Arizonas Anti-Bullying StatuteA look forward and a look back

2006
Arizonas first statutory language regarding bullying was enacted as HB 2368 in
2006. The 2006 language, and both subsequent revisions, was added to 15-341
which delineates the general powers and duties of local school district governing
boards. The provisions of this legislation were:
A requirement that school district governing boards adopt policies and
procedures to prohibit pupils from bullying, harassing or intimidating other pupils
on school grounds that include the following components:

A procedure for pupils and parents to confidentially report incidents

A requirement that school employees report suspected incidents to the
appropriate school official
A formal process for documenting reported incidents and a prohibition
on retention of documentation if the allegations are unproven
A formal process for investigation of reported incidents
Disciplinary procedures for students who have been found to have
committed bullying
A procedure that sets forth consequences for submitting false reports
of bullying

It is important to note that the actual design of the above-listed policies and
procedures was left to the discretion of the local school board in order to maintain
a school boards local control of its district.
2009
In 2009, HB 2011 removed the prohibition on retention of records of unproven
incidents but required that they be maintained confidentially. Also prohibited the
use of such documentation in the discipline of a pupil unless the appropriate
school official has investigated and determined that the incident occurred.
2011
In 2011, HB 2415 made the following changes to Arizonas anti-bullying statute:

Added the use of school district computers, networks, forums and mailing
lists in incidents to the list of actions that are required to be included in a
school districts policies and procedures

Added a procedure for school district employees to confidentially report, in

writing, incidents of suspected bullying, harassment and intimidation and
mandated the creation of a written form for pupils, parents and school
employees to use in reporting incidents
Added a description of appropriate disciplinary procedures for employees
that fail to report an incident
Mandated that school districts, at the beginning of each school year,
provide pupils with a written copy of the rights, protections and support
services available to a pupil who is an alleged victim of an incident; and,
required that this document be provided to a pupil who is an alleged victim
of an incident
A requirement that school districts maintain all documentation of an
incident for at least six years
A requirement that, if a school district provides documentation of an
alleged incident to anyone other than school officials or law enforcement,
all individually identifiable information shall be redacted
A requirement that an alleged victim be notified upon the completion and
disposition of the investigation
A mandate that a school district have procedures designed to protect the
health and safety of pupils who are physically harmed as a result of an
incident or incidents including, if appropriate, procedures to contact
emergency medical services or law enforcement, or both.
A requirement that school district policies and procedures include
definitions of harassment, intimidation and bullying

2012
In 2012, Senator David Schapira introduced SB 1462, which contained a clear
definition of bullying, added that a pupils use of any electronic device on school
grounds (including personal cell phones or computers) was covered by statute,
clarified and enhanced reporting requirements and mandated training programs
designed to prevent bullying for pupils, staff and parents. The individual
components of the bill are:

Defines Bullying as any written, verbal or physical act, or any electronic

communication that harms, that a reasonable person would know is likely
to harm a student by:
1. Substantially interfering with educational opportunities, benefits or
programs of one of more students
2. Adversely effecting the ability of a student to participate in or benefit
from educational programs or activities by placing the student in a
reasonable fear of physical harm or by causing emotional distress
3. Having an actual and substantial detrimental effect on a students
physical or mental health
4. Causing substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school

Added all of the provisions of the statute to the charter school statutes.
Contains an optional policy school boards may adopt that clarifies that
bullying both during the school day and at any other time off campus, if
investigated by law enforcement, is an incident that must be investigated
by school administrators. This includes the use of personal electronic
devices both on campus and away from school hours.
Moves language currently in statute to more clearly that the use of ALL
electronic communication devices on school grounds that are used in
harassing, bullying or intimidation are covered by the policy.
Mandates notification of the allegedly bullied students parent or guardian
but leaves notification of alleged perpetrators parent or guardian to the
school district or charter schools existing parental notification policies.
Includes language intended to give school administrators guidance when
conducting the required notification of an allegedly bullied pupils parent or
guardian. Restates current practice by requiring administrators to follow
relevant state and federal FERPA requirements regarding release of
student records. Adds provisions mandating that the parental notification
be timely. Includes emotional harm among the factors in developing
procedures designed to protect students.
Mandates training programs designed to prevent bullying that include:
1. Annual training for administrators and school employees in
preventing, identifying, responding to, and reporting incidents of
bullying and harassment.
2. An educational program for parents and students, if parents opt
their student in, in preventing, identifying, responding to, and
reporting incidents of bullying and harassment.
Includes a legislative intent provision enumerating the provisions of the bill
and clarifying the goals for the legislation.

SB 1462 passed the Senate but was never assigned to a committee in the
House. This bill, or a similar version, will be re-introduced in the 2013 legislative
session.
On the next pages are the Elements of a Comprehensive Ant-Bullying Law from
the ADLs Anti-Bullying Law Toolkit. Most Anti-Bullying advocates and experts
would consider this to be comprehensive list. Following the list, starting on page
7, you will find commentary on how Arizona statute compares to the elements
listed below.

III. Elements of a Comprehensive Anti-Bullying Law

(1) Require each school district adopt an anti-bullying policy.
A requirement will let the parents, students, and concerned community
members know that the issue is being taken seriously.
The bill should require that school districts work with parents, teachers,
students, law enforcement and other community stakeholders in the creation and
implementation of the policy. The issue of bullying is a community issue and any
response needs the support and buy-in of the entire community.
(2) A strong definition of intimidation, harassment, and bullying is
necessary.
The definition will notify school administrators, students, and teachers exactly
what is unacceptable.
The definition should not be overbroad, or vague it must not punish
constitutionally-protected speech. The definition should be limited to areas in
which the school administration has the authority to act.
(3) Enumerated characteristics must be included in any definition of
bullying.
Naming certain categories provides clear guidance to those who must apply the
standard.
Naming the categories (particularly sexual orientation) will remove all doubt
that Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) youth are included in the
protections from bullying. A recent national survey of a representative group of
students ages 13 to 18 found that students in schools with bullying or
harassment policies inclusive of sexual orientation or gender identity are less
likely to report a serious harassment problem at their schools.2
Inclusion of enumerated characteristics does not affect protection for all other
students.
The U.S. Supreme Court has found that enumerating personal characteristics
is the essential device used to make the duty not to discriminate concrete and
to provide guidance for those who must comply.3
According to a GLSEN report, Students who attend schools with policies that
enumerate categories report less bullying and harassment than students who do
not.
Students from schools with inclusive policies reported that other students are
harassed less because of their physical appearance (36% v. 52%), their sexual
orientation (32% v. 43%) or their gender identity (26% v. 37%).4
(4) Electronic communications must be included in any definition of
bullying.
With increasing access to online technology, the Internet has become yet

another vehicle to harass and bully. Cyberbullying may be more harmful than
traditional bullying because of the invasive and pervasive nature of the
communication: Messages are circulated far and wide and there is no refuge -it is ubiquitous.
In a survey of 824 13- to 17-year-olds, 35% reported being targeted by at least
one of the following forms of Internet harassment in the previous year: rude or
nasty comments, rumors, and threatening or aggressive messages. Eight
percent reported frequent harassment (being targeted monthly or more often).5
In a survey of middle school students from a large U.S. school district, students
who reported being cyberbullied said that the bully was most often someone
from school (26.5%).6
(5) Off-campus cyberbullying which affects and interferes with a schools
educational mission must be covered by the Act.
As a significant amount of cyberbullying is created on computers, cell phones
and other devices that are not owned by the school, or are not located on
school property, but still affect the school environment and the welfare of the
students, it is important to ensure that schools are given adequate legal
framework to address the issue.
While courts nationwide are engaging in debates about balancing a students
right to free speech with another students right to learn in a safe environment
when dealing with electronic harassment, most courts agree that schools may
discipline speech which results in a substantial disruption of the operation of
the school.
(6) In school reporting: a process within the school for reporting and
investigating bullying must be established.
Students and witnesses should know a safe place to come to report incidents.
There should be a point person in the school who is responsible for receiving
reports of bullying and communicating with appropriate personnel for
investigation.
(7) District Reporting: A systematic process by which the school reports to
the school district, and the school district reports to the State, must be
established.
The bill should create process for schools to report incidents to the
superintendents, who must then report to the designated state repository
agency.
State authorities must set an example that this is an important issue that is
being monitored and examined.
(8) Establish consequences for unacceptable activity.
Establishing consequences is important to put students, and staff, on notice
that inappropriate behavior will not be tolerated and will be taken seriously.
(9) Mandate training for faculty and students.

 Thorough training of school administrators, teachers and counseling staff is

essential to ensure that the Model Policy is properly implemented and
enforced.
A section such as this may have clear resource implications. It may be
necessary for supporters to advocate for funds to accompany the enactment of
this statute.
(10) Include counseling for victims and perpetrators.
The bill should include a section on counseling for both targets and
perpetrators, and for appropriate family members, affected by bullying. As
described in the introduction above, severe bullying can have long-lasting and
dangerous effects on students.
(11) Give notice to parents and guardians.
This bill should ensure there is a procedure for broadly publicizing the policy
(in conduct codes, handbooks, bulletin boards, school Web sites, and other
appropriate places.)
The notice will send a message to students, teachers and parents that the
school is taking this issue seriously and does not accept inappropriate conduct.
The notice will also serve to instruct students, parents, and school staff how to
identify, respond to and report incidents of bullying.
(12) The State Board of Education should play a significant role.
The bill should require the Board of Education to create a Model Policy.
School Districts will take their lead from the Superintendents, and the State
Department of Education. The State should lead by example and provide
inclusive sample policies so that schools districts have guidance in creating
comprehensive policies.
2 From Teasing to Torment: School Climate in America, Dana Markow, Ph.D., GLSEN and Harris
Interactive, Inc.
(2005)
3 Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996).
4 Id.
5 Ybarra, Michele L., Diener-West, Marie and Leaf, Philip J. 2007. Examining the Overlap in Internet
Harassment
and School Bullying: Implications for School Intervention. Journal of Adolescent Health 41: S42S50.
6 Hinduja, S. and Patchin, J. W. 2008. Bullying Beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Responding to
Cyberbullying. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications (Corwin Press).

How does Arizona statute compare to the list?

(1) Require each school district adopt an anti-bullying policy.
Current statute requires that school districts (but not charter schools) adopt an
anti-bullying policy but does not specifically require stakeholder input in the
creation of the policy.
(2) A strong definition of intimidation, harassment, and bullying is
necessary.
Current statute requires only that the school districts policy includes definitions of
harassment, intimidation and bullying but does not mandate specific definitions.
SB 1462 (2012) would have enacted a comprehensive definition of bullying.
(3) Enumerated characteristics must be included in any definition of
bullying.
Enumeration is not required under current statute and SB 1462 would not have
added enumeration to the statute.
(4) Electronic communications must be included in any definition of
bullying.
Current statute includes the use of electronic technology or electronic
communication on school computers, networks, forums and mailing lists but only
covers school owned computers and networks. SB 1462 would have added the
use of personal cell phones and computers on campus to the list of covered
incidents.
(5) Off-campus cyberbullying which affects and interferes with a schools
educational mission must be covered by the Act.
Current statute does not address off-campus cyberbullying. SB 1462 would have
added statutory authority for school districts, at their option, to add off-campus
cyberbullying to the list of covered activities.
(6) In school reporting: a process within the school for reporting and
investigating bullying must be established.
Current statute includes a reporting requirement but SB 1462 would have
strengthened reporting requirements.
(7) District Reporting: A systematic process by which the school reports to
the school district, and the school district reports to the State, must be
established.
Current statute mandates that school districts have a reporting process and
mandates the retention of reports for six years but does not require district
reporting to the state.

(8) Establish consequences for unacceptable activity.

Current statute requires school districts to adopt disciplinary procedures but does
not specify what the procedures must include.
(9) Mandate training for faculty and students.
Current statute does not mandate training but SB 1462 would have required
annual training of all staff, parents and students. The student training
requirement would have only applied to students whose parents specifically
opted in to the training. The opt in language was added to address concerns
raised by some senators and will need to be revisited in future legislation with the
possible change to a parent opt out provision which would be easier for schools
to administer.
(10) Include counseling for victims and perpetrators.
Current statute does not mandate counseling. SB 1462 would also not have
mandated counseling but did include language giving administrators guidance
regarding consultation with counseling staff when investigating and reporting
incidents.
(11) Give notice to parents and guardians.
Current statute requires schools, at the beginning of the school year, to give
students a copy of the rights, protections and support services available to a
pupil who is an alleged victim of an incident but does not require notice to
parents and/or guardians. SB 1462 would have mandated notice to
parents/guardians of an alleged victim and would have left the notice requirement
to parents/guardians of an alleged perpetrator up to existing school
parent/guardian notice procedures.
(12) The State Board of Education should play a significant role.
Current statute and SB 1462 are both silent on any role for the State Board of
Education.