NASP GPR, LGBT & MAC Committees NASP Convention Joint Session

Philadelphia, PA 2/21/12

Promoting Policies and Legislation to Ensure Safe Schools for All

2

3

Prior to 1999, no states had clear statutes addressing school bullying

Today, 46 states have enacted laws that contain specific bullying provisions

4

Purpose of U.S. Department of Education study:

What is current status of bullying legislation in the states?

How are policies formulated at the state and local level?

5

USDOE –Identified Key Components And School District Policy Subcomponents In State Bullying Legislation

Prohibition and purpose statementStatement of scopeProhibited behaviorEnumeration of groupsDevelopment and implementation of local policiesReview of local policies

Components of local policiesCommunicationsTraining and preventionTransparency and monitoringRight to pursue other legal remedies

6

Components of Local Policies

DefinitionsReportingInvestigatingWritten recordsSanctionsReferrals

7

Analysis of State Bullying LegislationKey Findings

From 1999 to 2010, more than 120 bills were enacted by state legislatures that have introduced or amended education or criminal justice statutes to address bullying and related school behaviorsForty- five state laws direct school districts to adopt bullying policiesForty two state laws containing clear statements prohibiting students from bullying. Three states prohibit bullying without defining the prohibited behaviors.Most states frame legislation as law governing “bullying,” “bullying and harassment,” or “bullying, harassment, or intimidation,” using the term interchangeably.Thirty six states now include provisions in their education codes prohibiting cyberbullying or bullying using electronic media

Analysis of State Bullying LegislationKey Findings

Nine states distinguish between “bullying” and “harassment,” and define them separately under the law. Two states only address “harassment” as it pertains to behavior in schools, with no mention of “bullying.”

Thirteen states specific that schools have jurisdiction over off-campus bullying behavior if it creates a hostile school environment

The least expansive state laws outline district requirements to develop local bullying policies without specifying policy content

9

Enumeration of Specific Characteristics

Seventeen state bullying and harassment laws include language enumerating the characteristics of protected groups.Conveys explicit legal protections for certain groups or classes of individuals, or for anyone bullied based on personal characteristics, such as physical appearance or sexual orientation.Seventeen state laws currently include language that names or references protected classes in their bullying definitions or in their harassment provisionsSexual orientation is listed as a protected class in 14 of the 17 states with enumeration language

10

11

Other experts advise against inclusion of protected classes, arguing that bullying be defined solely based on behavior and not characteristics of studentThey argue that the politicized nature of enumeration discussions lengthens debate over which classes to include, and delays enactment.This argument has been a key factor in those states that have failed to pass bullying legislation.Ex. Missouri law prohibits any school district from adopting a policy that safeguards specific classes of students

12

Proponents point out that naming groups provides a clear directive to schools about the need to safeguard student populations that are most vulnerable to bullying.

Example: NASP and other advocacy organizations recommend inclusion of LGBT youth who experience high rates of bullying but are not legally protected under civil rights legislation.

U.S. Supreme Court ruled that enumeration is an “essential device used to make the duty not to discriminate concrete”

Research found positive effects within school environments when policies contain these explicit protections for vulnerable populations

13

Enumeration of Groups

Each of the district policies that name protected groups define bullying as potentially motivated by characteristics of students that are bullied.

These policies do make it clear that behavior does not need to reflect the bullied students’ characteristics to constitute bullying

Enumeration language found in these policies communicates protections for specific classes of students but does not restrict bullying definitions to acts motivated by target characteristics

14

Analysis of State Model Bullying PoliciesKey Findings

Twenty seven state laws recommend or require state education agencies and create and disseminate state model policies or guidance to assist school districts with the development of bullying policies.

41 states have created model bullying policies, 12 of which were not required or encouraged by state law to do so.

The majority of state model policies were developed after 2006

15

Analysis of State Model Bullying PoliciesKey Findings

Bullying infraction consequences, reporting procedures, investigations, and guidelines for communicating policies were the most frequently covered components. Legal remedies for victims were addressed least frequently ( 9 states).

Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island developed state model policies that best covered the U.S. Department of Education-identified key components of bullying laws and policies.

16

Analysis of School District Bullying PoliciesKey Findings

The district policy component least frequently observed pertains to procedures for addressing mental health concerns of students who are bullied

District policies not only contain definitions of bullying and core district policy components, but also other key components, including procedures for publicizing policies, training and prevention for students and school personnel, and transparency and monitoring

17

Analysis of School District Bullying PoliciesKey Findings

District policies are generally more expansive than their authorizing legislation

Districts located in states with more expansive legislation have produced the expansive school district policies, although several school districts with less expansive laws have also substantially expanded the scope and content of their policies beyond the minimum legal expectations

18

To Summarize…

State legislation concerning bullying has grown rapidly and nearly all states currently have bullying lawsThere is currently a rapid expansion and revision of state bullying legislationSome key components are included in legislation in many more states than othersStates differ substantially in the number of components they include in legislation and in the ways in which those components are addressed

19

To Summarize…

Many states have expanded bullying legislation to respond to emerging problems related to cyber-bullyingMost states (41) have developed model bullying policies or other widely available guidance documentsPolicies in the randomly sampled set of 20 districts investigated tend to be more expansive than state legislation or policies in the states in which they are locatedAt least in the context of the sample, more expansive school district policies tend to be in states with more expansive legislation

20

National Law

21

Student Non-Discrimination Act (SNDA)/Safe Schools Improvement Act (SSIA)

Safe Schools Improvement Act

Student Nondiscrimination Act

Whom does the bill protect?

All students regardless of background-including LGBTQ

Any student who is discriminated against because of real or perceived LGBT status

What does the bill prohibit

Schools and districts must prohibit bullying and harassment in conduct policy

Protects students from discrimination by school personnel, as well as other students.

Where do these protections apply?

Any public k-12 school; any incident of bullying or harassment that impacts a student’s ability to participate in programs and activities

Any public K-12 schools; any incident of harassment of discrimination that impacts a student’s ability to participate in programs and activities

How can students seek remedies

Schools and districts must establish reporting and response systems.

Students may pursue claims through school system. May sue to ensure compliance with the law.

Other Information

Encourages a focus on prevention and professional development

Based on existing federal protections. Includes bullying and harassment as examples of discrimination

22

School Systems

23

Why?

Sexual orientation (38%)Look, talk or dress (33%)Race (20%)Lower SES (14%)Gender (11%)Religion (10%)

Bradshaw, C. P., Sawyer, A. L., & O’Brennan, L. M. (2007).

24

Who is involved right now?

Victims (11% currently, 30% frequently)Bullies (13%)Bully-Victims (6%)Witnesses (80% of students, 58% of HS Teachers)

Associated environmental factors:Conventional crimeChild maltreatmentHaving a peer or sibling be victimized Sexual abuseWitnessing violence

Holt, M.K., Finkelhor, D., & Kantor, G.K. (2007).

25

Bullying and SuicideBoth victims and perpetrators of bullying are at a higher risk for suicide than their peers. Children who are both victims and perpetrators of bullying are at the highest risk.

LGBT youth experience more bullying (including physical violence and injury) at school than their heterosexual peers

A review of the research found that the relationship between bullying and suicide risk was stronger for LGBT youth than for heterosexual youth

(SPRC Suicide and Bullying Issue Brief, 2011)

26

CDC Coordinated School Health

PBIS anti-bullying State Standards:1) Social Emotional Learning; or 2) Health

Oregon State Health Standards for Anti-BullyingExamine how violence, aggression, bullying and harassment affect health, safetyRecognize diversity among relationships including disability, gender, race, sexuality, and body sizeAdvocate respect for diversityDesign a campaign for preventing violence, aggression, bullying & harassmentExplain pro-social behaviors and explain how they may prevent violence (e.g., helping others, being respectful of others, cooperation, consideration).

29

Accountability

Coordinated School Health Model

PBISState

Standards

School Improvemen

t Plan

30

School Improvement Plan

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT GOAL (SMART GOAL):1. Students will increase healthy habits and reduce

alcohol, tobacco and drug use. 2. Students will increase knowledge of human diversity

and develop interpersonal skills to counter bullying, harassment and conflict.

3. Students will develop mindfulness, distress tolerance, and emotional regulation skills, recognize the signs of anxiety/depression/suicide, and access appropriate support services when needed.

Guidelines and Procedures to Implement the Bullying and Harassment Policy

& Dating and Sexual Violence Policy for Students

School Climate Context

There is growing appreciation that school climate—the quality and character of school life—fosters children's development, learning, and achievement.

School climate reflects the norms, goals, values, interpersonal relationships, teaching, learning and leadership practices, and organizational structures that comprise school life.

(Introduction to National School Climate Standards)

Standard Four of Five National School Climate Standards

The school community creates an environment where all members are welcomed, supported, and feel safe in school: socially, emotionally, intellectually, & physically.

Indicators emphasize need for measurement data

School Climate Resources

For full Standards document, go to: http://www.schoolclimate.org/climate/standards.php

For information on National School Climate Center’s assessment tool: http://www.schoolclimate.org/programs/csci.php

Providence School DistrictStudent Enrollment: 24,050 students

45 schools: 22 elementary, 6 middle, 10 high schools

17% of students have an Individualized Educational Plan District under “Corrective Action”70% of students are below grade level, no AYP 26% drop out rate

Successes

Approved Aligned Instructional System Policy: Core Curriculum Implementation of Criterion Based Hiring SystemOngoing Implementation of PBISReceived Race to the Top Funding

Challenges

Stability of Leadership in the District Collective bargaining agreementsState funding formula (6/10/10)Student Achievement DataSignificant Disproportionality

500

505

510

515

520

06 07 07 08 08 09

School Year

Total # of SAO Referrals by School year

06 07

07 08

08 09

Reasons for SAO Referrals (top 7)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Violation

Perc

enta

ge 06 0707 0808 09

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

2007-2009 Threats of Violence Referrals included:

Threats made against an Administrator/teacher/student/bldg./gang/police officer/school/staff member.

“Masked Referrals” Victims of bullying

weapons, disruption, fightingSelf-Injurious behaviors

weapon, threat of violence to self, disruptionSuicide Ideation Students in psychiatric crisis

e.g, level II threats of viol./staff/admin., bldg, disruption

Phase I: Aug 2009 - Jan 2010

“Improving District Prevention of Threatening & Self-Injurious Behaviors”

PartnershipsElizabeth A’Vant PPSD School Psychologist

Sara Dinklage RI Student Assistance Services

Randy Ross New England Equity Assistance

Extensive Professional Development on Bullying/Harassment

Central Office StaffPrincipalsAssistant PrincipalsGuidance CounselorsStudent Assistance Counselors

PsychologistsSocial WorkersBehavior CoachesTeachersParents

Phase IICreating Comprehensive Policy

Administrative support to revise policyForming a Collaborative Team

Union OfficialsCommunity PartnersLegal OfficeTeachersSchool AdministratorsCentral Office

Phase IICreating Comprehensive Policy

Comprehensive PolicyIncludes adults Distinguishing bullying from harassmentCyberbullyingRetaliationParent reporting & communicationSupport for target and for aggressorAccountability/Data CollectionProcedural Guide/Manual

Group worked from Dec.2009 - June 2010Adopted by School Board Aug 10,2010

Phase IIIIdentification & Development of Standardized Procedures

Group worked from September 2010 – April 2011

Development of Procedures and tracking tools to execute/implement the revised policies (e.g., standardized complaint forms, investigation form, safety plan, notifications, timeline, consequences, and reporting).

Report, Investigate, Take Action (RITA protocol)

Adopted by School Board June 2011

Intervention ProceduresReport -Investigate-Take Action (RITA)

o Safety Plans Standardized FormMechanism for informing all relevant adultsPeriodically reviewed as deemed necessary

o ConsequencesReasonable timely age-appropriate corrective actionRange from positive behavioral supports up to

including suspension or exclusiono Social Emotional Interventions

Social Skills Counseling Functional Behavioral Assessments Behavior Intervention Plan Referral to outside agencies

48

Phase IV Next Steps

Standardized Training delivered to all students (just completed development of training power point and hand-outs)

Parent Training Sessions

Support Staff including bus drivers, crossing guards, maintance, and Cafeteria workers

Revise Code of Conduct to include retaliation.

Lessons LearnedStaff Engagement

Leadership

Positive professional relationships

Tie in with other related initiatives, such as suicide prevention

Making Collaboration Successful

Shared motivations

Team goals, roles, deadlines

Ideas/creativity of the group

Constant feedback

Lessons Learned (2)

Importance of interpersonal relationships

Diversity - harassment vs. bullyingCultural competence training neededSocial support among adults

Lessons Learned (3)Safety is essential for student achievement and mental healthPolicy and implementation procedures:

Clear rules and normsEnsuring physical securitySupporting social-emotional security

Select, implement, and embed social-emotional learning (SEL) curricula and approaches

Contacts

GPR: Barry Barbarasch barryeva@comcast.netNASP: Kelly Valliancourtkvaillancourt@naspweb.orgLGBT: Jim Hansonjabrhanson@yahoo.comMulticultural Affairs: Liz A’Vantlizavant@cox.net