Mr. Seán Fallon:

I am deputising for Ms Monica Monaghan, president of the National Anti-Bullying Coalition. With my two colleagues we will present a scenario. I wish to address cyberbullying as part of a wider issue which is bullying in general. Cyberbullying is one more means of doing what children have been doing to each other for generations when groups gather together. Some who are more dominant tend to pick on those who are more timid and, for whatever reason, they can find a way of doing it.

I will begin with a PowerPoint presentation and take as a guideline, not a real definition, key factors in bullying, which include cyberbullying. I am coming from the perspective that all bullying is deliberate, hurtful behaviour that is repeated over time either in act or in impact; in other words, one event which has an ongoing negative impact on a child day after day. For example, if something is put on line and not taken down, each day it is left there, even though there is no act happening, the impact is still there. Cyberbullying is one particular form of bullying behaviour targeting someone who is seen as vulnerable. Research shows that most of those who cyberbully have already been bullying the person in the school yard, the classroom or wherever. A year and a half ago when the Anti-Bullying Centre in Trinity College hosted an international conference the one aspect that stood out in my mind from all the research presented that day on cyberbullying was that there is a very close link between the person cyberbullying and the person who has already been bullying that child in the school yard. The mystique as to how it might be somebody totally different does not necessarily apply. The reason people cyberbully is not related to the technology but the mindset they have that they want to bully a particular person. The view of the National Anti-Bullying Coalition is that if one wants to deal with cyberbullying on a stand-alone basis, one is not likely to be successful. My colleagues, who have the technical expertise, will tell the committee about things that can certainly help.

Traditional strategies to deal with bullying in general have been unsuccessful, as indicated by the figures on the screen. From 2008, Trinity College research on secondary schools showed that approximately 30% of students had been bullied during the previous couple of months. Research from UNICEF in 2012 showed that 55% of secondary school students have been bullied. A European Study, reported in the Irish Examiner, in 2012 showed that 12% of ten-year old children are bullied at least weekly, before they go to secondary school. Whatever has been happening in regard to bullying in general or cyberbullying, in particular, or both, has not been successful if that number of children are still affected by bullying.

There are some proactive approaches that did not work in the past. It is the law since the Education (Welfare) Act 2000 that every school in Ireland must have an anti-bullying policy. Unfortunately, there is no legal obligation on them to implement it. Schools are allowed draw up their own anti-bullying policy with, perhaps, certain guidelines. That has not made a difference given that so many people are being bullied. Depending on SPHE and CSPE classes to raise awareness about bullying has not worked given the percentage of people who have been bullied. Three events in SPHE per year on bullying will not suffice. One has only to ask any advertiser if three little events per year would convince people to buy their product. There is not chance. It needs a more sustained ongoing approach to awareness raising if that is part of what we are talking about. Also, it is not part of the brief of SPHE and CSPE to deal with bullying behaviour when it arises; its only brief is to raise awareness about it. Some children may be more aware than others. Holding an anti-bullying week, which schools do, is very valuable and highlights the issue. When we were all teenagers, a week later that was all forgotten and we were thinking about what we would do the next weekend. Teenagers have forgotten what happened last week. An anti-bullying week is brilliant at the time but it is clear from the percentages that on its own, it is not enough.

Reactive approaches that have not worked in the past include expecting the bullied child to "shape up" and not let those comments bother them. Even if there was a chance that it might work, people who get involved in bullying behaviour seldom act alone. They usually have somebody else because they are showing off to the somebody else. Whether it is traditional bullying or cyberbullying two people are huddled around a mobile telephone sending the text message showing off to somebody else while the person on the receiving end is outnumbered. How can one expect him or her to "shape up" and deal with the issue at 12 years of age? Ignoring the bullying in the hope it would stop is the reaction by many schools but it does not work. Punishing or threatening to punish the person who bullies has not worked well either. That leads to bullying being hidden and to the "no ratting" culture where a child will not let on that the other child is doing something wrong and will not get that child in trouble with a teacher. Why is that "no ratting" culture there? It is there because punishment is part of the treatment that schools use in relation to bullying. I know from my own experience when the punishment is taken away and something else is put in, the "no ratting" culture disappears completely and the students will tell one what is going on. All that is needed then is to find a way to deal with it. Therefore, punishing or threatening to punish does not work. The awareness raising events and the proactive SPHE events have been too little and dealing with it has been too late. It is an example of being too little and too late, depending on which line one takes.

The 1993 guidelines, which will be replaced thanks to the efforts of the working group and the Minister, contain two important and useful aims: to increase the awareness of bullying behaviour, such as the damage it does and the difficulties that arise as a result, and to assist schools in devising procedures to prevent and deal with it. Both of those most happen in the school or the environment. How can that be done? An ongoing awareness raising programme must be set up in schools, not just one anti-bullying week, in order that the students are constantly brought face to face with the fact that bullying is a no-no, it is hurtful and damaging. Students must be brought to a cultural position where they reject the bullying themselves.

There is a programme that delivers that. It made a presentation to the working group, and the committee is probably aware of that. Therefore, there is an effective programme for dealing with this bullying in general.

To stop cyberbullying and bullying in general, one needs to look at the attitude of the person doing it. There are many types of bullying some of which the committee will be familiar with. In the action plan by the Minister, he has particularly targeted homophobia because it is so insidious and damaging to teenagers. As they have not yet become adults, it is very tricky. The slide lists ways, including cyberbullying, in which one can choose to bully someone. One can set up structures to deal with each and all of those. My colleagues will present some good insights on cyberbullying today.

If, hypothetically, one were to prevent cyberbullying forever, unfortunately, another way to bully the child will be found which will not be a cyber way. If the committee is interested in making children safe in schools and in their environment, it needs to look at cyberbullying and also at other forms of bullying so that if it manages to be successful on cyberbullying, there is not a shift to other forms of bullying. There is a way of doing that and it is already available. I can talk to anybody later about that.

There is another point about schools which really has a significant impact. If, for example, the adults in schools display a bullying attitude in their dealings, either with the children or with each other, if the school principal is bullying some of the younger teachers, if I, as a teacher - I was one for more than 30 years - behave in a bullying manner towards some of my students, or if I target a student who is slow at mathematics and make joking sarcastic remarks about that, I give permission to the other students to do the same. A teacher needs to be careful not to do that. A teacher needs training in how not to do that. So far, there is no training in how teachers deal with students in a way that is respectful. Some teachers do it instinctively; some, let us say, may not. It is important how one deals with others in schools - how teachers deal with students and how teachers deal with each other. Research shows that if the teachers are modelling bullying behaviour, it will be picked up by the students and they will do likewise. The teacher might do it with a loud voice or a sarcastic comment whereas the child might decide to go and do some texting or Facebook bullying to which my colleagues will refer.