of developing problem-solving and conflict resolution strategies (Bickmore 2011;Flanagan et al 2012;Griffin, Brown, and warren 2012) necessary in the development of critical, democratic citizens (Westheimer and Kahne 2004).…”

“…To remediate the oppressive acts of bullying, several different approaches have been taken, including a multitude of character education programs that emphasize the reinforcement of moral behaviors Marshall, Caldwell, and Foster 2011), such as respect, honesty, and responsibility (Westheimer and Kahne 2004), while enforcing punitive measures for students who do not abide by these socially normative behaviors (Smith et al 2007;Walton 2011). In addition, social skills interventions (Albayrak, Yildiz, and Erol 2012;Hunt 2007;Smith et al 2007) and even Web-based bullying prevention games have been implemented (Rubin-Vaughan et al 2011).…”

“…To remediate the oppressive acts of bullying, several different approaches have been taken, including a multitude of character education programs that emphasize the reinforcement of moral behaviors Marshall, Caldwell, and Foster 2011), such as respect, honesty, and responsibility (Westheimer and Kahne 2004), while enforcing punitive measures for students who do not abide by these socially normative behaviors (Smith et al 2007;Walton 2011). In addition, social skills interventions (Albayrak, Yildiz, and Erol 2012;Hunt 2007;Smith et al 2007) and even Web-based bullying prevention games have been implemented (Rubin-Vaughan et al 2011). While these programs and approaches have been inconsistent and ineffective Hunt 2007;Smith et al 2007;Walton 2011), they also deprive students of developing problem-solving and conflict resolution strategies (Bickmore 2011;Flanagan et al 2012;Griffin, Brown, and warren 2012) necessary in the development of critical, democratic citizens (Westheimer and Kahne 2004).…”

Bullying in Schools: Addressing Desires, Not Only Behaviours

“…Meetings through Circle Time at which students disclose their concerns can be effective in helping students to understand how their peers feel about school life (Tew 1998). Methods of intervention in which practitioners convey to the perpetrators how a target has been feeling can raise their levels of concern, for instance through the use of the Support Group Method (Smith et al 2007) and the Method of Shared Concern (Pikas 2002;Rigby and Griffiths 2011). When these methods are effective, they commonly motivate students to 'own the problem' and to take steps to solve it.…”