“Say Anything”
Waterville College’s Rally Cry To Knock Out Bullying
Western Kentucky University
Christopher Crutchfield
Kassy Fineout
Christian Montgomery
No Bull:
Even at colleges, bullying exists and is harmful.
A recent increase in reports of bullying has us worried, yet Waterville College is
not alone in experiencing more frequent instances of bullying, particularly
cyberbullying – the use of technology such as text messages, emails, and social
media platforms to intimidate, abuse, or harass.
Findings from a 2010 Indiana State University (MacDonald and Roberts, 2010)
study found that:
 21.9% of college student respondents reported being cyberbullied
 8.6% of respondents reported cyberbullying someone else
 38% of respondents reported seeing someone else get bullied
Extensive research on bullying in college is sparse, but recent news coverage and
academic studies suggest it would not only be naïve, it would be dangerously
negligent to ignore bullying. Victims can suffer from decreased academic
performance (Nishina, Juvonen, and Witkow, 2005) or, at worst, a desire to
commit suicide, as in the cyberbullying case of Rutgers student Tyler Clemente.
This is particularly worrisome because many students do not outright consider
cyberbullying to be an important concern (Kota and Moreno, 2013).
Motivation, Obligation, and Capability:
Waterville’s Call to Reduce Bullying
Our college’s call to providing a safe environment for learning stems from both
adherence to a number of policies as well as a commitment to whole-person
education.
Commitment to Theory
of Whole-Person Growth
Every member under
our Office of Student
Affairs – from advisors
to RAs – should seek to
contribute to the
“whole-person” growth
of our students. By
reducing bullying on
campus, we are
protecting students’
physical, emotional,
and mental well-being
so they may positively
mature in each
capacity.
Policies Regarding
Bullying
Like many schools, Waterville
is obligated to address
bullying because of adherence
to a number of policies aimed
at creating a safe, nondiscriminatory campus. Some
of these policies are external,
such as Title IX and Equal
Employment Opportunity.
Others are internally drafted
such as Waterville College’s
anti-hazing policies,
discrimination and harassment
policy, the focus on harassment
in the student code of conduct,
and more.
Organizational Ability to
Affect Change
Our college has the
organizational depth to
address bullying at multiple
levels, from RAs and
counselors to help victims, to
Student Activities
coordinators to help build
healthy, positive social
spaces for students. Our
collective resources and
expertise are uniquely suited
to create the safe campus
our students deserve.
A Two-Pronged Strategy:
Support the Victim and Encourage the Bystander
It’s essential that college staff understand the sphere of influence we have in
reducing bullying. Unfortunately, directly seeking to punish bullies is difficult. In
the words of WKU Residence Hall Director Ethan Sykes, “Like it or not, bullies’
words are often protected by free speech unless a victim decides to make it a
legal issue. We typically focus on providing support in other ways.” Fortunately,
there are two other actors that we can address in the dynamics of bullying.
Victim-focused Support
Bystander-Focused Encouragement
Obviously, bullying does not happen without a victim
on the receiving end of a bully’s actions. Student
affairs professionals can be instrumental in providing
an ally for those feeling abused and harassed.
Some research has shown that bystanderintervention models of anti-bullying campaigns can be
quite successful (Polanin, Espelage, and Pigott,
2012).
As a college, we have pushed all of our staff – from
RAs to professional counselors - to reflect on the core
competency areas of Advising and Helping so that
they are most able to comfort, support, and direct the
victim.
The fact that many more students report seeing a
case of bullying (38%) than being a victim (21.9%)
inherently means that there are more bystanders than
victims, giving student affairs professionals a large
group of potential allies to work with, but numerous
social psychology studies have shown that
bystanders do not typically intervene unless prompted
(Twemlow and Fonagy, 2004).
Our staff must know how to:
 Listen without judging
 Speak about common feelings and responses that
victims may experience
 Refer students to appropriate resources when
necessary
A strong bystander-focused anti-bullying campaign:
 Asks bystanders to assume responsibility
 Suggests direct and indirect methods of aiding
victims or confronting bullies
 Recognizes bystanders for doing so
A Call to Action
Scouring dozens of bullying websites and articles, from
StopBullying.gov to recommendations on the part of
the American Psychological Association, the first steps
all come down to a similar theme.
Our anti-bullying message to students, victims or bystanders, is simple.
Tell a counselor. Call out an aggressor. Protect a victim. It doesn’t matter what you say.
Just #SayAnything
References
American College Personnel Association & National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. (July 24, 2010).
Professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners. Retrieved from:
https://www.naspa.org/images/uploads/main/Professional_Competencies.pdf
Kota, Rajitha & Moreno, Megan. (January 17, 2013). The nature of cyber-bullying among college students. Journal of Adolescent
Health, Volume 52. Retrieved from: www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(12)00550-2/abstract
MacDonald, Christine & Roberts-Pittman, Bridget. (January 26, 2011). Cyberbullying among college students: prevalence and
demographic differences. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 9. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042810025413
Nishina, A., Juvonen, A., & Witkow M. R. (March 2005). Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will make me feel sick:
The psychosocial, somatic, and scholastic consequences of peer harassment. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent
Psychology, Volume 34. Retrieved from: http://njbullying.org/documents/nishinajuvonenwitkow2005-jccap.pdf
Polanin, J., Espelage, D., & Pigott, T. (March 2012). A Meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on
bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, Volume 41. Retrieved:
www.researchgate.net/profile/Dorothy_Espelage/publication/235220413_A_meta-analysis_of_schoolbased_bulling_prevention_programs%27_effects_on_bystander_intervention_behavior/links/00b4952c602de18785000000.pdf
Twemlow, S., Fonagy. P., and Sacco, F. (December 2004). The role of the bystander in the social architecture of bullying and
violence in schools and communities. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Retrieved from:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15817740
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (n.d.) How to talk about bullying. Retrieved from:
http://www.stopbullying.gov/prevention/talking-about-it/index.html