Missing Structure: A Critical Content Analysis of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program

Abstract

School bullying is dominantly understood as an individualistic phenomenon, overlooking the sociostructural environment that creates and maintains it. A critical content analysis reveals that the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program is similarly lacking. The programme labels students as bullies and victims, ascribes these groups’ particular character traits, sidelines issues of bias and at times reproduces norms that foster bullying. The programme hyperfocuses on real‐time manifestations of bullying incidents, attempting to end bullying through universal monitoring of students and student compliance with anti‐bullying rules. It is argued that efforts to reduce school bullying should address both its individualistic and structural determinants.

Bullying, Cyberbullying and the Overlap: What Does Age Have to Do with It?

“…These conceptual problems extend to the terminology used when describing bullying and the actors involved and have implications for measurement. All this calls for the need to reach a consensus [17], but in the meantime research relies on existing and validated instruments and attempts to align itself with the terminology of said instruments [18,19].…”

A Sociological Critique of Youth Strategies and Educational Policies that Address LGBTQ Youth Issues

“…Sociological approaches, on the other hand, highlight the role that schools themselves play in generating bullying, or in providing the conditions within which it can flourish. As such, they seek to illuminate the broader contextual factors and systemic inequalities that underlie bullying practices and behaviours (Temko 2019).…”

“…While much of the anti-bullying literature has focused on school-based bullying, it has failed to take adequate account of the sociocultural context of school-which is linked to larger social structures such as gender and sexuality that children and youth have to navigate on a daily basis (Duncan 2013a, b;Payne and Smith 2016;Temko 2019;Pascoe 2013). From a sociological perspective, schools are "microsystems embedded in a larger cultural context," and broader social policies, discriminations or legislative scenarios "trickle down and impact school cultures" (Pearson and Wilkinson 2018, p. 198).…”

“…Recent years have witnessed the emergence of a body of literature that adopts an explicitly sociological perspective on the problem of bullying (e.g. Brenick and Halgunseth 2017;Pascoe 2013;Smith 2013, 2016;Søndergaard 2012;Temko 2019). This literature has emerged as a response to the perceived failure of the dominant bullying literature, which has its disciplinary roots in psychology, to adequately address the underlying reasons why bullying actually happens, and relatedly, the broader social contexts within which bullying occurs (Temko 2019;Pascoe 2013).…”

“…Brenick and Halgunseth 2017;Pascoe 2013;Smith 2013, 2016;Søndergaard 2012;Temko 2019). This literature has emerged as a response to the perceived failure of the dominant bullying literature, which has its disciplinary roots in psychology, to adequately address the underlying reasons why bullying actually happens, and relatedly, the broader social contexts within which bullying occurs (Temko 2019;Pascoe 2013). Within the dominant psychological framework, bullying stems from deficiencies in bullies' psychological development or family background, such as their inability to express empathy, inadequate socialisation or a dysfunctional family structure (Payne and Smith 2016).…”