SURF Experiences Summer 2011

Greetings,

On Sunday, July 3 I finished looking at the final twenty anti-bullying policies in my last state.  I have now looked at a grand total of 360 policies in eighteen states.  Here is a very brief overview of the final nine states:

Georgia: The anti-bullying policies that I looked at in Georgia were all very general.  There was a little bit of a variety in the language of the policies, but not much.  There were a few policies that defined bullying in two sentences or less, but for the most part school districts defined bullying in the exact same terms.  I found three heartbreaking articles about students who had committed suicide due to severe bullying and a handful of other bullying related incidents in schools across the state.

Georgia Bullying Incident

Georgia Bullying Video

Minnesota: Our neighbors are widely criticized for having one of the weakest anti-bullying laws in the country and this is reflected in school district policies.  A few school districts only had an anti-harassment policy in place.  However, the majority of districts had identical bullying policies.  None of the policies protected characteristics of any kind.

Minnesota Bullying Incident #1

Minnesota Bullying Incident #2

Kansas: Bullying policies in Kansas vary widely from district to district.  Only one school district that I encountered protected students on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, mental, physical, or sensory disability or impairment while the majority of others did not protect any characteristics.  Four districts had more of a bullying prevention plan in place than a policy in that bullying wasn’t defined, reporting procedures weren’t discussed, etc.  This leads me to believe that these districts have yet to implement a bullying policy and what is currently posted on their websites is only temporary.

Kansas Bullying Incident

Kansas Bullying Video

Ohio: School districts in Ohio have very similar bullying policies.  There was little to no variation in language.  Gender, race, color, national origin, marital status and disability are the characteristics that the majority of districts protected in their policies.

Ohio Bullying Incident #1

Ohio Bullying Incident #2

Illinois: School district policies in Illinois are nearly identical.  They are very specific and inclusive.  I encountered some difficulties finding bullying incidents in my Google searches, which points to underreporting.  There has to be bullying occurring in Illinois, the incidents just weren’t highly publicized.  The majority of the policies protected students on the basis of race, color, nationality, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender-related identity or expression, ancestry, age, religion, physical or mental disability, order of protection status, status of being homeless, actual or potential marital or parental status, and pregnancy.

Illinois Bullying Video

Illinois Bullying Incident

Pennsylvania: In Pennsylvania, there are very specific harassment policies in place.  The definition of what constitutes harassment in Pennsylvania school districts is equivalent to what constitutes bullying in other states.  Districts do have bullying and cyberbullying policies in place, but their harassment policies are the ones that include and protect student characteristics.

Pennsylvania Bullying Incident #1

Pennsylvania Bullying Incident #2

Pennsylvania Bullying Video (Goes with Incident #2)

New York: Nine of the twenty school districts in New York did not have their policies posted online.  The state’s anti-bullying legislation does not require districts to have a bullying policy implemented until July 1, 2012, which could be why there were so many districts that didn’t have anything online.  As for the school districts that did have policies online, some had anti-harassment/discrimination policies in place while others had meidocre bullying policies.

New York Bullying Incident #1

New York Bullying Incident #2

Rhode Island: Policies in Rhode Island vary a lot from district to district.  Such a variety makes it an interesting state to analyze in further detail.  I noticed that a few school district policies were really outdated while others had been updated this year.  It comes as no surprise that the recently updated policies were much more specific and inclusive.  They included such characteristics as sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, disability (physical, mental, educational), marital status, socioeconomic background, ancestry, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, gender expression, linguistic preference, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and social/family background.

Rhode Island Bullying Incident #1

Rhode Island Bullying Incident #2

New Hampshire: In New Hampshire, there was no variety between school district bullying policies.  Nearly all of the policies were identical and described bullying as: “A single significant incident or a pattern of incidents involving a written, verbal, or electronic communication, or a physical act or gesture, or any combination thereof, directed at another pupil which physically harms a pupil or damages the pupil’s property; causes emotional distress to a pupil; interferes with a pupil’s educational opportunities; creates a hostile educational environment; or substantially disrupts the orderly operation of the school.”  They also protected students on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, ethnicity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, age, physical, mental, emotional or learning disability, gender, gender identity and expression, and appearance.

New Hampshire Bullying Incident #1

New Hampshire Bullying Incident #2

My next task is to contact the school districts that did not have their bullying policies available online, didn’t have a website, etc.  I hope that this process goes smoothly and whomever I speak to will be able to provide me with the information I need.

Until next time!

Katie

Hi All,

I have now looked at 180 bullying policies in a total of nine states.  Last night, I finished Maryland.  They have one of the strictest anti-bullying laws in the country!  According to the law, bullying, harassment and intimidation is defined as: “Intentional conduct, including verbal, physical or written conduct or an electronic communication, that creates a hostile educational environment by substantially interfering with a student’s educational benefits, opportunities, or performance, or with a student’s physical or psychological well-being and is motivated by an actual or perceived personal characteristic including race, national origin, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, ancestry, physical attributes, socioeconomic status, familial status, or physical or mental ability or disability; or occurs on school property, at a school activity or event, or on a school bus; or substantially disrupts the orderly operation of the school” (Michie’s Legal Resources 2011).  The policy goes on to list six requirements that the State Board must follow as well as requirements for County Boards to follow too.  What I like the most about Maryland’s anti-bullying legislation is the wide variety of characteristics that are included and protected.

Due to the fact that Maryland has such strict state legislation, there was little variation in the 20 school district policies that I looked at.  They all define bullying, harassment and intimidation the same and all protect, more or less, the same characteristics.  Despite having such strict district policies, I still found some very startling cases, which caused me to ask a few questions and make a few observations (links to a few of these cases are provided below).  Initially, I was extremely confused as to why I found more bullying incidents in a state with strict legislation and district policies than one with weak legislation and district policies.  It occurred to me that it may just appear that Maryland has more of a bullying problem than other states because a higher number of incidents are reported.  Maryland has a reporting procedure for students to follow, making it easier and more confidential for incidents to be reported to school officials.  Looking at Maryland’s bullying incidents, one theme I noticed throughout was that parents didn’t feel that teachers and administrators did enough to protect their children and punish the perpetrators.  They felt largely ignored by the district, which brings me to conclude that districts can have extremely strict policies, but it all comes down to how these policies are implemented.  What good is a bullying policy if it isn’t put to use?  Regardless of whether or not districts have strict policies, there is no doubt that there will always be bullying occurring in schools so I wonder, how do we combat it?  Maryland has taken steps in the right direction, but there have to be more solutions out there.  As I continue my research, I hope to discover these solutions and construct a few of my own.

Maryland Bullying Incident #1

Maryland Bullying Incident #2

Maryland Bullying Incident #3

Maryland Bullying Incident #4

Maryland Bullying Incident #5

I hope that your projects are going well, everyone!  Talk to you soon.

Katie

Reference:
Michie’s Legal Resources. (2011). Retrieved from: http://michie.lexisnexis.com/maryland/lpExt.dll?f=templates&eMail=Y&fn=main-h.htm&cp=mdcode/a882/ae98/af7d/affa

Hello Everyone,

I began my research a few weeks ago on Monday, May 16.  I am currently in the process of looking at 360 bullying policies in school districts across the country.  So far, I have looked at 140 policies in a total of seven states.  The process is pretty time consuming as every school district website is set-up differently.  Some websites provide easy access to their policies, some require a little digging, and others do not have their policies available online at all.  Therefore, Dr. Flad and I decided that it is best to begin contacting the school districts that do not have their policies available online and inquire as to why they aren’t accessible to the public and if they can provide us with the information we need.  On Monday, I called twelve school districts in Mississippi, but the majority of them were not very helpful.  I will need to re-contact all of them again soon.  Hopefully the second time around they will be able provide me with information.

One pattern that I have noticed so far is that school districts located in states that have strict bullying or harassment legislation basically copy and paste the legislation into their policy manual and student handbooks.  These districts do not add any additional information to their policies, which shows me a lack of interest.  On the other hand, school districts located in states that do not have strict bullying or harassment legislation have extremely weak policies.  Louisiana school districts, for instance, have particularly weak policies that do not protect student “characteristics” (i.e. race, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, physical ability or disability, etc.).  I find it very sad that school districts only have strict bullying policies if state law requires them to.

One of the steps in my research has been to look up bullying incidents in the city or town a school district is located in using Google.  So, for example, if I were researching bullying in Whitewater, I would type in “bullying Whitewater, WI” in the search engine.  My searches have turned up some startling cases.  Here are links to a few of the cases that I have found so far:

Louisiana Bullying Incident

Mississippi Bullying Incident

New Mexico Bullying Incident

Oklahoma Bullying Incident

Washington Bullying Incident

I hope you are all enjoying your summer so far!  Thank you for reading.

Katie