According to Van Rooijen-Mutsaers, Udo, Wienke, and Daamen (2015), a whole-school approach is the most effective way to reduce bullying. In their report, they discuss various programs aimed at preventing bullying. They note that while much research has been conducted into the causes of bullying, less attention has been paid to the effectiveness of interventions. Studies show mixed results regarding how effective these interventions are. However, they suggest that a whole-school approach that involves multiple levels appears to be the most effective. These levels include the individual, classroom, and school-wide levels.
At the school level, strategies include involving peers, improving playgrounds, and increasing supervision to promote a positive school climate. At the classroom level, group discussions and attitude-shaping interventions are used; however, when these are implemented in isolation, outcomes are often not positive. Finally, the individual level involves social skills training, anger management, assertiveness training, and empathy development.
The report also outlines several evidence-based programs and methods that can support a whole-school approach.
Although this approach appears promising, there remains a clear need for more rigorous research to determine what truly works in preventing and reducing bullying.
Van Rooijen-Mutsaers, K., Udo, N., Wienke, D., & Daamen, W. (2015). Wat werkt tegen pesten? Nederlands Jeugdinstituut. Retrieved on May 7 from https://www.stoppestennu.nl/sites/default/files/uploads/watwerkt_pesten_nji.pdf
- Hannah Nys
Thanks for your post! I really liked how you explained the whole-school approach and how it works on different levels. It’s a model that seems to be gaining a lot of support lately, and I can see why.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, I think it’s also important to think about how realistic it is to apply this in real schools. It requires a lot of coordination and commitment from the whole staff, and that’s not always easy, especially in places where there aren’t enough resources or teachers change all the time.
Moreover, it’s interesting to see that many programs nowadays are shifting away from individual-focused interventions and are trying to change the school environment as a whole. The ViSC program, which I recently posted about, does exactly that. It uses a train-the-trainer model to give schools more autonomy, which sounds good in theory. But even then, the results on reducing victimisation weren’t that strong, so clearly there’s still room for improvement.
That made me wonder if maybe combining the whole-school approach with more targeted support for students who are more vulnerable, and offering ongoing help for teachers, could make it more effective.
In the end, I think whole-school programs have a lot of potential, but we shouldn’t treat them as the only solution. Schools are all different, so having a bit more flexibility might actually help make these interventions work better.
Salma Garrijou