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.
Number of times cited: 12
- Rozemarijn van der Ploeg, Christian Steglich and René Veenstra, The support group approach in the Dutch KiVa anti-bullying programme: effects on victimisation, defending and well-being at school, Educational Research, 58, 3, (221), (2016).
- Peter K. Smith, Research and Practice in the Study of School Bullying, The Wiley Handbook of Developmental Psychology in Practice, (290-310), (2015).
- Erin Vaughn and Kathryn Obenchain, Fourth Graders Confront an Injustice: The Anti-Bullying Campaign—A Social Action Inquiry Project, The Social Studies, 106, 1, (13), (2015).
- Claire F. Garandeau, Elisa Poskiparta and Christina Salmivalli, Tackling Acute Cases of School Bullying in the KiVa Anti-Bullying Program: A Comparison of Two Approaches, Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 42, 6, (981), (2014).
- Ernest Tamanji Anye, Tara L. Gallien, Hui Bian and Michael Moulton, The Relationship Between Spiritual Well-Being and Health-Related Quality of Life in College Students, Journal of American College Health, 61, 7, (414), (2013).
- Maria M. Ttofi and David P. Farrington, Bullying prevention programs: the importance of peer intervention, disciplinary methods and age variations, Journal of Experimental Criminology, 8, 4, (443), (2012).
- Ken Rigby, Bullying in Schools: Addressing Desires, Not Only Behaviours, Educational Psychology Review, 24, 2, (339), (2012).
- Ken Rigby, References, Bullying Interventions in Schools, (151-160), (2012).
- Ken Rigby, What can schools do about cases of bullying?, Pastoral Care in Education, 29, 4, (273), (2011).
- Claire P. Monks, Peter K. Smith, Paul Naylor, Christine Barter, Jane L. Ireland and Iain Coyne, Bullying in different contexts: Commonalities, differences and the role of theory, Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14, 2, (146), (2009).
- Muthanna Samara and Peter K. Smith, How schools tackle bullying, and the use of whole school policies: changes over the last decade, Educational Psychology, 28, 6, (663), (2008).
- Ken Rigby and Phillip Slee, Interventions to reduce bullying, International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 20, 2, (2008).
