Seven years ago, I helped found a nonprofit organization committed to changing the culture for girls. Our work was based on the health-psychology notion of 鈥渉ardiness鈥濃�攁 way of talking about resilience that not only identifies what girls need to thrive in an increasingly complex and stressful world, but also makes clear that adults are responsible for creating safe spaces for girls to grow, think critically, and work together to make their lives better.
As a result of this work, I鈥檝e grown concerned lately that 鈥渂ully prevention鈥� has all but taken over the way we think about, talk about, and respond to the relational lives of children and youths in schools. So, from our group鈥檚 strength-based approach, I offer 10 ways to move beyond what is too often being sold as a panacea for schools鈥� social ills, and is becoming, I fear, a problem in and of itself:
Stop labeling kids. Bully-prevention programs typically put kids into three categories: bullies, victims, and bystanders. Labeling children in these ways denies what we know to be true: We are all complex beings with the capacity to do harm and to do good, sometimes within the same hour. It also makes the child the problem, which downplays the important role of parents, teachers, the school system, a provocative and powerful media culture, and societal injustices children experience every day. Labeling kids bullies, for that matter, contributes to the negative climate and name-calling we鈥檙e trying to address.
Talk accurately about behavior. If it鈥檚 sexual harassment, call it sexual harassment; if it鈥檚 homophobia, call it homophobia; and so forth. To lump disparate behaviors under the generic 鈥渂ullying鈥� is to efface real differences that affect young people鈥檚 lives. Bullying is a broad term that de-genders, de-races, de-everythings school safety. Because of this, as the sexual-harassment expert Nan Stein has noted, embracing anti-bullying legislation can actually undermine the legal rights and protections offered by anti-harassment laws. Calling behaviors what they are helps us educate children about their rights, affirms their realities, encourages more-complex and meaningful solutions, opens up a dialogue, invites children to participate in social change, and ultimately protects them.
If we allow kids to speak out, to think critically and question unfairness, we provide the groundwork for civic engagement.
Move beyond the individual. Children鈥檚 behaviors are greatly affected by their life histories and social contexts. To understand why a child uses aggression toward others, it鈥檚 important to understand what impact race, ethnicity, social class, gender, religion, and ability has on his or her daily experiences in school鈥攖hat is, how do these realities affect the kinds of attention and resources the child receives, where he fits in, whether she feels marginal or privileged in the school. Such differences in social capital, cultural capital, and power relations deeply affect a child鈥檚 psychological and relational experiences in school.
Reflect reality. Many schools across the country have adopted an approach developed by the Norwegian educator Dan Olweus, the 鈥淥lweus Bullying Prevention Program,鈥� even though it has not been effectively evaluated with U.S. samples. Described as a 鈥渦niversal intervention for the reduction and prevention of bully/victim problems,鈥� the Olweus program downplays those differences that make a difference. But even when bully-prevention programs have been adequately evaluated, the University of Illinois鈥� Dorothy Espelage argues, they often show less-than-positive results in urban schools or with minority populations. 鈥淲e do not have a one-size-fits-all school system,鈥� she reminds us. Because the United States has a diversity of race, ethnicity, and language, and inequalities between schools, bully-prevention efforts here need to reflect that reality.
Adjust expectations. We hold kids to ideals and expectations that we as adults could never meet. We expect girls to ingest a steady diet of media 鈥渕ean girls鈥� and always be nice and kind, and for boys to engage a culture of violence and never lash out. We expect kids never to express anger to adults, never to act in mean or hurtful ways to one another, even though they may spend much of the day in schools they don鈥檛 feel safe in, and with teachers and other students who treat them with disrespect. Moreover, we expect kids to behave in ways most of us don鈥檛 even value very much: to obey all the rules (regardless of their perceived or real unfairness), to never resist or refuse or fight back.
It鈥檚 important to promote consistent consequences鈥攖he hallmarks of most bully-prevention programs鈥攂ut it鈥檚 also critically important to create space for honest conversations about who benefits from certain norms and rules and who doesn鈥檛. If we allow kids to speak out, to think critically and question unfairness, we provide the groundwork for civic engagement.
Listen to kids. In her book Other People鈥檚 Children, Lisa Delpit talks about the importance of 鈥渓istening that requires not only open eyes and ears, but also hearts and minds.鈥� Again, consistent consequences are important; used well, they undermine privilege and protect those who are less powerful. But to make such a system work, schools have to listen to all students. It鈥檚 the only way to ensure that staff members are not using discipline and consistent consequences simply to promote the status quo.
Instead of labeling kids, let鈥檚 talk about them as potential leaders, affirm their strengths, and believe that they can do good, brave, remarkable things.
Embrace grassroots movements. There鈥檚 nothing better than student-initiated change. Too many bully-prevention programs are top-heavy with adult-generated rules, meetings, and trainings. We need to empower young people. This includes being on the lookout for positive grassroots resistance, ready to listen to and support and sometimes channel youth movements when they arise. We need to listen to students, take up their just causes, understand the world they experience, include them in the dialogue about school norms and rules, and use their creative energy to illuminate and challenge unfairness.
Be proactive, not reactive. In Maine, we have a nationally recognized Civil Rights Team Project. Youth-led, school-based preventive teams work to increase safety, educate their peers, and combat hate violence, prejudice, and harassment in more than 250 schools across the state. This kind of proactive youth-empowerment work is sorely needed, but is too often lost in the midst of zero-tolerance policies and top-down bully-prevention efforts. And yet such efforts work. According to a study conducted by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN, youth-led gay-straight alliances make schools safer for all students.
Build coalitions. Rather than bully prevention, let鈥檚 emphasize ally- and coalition-building. We need to affirm and support the definition of coalition that activist Bernice Johnson Reagon suggests: work that鈥檚 difficult, exhausting, but necessary 鈥渇or all of us to feel that this is our world.鈥�
Accentuate the positive. Instead of labeling kids, let鈥檚 talk about them as potential leaders, affirm their strengths, and believe that they can do good, brave, remarkable things. The path to safer, less violent schools lies less in our control over children than in appreciating their need to have more control in their lives, to feel important, to be visible, to have an effect on people and situations.
Bully prevention has become a huge for-profit industry. Let鈥檚 not let the steady stream of training sessions, rules, policies, consequence charts, and no-bullying posters keep us from listening well, thinking critically, and creating approaches that meet the singular needs of our schools and communities.
