This article was downloaded by: [University of Arizona] On: 11 June 2011 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 933127480] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37- 41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Educational Psychology in Practice Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713417121

The Support Group Approach to Bullying in Schools Sue Young

To cite this Article Young, Sue(1998) 'The Support Group Approach to Bullying in Schools', Educational Psychology in Practice, 14: 1, 32 — 39 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/0266736980140106 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0266736980140106

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. The Support Group Approach to Bullying in Schools

Sue Young

Summary review because it is similar to the Method of Shared The Kingston upon Hull Special Educational Needs Concern (Pikas, 1989) and because the training Support Service (SENSS) Anti-Bullying Project has materials are easily accessible to schools. The gen- developed the support group approach to bullying, eral conclusion was that this type of approach may building particularly on the work of Maines and be worth trying. Robinson (1991, 1992). This article reports on the Since the publication of the DfE pack, the No outcome of this type of intervention. It provides Blame Approach has been reviewed in more detail independent corroborative evidence of Maines and (Smith and Sharp, 1994). The results look promis- Robinson's findings and outlines the theoretical ing to say the least: 45 out of 47 interventions in framework that leads to an understanding of why secondary and 7 out of 7 interventions in primary this approach is so successful. schools having been successful. However, it was con- cluded that independent replication and further ra- tionale on how or why the approach is effective Introduction would be valuable. The anti-bullying pack Bullying — don't suffer in si- lence (DfE,1994), gave guidance to schools based on research and practice developed by the Department Background for Education (DfE) anti-bullying project in Sheffield. The Special Educational Needs Support Service in It promoted the message that bullying is to be found Kingston upon Hull has an established anti-bullying in all schools and that the.issue of bullying should project. One aspect of the work is to advise and be addressed by developing whole school policies. support schools over individual referrals for bullying One section, 'Working with pupils in bullying situa- situations. In the majority of cases there has been a tions', reviewed the effectiveness across a range of long-standing problem. Concern has been expressed,

Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011 schools of different intervention strategies, including and ultimately complaints have been made, to the the No Blame Approach. school, followed in some cases by the parent The No Blame Approach to bullying, developed contacting the local education authority. With the by Barbara Maines and George Robinson, was first head's approval, the referral may be passed to SENSS. outlined in Educational Psychology in Practice By the very nature of the referral process, the (1991) and published as a distance learning pack in complaints tend to be serious - indeed the police may 1992. The approach addresses bullying by forming have been involved, there may have been a medical a support group of 'bullies' and/or bystanders. With- referral, the problem may have been going on for years out apportioning blame, it uses a problem-solving and the child may be absent from school. approach, giving responsibility to the group to solve Over a period of 2 years the service dealt with over the problem and to report back at a subsequent re- 80 referrals that required active involvement beyond view meeting. The authors are confident on the train- advice over the phone. In some referrals the support ing video that this method is tried and tested and it group approach was not appropriate for a variety of works. reasons: for example, a pupil not returning to the The No Blame Approach had not been included same school, being on study leave, or actively not in the Sheffield Project but was mentioned in the wishing any intervention to take place.

32 Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 Inevitably, each referral has its own individual 9. A disproportionate number of children referred characteristics. Although no referral is typical, some have special educational needs, such as learning features, while not occurring in every case, occur difficulties or speech problems (Whitney et al, frequently enough to be called typical. 1994). 10. Frequently parents report bed wetting as a problem at home, also nightmares, mood swings, The parents' perspective temper tantrums, uncharacteristic disobedience The parent(s) of the bullied child are often the first and aggression, withdrawn behaviour and people with whom the problem is discussed: complaints of illness before school such as tummy upsets and headaches. 1. They are very often worried, upset and frustrated because they feel powerless to defend their child, The parents may have wanted severe punishment frightened to intervene directly because this of the bully in the first instance but this is because might make things worse, or indeed having they know of no other approach that could be intervened, they have made things worse. They successful. Incidentally the term 'No Blame' is not often become distressed when talking about their used, since parents may take this to imply that the child being bullied and about their frustration bullying is condoned, which is not the case. The with not being able to act effectively. support group approach is outlined to the parents and the reasons why this approach may be 2. They often say that no-one at the school will appropriate in their case. listen to them, that they are not taken seriously, that they are told they are over-reacting or are Often the child may want to change schools, over-protective. although we indicate that it is possible that they 3. They are often considering changing schools, may find themselves being bullied again. A change perhaps not for the first time.The parents may of school, moreover, would not stop the bullying be asking for advice on transfer and can be quite round the home, whereas in our experience support adamant that their child is not returning to their groups operate outside school as well as in. We can present school. assure parents that this type of approach has a high 4. Occasionally they say the school has done all it success rate, and with immediate effectiveness, can, but the bullying continues and the bully although a change of school can still be an option ought to be expelled, since they cannot think of if necessary. any alternative solution. 5. Parents often report that non-physical bullying Teachers' perspective has preceded physical bullying. The fact that bullying seems to be taken less seriously if it is Although parents may have said that 'nothing has not physical, notwithstanding that verbal been done', this is rarely the case. Teachers have bullying can be extremely hurtful, may be one usually taken various steps along the line of punish- reason that more referrals involve boys, since ment, but very often have found difficulty in getting we know that boys are more likely to bully in to the bottom of incidents. School staff, however, Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011 a physical way (Smith and Sharp, 1994, p 16). may not have told the parent what has been done, 6. Sometimes bullying has started to happen and if the bullying continues the parent assumes that outside school. nothing was done. Once teachers have tried various 7. Parents can also be quite defensive about their strategies such as counselling, punishment and, per- complaint. They think that they may be judged haps, contacting the parents of the 'bullies', and if the to be wanting in the way they have brought up bullying does not stop, there appears to be a shift in their child. They may be concerned that they sympathy away from the victim. Some victims and cannot afford to buy fashionable, expensive their families are seen as problems themselves in the clothes and shoes. school: 8. By way of corroboration, they often say that the 1. The victim or their siblings may be disruptive. school has lots of bullying and that various people 2. Their parents may indeed be overprotective or were concerned about it - it wasn't just their child even aggressive. being picked on. The fact that brothers or sisters 3. Signs of distress and anxiety may not be apparent do not have difficulties, or that other children in in the school and the child's expressed fears are the school do, is also cited in their defence. sometimes dismissed as attention seeking.

Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 33 4. Occasionally a teacher will say that a victim mine the victim's confidence and are unnecessary. 'frankly deserves all they get'. As long as it is The victim is told that the bullies will not be in trou- seen as somehow acceptable to bully some ble so there will be no problems that they will 'get children, regardless of the reason, there is him/her for it later'. Without this assurance, the vic- implicit permission to bully in that school. tim may be reluctant to give any names. The pur- pose of this interview is to reassure the victim that We recommend using the support group approach the problem can be solved and find out: to teachers as a better solution because: • who are the main threatening figures, the 'bullies' • no sanctions are used and therefore no one can • who are present although they may not actively be unfairly punished join in the bullying, the 'bystanders' • school staff would be seen to be taking action • who the victim finds supportive or, if he has no following DfEE guidance supporters, whom he would like to have as • the children would be involved in a positive friends. approach; they would enjoy it • it has proved to be effective in similar cases The victim is told that the group will be asked to before help make him/her happier in school. • a member of staff is present if the co-ordinator is leading the intervention so that the strategy is demonstrated; otherwise there is a possibility Step 2 that teachers do not feel they can operate this From these names a support group is made up, ideally approach for themselves. 6-8 pupils. All the main bullies are included with some bystanders and supporters. The support group often Teachers are sometimes sceptical that the parents needs reassurance at the beginning that they are not in will accept this type of approach, thinking that the trouble. The pupils are often unsure of why they have parents are bent on punishment for the bullies. In been selected, since they are not all 'bullies' or 'friends'. fact, parents have been generally quite ready to It is important that no child is labelled by their selection accept that this might work, as it is not usually for the group and having a truly mixed group facilitates punishment but effectiveness they are after. this. The group is seen separately from the victim. The group is told that X is unhappy in school, and they have been chosen because they are all able to help. Group Intervening with the support group ap- members seem to accept the rationale that they can all proach help; indeed this is what they have in common. At this The support group approach has been identified point the term bullying is avoided since this suggests a separately because it contains some features which judgement has been made on the nature and causes of differ from Maines and Robinson but the same step- the problem. It is equally important, as with the inter- by-step description of the strategy fs used for ease of view with the victim, that a non-judgemental atmosphere reference. Where divergencies from the No Blame is maintained. However, very often the group members Approach occur these are printed in italics. use the term anyway. Once the reason for the group is Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011 clear and they do not feel threatened, they can be remark- ably open about what is happening. Step 1 The victim is interviewed first, sometimes at home if they are away from school. Concentrating on the Step 3 kind of things that have been happening rather than Empathy for the victim is heightened by asking if particular incidents, the victim is allowed to to talk they have ever been unhappy in school. Usually about whatever they think needs to be known. This there are at few who will admit to this and say a lit- might include the whole history of the problem, or tle about it. The feelings of the victim are not relayed very little about it. All that is said is accepted in a to the group, as Maines and Robinson suggest. non-judgemental way, without questioning its valid- Rather, we discuss briefly the feelings of members of ity. We do not concentrate on the feelings of the vic- the group that have been unhappy in school and say tim or request a picture or piece of writing to that 'X must be feeling very like that'. This is an illustrate them. Questions such as 'What did you effective means of raising empathy without breach- do to make him do that to you?' or similar under- ing confidentiality.

34 Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 Step 4 powerful single feature of the approach. Inevitably, sometimes, this initial meeting goes better than It is explained that no one should feel unhappy in others but it is curious that no matter how it is seen school and because they know X they probably subjectively, this does not appear to be reflected at know better than anyone why and when he or she all in the outcome. is unhappy. Members of the group often volunteer information that can be very illuminating at this point. If anyone mentions a name, they are gently Step 7 interrupted and told there is no need for any names, At the review the victim is seen first to see how things in order to maintain the non-judgemental have gone. Generally, things are fine. This review atmosphere. Again all that is said can be accepted, usually takes about 2-5 minutes. The victim is since no punitive action will follow as a result of this complimented on things going well; attention is not discussion. withdrawn because there is no trouble or a provocative victim may be inadvertently encouraged. Step 5 The support group members are then seen together and asked how things are going. Usually they are The group is asked to make suggestions. Because aware the victim is happier although they may they know what goes on they are the best people occasionally report on an incident not involving to suggest what can be done to make the situation members of the support group. Many times they better for X. We wait for suggestions from them. express the improvement in terms of 'He/she is better This part of the process is very variable; some now', as if they view the problem as lying within the groups are full of ideas, others are very vague or victim. They are encouraged to say how they have there may be some resentful silence. Simply ignor- helped although their efforts are not matched with ing resentment and praising any suggestions from the suggestions made at the previous meeting, unless members of the group usually ensures that most will individuals wish to do so. They are also either have made a suggestion of their own or will complimented and thanked for their help. Then they take up a suggestion that someone else has made so are asked if they are willing to continue for another that all have a role. The actual suggestions are not week. No one has ever refused to do this in our in themselves significant except insofar as they dem- experience. On one occasion a group member was onstrate a commitment to the group goal. Mem- unwilling to come to the review meeting and bers say things such as 'I will bring him/her some apparently tried to persuade two others to refuse to sweets', 'I will watch out for her/him at break to come but by the following week the other two were make sure s/he is not alone', 'I will help him/her in eager to come and the dissenter, who was one of the class'. The only suggestion that has to be gently re- identified bullies, had not bullied the victim further. jected is of the kind — 'If I see anyone hurting her/ A new review is arranged as before. Reviews can him I'll beat them up'! They are not asked to make be continued for as long as necessary but usually two any promises and are not given jobs. The plan must reviews have been sufficient. This avoids creating a be owned by the group. If suggestions are not false sense of dependency. Individuals can be Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011 forthcoming, which has happened occasionally, reinforced informally from then on. It is usually exploring further the circumstances when upset oc- arranged for the whole group, victim as well as curs generally gets ideas flowing. supporters, to receive an appropriate reward to reinforce the new status. They may get a certificate or a letter home to parents. Having their photograph Step 6 taken is very rewarding to primary pupils and it can Group members are thanked for their support and go up in their classroom or a notice board. In told that it looks like they have a good plan that secondary school of course the reinforcement needs will make all the difference to X. Then they are to be more subtle. told that they can report back all they have The parents are asked for their views on how managed to do in a week's time. In other words, things are going and value being kept informed after the responsibility is passed to the group at this each review. When they feel involved and therefore point. The shift of ownership of the plan and the not frustrated this can often help rebuild the transfer of the responsibility for its implementation relationship with the school which was usually to the whole group is crucial. This is the most strained beforehand.

Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 35 Evaluation of the support group ap- return to school at all and one transferred to another proach school early during intervention. On this basis the support group approach appears to be an effective Over the 2 year period, in 55 cases (over 70 per cent intervention at secondary level, and subsequent referrals of referrals), the support group approach was used, continue to reinforce this view. When choosing the usually by the SENSS anti-bullying co-ordinator or support group in a secondary school an additional occasionally by the school. These referrals are check needs to be made whether there are members of predominantly from primary schools - 51 primary the support group in every set or grouping to which the and four secondary. The approach has been pupil belongs that he/she finds a problem. successful in the great majority of cases - to be The confidence of Maines and Robinson has been precise, the bullying stopped completely or the victim substantiated in our experience, so much so that now no longer felt in need of support. Table 1 shows the SENSS advises the schools to adopt this approach, results for primary school only, because this is where unless there are compelling and usually obvious the weight of our experience is to date. reasons why it would not be appropriate. Table 1. Support group approach Why does the support group approach Number of work? 51 Cases An approach so successful deserves to be better Not known and more widely used. Perhaps one of the completed 1 Child excluded reasons it appears not to be widely accepted is implicit in Smith and Sharp's review (1994), when Immediate success 40 (80%) they suggest that it is not known why it works. Maines and Robinson only begin to give any Successful 50 (100%) Success delayed 7 (14%) rationale. Although Smith and Sharp (1994) draw attention Limited success 3 (6%) to the No Blame Approach in the DfE anti-bullying pack for schools, it is with a certain tentativeness. They suggest that this type of approach may used in The cases have been further sub-divided in order to less serious cases of bullying (DfE, 1994, p 18-19). clarify the criteria by which they have been judged. Their suggestion that the No Blame Approach needs 'Immediate success' is where, from the time the group independent verification also sounds a note of was set up, the victim reported little or no difficulties, caution. Why are they are so cautious in the light of the support group agreed, and the parents of the available evidence? Trying to understand the causes victim (when involved) were happy that the bullying of behavioural change is not always a 'common had stopped. Leaving aside the one case not able to sense' pursuit. Despite knowing that a reprimand be completed, 80 per cent of cases fell into this can in some circumstances reward disruptive pupils, category. However, in a minority of cases, identified it is still difficult to practice this in the classroom. It Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011 as 'success delayed' in the table, the victim was not takes practice and considerable restraint for a teacher entirely happy at the first review, or the support group to avoid reinforcing misbehaviour. thought things were not satisfactory. In these cases the Teachers also often have difficulty rewarding a de- situation improved over the following 3 to 5 weekly crease in misbehaviour, thinking that it is somehow not reviews, until it appeared to be stable with no bullying right that a child is rewarded for behaviour that in other taking place. In a small minority of cases the victim pupils is expected and taken for granted. Maines and continued to mention incidents that bothered him/her, Robinson (1992) indicate that there is a 'natural' de- although there had been considerable improvement. sire to punish the bully and that it is often asked what In these cases, identified as 'limited success' in the • the parents of the victim think of the strategy proposed, table, the intervention was monitored until there was with the implication that they will be dissatisfied with stability at a 'tolerable' level for the victim but the a non-punitive response. In one of our referrals, teach- victim was re-referred subsequently for being bullied ers objected to the bullies being given any reward. No by different pupils. parent has ever objected — they are only too happy their Of the four cases in secondary school during the same nightmare has ceased. While there is no clear, rational period, two were immediate successes, one child did not explanation for the approach working, and where

36 Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 schools have tried to address the problem with little addressed and will be solved by focusing, for success, it does seem unbelievable that a relatively low- example, on what happens when the problem is not key approach will have any impact. If the strategy is there. When the 'miracle' has happened (de Shazer, "not open to plausible explanation it is unlikely to gain 1985;1988), what will be going on? Brief therapy widespread adoption. is solution-, rather than problem- focused; future- However, we have turned to 'brief therapy' and rather than past-oriented. social psychology, especially group psychology, to give Several brief therapy techniques can be recognised us insights into why and how the strategy works. In in the support group approach. For example, one of the Kingston upon Hull Anti-Bullying project the the apparently contradictory principles of brief therapy original Maines and Robinson approach has been is that the solution has nothing to do with the prob- developed. The differences are small and we fully lem. Indeed, there is no need to even know what the acknowledge the No Blame Approach as our starting problem is to find a solution. Using the support group point. However, it is believed that the following approach as outlined above, although we allow par- exposition demonstrates the changes are significant. ents to tell their complaint in whatever detail they think necessary, it does not in fact matter what the details of the complaint are. Equally the victim may Brief therapy be forthcoming or may be very reticent but again it The support group approach can be viewed as an does not matter, since the solution is independent of example of applied brief therapy. Brief therapy has the problem. In order to use a solution-focused sup- been developed in the USA over the last 20 years in port group it is necessary only to find out the names particular, and recently by practitioners in this country of those in the child's social system who are involved (Budman et al, 1992). It is recognised not only for in maintaining the problem. Although teachers are its powerful effect in clinical settings but for its often anxious to say what they have done to address application to situations such as in education. It is the problem, again it does not matter what they say, pre-eminently associated with de Shazer (1985; 1988). in the sense that it has no impact on the solution. In Brief therapy originally developed from a mood of this way the support group is a 'skeleton key' (de dissatisfaction with traditional psychoanalysis that Shazer, 1985), a solution that fits rather than matches, tends to be long-term. Moreover, the number of and is all the more powerful for that, because it can sessions of therapy began to be limited by the health unlock a wide range of individual problem circum- insurance available in the USA so that long-term stances. Creating 'virtuous circles' relies on the sug- therapy was only available to the rich. Reducing the gestions from the group, to break the 'vicious circle' number of sessions available for the therapist to work, of the problem and initiate a process of continued initially thought of as a necessary evil, led to a change for the better. realisation that better and more successful therapeutic As in brief therapy, the means to a solution are sessions could be developed. not found in the knowledge or expertise of the leader It was also recognised that many clients only attended of the group or how well the staff understand the the first session of psychotherapy. In order to be situation, or whether we actually know what has effective, brief therapists took account of this and been going on but in the group members themselves. Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011 developed a concentrated structure of questions to move They make the suggestions of what they think will clients towards the solution, rather than'concentrating make the difference. on the feelings and experiences within the problem. The process changes perceptions of behaviour, When working to manipulate a system, small creating new 'stories' for the protagonists that changes can lead to profound changes. Indeed, any enhance their own self-esteem and are, therefore, self- changes in a system will inevitably lead to further reinforcing of the change taking place. Added to change. Solving the problem, therefore, concerns this, the leader gives feedback of compliments in such making the small difference that makes all the a way that creates the likelihood that the action will difference, creating a virtuous instead of vicious circle be implemented - what is called 'cheering on change' (Wender, 1971). Brief therapy takes a direct route (George et al, 1990). to a solution, eliciting from the client those crucial Molnar and Lindquist (1989) were the first to small differences that will bring about the necessary recognise and provide models for applying brief changes that solve the problem. therapy to classroom management of children with From the beginning the therapist is positive, behaviour problems. They refer to their ideas as an convincing and optimistic - the problem can be 'ecosystemic' approach. As they put it, 'Sometimes

Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 37 these changes seemed to occur instantaneously, as if • have been asked to help and have agreed by magic' and, 'Since ecosystemic ideas are intended • know the need for action is unambiguous, they to to help change problem situations instead of to are not left in any doubt diagnose or "treat" a particular type of problem, they • have been given some responsibility to act can be used in a large number of very different • have individual responsibility problem situations in schools' (page xiv). Molnar and • know that their action is appropriate Lindquist do not however address a bullying problem • have witnessed harm even if they were not in their many case studies (see also Rhodes and Ajmal, directly involved 1995; Durrant, 1993). • have their empathy aroused The support group approach to bullying is such an • know that they will receive feedback of ecosystemic approach. It is powerful and effective but outcomes gentle - just as an anti-bullying response should be. • have a specific assigned task In the best tradition of conflict resolution the strategy • feel guilty. provides a win-win outcome. In addition, the above research shows that working There is, of course, evidence that using a peer as part of a group enhances this pro-social affect support group in the same manner could help children because: through a variety of difficulties. Newton et al (1996), for example, have recognised the power of the peer • each knows their suggestion for action has been group that is empowered to intervene appropriately accepted and effectively to support a classmate. The benefits to • even if only one member helps initially, the the members of the group themselves are enormous. others are likely to follow • they have made their commitment to action 'public' Social psychology • anonymity of any action is reduced The reason the support group approach appears to • identifying with a successful group increases self- work is not only because it is effective and immedi- esteem ate but also because the solution develops outside the • continuance of unhelpful behaviour becomes direct influence of the teacher. It is the dynamics of unacceptable to the group the support group acting both as a group and as in- • in an interdependent group, mutually beneficial dividuals in interaction with the victim that gives the behaviour is encouraged strategy force. Maines and Robinson suggest that • commitments made during group discussion lead raising empathy for the victim of bullying is a key to high levels of co-operation component of the No Blame Approach. Indeed, • defection from a group goal is less likely when they concentrate on the feelings of the victim as an the group expects reward. important part of the procedure. They suggest that relaying to the support group how the victim feels We can infer what is happening during intervention, raises this empathy. However, we have come to con- even though the action is outside our direct centrate less on the victim's feelings without jeopard- observation. It can be suggested that the main Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011 ising the success of the intervention. We do not need purpose of bullying is not so much the effect it to relay any other information to the group other produces in the victim but rather its effect on the than that the victim is unhappy. , bystanders. The support group as a whole has a Social psychologists have studied in depth how purpose that transcends any one member. For the 'bystanders' react - what factors motivate people to group to be successful, the individuals depend not only help and also what may make people unwilling to on their own actions but also on other members of the intervene to support others. Looking at this research group. Before a support group is formed it can be together with work on the psychology of groups assumed that the individuals have mixed motives. For provides insight into why anti-bullying support example, the friend may wish to help, the bully may groups are so effective. wish to continue to bully. But the group as a whole The research informs us (Brewer and Crano, 1994; is given the responsibility for helping. So the bully has Deaux et al, 1993; Baron et al, 1992) that the factors to choose either to continue bullying, bolstering his/ below enhance the likelihood of help being given (all her dominant position in the wider peer group, or stop of them are present in the support group approach). bullying and thereby allow the support group to Individuals are more likely to help when they: succeed and maintain a leading position.

38 Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 In more general terms, people are aroused by the Acknowledgement needs of others and then decide whether to intervene The author wishes to thank Dez Allenby (Head of by weighing the costs and rewards of helping. If we SENSS) for his encouragement and support as well as look at the roles of the people involved in the practical help during the drafting of this article. bullying situation we can see how a support group approach can alter the balance so that the rewards References for helping the victim outweigh the costs. Baron, R. S., Kerr, N. L. and Miller, N. (1992) Group The costs of helping will differ for individuals Process, Group Decision, Group Action, Buckingham: depending on their former roles. Open University Press. Brewer, M. B. and Crano, W. D. (1994) Social Psychology. A bully will lose the excitement associated with Minneapolis: West. aggression and may lose (or expect to lose) the peer Budman, S. H., Hoyt, M. F. and Friedman, S. (eds) (1992) group's recognition of their power over others. A The First Session in Brief Therapy, New York, Guildford. bystander loses the excitement and arousal of Deaux, K., Dane, F. C., Wrightsman, L. S. and Sigelman, watching bullying and risks becoming a target for the C. K. (1993) Social Psychology in the 90s, 6th Edition. bully. A friend may just risk becoming a target him/ California: Brooks/Cole. herself. Department for Education (1994) Bullying - don't suffer in All support group members participate in a range silence. An anti bullying pack for schools. London, HMSO. of rewards including de Shazer, S. (1985) Keys to Solution in Brief Therapy. New York: Norton, • recognition that they belong to a successful de Shazer, S. (1988) Clues: Investigating Solutions in Brief group Therapy. New York: Norton. • freedom from various levels of guilt Durrant, M. (1993) Creative Strategies for School • feeling good about their own altruism Problems. Norton, New York. • the esteem of other group members or at least George, E., Iveson, C. and Ratner, H. (1990) Problem to not rejection Solution. London: Brief Therapy Press. Maines, B. and Robinson, G. (1991) 'Don't beat the bullies!'. • recognition and reinforcement from a member Educational Psychology in Practice, 7(3),168-172. of staff guiding the group. Maines, B. and Robinson, G. (1992) The No Blame Approach. Bristol: Lucky Duck. Conclusion Molnar, A. and Lindquist, B. (1989) Changing Problem One special educational needs co-ordinator, who was Behaviour in Schools. California: Jossey Bass Inc. Newton, C., Taylor, G. and Wilson, D. (1996) 'Circles of initially sceptical of the outcome, watched the process friends', Educational Psychology in Practice, 11(4), 41-48. and declared it was magic. It sometimes appeared that Pikas, A. (1989) 'The common concern method for the way when I first used the strategy. However, with treatment of mobbing'. In Munthe, E. and Roland, E. further experience the underlying processes at work (eds) Bullying, an International Perspective. London: have become clearer. The approach appears to work at David Fulton. varying levels and in a variety of ways, each Rhodes, J. and Ajmal, Y. (1995) Solution Focused Thinking complementing the other. These act as 'back-up' systems in Schools. London: Brief Therapy Press. in case of failure of any one aspect or level, making the Smith, P. K. and Sharp, S. (eds)(1994) School Bullying: Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011 support group approach extremely powerful. Insights and Perspectives. London, Routledge. Aspects of social psychology help to explain why Wender, P. H. (1971) 'Vicious and virtuous circles: the role of deviation amplifying feedback in the origin and a support group approach works. An awareness of • perpetuation of behaviour'. In Barton, H. H. (ed) Brief these factors helps develop practice that reinforces the Therapies. New York: Behavioural Publications Inc. power of the intervention. Moreover, recognising Whitney, I., Rivers, I., Smith, P. K. and Sharp, S. (1994) that the support group approach is an application of 'The Sheffield Project: methodology and findings'. In brief therapy also helps point the way to strengthen- Smith, P. K. and Sharp, S. (eds) School Bullying: Insights ing intervention by using further strategies from that and Perspectives. London: Routledge. field, such as using future-focused questions and the Sue Young is Anti-Bullying Coordinator, with effective use of compliments. Kingston upon Hull Special Educational Needs It is intended that this independent corroboration Support Service, The Education Centre, Coronation and explanation of the rationale behind the support Road North, Kingston upon Hull, HUS 5RL. group approach will lead to effective practice being promoted to help reduce bullying problems in our This article was accepted for publication in January schools. 1998.

Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1i April 1998 39