|
Anti-Harassment and Anti-Bullying Decision Matrix: Page 2 of 3
Anti-Harassment and Anti-Bullying Decision Matrix
Senate File 61, which
created new Iowa Code section 280.28, requires districts and nonpublic
schools
to collect and report harassment and bullying incidence data. The
definition of harassment and bullying in the law is: “Any electronic,
written, verbal, or physical act or conduct toward a student which is
based on any actual or perceived trait or characteristic of the student
and which creates an objectively hostile school environment that meets
one or more of the following conditions:
(1) Places the student in reasonable fear of harm to the student's person or property.
(2) Has a substantially detrimental effect on the student's physical or mental health.
(3) Has the effect of substantially interfering with a student's academic performance.
(4) Has the effect of substantially interfering with the student's
ability to participate in or benefit from the services, activities, or
privileges provided by a school.”
"Trait or characteristic of the student" includes but is not limited
to age, color, creed, national origin, race, religion, marital status,
sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, physical attributes, physical
or mental ability or disability, ancestry, political party preference,
political belief, socioeconomic status, or familial status
The following matrix is designed to assist school personnel
determine whether an incident needs to be reported under the new law.
If the answer is “yes,” the report will be made on spring Basic
Education Data System (BEDS).
Situation
|
Report?
|
Other remarks
|
|
1.
A group
of middle school girls (all on-again, off-again friends of each other) start
texting each other at school. Some of
the messages turn nasty; they start
calling each other “be-otch,” “ho,” etc.
Hurt feelings escalate to a one-time shoving match in the hall between
classes.
|
NO.
This
behavior is more like “typical adolescent cruelty” that does not rise to the
level of meeting any of the four conditions above in the definition.
|
Just because
this is not an incident to report under the new law does not mean that the
school does nothing. It is always
appropriate for the school to look into the matter and talk to the students
involved, call the parents, etc. Not
having to report this on spring BEDS does not mean not taking any
action. (Because this example assumes
use of school time, that alone is enough to punish under most local school
codes of student conduct.)
|
|
2.
Situation
starts out same as #1 above, but now the girls have divided themselves in to
two groups and there are frequent physical incidents between them.
|
YES.
This
behavior has moved beyond “typical adolescent cruelty” to the point where a
student has objective reason to be in “reasonable fear of harm” to her
person.
|
The
motivation would be reported as based on sex, given that the name-calling
that started all this was limited to derogatory female terms.
|
|
3.
Back to
the facts in #2, but this time the name-calling was gender-neutral (e.g.,
“jerk”), so the harassment is NOT based on sex. Again, suppose that the name-calling has
escalated to frequent physical incidents between the girls.
|
MAYBE. If the school’s local policy lists just
the 17 traits or characteristics from the law without language to the effect
“including but not limited to these characteristics,” and if the harassment
is not based on any of the 17, this is not reportable on BEDS. If the school’s local policy is more broad,
this is reportable because a student has objective reason to be in
“reasonable fear of harm” to her person.
|
If
reporting, the motivation would be reported as “other, unspecified.”
|
|
4.
Two male
elementary students, one Hispanic and one white, standing in lunch line get
into an argument about who was first in line.
They start shoving each other.
The white student calls the Hispanic student a “wetback,” and gets in
the last shove. There’s no prior
history of issues between these two students.
|
NO. While the derogatory name implicates a
protected characteristic (national origin), this is the type of misbehavior
that can be resolved quickly by having a teacher or other school staff member
step in immediately to separate the boys, make them apologize, issue a quick
punishment, and school life goes on.
|
Make the
classroom teacher(s) aware of the minor argument and ask that the teacher
keep an eye on the students to make sure that this was a one-time issue.
If there
are repeat performances and if continued problems seem to be based on
national origin or another listed trait, a report may need to be made in the
future.
|
|
5.
An
elementary student frequently makes rhetorical comments to no one in
particular about how she is going to “get” one or another fellow
student. No specifics are ever
mentioned, and there is no genuine expression of intent to harm. The student has older siblings and often
“talks tough” as a means of posturing.
|
NO.
But, the
answer changes as soon as the student starts becoming specific and seems to
be targeting a specific classmate.
|
Generally
speaking, the older the student, the less a school may assume that the
student has no means by which to carry out threats. Pay attention to even rhetorical
threats; talk to the student and
his/her parents. Counseling may be a
good option because nonspecific threats could be a first “cry for help.”
|
|
6.
A student
makes a specific threat to harm a school employee and has the wherewithal to
carry out the threat.
|
NO. The answer is ‘no’ only because
school employees are not protected under the new law.
|
OF COURSE
the school will take immediate and appropriate action to protect the
employee, including calling law enforcement, getting the student isolated and
searched, and calling the student’s parents.
|
The situations above are not to be taken literally, and are usable
as scenarios from which school personnel can extrapolate their own
situations. Not covered below are the obvious harassment situations
that must be reported and investigated. When in doubt, INVESTIGATE.
|
D.E. & State Board 
