The authors would like to thank the Portuguese National Agency for the Management of Youth in Action for their support of this project that is of benefit to the health and wellbeing of students from around Europe. They also extend their gratitude to the partner organisations: The leading and applicant organisation MOJU – Associação Movimento Juvenil em Olhão (Portugal) and the partner organisations YEU – Youth for Exchange and Understanding, Belgium, CID – Centre for Intercultural Dialogue, North Macedonia, APY – Armenian Progressive Youth, Armenia for their inspirational ideas, their assistance in the research by providing in loco feedback from educational actors and for their open-mindedness and their excellent organisational skills without which this project would have been impossible.

The project, financed by the Erasmus+ programme, began in 2021. Its focus was on bullying in schools and it seeks to disseminate knowledge on handling this nefarious phenomenon. The various methods that have been adopted to date around the world were compared and presented during a five-day training course in February 2022, in which participants came from various countries. Special emphasis was given to the “Shared Concern Method” and the participants were trained in the use of this method.

Other outcomes of the project took the form of an Internet site, as well as the present book. Both are viewed as tools to help both the participants in the training programme and anyone else interested in dealing with bullying in school to develop their skills, form anti-bullying teams and communicate their ideas and questions to one another and to the trainers.

The experts, who were also the trainers during the five-day training and the authors of the present text, are Marija Stankovska and Alexandros R.A. Tzamalis.

A survey on bullying/cyber-bullying was conducted during the summer 2021 with the help of the partner organisations in three countries (Armenia, North Macedonia and Portugal).

In North Macedonia the survey was conducted in the region of Kumanovo. 40 teachers and members of the school staff (Teachers: 33; Socio-medical staff: 3; Educators: 4), 42 students and 2 youth workers were interviewed. The schools that participated have a student population from a mixed social background and, in most cases, a mixed ethnic background also.

This survey allows us to draw some interesting conclusions from the data gathered.

Concerning the awareness about issues of bullying and cyber-bullying in their environment, it appears that it is quite low in North Macedonia, with students and school staff rating it at just 5.4 on a scale of 10, while youth workers, appear more aware of the issue, rating it with 9 out of 10.

In a similar manner, in North Macedonia respondents offered a wide variety of propositions for a term that translates “bullying”, but from the variety of the proposed answers (9 distinct terms were proposed, many of which were given in differentiated variants) it is clear that in this linguistic environment there is also no clear term that could be used to translate the term “bullying” exactly.

Students’ answers were much more mitigated on these questions than their professors, with 59.5% answering that the issue of bullying is/has been discussed in class, 31% answering that it isn’t/hasn’t been discussed and 9.5% declaring ignorance. On this issue we should focus more on the answers of the students. It should further be pointed out that even if we accept that almost all teachers have treated the issue of bullying in class, it becomes obvious that the problems of terminology that were pointed out above do not allow the students that participate in such a discussion to have a clear image as to what exactly is being discussed.

A similar image emerges when the question about the existence of anti-bullying programs is discussed with respondents from North Macedonia: 45% of teachers and school staff stated that such programmes existed, 17,5% stated that no such programmes existed and 37.5% professed ignorance of any such programmes. The majority of students, on the other hand, i.e. 54.8% stated that no such programmes exist, 21.4% stated that they did not know whether such programmes existed and 23.8% stated that they were aware of such programmes. If we take all those students who have never been touched by such a programme together we see that 76.2% have never encountered such a programme in North Macedonia. It should thus be emphasised that these numbers taken together demonstrate that existing programmes in the country seem to have been ineffective and that there is a great need to import methods and ideas that have been tried and tested in other educational contexts.

When asked whether there are any state programmes that aim at training educators to deal with bullying the image that emerges from answers given by the teachers and other school staff members confirms the situation: 60% (24 educators) state that no such programme exists, 17.5% state that they ignore if such programmes exists, and only 22.5% (9 educators) answer that they have come across such programmes.

The educators were asked about whether they had come across cases of bullying during their academic career. Here the results were, at a first glance, surprising, as 60% of the educators in North Macedonia stated that they had never come across a case of bullying in their schools. Given past experience, this figure should probably be attributed to ignorance of what exactly constitutes bullying and also voluntarily turning a blind eye to negative student interactions.

In Armenia the survey was conducted in the schools in Arabkir, Kentron and Erebuni administrative districts of Yerevan. 10 students aged between 13 and 16 years old, 5 youth workers and 4 teachers participated in the survey.

In Armenia all respondents stated that awareness is very low, giving it just 4.8 out of 10 for students and teachers, while youth workers state that it is slightly lower, placing it at 4. Awareness of cyber-bullying was ranked only slightly higher.

There appears to be no widely used term in Armenian that corresponds to the term “bullying”. Respondents proposed terms such as “violence”, “harassment”, “violation of child rights”, but there is no single term that is recognisable and widely-used for “bullying” in this language.

79% of respondents answered that teachers did indeed discuss bullying issues with their classes in Armenia and all respondents believe that the existence of an Anti-Bullying structure in each school is very important. However it might be useful to qualify these numbers by breaking them down further: while all adults and 60% of the students agreed that discussions about bullying are organised by the teachers, with some even stating that such discussions take place on a weekly basis, 40% of all students said that they had never come across any such discussions during their school career. Given the age of the participating students (13-16 years old), this statement once again raises questions concerning the lack of clarity that surrounds both the name of the phenomenon and of its exact definition.

Once again, and probably for similar reasons as in North Macedonia, 79% of respondents answered that they had no personal experience of bullying and only 21% stated that they had come across cases of bullying in the past. As we discussed above, this is probably due to the lack of a firm definition of what exactly bullying is.

It is interesting to note that not a single respondent in Armenia had ever heard of the “Shared Concern Method” or Anatol Pikas, which shows how important this introductory work is.

Note that in Armenia, as was the case in North Macedonia, the schools where the surveys were held had ethnically mixed populations, as here Armenian students were mixed with students of an Iranian ethnic background.

In Portugal the sample comprised 75 pupils, 8 professors and other members of the school staff and 4 youth workers, giving a total of 87 responders.

Of these, 26% stated that they had personally suffered from bullying or cyberbullying in the past. It is positive to note that the vast majority of answers were positive concerning whether there are discussions of the topic of bullying that take place in classrooms in Portugal. This also is in agreement with the importance that is accorded to dealing with bullying of all forms in schools, as 88.5% of participants stated that anti-bullying structures in school are very important. However only 2 out of the 12 adult participants actually knew of a specific method to deal with bullying (17%) and only 1 (8%) had even heard of the Shared Concern Method.

The preceding figures allow us to draw some interesting conclusions:

Awareness of the issue of bullying and cyberbullying is very low among the respondents in the three participating countries, averaging at 54% in North Macedonia, 48% in Armenia, although in Portugal 84% of respondents answered that the issue was addressed in the lives of young people.

Asked whether they had personal experience of bullying, 60% of educators in North Macedonia, 79% of educators in Armenia and 74% in Portugal, stated that they had never noticed a case of bullying. These surprising figures are probably due to a number of factors which could include problems defining what exactly bullying is, problems concerning the exact terminology used or even voluntarily turning a blind eye in the face of the lack of the right tools to deal with the problem.

Concerning the issue of the exact terminology used to describe bullying, this is another common issue detected in the three countries, as in all three cases there appears to be no common nomenclature to define it. People faced with bullying are obliged to choose from among a number of different terms, which do not, however, describe the issue exactly, nor are they reserved exclusively for it. Lacking a specific term in the local language, the solution of using the English term is sometimes put forward.

Given the above, it hardly comes as a surprise that very few of the respondents had ever heard of any of the “humanistic” methods used to deal with bullying and especially the Shared Concern Method of Anatol Pikas.

The results of the survey also show the urgent need to continue implementing programmes such as the “Working Together To Stop Bullying” with the objective of raising awareness about this problem and equipping people, and especially educators, with the knowledge and tools that they need to deal with this problem that can be harmful for young people both while they are still children and throughout their adult life.

Description:

Bullying is a form of aggressive behaviour that intentionally and repeatedly causes someone injury or discomfort. Bullying can be physical, verbal or can even take on more subtle forms. It usually involves one or more aggressors or bullies, one or more victims and a number of witnesses or bystanders.

The American Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) defines bullying as “any unwanted aggressive behaviour(s) by another youth or group of youths, who are not siblings or current dating partners, that involves an observed or perceived power imbalance, and is repeated multiple times or is highly likely to be repeated”.

Until relatively recently bullying was never, if ever, reported and recorded in schools. Many considered bullying as being normal behaviour for children and thus no cause for worry, while others even went as far as considering it as something positive, being a way to “harden” children, giving them the necessary experience to deal with hardships that they would have to face in their adult life.

International nomenclature:

It is interesting to note that there is a disparity in the use of terms used to describe bullying, proof that this behaviour has only recently been recognised and studied in a more systematic manner. In France, for example, the word harcèlement is employed to replace bullying. But harcèlement (harassment) brings to mind much more serious situations, and notably sexual harassment. For this reason experts have suggested the use of the term intimidation, although this, as in English, has a different signification.

In Macedonian, the term most used in малтретирање – [pron. maltretiranje], which is not adapted to the specific phenomenon, as it covers a range of situations going from physical abuse to simply putting too much effort into something that is not worth it!

For this reason other languages, such as Greek, have imported the word directly from English.

Identifying Bullying:

At this point it might be useful to underline the essential elements that can allow us to identify an aggressive behaviour as bullying. The first is an imbalance of power: Kids who bully use their power—such as physical strength, access to embarrassing information, or popularity—to control or harm others. Power imbalances can change over time and in different situations, even if they involve the same people. The second essential element is repetition: Bullying behaviours happen more than once or have the potential to happen more than once.

Bullying is not limited to the schoolyard. Most bullying takes place within the walls of the school, either within the buildings themselves or in the playground. It also often takes place when travelling to or from school, either in the bus or in the street. In France a lot of bullying takes place in the buses, where the children are no longer under the jurisdiction of the school and the driver is too busy to intervene – and it’s not his role anyway…

Frequency of Bullying:

Sources vary as to the exact definition of bullying and many cases are not reported anyway, because of the feeling of shame that the victims often experience.

In the USA, according to the 2019 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (National Center for Education Statistics and Bureau of Justice), about 22% of students ages 12–18 experienced bullying in the US. Another source for the same country, the 2019 Youth Risk Behaviour Surveillance System (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) indicates that, 19.5% of students in grades 9–12 report being bullied on school property in the 12 months preceding the survey.

In the UK, according to a global report  , almost a quarter of British pupils say they are being bullied a few times a month, while more than 14% say they are bullied frequently. According to the 2016 national bullying statistics by Ditch the Label, a staggering 1.5 million young people in the UK were bullied within the last year alone. Of these, 145,800 (19%) were bullied every day.

In Australia approximately one in four Year 4 to Year 9 Australian students (27%) reported being bullied every few weeks or more often (considered to be frequent) in a national study in 2009 .

In France a parliamentary report from 2020 states that almost 700,000 children are victims of bullying each year, which corresponds to 5-6% of children – a surprisingly low figure, that is probably related to the fact that anti-bullying programs are relatively recent in France. The same source states that almost 10% of children undergo bullying at least once during their years in school.

In countries with more established anti-bullying programmes, the statistics tend to show that approximately 1 child in 4 is subjected to bullying more or less regularly at school. Even the low French figure – 1 in 10 – is shockingly high.

Consequences of bullying:

The figures, one might say, are interesting enough, but why are they of concern? Hasn’t bullying always existed in schools? Is it not part of growing up, of socialisation, of learning to deal with life? Even people of my own generation had virtually no recourse when faced with bullying, but we survived well-enough, didn’t we?

Well, the truth of the matter is that, no, not everyone did survive. And not everyone does. Bullying is the cause of some terrible long-term consequences. Bullying can cause many young people to feel isolated, worthless, and experience thoughts of suicide.

A national bullying survey by Bullying UK found that students were more likely to take time off school after they had experienced bullying.  Other consequences can be detected from the example of the UK: 

• More than 16,000, or 42% of young people who have experienced bullying, are absent from school due to bullying
• 55% of children who have been bullied will develop depression
• 40% of young people who reported being bullied experienced thoughts of suicide
• 39% had self-harmed
• Over 200 schoolchildren die by suicide every year in the UK (although statistics are not clear how many of these cases were related to bullying).

Research in the US has similarly revealed the devastating effects that bullying has. These include a higher chance of experiencing depression and anxiety in children that are the victims of bullying, which may persist into adulthood. It is reported that victims also often experience a decrease of their academic achievement and are more likely to skip classes or drop out of school. Bullying may also aggravate the chances of suicidal thoughts and suicide, while young people who display extremely violent behaviour have often been victims of bullying (in 12 of the 15 school shooting cases in the 1990s, the shooters had been the victims of bullying at school). 

The negative effects of bullying are not limited to the victims, however. It has been shown that kids that display bullying behaviour at school can also display violent and risky behaviour in adulthood. They are more likely to abuse alcohol or drugs, get into fights, have criminal convictions or show abusive and violent behaviour to their romantic partners or children.

Witnesses or bystanders also experience negative effects from the acts of bullying at school, as they are more likely to show signs of increased anxiety or depression, are more likely to have an increased use of alcohol or drugs and are more likely to skip or miss school.

The Profile of a Bully:

There is, unfortunately, no clear profile of a bully. Bullying is related to an imbalance of power: a bully might be stronger or have more knowledge than the victim – but not everyone who holds power is a bully.

One thing that we can say about bullies is that quite often (but not always) they have suffered some form of bullying (or isolation) themselves.

The Profile of the Victim:

Again, there is no clear profile as who a victim might be. There are a few stats that are interesting, however:

• Research in the UK has shown that young people who have an ethnic minority profile were at a much higher risk of being bullied than a young Caucasian person;
• 65% of gay or bisexual young people experience homophobic bullying in school;

So, one attempt to classify students that are likely to be bullied, gives the following list as children likely to be bullied :

• Successful students
• Intelligent, Determined, Creative students
• Vulnerable students
• Isolated students
• Popular students
• Having a distinctive Physical Appearance
• Having an Illness or Disability
• Different Sexual Orientation
• Different Religious or Cultural Beliefs
• Different racial and ethnic background

Successful:

Kids who are good at what they do might get bullied. A lot of times kids will be bullied because they get a lot of positive attention from their peers and from adults.

Bullies target these students because they either feel inferior or they worry that their abilities are being overshadowed by the target’s abilities. As a result, they bully these kids hoping to make them feel insecure as well as to make others doubt their abilities.

Intelligent, Determined, Creative

At school, these students go that extra mile on schoolwork. Or they learn very quickly and move through projects and assignments faster than other students. For instance, gifted students are often targeted for excelling in school. Bullies usually single them out because they are jealous of this attention.

Vulnerable

Children who are introverted, anxious, or submissive are more likely to be bullied than kids who are extroverted and assertive. In fact, some researchers believe that kids who lack self-esteem may attract kids who are prone to bully. What’s more, kids who engage in people-pleasing are often targeted by bullies because they are easy to manipulate.

Research shows that kids suffering from depression or stress-related conditions may also be more likely to be bullied, which often makes the condition worse. Bullies select these kids because they are an easy mark and less likely to fight back. Most bullies want to feel powerful, so they often choose kids that are weaker than them.

Isolated

Many victims of bullying tend to have fewer friends than children who do not experience bullying. They may be rejected by their peers, excluded from social events, and may even spend lunch and recess alone.

Parents and teachers can prevent bullying of socially isolated students by helping them develop friendships. Bystanders can also support these students by befriending them.

Research shows that if a child has at least one friend, their chances of being bullied reduce dramatically. Without a friend to back them up, these kids are more likely to be targeted by bullies because they do not have to worry about someone coming to the victim’s aid.

Popular

Sometimes bullies target popular or well-liked children because of the threat they pose to the bully. Mean girls are especially likely to target someone who threatens their popularity or social standing.

A lot of relational aggression is directly linked to an attempt to climb the social ladder. Kids will spread rumors, engage in name-calling, and even resort to cyberbullying in an effort to destroy their popularity. When these kids are targeted, the bully is looking to discredit the victims and make them less likable.

Distinctive Physical Appearance

Almost any type of physical characteristic that is different or unique can attract the attention of bullies. It may be that the victim is short, tall, thin, or obese. They might wear glasses or have acne or some exceptional physical feature. It really doesn’t matter what it is, the bully will pick a feature and distort it into a target.

Many times, this type of bullying is extremely painful and damaging to a young person’s self-esteem.

Most bullies who target these kids get some enjoyment from making fun of others. Other times, they are looking for a laugh at another person’s expense. The best way to combat a bully who targets this type of person is to take away their audience.

Illness or Disability

Bullies often target special needs children. This can include children who have autism spectrum disorder (ASD), Asperger’s syndrome (which the DSM-5 no longer uses as a diagnosis but, instead, now falls under ASD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dyslexia, Down syndrome, or any condition that sets them apart. Kids with food allergies, asthma, and other conditions also can be targeted by bullies. When this happens, the bullies show a lack of empathy or are making jokes at another person’s expense.

Different Sexual Orientation

More often than not, kids are bullied for being gay. In fact, some of the most brutal bullying incidents have involved children who are bullied for their sexual orientation. If left unchecked, prejudicial bullying can result in serious hate crimes. As a result, it is essential that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) students be given a solid support network in order to keep them safe.

It is very important for teachers and parents to make sure these kids have a support group with them to help defend against bullying. It also helps if the general student population frowns on this type of bullying in particular. If bullies know this is taboo, they are less likely to do it.

Religious or Cultural Beliefs

It is not uncommon for kids to be bullied for their religious beliefs. In the US, one example of this type of bullying includes the treatment Muslim students received after the 9/11 tragedy. However, any student can be bullied for their religious beliefs. Both Christian students and Jewish students are often ridiculed for their beliefs and practices as well.

Bullying based on different religious beliefs usually stems from a lack of understanding as well as a lack of tolerance for believing something different.

Racial and ethnic background

Sometimes kids will bully others because they have a different racial or ethnic background. For instance, White students may single out Black students and bully them. Or Black students may single out White students and bully them.

It happens with all racial and all ethnic backgrounds and in all directions. No one is exempt from being bullied, and no group is exempt from having bullies. Just like with religious bullying, these students are singled out for no other reason than the fact that they’re different.

Cyberbullying

A relative new form of Bullying is Cyberbullying.

Cyberbullying is bullying that takes place over digital devices like cell phones, computers, and tablets. Cyberbullying can occur through SMS, Text, and apps, or online in social media, forums, or gaming where people can view, participate in, or share content. It includes sending, posting, or sharing negative, harmful, false, or mean content about someone else. It can include sharing personal or private information about someone else causing embarrassment or humiliation. Because of various laws that define how cyberspace can be used, cyberbullying often crosses the line into unlawful or criminal behaviour – although children and young people are almost unaware of this.

The most common places where cyberbullying occurs are:

• Social Media, such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and Tik Tok
• Text messaging and messaging apps on mobile or tablet devices – note that educators and parents are increasingly eager to see the creation of an online “class group” that can be used to share homework or for students to help each other with work.
• Instant messaging, direct messaging, and online chatting over the internet
• Online forums, chat rooms, and message boards, such as Reddit
• Email
• Online gaming communities

Cyberbullying is the cause of further concern, given that with the prevalence of social media and digital forums, comments, photos, posts, and content shared by individuals can often be viewed by strangers as well as acquaintances.

Cyberbullying has unique concerns in that it can be:

• Persistent – Digital devices offer an ability to immediately and continuously communicate 24 hours a day, so it can be difficult for children experiencing cyberbullying to find relief.

• Permanent – Most information communicated electronically is permanent and public, if not reported and removed. A negative online reputation, including for those who bully, can impact college admissions, employment, and other areas of life.

• Hard to Notice – Because teachers and parents may not overhear or see cyberbullying taking place, it is harder to recognize.

Given especially the first two characteristics cyberbullying can be especially dangerous, as it is often a continuation of bullying that goes on physically at school. Before cyberbullying the victim of bullying could at least find some respite while at home, while now the suffering is continued at home and is 24 hours a day…

Note that in the USA about 16 percent of students in grades 9–12 experienced cyberbullying and that Cyberbullying is on the up with the number of children and young people tormented by online trolls having increased by 88% in five years.

Conclusions

What can we say in conclusion of this brief overview of bullying? What stands out is that there is no specific profile either for bullies or their victims. In fact bullies quite often have been victims themselves. Anyone can be a bully of a victim – depending on the circumstances.

One element that we didn’t insist on was that bullying is often associated with group dynamics. Bullies often bully for the sake of the approbation of the group. This is why bullying is usually observed in situations where group dynamics are strong – such as schools.

Since the recognition of its existence and the perception of its distinct character compared to pure physical violence in 1970es, several definitions of the bullying phenomenon were put forward and various methods were developed to handle this problem.

According to these definitions, the most characteristic features of the phenomenon of school bullying are:

1. The psychological, physical, moral, or verbal violence that is intentionally carried out by the students (or professors) in a dominant position towards one or several students in a weak position; an imbalance of power is an important factor in bullying.
2. The prolonged duration and the repetitive character, which distinguishes it from pure physical violence. The bully-ies will return to their target(s) repeatedly over a prolonged period of time – weeks, months or even years.

Several methods have been used to find a solution when this problem appears, and to re-establish a serene school climate following the event.

Here is a general overview of the most common approaches:

Traditional or legalistic approach:

This approach focuses on the fact that an act of violence (physical or verbal) was committed and doesn’t attempt to recognise bullying as such. As soon as the actors of the violent act are known, a sanction is immediately applied because the school rules have been broken. This method rarely leads to any long-lasting effects, because more often than not, the bully seeks for vengeance and continues bullying.

Moralistic approach:

The identified bully is called into an advisor’s office. The advisor forcibly states and reiterates the values and moral position of the school as they apply to bullying and seeks to make the student understand the importance of respecting the school rules. To reinforce the message, the student might be required to write an essay, to present his excuses to the victim or carry out similar acts to prove his/her repentance. Experience has shown that usually, the bully will agree, carry out any given tasks and then go back to bullying.

Humanistic approach:

The humanistic approach is more recent and the most innovative of all. The main feature of this approach is that it is not punitive. It also treats the bully as a basically decent human being. It has intention not only to stop a specific bullying case but to durably change the attitude of the bully so he/she never starts bullying again. This main principle will be further expanded, and several different methods based on this approach will be discussed. Among them, the most well-known are:

            The Pikas Method / The Shared Concern Method / The Method of Shared Concern which was adapted in various countries;  

            The No Blame Approach

            The KiVa method.

The Shared Concern Method or The Pikas method:

This method is developed by the professor in Educational Psychology, Anatol Pikas (1928 – 2021), who taught at the University of Uppsala, Sweden and it was the first method of humanitarian approach to be developed. The purpose of this method is not to punish, but to convert the bully to a new, positive role, to develop the empathy of the students and, in that way, to stop the bullying.

The SCM is based on the postulate that bullying is a process in which several actors are involved: victim(s), bully(ies) and bystanders that can be either passive or active.

The method consists of leading several short interviews with the actors involved in the process. All the actors are interviewed separately by the members of a team familiar with the steps of the method, in a friendly, positive atmosphere. The victim is treated separately. The bully, aka Presumed Intimidator, is first reassured that he is not in trouble and then he is asked if he/she had noticed that student X (the victim) is having difficult time at school. The bully either confirms this, or denies it. If the first happened, the team member asks him what he/she can do to change the situation of X. Usually, the bully proposes some modest steps to undertake, such as keeping an eye the situation of X, talking to him/her or talking to the students that are bothering him. Whatever the proposition, the interviewer reacts in positive manner without asking any further explanations. If the bully doesn’t recognise the situation, he is asked to keep an eye of X and is invited to report back if he notices something.

The next interview is carried out a few days later. The most common situation is that bully wants to show to the member of the team his shared concern about the situation of the student in question. The interview finishes in a way that is similar to the previous one: the student is thanked for his contribution and invited to continue with his positive manner of acting that helps X to feel better at school. Thus, several interviews are carried out over two weeks at most.

The series of the interviews with the witnesses are similar. The team member already knows the position of the witness in the case: is he close to the victim, is he a passive witness or an active witness, someone who laughed and encouraged the bully. Whatever the situation, the team member carries out the interview. In all cases, the steps are similar, and the objective is not to find the truth, but to stop the bullying and to convert the attitude of the bully.

When developed and applied by Anatol Pikas, this revolutionary method was spread to several countries which adapted it to their own reality, which in some cases led to the development of new types of method., as in Australia, in UK (No Blame method) in France (Méthode de preoccupation partagée, adapted by Jean-Pierre Bellon, Bertrand Gardette and Marie Quartier), and recently, in Finland (the KiVa method).  

The No Blame Approach:

Developed by Barbara Maines and George Robinson in England at the beginning of the1990s. As is the case with the other humanistic approaches, the No Blame Approach doesn’t apply any punishment. Bullies are involved in the process of the amelioration of the school climate by looking at how their actions have affected the victim. This approach is intended to develop the bully’s empathy towards the victim and to make him durably change is attitude.  

The KiVA method:

This method was developed in Finland and its name is a shortened for “Kiusaamista Vastaan” (in Finish – “against bullying”) and it’s the newest humanistic method. This method does not focus on the bully, and it doesn’t try to develop the empathy of the bully either, nor does it attempt to confront the bully and the victim. It focuses on the bystanders by trying to make the spectators stop laughing when someone is mocked, thus leaving the bully without a public. The method is reported to be very efficient and it is applied mainly among younger pupils.

To find more about No Blame Approach:

• George Robinson, BarbaraMaines, Crying forhelp, Lucky Duck, 1997.
• George Robinson, Barbara Maines, Bullying, A Complete guide to the Support Group Method, 2008.
• https://www.gesamtschule-scharnhorst.de/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/The-No-Blame-approach-to-bullying.pdf

To find more about the KiVa method:

• https://www.kivaprogram.net

A – Participants

The 24 participants in the training course were professors, school staff from public schools in Portugal and North Macedonia as well as youth workers from North Macedonia and Armenia. The two experts are teachers in a public school in France and trainers for the MPP  in France. 

B – Place

The training took place in Berovo, North Macedonia, from 23 until 27 of February 2022.

C – Day-by-day

Day 1

The first session was used for non-formal activities that aimed at initiating the communication between the members of the different countries, to better understand the process of learning, to prepare the participants to be open to new ideas and be ready to apply what they learned. Thanks to these activities, of which some were metaphors for the learning process, communication was much easier, and a positive spirit was created.

The next session was dedicated to gaining a better understanding of how victims of bullying feel through non-formal activities. The discussion about the feelings of the participants after the activities (power, isolation, fear, frustration…) and their transposition on cases of bullying helped to better understand the importance of the empathy for the victim as well as the danger of feelings of isolation. 

The afternoon sessions aimed at examining the existing school structure in order to gain awareness of existing human resources that can be mobilised in the school’s teamwork against bullying. The trainers presented their school environment as well as the institution itself (the staff) as an example of the French public-school structure. This was also an occasion to present the composition of their unit that handles cases of bullying in their school. 

This presentation was carried out as a two-way discussion. The trainers presented their school and their unit so as to serve as an example of how to integrate the existing staff in a team that handles the cases of bullying. Given that the participants were from three different countries, this discussion was very useful; each “team” learned about the situation in the other countries. The main impact of this session was that the members compared the realities from their countries and that the group compared the presented pattern and established the common points with their school structure that can be mobilised for applying the Shared Concern Method. 

The first day finished with a session that aimed at examining bullying and cyberbullying and to distinguish the situations where the Shared Concern Method can be applied. For that purpose, different types of bullying were examined, and the trainers underlined some characteristics that define behaviours as bullying and exposed some general features of the profiles of bullies and of victims. The participants arrived at a better understanding of bullying and agreed on basic definitions that could be used for the next parts of the training as a common ground.

Day 2

The discussion of the participants home’s institutions that had been started the previous day, continued in a more structured form, with the presentation by each team of the organisation of their school. Each presentation was followed by input from the trainers and the other participants with suggestions about the future anti-bullying teams. A better understanding of all institutional actors was gained.

In the afternoon, the participants gained insight into existing methods of dealing with bullying (pros and cons). The trainers presented some of the existing anti-bullying methods: Traditional or Legalistic, Moralistic and Humanistic. The “No Blame” method was presented in some length as an example of a Humanistic approach with many common points with the “Shared Concern” Method.

The participants showed great interest in the proposed classification of the various methods but were especially interested in the “No Blame” method, which they compared with other methods they know or that had been presented earlier.

Day 3

The previous sessions led us to the heart of the subject – The Shared Concern Method. The trainers presented and explained the method and the steps to be taken during the interviews. During the discussion, the differences between the other methods and the Shared concern method were underlined.

The participants were also reminded about the nature of the bullying cases that can be resolved with this method.

The most important part of the session was the practical application of the method through role-playing games followed by the analysis of the situation and explanations. The case scenarios were written by the trainers and aimed to immerse the participants in fictional cases that are close to reality. The trainers provided a form that participants filled after each case. This form was an example for the participants that can serve as a general model which can be adapted and serve as a reminder or an internal document containing the details of each case of bullying.

The outcome of this session was multiple. The participants learned about the Shared Concern Method and agreed that it can be applied in their schools either as it was described by the trainers, or with some adaptations. They were curious to try the method, and eager to analyse its steps and its future benefits. They adopted the habit of filling in the form.

Day 4

The fourth day’s sessions were dedicated to preparing for the dissemination of the method that had been studied. The trainers presented in detail the organisational chart of the procedure that is undertaken their school when the case of bullying appears as well as their platform of communication. The participants engaged a discussion about the suitable modifications of the presented pattern in the aim of applying in different countries it in the most functional way.

After the discussions, the participants worked in groups from the same school/organisation in order to create a plan (protocol) for the procedure to undertake in the case of bullying. All the teams presented the organisational chart that they had created, that shows the steps of the procedure to be undertaken in the case of bullying, and especially in those cases that can be resolved with the learned method as well as the coordination of the interaction between the staff. The created procedure was adapted to the realities of each country and institution. The participants exchanged ideas and opinions about the organisational charts that had been created and each group took the chart to their school or organisation so as to use it as a reminder and to explain the function on the procedure to their colleagues.

Day 5

The consensus of the group was that the best way to deal with bullying is preventing it from occurring in the first place. For this reason Day 5 was given to discussing the ways of preventing bullying situations before they happen. What can NGOs do in partnership with schools to prevent bullying before it starts or stop bullying if it does start? The participants discussed prevention methods already implemented in their institutions and compared efficiency of what they had attempted. They ended the session by presenting videos of past actions.

All the participants discussed the creation of an implementation plan and at the end of the session, each participant created a short- and long-term action plan for the implementation of the Shared Concern Method, which they evaluated as something very useful.

Several times during the training course, the participants expressed the need for a follow up project or a recurring training opportunity. Therefore, we accorded time to discussing these needs. The participants came up with numerous and ambitious ideas that can be used as a basis for future projects that could bring together NGOs and schools to prevent bullying.

At the end of the course, the participants were invited to answer an online questionnaire, giving feedback and evaluating the training. The answers provided useful insight for the trainers.

These scenarios of role-playing games were created for the participants of the training course so they could try the method in an improvised situation. While some participants were involved in the role-playing game, others analysed the situation and the steps that were undertaken by the actors. After each scenario, the participants were invited to complete a form as a document that resumes the case, the interviews and the results.

Case scenario 1:

Participants: 3 (1 interviewer, 2 presumed intimidators)

Here is the information that came to the members of the team:

Dear all,

Ms Roux just send me a mail telling me that her daughter Elsa is feeling anxious every time she goes to school. At first, Elsa was saying that nothing was wrong, but after she admitted that she was having a bad time at school because Ricky and Dina are rude to her, they keep saying that she doesn’t understand anything, that she is the clumsiest person they have seen. Apparently, this has been going on for months, but these two last weeks, they seem to have started to instigate other kids to push her when she is in the school yard, but every time the kids say that it wasn’t in purpose. I spoke with Elsa and she confirmed the story. Can you start the SCM?

Thank you,

Mrs Wels, Chief educational advisor.

INTERVIEWER

You are Mme Perrain interviewer and you organise 2 series of 2 interviews with the PIs. After each interview, please fill the form.

BULLY 1

You are Ricky and you will have two interviews with Mme Perrain. During the first one, you will show a medium degree of concern (about 2/5), recognising that Elsa is having a bad time, and you will give a name of an Elsa’s good friend (Tomas). At the end, you will promise that you will keep an eye on her and you will talk to her.

In the second interview, you will immediately report that you tried to talk to Elsa often but she refuses to talk to you. You promise again that you will continue to try.

BULLY 2

You are Dina and you immediately say Ricky is behind all this. You are very scared and show a high degree of concern. You promise that you will keep an eye on her and you will tell Ricky to stop bothering her.

In the second interview, you will immediately report that you have talked with Elsa. She talked with you and that you have the impression that you have become close to her. 

Case scenario 2:

Participants: 2 (1 interviewer, 1 PI)

Here is the information that came to the members of the team:

Hello M. Oliver,

A student of mine, Samy, has problems that I think can be resolved by your team. Samy is a nice albeit introvert boy, but has a difficulty to pronounce some vowels. The other students of my class are really good to him, but Gordon, that arrived recently in our school has started making fun of him. Maxim has also accepted this “game” and joined Gordon. Please let me know if you will start the procedure so I will not do anything that will be contradictory with your method.

Keep calm, we are almost on holiday,

Mme Yves, the head teacher.

INTERVIEWER

You are M. Oliver and you are receiving Gordon for three interviews. Please fill the form after each meeting.

BULLY 1

You are Gordon and you will have three interviews with M. Oliver. In each interview, you will refuse to acknowledge that something is going on with Samy. 

Case scenario 3

Participants: 4 (2 interviwers, 1 IP, 1 witnes)

Here is the information that came to the members of the team:

Dear colleagues,

Abdel came to my office saying that Paul, Quentin and Dora are telling the other students that he is a freak as are all the members of his family, that they are living in a hut and that don’t have money to buy him new shoes, and all that because his father is lazy and doesn’t want to find a job. I will receive Abdel next week. Can you interview students that he named?

INTERVIEWER 1

You are Mme Fati and you receive Paul for one interview. Please fill the form.

INTERVIEWER 2

You are Mme Nicole and you will receive Clara for one interview. Please fill the form.

BULLY 1

You are Paul and you will talk to Mme Fati, your professor. You will show some concern and say that you noticed that Paul been mocked. You will also say that Clara already shouted at someone that was rude to Abdel. But you will not give any names. You will promise that you will try to make the others stop making his life miserable.

BULLY 2

You are Clara, you will show a high degree of concern, confirm the stories that Abdel was mocked and also give the names of the presumed intimidators.

Case scenario 4:

Participants: 2 (1 interviewer, 1 PI)

Here is the information that came to the members of the team:

Dear colleagues,

Hope you had a nice week-end. Last week, I received an e-mail from M. Volkovsky that I am forwarding to your group. Mme Jacques, the nurse, already received Gregory and she is giving you a green light to start the SCmethod.

Thank you for everything that you are doing,

Mme Zahara, the principle

____________________________________________________________

Dear Mme Zahara,

The reason I’m writing this is that Gregory don’t want to go to school. He says that he had stomach ache every morning because of the problems with two girls who are older than him: Natasha and Hanna. That was really strange for me because Hanna is our neighbour and she seems a polite girl to me. Please, can you do something about that so that Gregory will no longer have this kind of trouble in school?

Regards,

Mme Volkovsky.

INTERVIEWER

You are M. Tariq and you will do two interviews with Hanna. Pease fill the form for each interview.

BULLY

You are Hanna and you will be received twice by M. Tariq. At the first interview, you will show a medium level of concern, saying that you are Gregory’s neighbour and that you even helped him when someone else emptied his bag on the floor. You will promise to help. In the second interview, you will say that Natasha stopped talking to you since you started talking with Gregory. 

Case scenario 5:

Participants 4 (2 interviewers, 2 bullies + 1 bystander -optional)

Here is the information that came to the members of the team:

To: HEADMASTER’S OFFICE

CC: Everyone in School

Mr Fato,

I do not know what kind of school you think you are running, but the situation in it is becoming intolerable! My son Marcus has been suffering such a degree of harassment that it is now almost impossible to get him out of bed in the mornings. He is so frightened because of this situation that he refused to talk to me. But as I know my son so well, I sent him to my good friend the eminent psychologist George Sandyman, who managed to get him to tell us all! In fact he has been regularly attacked by a group of horrible boys who call him names and tease him horribly, all because they feel that his nose is too long!

I demand that you do something immediately! If you do not so promptly I shall be pressing charges against the school and against you personally!

Mr Quintus Severus

___________________________________________________________________

From: Mr Fato, Headmaster

To: Mrs Drain, School Psychologist

Dear Trisha,

Please find attached the letter from the father of Marcus Severus. Could you speak with him and evaluate the situation? If you feel that it is a compatible case, please give the School Well-Being team all relevant information, and maybe they can operate their magic on the situation. Please also contact the student’s family and explain how we are going to intervene.

Best,

Cornelius Fato

___________________________________________________________________

From: Patricia Drain, School Psychologist

To: Members of the School Well-Being team

Dear All,

Please find attached the documentation pertaining to a bullying case that I believe is perfectly suited to our structure.

I have interviewed the victim (Marcus Severus) and he gave me the names of three boys who have been making fun of him for a while now because “he has a long nose”. These are Peter Knight, Steven Ashley and Robert Terry. They are all in his class. I have a feeling that Alexander Gomery might also be involved, as their form-mistress, Miss Smith, informs me that the four of them are often together.  

Don’t forget to include other students in the interviewing process. I believe that Bartholomew Peete is a good friend of Marcus, while Cecile Voitout is the class delegate and a very open and has a helpful personality.

I will contact Severus’s family to explain what we are doing.

Best,

Trisha

BULLY 1

You are Peter Knight. You are 13 years old.  You and your friends Steven Ashley and Robert Terry have been calling your classmate Marcus names and making fun of his long nose and greasy hair. He is an easy target because he is isolated.

During the first interview you deny any knowledge of any problems that Marcus might have. If the interviewer asks you to perform a task, you accept but with no enthusiasm.

During the second interview you have decided to change tack: you give the names of Steven Ashley and Robert Terry as the bullies and add that many girls of the class find their teasing funny and encourage them.

Propose at least two ideas to help the interviewer.

BULLY 2

You are Steven Ashley. You are 13 years old. You and your friends Peter Knight and Robert Terry have been calling your classmate Marcus names and making fun of his long nose and greasy hair. He is an easy target because he is isolated.

During the first interview you eagerly propose ideas to help the interviewer as soon as he asks you if you can help.

During the second interview you report the actions you have undertaken and propose more ideas.

Bystander 1 

You are Cecile Voitout. A classmate of yours – Marcus Severus – is being bullied by a group of boys from your class. You do not take part in the bullying but feel concerned and helpless (you are a bit afraid of these boys, yourself).

During the first interview you show great concern for the situation. You let the interviewer understand that you are a bit afraid of the boys. But you propose ideas.

During the second interview you report that the bullying has stopped.

Case scenario 6:

Participants: 4 (2 interviewers – 2 bullies)

Facts:

The mother of Michael has met the vice-principle. She has explained that her son has been complaining of stomach-aches these last few days; he no longer wants to go to the high school. He even talked about “ending it all”. The vice principle had a chat with Michael and he confirmed that he does not feel comfortable in his class because of classmates who regularly make fun of him and make nasty remarks frequently. This has been going on for over a year. He singles out two pupils as being the chief instigators: Adel and Morris.

The vice-principle asks your team to step in.

BULLY 1

You are Adel. You are 16. You have been making fun of Michael for a while now. Most of the class – and especially the girls! – think it is hilarious when you crack jokes about him being short. And fat. And smelly.

During the first interview you insist that everything is fine.

During the second interview you admit that something is wrong and you propose solutions.

BULLY 1

You are Morris. You are 16. You and your friend Adel have been making fun of Michael for his physique for a while now, although sometimes you do feel sorry for the guy, especially when he starts crying.

During the first interview you immediately admit that something is wrong.

You promise to help and propose solutions.

It is strongly recommended that each anti-bullying in each school creates its own protocol concerning the procedure to be followed when a case of bullying is detected. This is important both because each member of the team needs to know exactly how to proceed, but it will also allow each member to fulfil every role that is required (interviewing bullies, interviewing the victim, talking with the families etc.). Furthermore a protocol is of great help when integrating new members to the team and when explaining why each action was taken.

It is a good idea to have the protocol validated by the school council, so that all the actors will be aware of the existence of the anti-bullying procedure put in place by the school. Creators of a school protocol should bear in mind that the team is going to be conducting interviews with students, and that some parents might feel that their child is being targeted or singled out for punishment if they do not understand the essentials of the procedure.

For these reasons it is suggested that the team’s protocol includes the following elements:

• The names of the team members and their institutional capacities (professor, psychologist etc.). This will not only serve as a reminder of who is in the team for anyone wanting to contact all the members of the team (for example the principal, wanting to send a mass-email), but it will also enable any other member of the staff who wants to alert the team of a case of bullying to easily contact one or more members of the team.
• Steps to be taken once the team is alerted of a case of bullying, i.e. evaluation of the case by the team; assignment of the role each member of the team is to play; interviews (number of and duration)
• Ways of feedback: a system of recording the feedback must be defined that will allow each member of the team to access all the information during the active phase of each case. The same system should also be preserved as a form of archive for future reference either by the team or by the school’s principal. Bear in mind that this archive is also very important in case something goes wrong.
• How and when a case is considered closed. Specify what is considered to be a positive outcome, i.e. all actors concur that the bullying has ceased completely or a negative outcome i.e. the bullying persists despite the team’s intervention after a specific amount of interview (3-5?) and a specific period of time (2 weeks?). In the case of a negative outcome, the protocol must also specify what is to be done (a usual practice is that the case is referred to the principal who will decide if and what punishments should be handed out or if a completely different approach should be attempted instead.
• The protocol should also be clear on the following: who is assigned to talk with the victim, and who talks with the victim’s family. Ideally this should be the same person.
• It cannot be stressed enough that there is no singe “correct” form of protocol. Each team of educators know the specificities of their own school environment and should create their own protocol that suits the specific needs of their school.

It should also be noted that a protocol should not be considered as being carved in stone. The team should be ready to re-adapt it to fit an evolving school environment and should be ready to modify, adjust or even delete whole parts of the protocol that are not, in fact, suited to the realities of the school. In a similar manner the team should not hesitate to add parts to the protocol that it had not initially provided for. These adjustments can be carried out on a yearly basis, in collaboration with the principle. The protocol can be re-validated by the school council after the adaptations have been completed so as to re-establish its validity.

The training course that was held in the town of Berovo, in the Republic of North Macedonia, brought together educators from four countries. The trainers work in France, while teachers, school staff and youth workers from Portugal, Armenia and the Republic of North Macedonia (both from Albanian and Macedonian schools) participated in the training. The multi-ethnic background of the participants, the disparities in their educational environments and their different professional qualities (teachers, school psychologists, school principals, Youth Workers) could have been a factor that held up the learning process and the coherence of the group.

Contrary to the apprehensions that had been expressed before the training started, however, the anonymous written feedback of the participant shows clearly that the training programme achieved all its goals and in some cases went even a step further.

17 trainees answered the proposed online form.

Of these all stated that their understanding of the Shared Concern Method after the training was 8 on a scale of 10 (2 responders or 11.8%), 9 (6 responders of 35.3%) or 10 out of 10 (9 responders or 52.9%).

Concerning the clarity of the information provided by the programme 82.4% (14 responders) stated that it was given in a clear manner and 17.6% stated that it was quite clear. As far as the means of training were concerned, almost all the participants (15 of 17) agreed that the role-plays were most useful for understanding the proposed method.

Almost all the participants affirmed that they would probably apply what they had learned in their work environment (16 respondents giving a probability of 7 out of 10 or more for this). When asked to explain if there were any factors that might impede the participants from applying the method, the reasons cited were economical, i.e. asking educators to put in unpaid working hours (3/17) or problems convincing the administration or other colleagues (7/10).

Finally, when asked to rate the training programme and the trainers, all the feedback was positive and most participants expressed their wish that the programme be continued and extended, insisting on the need to be able to communicate with each other and with the trainers concerning the implementation of the method.

“Thank you very much for organizing and leading the training. On the first day I was not sure if I am in the right place and if this will work but now I am super excited to continue this cooperation and work on this topic back in my country.”

“It gave me a whole new perspective on how to deal with bullying, especially on how to deal with youngsters who have developed some disruptive behaviours.”

“I think the training was an excellent opportunity for teachers and educational staff to share their ideas and knowledge about their actual and future projects to be implemented with pupils and students. In my opinion all the partners are leaving eager to disseminate and implement the SCM in their institutions.”

“Thank you very much for organizing and leading the training. On the first day I was not sure if I am in the right place and if this will work but now I am super excited to continue this cooperation and work on this topic back in my country.”

“The training gave to me another perspective about bullying and gave me a useful method to apply in my school”

“It was one of the best trainings I’ve ever been” 

The training course that took place in February 2022 in North Macedonia and which brought together professors, members of school staff and youth workers from four countries (France, Armenia, North Macedonia and Portugal) was a very positive experience for all the participants who were introduced to the principles of the no-blame methods for treating bullying at school, and who were specifically trained in the Pikas method (the Shared Concern Method).

The questionnaire that was answered by pupils, professors and youth workers from the three countries (the trainers from France did not answer the questionnaires) has shown that all the different actors are aware of the extent that the phenomenon of bullying has among young people and of the necessity to give it our full attention and act quickly so as to stop it and create a healthy and positive atmosphere for pupils in learning institutions. The professors had also already come across cases of bullying and cyber-bullying in their schools. Up to now, however, only the traditional approach (punishments) and the moralist approach (discussions, asking for the presentation of an apology etc.) had been applied.

Neither the professors nor the youth workers were familiar with the Pikas method or the other no-blame methods that were presented. The training allowed them to discover their principles, something that excited much enthusiasm among the participants: both the professors and the youth workers showed their profound interest to learn more about them and to be further trained in their application. According to the opinion of the professors, this method could be more efficient that the two others that they had been used to apply in their dealing with cases of bullying.

Despite their obvious good will, a certain lack of skills was observed among the participants. The training course allowed them to practice the method playing out different scenarios that had been created specifically for this training course. The analysis of these role plays allowed them to discuss the mistakes that were made during the interviews and the application of their newly acquired knowledge and skills.  We note that the participants had the tendency to adopt naturally the tone and the posture influenced by the methods that they were used to using, and especially the traditional method. This means that a supplementary training course would be recommended so as to consolidate and reflectively adopt the gests necessary to apply the Pikas method, and also allow the participants to transmit the method of their colleagues.

During the training course, the trainers insisted on the importance of elaborating a protocol of action against bullying that will be used by each institution. As an example the trainers presented a schematic of their own protocol and then the participants created their own rough drafts of a protocol adapted to their own institutional needs. We recommend that these protocols be used both as an example and a starting point and that they be further developed by the enlarged anti-bullying team (with the inclusion of other teachers and members of the school staff, the headmaster or headmistress, members of the administration team etc.) and that the action plans for the prevention of bullying that are put in place in partnership with the NGOs be formally outlined.

This training course consecrated half a day to discussion about the prevention of bullying and projects which have the potential to improve the atmosphere of well-being at school. This question which was not at the centre of the training provoked a great interest among the participants. Many of the participants had already taken part in such projects which were most often carried out in partnership with NGOs and had been able to experience the positive effect that such actions have on the pupils. Despite this, we noted that these projects did not make up part of a larger programme, and that they often remain isolated so that their effectiveness is blunted by the lack of a follow-up. It would thus be useful to create a plan or framework on a larger scale that would allow for the extension of projects of this time and their inclusion in a longer-term action plan that would interlink these disparate parts.

During the training the participants had expressed the need to be given the tools that would permit them to consolidate their newly acquired knowledge and would make the transmission of this knowledge to others easier. This it is that the present report has a double objective: it will serve as the final report of the training course, summarising both the activities of the course and the conclusions drawn from it, but it also provides the basic tools to obtain a basic familiarity with the Pikas method.

One of the great advantages of this project is the creation of an internet site which allows the participants and any other interested parties to obtain information and practical tools relative to the method and to discuss with other colleagues and with the trainers.

Here are the most important recommendations for the further steps to take in order to continue to work for improving the school climate and to prevent bullying:

• Continue to apply the Shared Concern Method and to share experiences with colleagues;

• Create a tool that is best adapted to each school environment and that will serve both to keep a record of bullying cases and to follow the evolution of the results of the team work during a longer period, i.e. keep a statistical track of the reduction – or increase – of cases of bullying and adapt the methods used accordingly;

• Create and develop school policy that will allow the establishment of a wider framework for further actions that aim at improving the school climate and the well-being of all students. This framework, that will allow the realisation of different projects and will permit a stronger collaboration between schools and other sectors of society, and most notably NGO’s, should include several axes, for example a cultural axis, a sports axis, a scientific axis, a literature and a language axis… Thus, every new idea that aims at improving the school climate can more easily take the form of a precise project and be carried out;

• Create a school policy against bullying by developing a school protocol that can provide the guidelines for both anti-bullying teams and the whole school community.

In conclusion it must be reiterated that follow-up to this training course is recommended and desired by all the participants. This would allow concentrating on the practice of applying the method within specific educational environments and create and develop specific school policies that will permit the undertaking of wider action to create a climate of well-being in schools.

It should be remembered that bullying can be an experience that leaves deep scars on the victims which may torment them throughout their whole life. We possess today the intellectual tools that allow us to halt the habits of bullying in school, change the posture of bullies so that they adopt an active and positive attitude in their interactions and make the school environment more safe and agreeable for all students. These changes also affect young people throughout their life!