Placer County Grand Jury Anti-Bullying Policies in Middle

Additional Recommendations 1

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.

• R5
  of that report is that: “Schools should develop a comprehensive means to evaluate the effectiveness of their anti-bullying programs and policies. Schools should conduct semi-annual anonymous surveys of the student body to measure the effectiveness of anti- bullying programs. In addition to gathering information regarding the amount and type of bullying that the student has experienced, the survey should seek student perceptions of the attitudes of teachers and administrators toward bullying.” The current Grand Jury wanted to know:  How the schools are measuring the effectiveness of their programs.  If changes were made to the Placer County schools policies and procedures to assure a safe environment for reporting bullying. Definitions: Bullying may include any physical or verbal act or conduct by an individual or group of individuals, including communications made in writing or electronically, that a student has or may reasonably be predicted to experience fear of harm to their person or property, a detriment to their physical or mental health, an interference with their academic performance, or with their ability to participate in or benefit from the services, activities or privileges provided by a school or county office program. Cyber-bullying may include the creation or transmission of harassing communications, direct threats, or other harmful texts, sounds or images on the Internet, social media, or other technologies using a telephone, computer or any wireless communication device. Cyber- bullying also includes breaking into another person’s electronic account and assuming that person’s identity in order to damage that person’s reputation. Source: Placer County Office of Education Policy SR 5131.2 (a). Investigation Methods The investigation was performed through interviews, reviewing documents and the responses to the 2013-2014 Grand Jury Report. Specifically, the 2014-2015 Grand Jury:  Interviewed the leadership of the Placer County Office of Education (PCOE), several school district superintendents, as well as high school and middle school principals.  Reviewed policies regarding bullying and harassment provided by school administrators and County Office of Education management.  Reviewed 2013-14 Grand Jury report and the 13 responses received in response thereto. One member of the Grand Jury was recused to avoid any conflict of interest and the appearance of bias. Facts  Placer County Office of Education has updated its anti-bullying policies.  Schools are aware of bullying as an issue; some schools are ahead of others. In particular, 49 schools in Placer County have implemented PBIS. There are 110 public schools in Placer County, including alternative high schools and public charter schools.  The following school districts have graduated enforcement policies that could result in suspension or expulsion of a student for bullying and/or cyber-bullying: 1. Placer Union High School District 2. Roseville Joint Union High School District 3. Rocklin Unified School District  Not all schools have a means for anonymous reporting.  Positive Behavior Intervention Support (PBIS) is a Program developed by the University of Oregon with support from University of North Carolina “to establish the social culture and behavioral supports needed for a school to be an effective learning environment for all students.”.1  PBIS emphasizes four integrated elements: (a) data for decision making, (b) measurable outcomes supported and evaluated by data, (c) practices with evidence that these outcomes are achievable, and (d) systems that efficiently and effectively support implementation of these practices.  PBIS has a data collection component that allows schools to generate reports.  PBIS collects both “behavior data” (who, what, where, when) and “fidelity data” (how the plans are being implemented).  Schools using PBIS have teams of staff (administrators, certificated, non-certificated, parents) that analyze data to measure the effectiveness of the program and develop solutions to problems.  For most schools, there has not been enough baseline data collected in PBIS to develop trends showing if the school’s programs are effective in reducing bullying incidents.  Placer County Juvenile Detention Facility reports that using PBIS has led to a decrease in poor behavior incidents since they began using the program in February, 2013. Placer County Office of Education, PCOE Board Review “Student Support Services” October 9, 2014, http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/pcoe/Board.nsf/files/9PMN7N5CD799/$file/PCOE%20Board%2 0Overview%20of%20PBIS%2010%204%2014.pdf