Peer Mediation – Panacea or Quick Fix?
Abbie and Beth have fallen out, big time. Having been pals for a while, they are now experiencing and demonstrating conflict in ways that are apparent and disturbing. Abbie approaches the school’s peer mediators for help. Firstly the mediators take time to listen to Abbie’s concerns and to decide if mediation is appropriate. With Abbie’s agreement they approach Beth and explain that there is a problem and that mediation may be a useful way to sort it out. Beth puts her side of the story and then if they both agree, they all work together. The mediation process aims to allow each to say how she feels, to avoid retrospection and accusations, and to work towards a mutually agreed solution that clarifies individual responsibilities and future actions.
This is a generalised but realistic scenario based on observed practice in Scottish schools. The mediators are modelling behaviours that include empathic listening, taking personal responsibility and respect for others’ views. How easily can young people learn to relate in these ways? The evidence to support the effectiveness of peer mediation has been growing in a number of countries for more than twenty years. In Scotland the evidence is limited, principally through lack of opportunity. This situation is, however, changing. Ten years ago we effectively had no structured peer mediation whereas now around fifty schools operate schemes and interest in peer mediation is growing rapidly. Peer mediation is however neither panacea nor quick fix for the resolution of conflict.
In making the case for peer mediation it is important to establish why it is qualitatively different from more established approaches. In broad terms, when addressing the issue of conflict amongst their pupils, schools can choose from three options.
1. Punishment and deterrence involving sanctions such as written exercises, social isolation, formal exclusion and other retributive strategies.
2. Recognition systems involving structured praise, incentives and extrinsic rewards such as stickers, certificates and ‘treats’.
3. Ways of working that promoting individual responsibility and the repairing of relationships, such as restorative, counselling and mediated approaches, of which peer mediation is one.
In twenty years of teaching I have used all three of these approaches.
The first can provide a useful breathing space but mostly these strategies demonstrably fail our children. A high proportion of threats and punishments are meted out to a relatively small proportion of children, often to no positive effect. Even where this approach appears to work, am I alone in feeling a deep sense of unease? What message are we sending regarding the appropriate use of power?
The second has been much promoted in recent years. Recognition systems can provide a concrete platform for developing effective working relationships and can be helpful in turning around entrenched behaviours. However, schools frequently experience two difficulties in implementing such systems:
(i) achieving staff consistency
(ii) long term maintenance.
These systems tend to reinforce a child’s external locus of evaluation. Children can become overly dependant on the approval of others rather than learning to take responsibility for their own judgements and behaviour. “They bribe us, we behave.” to quote one 15 year old.
Essentially preventative in nature, recognition systems do not provide teachers with effective responses to conflict. If there is no suitable alternative to hand, the temptation is often to revert to threat or punishment. Peer mediation offers one alternative, but it also raises a number of challenges for those involved.
Are young people able to take on the significant responsibilities involved in being mediators?
Can they leave behind learned behaviours associated with conflict and adopt alternative approaches? There is clear evidence that they can.
Are parents willing to let young people resolve their own problems? Can they accept that existing retributive approaches don’t get everyone’s needs met?
Are school staff willing to lessen their tendency to take personal responsibility for outcomes?
Can they commit to genuinely restorative approaches, avoiding the temptation to engage young people into propping up retributive systems?
Are schools and Councils willing to commit resources to essential training and support for mediators? Anecdotal evidence suggests that some schools operate something that they call ‘peer mediation’ but which is fundamentally not, and which may be counterproductive. Do they sometimes see the promotion of peer mediation as an alternative to addressing systemic factors and adult attitudes that can contribute to disturbing behaviour?
The SEED promotes peer support schemes nationally, through the ‘Better Behaviour, Better Learning’ initiatives, although the emphasis to date has been on buddying and mentoring. Three Councils have been funded to pilot restorative approaches in schools including, in some, mediation. But challenges also exist for the SEED.
Are the SEED willing to recognise and actively promote a potentially valuable and effective resource? Can they, along with bodies such as the Scottish Mediation Network, help address wider issues such as quality standards in training and practice?
A further challenge faces us all. Young people are generally more open than adults to new experiences. It can be easier to support them than it is adults in changing their attitudes and behaviours when responding to conflict. But is it fair to expect young people to lead the way?
This article first appeared in the Times Educational Supplement Scotland in April 2005.
Establishing a Peer Mediation Programme in Schools
Effective planning and consultation are key elements in establishing a working service in schools. These are a few questions and issues that you might wish to consider.
Mediators
Who are to be the mediators? Possible selection criteria include: age, personal skills, perceived position amongst peers, gender balance, volunteers vs nominated, distribution across teaching / year groups, parental involvement and permissions.
Training
Who is to be trained? It makes sense to include one or more staff in the training so that you don’t have to buy in trainers in the future! A list of trainers is available from the Scottish Mediation Network.
Tel: 0131 556 1221.
http://www.scottishmediation.org.uk.html
Timing of training sessions
Whilst key skills and ideas can probably be covered in a day’s session it makes sense to tailor the sessions towards the age and current skills of the selected pupils. It is also helpful to offer opportunities for brief follow-up training to reinforce learned skills and to offer on-going support to those involved.
Structural Issues
Is the emphasis to be on developing the skills in all pupils (perhaps eventually using your trained mediators as peer trainers) or on offering an “expert” service which all pupils can be encouraged to use? (These are not mutually exclusive approaches).
Access
How will pupils get access to the support of their peers? Do you want this to be through formal self-referral (this can be confidential eg. post boxes), staff referrals, access through more open channels (eg. PSE, circle time, play ground approaches) or some combination of these?
Place in the current scheme of things
How will this service fit in to Support for Learning, Discipline and Anti-bullying policies and procedures which are already in place? Will any of these need amended as a result? Will this create any confusions or conflicts?
Promoting and launching the scheme
How can you encourage pupils to take ownership of the programme? This is key to encouraging them to make good use of the service. Do you want to promote it as a specifically anti-bullying strategy or as a wider service? Do you want a whole-school launch, a smaller initial trial or drip-drip integration?
Community Involvement
Who (apart from pupils and teachers) do you intend to involve in the planning, development and implementation of the scheme? Parents and non-teaching staff may also have a role to play.
