NASP GPR, LGBT & MAC Committees NASP Convention Joint Session Philadelphia, PA 2/21/12

1. NASP GPR, LGBT & MAC Committees NASP Convention Joint SessionPhiladelphia, PA 2/21/12 Promoting Policies and Legislation to Ensure Safe Schools for All

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 Components of local policies Communications Training and prevention Transparency and monitoring Right to pursue other legal remedies • Prohibition and purpose statement • Statement of scope • Prohibited behavior • Enumeration of groups • Development and implementation of local policies • Review of local policies

6. Components of Local Policies Definitions Reporting Investigating Written records Sanctions Referrals

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 behaviors • Forty- five state laws direct school districts to adopt bullying policies • Forty 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

8. 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 provisions • Sexual orientation is listed as a protected class in 14 of the 17 states with enumeration language

11. Other experts advise against inclusion of protected classes, arguing that bullying be defined solely based on behavior and not characteristics of student • They 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 laws • There is currently a rapid expansion and revision of state bullying legislation • Some key components are included in legislation in many more states than others • States 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-bullying • Most states (41) have developed model bullying policies or other widely available guidance documents • Policies 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 located • At 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)

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 crime • Child maltreatment • Having a peer or sibling be victimized • Sexual abuse • Witnessing violence Holt, M.K., Finkelhor, D., & Kantor, G.K. (2007).

25. Bullying and Suicide • Both 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

27. PBISanti-bullying State Standards:1) Social Emotional Learning; or 2) Health Oregon State Health Standards for Anti-Bullying • Examine how violence, aggression, bullying and harassment affect health, safety • Recognize diversity among relationships including disability, gender, race, sexuality, and body size • Advocate respect for diversity • Design a campaign for preventing violence, aggression, bullying & harassment • Explain pro-social behaviors and explain how they may prevent violence (e.g., helping others, being respectful of others, cooperation, consideration).

29. Accountability

30. School Improvement Plan

31. Guidelines and Procedures to Implement the Bullying and Harassment Policy & Dating and Sexual Violence Policy for Students

32. 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)

34. 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

35. 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

36. Providence School District Student 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

37. Successes • Approved Aligned Instructional System Policy: Core Curriculum • Implementation of Criterion Based Hiring System • Ongoing Implementation of PBIS • Received Race to the Top Funding

38. Challenges Stability of Leadership in the District Collective bargaining agreements State funding formula (6/10/10) Student Achievement Data Significant Disproportionality

41. 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, fighting • Self-Injurious behaviors • weapon, threat of violence to self, disruption • Suicide Ideation • Students in psychiatric crisis • e.g, level II threats of viol./staff/admin., bldg, disruption

43. Phase I: Aug 2009 - Jan 2010“Improving District Prevention of Threatening & Self-Injurious Behaviors” Partnerships Elizabeth A’VantPPSD School Psychologist Sara DinklageRIStudent Assistance Services Randy Ross New England Equity Assistance

44. Extensive Professional Development on Bullying/Harassment • Central Office Staff • Principals • Assistant Principals • Guidance Counselors • Student Assistance Counselors • Psychologists • Social Workers • Behavior Coaches • Teachers • Parents

45. Phase IICreating Comprehensive Policy Administrative support to revise policy Forming a Collaborative Team Union Officials Community Partners Legal Office Teachers School Administrators Central Office

46. Phase IICreating Comprehensive Policy Comprehensive Policy Includes adults Distinguishing bullying from harassment Cyberbullying Retaliation Parent reporting & communication Support for target and for aggressor Accountability/Data Collection Procedural Guide/Manual Group worked from Dec.2009 - June 2010 Adopted by School Board Aug 10,2010

47. 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

48. Intervention ProceduresReport -Investigate-Take Action (RITA) • Safety Plans • Standardized Form • Mechanism for informing all relevant adults • Periodically reviewed as deemed necessary • Consequences • Reasonable timely age-appropriate corrective action • Range from positive behavioral supports up to including suspension or exclusion • Social Emotional Interventions • Social Skills Counseling • Functional Behavioral Assessments • Behavior Intervention Plan • Referral to outside agencies

49. 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.

50. Lessons Learned • Staff Engagement • Leadership • Positive professional relationships • Tie in with other related initiatives, such as suicide prevention