Ann Arbor school district OKs anti-bullying policy; regulations extend policy to teachers, volunteers
School administrators have issued their recommended regulations for implementing a new anti-bullying policy at Ann Arbor Public Schools, and they don't just cover students.
The regulations include a timeline for investigations, protections against “electronic” bullying and language that applies the policy to staff, parents, volunteers, independent contractors and board members, as well as to the student body.
The regulations were brought to the Board of Education last week after board members expressed some concerns about the vagueness of the anti-bullying policy they had been asked to approve.
The regulations establish an “investigation completion goal” of five school days from when the complaint is received. They also list sanctions against adult perpetrators that could include discharge for employees; exclusion for parents, guardians, guests, volunteers and contractors; and a request for resignation from school board members.
View Ann Arbor’s new anti-bullying policy, which the board passed on May 23, and the administrative regulations here.
The purpose of the regulations, according to AAPS, is to provide a process for reporting and investigating cases of bullying and to provide strategies for recognizing and protecting against bullying within the school community.
Previous story: Ann Arbor Public Schools releases first draft of anti-bullying policy
Staff reporter Danielle Arndt covers K-12 education for AnnArbor.com. Follow her on Twitter @DanielleArndt or email her at daniellearndt@annarbor.com.
Comments
Kathleen Kosobud
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 7:47 p.m.
I'm a past parent and retired teacher from the AAPS. I agree that the best outcome of all of the attention to bullying is to develop a strong school culture where the entire school community is committed to the safety of all students. My biggest concern about the bullying policy is that it gives a 5 day window for investigation, but does not address the immediate needs of any person who reports bullying. Victims and whistleblowers need to feel that they are safe from further harm, or they won't bother to report incidents of bullying. We also need to look at the data on the physical environments in which bullying takes place. Particularly in the middle and high schools, the location of lockers, restrooms, and stairwells affects the safety of students from bullying. I do hope that this bullying policy is just a first step in creating a comprehensive system of school wide positive behavioral supports.
Michigan Man
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 2:08 p.m.
Perhaps the AAPS elites will generalize this policy to those motorists blowing by A2 on the interstate? AAPS needs to bet back to educational basics and discontinue this boring practice of creating new policies for every cultural diversion of the day.
local
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 11:19 a.m.
This would be a great follow up for AnnArbor.com, to go into the schools and talk with TEACHERS about what type of behavior is demonstrated within the classroom throughout the district. And then follow up with, what consequences have been handed down for these behaviors. I am guessing most parents would be shocked by the lack of consequences for behaviors that back in the day, would have gotten us suspended. This policy will make it harder for teachers to reprimand students for inappropriate behavior because the student/family will cry bullying. Ask those tough questions, but don't be shocked by answers. I am guessing most teachers will be afraid to comment for simple reason of job security. But if stories are similar to the ones my teacher friends tell me, wow, what a dialogue we all could have
Dog Guy
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 2:37 a.m.
This policy is a broad piece of tissue paper protecting administrative flanks. It will be kept in the CYA file.
ypsi
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 12:57 a.m.
So, if a teacher singles out a child for behavior and not the other children involved.Is that bullying?It sure seems like it to me.I do know a child that this is happening to each and every day.How could a teacher allow all the other kids to participate in recreational activity.Then make this child clean up afterwards.This is a Ann Arbor Public School.
local
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 11:13 a.m.
If the child is bullying or doing the wrong thing over and over, then yes they should have a punishment. Would I consider that bullying by a teacher, I wouldn't, but AAPS might. If a child does something wrong, they need to be told and if the behavior continues, they need to be told again and again until the behavior changes.
Sandra Samons
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 3:55 p.m.
Well, I suppose something is better than nothing, but it still seems that the policy is window dressing. It addresses consequences but does nothing for prevention, without which nothing will change except on the surface. And, I agree about it being so vague that every decision will end up being discretionary. We should be able to do better than this!
Bogie
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 3:43 p.m.
Dharun Lavi said something interesting is in his post conviction interview (The NYC case of a college dorm roommate video taping his gay roommate). He told the interviewer, that there is no way people knew what he was thinking. Good point. I don't know how any institution can enforce a bullying rule. These popular rules (and laws) will probably create a lot of "McCarthy" types of investigations. To get in the business of knowing the intent of the bully, and also a true account of the pain and anguish of the victim; will be an attempt at an impossibility.
ViSHa
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 2:57 p.m.
What happens if a report of bullying interferes with the discipline gap numbers Ms. Green is trying to achieve?
ViSHa
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 12:08 a.m.
I don't doubt anything that you are saying as I have heard similar things about my child's school. I wonder if the Board has thought this through concerning this conflict? I think this would make an interesting story for Ann Arbor dot com to expand on. It seems almost insulting to come up with a bullying policy knowing it will not be applied to all children due to this "Discipline Gap Initiative".
J. A. Pieper
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 6:28 p.m.
ViSHa, as a school employee, this is exactly what I want to know. When some kids throw chairs, at either classmates, or teachers, this is meant to cause harm. This is bullying, the kids in that classroom, and the teacher always have a fear of what is going to happen. I personally believe the new bullying standards and the Discipline Gap initiatives are conflicts, you just can't have them both. Some kids in my school can kick, bite (peers and adults), throw dangerous things, and NOTHING happens to them because of the discipline gap initiative. When parents at our school see this behavior, are they going to want to keep their kids in AAPS?
Augustine
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 2:41 p.m.
From the wording in the article, I thought that the policy was going to be so enlightened as to include protection for the bullying OF adults as well as BY adults. We do so much to ensure the right treatment of our children, as we should, but then do not apply that which we teach our children to adult interactions. Children see adults teaching them one thing and not acting it out in their relations with other adults.
tom swift jr.
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 2:36 p.m.
hmmm... coaches are going to have to develop a whole new approach...
Tony Livingston
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 4:34 p.m.
Great point, Tom. Coaches seem to be the only high school staff members who are beyond reproach and who do not seem to be supervised in any way. Much of what goes on in sports would be considered abuse in any other environment. This idea that parents are not allowed to question the coach is ridiculous.
alex
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 1:52 p.m.
there has been so many videos of not only kids harassing kids but teachers harassing young children... I understand that bullying is going to happen among children but you'd think/hope that teachers have enough common sense to not pick on their students :/
local
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 11:09 a.m.
I agree with J.A. the schools hands are tied. My kids school has elementary students cussing at teachers, tell them off, hitting other students and they receive ZERO consequences. They may miss a recess here or there, but that is all. When the principal was asked about it, she basically said her evaluation was tied to suspensions, thus she was looking for alternative punishments for these kids. My daughters go to a pretty good school, but the kids over the years have become less and less respectful to those around them. We see it on field trips, evening music concerts, and when we volunteer in the classroom. I would struggle to be a teacher in many of the rooms my kids have been in.
J. A. Pieper
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 9:44 a.m.
Basic Bob - what kindergarteners are you talking about, or is this sarcasm? Unfortunately, I guess it depends on what school you are talking about, but for what I see at my school, this generation of K and First graders, and higher grades, have much less appropriate behavior than past groups of children. In AAPS, our hands are tied, we cannot discipline some children due to the district's Discipline Gap policy. Yes, many students are self disciplined because their parents have taught them about appropriate behavior before they arrived at the school doors. Some families have their own standards, these are the ones that it is very difficult to affect a positive change in their behavior. If there is no order in the home, it is impossible for the child to maintain , or self regulate, order when they are in a classroom.
Basic Bob
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 2:18 p.m.
I guess the children should be expected to maintain order on their own, since any attempt by a teacher to correct behavior will be investigated as harassment and bullying. I'm so glad to hear that today's kindergarteners and first graders are so much better behaved than we were, without being sent to the corner, held in from recess, or escorted to the principal's office repeatedly.
PeteM
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 1:47 p.m.
I'm glad to see the school system taking this seriously, but the policy -- at least from this summary -- seems legalistic. My concern is that administrators and teachers will be, as a result of sanctions, concerned mostly with following the letter of the law -- completing their investigation in time etc. -- than in dealing with unique situations in a case by case basis. Also, my sense is that many kids -- particularly boys -- are embarrassed about being bullied and unwilling to report it. I think that more than a policy would be more programs designed to help kids who bullied respond effectively and create a culture where the kids themselves discourage bullying within their peer groups.
Klayton
Wed, May 30, 2012 : 2:06 a.m.
Good Point! Maybe there should be an anonymous "hot line" option for reporting
John Hritz
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 8:23 p.m.
Well stated, PeteM. As previously mentioned, there's a difference between a dispute poorly articulated and bullying. There should be remedies short of going to the principle to resolve deep conflicts between friends and peers. The bully has no interest in resolving the conflict.
Dirtgrain
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 12:32 p.m.
"Will we ever have fascism in this country?" "Yes, but we will call it anti-fascism" (attributed to Huey Long). Kids are so quick to claim that this or that teacher picks on them. It's a slippery slope. Witch trials?
Will Warner
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 12:05 p.m.
"Will we ever have fascism in this country?" "Yes, but we will call it anti-fascism" Man, I would give anything to have said that.
Dirtgrain
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 1:36 p.m.
That was the irony of the Salem Witch Trials, too. Let's hope the school district relies on better evidence and process.
Peter
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 12:57 p.m.
There's a peculiar irony in calling anti-bullying efforts witch trials.
yohan
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 11:21 a.m.
The policy so so broad, general and vague that any comment or action that may be taken in a negative manner is prohibited. From the policy "Any written verbal or physical act" (snip to 3.1.3) "Having an actual and substantial detrimental effect on a pupil's physical or mental health" is prohibited. My question is then, How do you tell a student that they are failing? Or are failing grades now prohibited?
ESprout
Tue, May 29, 2012 : 4:38 p.m.
Whatever logical fallacy this argument falls under (I do believe it's a straw man) it's completely asinine. It's like saying, "If we allow gay marriage we open the door to people marrying dogs or lamp posts..." To answer your question, you say, "Timmy, based on your coursework, you are failing this class." As to failing grades being prohibited...they should be. This country needs to have higher academic standards, but that's a whole other topic.
nuseph
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 10:05 p.m.
@GoNavy yohan's post relied on a misrepresentation of the policy--leaving out the intent and reasonableness requirements. Without those criteria, he sets up the policy to read that "any comment or action" taken negatively is prohibited. If that were actually true, then the policy would be "broad, general and vague," such that telling a student he or she is failing would be prohibited. So yohan's criticism would be right on point, assuming the policy were something altogether different from what it actually is. That's the essence of a straw man argument. Class dismissed.
GoNavy
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 8:43 p.m.
@nuseph: As I've stated, and you've now demonstrated, you've used the term "straw man" incorrectly. It is not a straw man to argue that a policy is "unbounded", when evidence and precedent exist to suggest that similar policies in the past have been abused to obtain outcomes far from the original intent of those who first wrote the policies. If you remain interested in logical fallacies, I'd put forth that you are "begging the question": You said "It is a straw man when yohan suggests that the policy is unbounded." Here, you put forth a proposition which requires proof, and assumed it without any. You then went on to suggest that these policies are not "unbound" because they are policies, and because polices are supposed to be specific, they cannot possibly be "unbounded." Circular reasoning, at best.
nuseph
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 7:51 p.m.
@GoNavy It is a straw man when yohan suggests that the policy is unbounded. Also, note that is a policy, not a law. A policy should be specific, but not so specific that it leaves administrators unable to address reality on the ground.
GoNavy
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 7:12 p.m.
@nuseph: I'm not sure if you're correctly applying the straw man concept here. Yohan, on the other hand, correctly states that the expansive nature of the allows for nearly any definition of bullying, which may in turn be used to turn perfectly good students into "examples" through administrative punishment. The road to you-know-where is paved with good intentions, as I'm sure you're aware. When it comes to the law, we need to be specific, not broad.
nuseph
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 4:40 p.m.
Straw man argument. Look at the definitions. It refers to bullying as either intended to cause harm or that which a reasonable person would know would cause harm. Presumably a teacher wouldn't intend to cause harm by telling a kid he's failing. And a reasonable person wouldn't know that telling a kid he's failing would cause harm--it's clearly debatable whether it would cause harm or help a kid progress.
skigrl
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 10:34 a.m.
Perhaps they should add that school support employees should also be required to report instances of bullying. I would assume that social workers, psychologists, nurses etc would report these instances but since they are developing the policy they should include these folks.
ViSHa
Mon, May 28, 2012 : 3:25 p.m.
I would think recess monitors, lunch monitors, room assistants, etc.. would see bullying more than even those support staff. Would they be required to report?