Orange County Grand Jury
• 2011-2012
• Agency Response
Response to:
Orange Unified School District
Orange Unified School District Education Center 1401 North Handy Street • Orange, Ca 92867-4334*
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 4 findings
F1
Not all Orange County schools use the same technology, procedures and codes to record bullying or harassment incidents. Response to Finding 1: The District has no independent knowledge by Superintendent which to agree or disagree with this finding. The schools of this District use of the same technology, procedures and codes to record incidences of Schools bullying or harassment, and use the definition of bullying as currently embodied in Education Code 48900(r) and Education Code sections Michael L. Christensen referenced therein.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
New legislation takes effect July 1, 2012, and broadens the definition of "Bullying." 714.628.4487 714.628.4041 (FAX) Response to Finding 2: The District agrees that AB 1156 provides a [email protected] broader definition of "bullying" than was contained in prior law.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Recommend all county-wide schools agree upon the same definition of bullying.
F3
Education Code section 234.1 requiring posting of anti- bullying/anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas was not evident in all schools visited. M Response to Finding 3: The District cannot comment on what policies are posted in all schools throughout Orange County, but can respond only on behalf of the District itself. Finding 3 combines the requirement to post anti-discrimination/anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas with the requirement to post anti-bullying policies. The requirement for school districts to post their anti-bullying policy in all schools and offices, including staff lounges and pupil government meeting rooms, is new as of July 1, 2012. Thus, the District disagrees with Finding 3 to the extent it reflects on the District's practice in regard to posting its anti-bullying policy in prescribed areas prior to July 1, 2012. The Grand Jury report does not identify which districts and/or schools it found out of compliance; therefore, the District cannot agree or disagree with this finding.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Each district review standardized procedures to protect a bully victim and bystanders' confidentiality as stated in Education Code section 234.1.
F4
Based on witness testimony, confidentiality was not maintained in a bullying incident as prescribed in California Education Code section 234.1. Response to Finding 4: The Grand Jury report does not contain sufficient information to enable the District to respond to this finding nor does it identify which school district was involved in the alleged breach of confidentiality; therefore, the District disagrees wholly with this finding.
No recommendations for this finding
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.