Do Anti-Bullying Laws Translate to School Bullying Prevention? Preliminary Evidence from Washington, DC

INTRODUCTION: Bullying is a critical and preventable behavior that has gained renewed attention over the last five years among both the general public as well as policymakers. Laws aimed to prevent and reduce bullying now exist in 49 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico (StopBullying.gov, n.d..; Stuart-Cassel et al., 2011).  These laws primarily require schools and districts to develop anti-bullying policies containing specific requirements, such as a consistent definition and reporting procedures (Stuart-Cassel et al., 2011). Federal lawmakers are currently considering two laws (the Safe Schools Improvement Act and the Student Non-Discrimination Act) that would establish such requirements nationwide. Having an anti-bullying policy is consistent with identified best practices for bullying prevention (Espelage et al., 2013). However, little is known about the effectiveness of anti-bullying laws (EMT Associates, 2013).  This study takes the first step in answering this question by exploring whether school-level anti-bullying policies are compliant with the requirements of a comprehensive anti-bullying law and how this law has affected schools’ efforts to prevent bullying.

METHODS: The Washington D.C. Office of Human Rights contracted with the authors to conduct an audit of local education agency (LEA)-level (public and public charter school providers) anti-bullying policies for compliance with the 2012 Youth Bullying Prevention Act (YBPA). LEAs were obligated to submit a copy of their policy by September 2013, although policies were accepted through September 2014. A total of 57 policies (93%) were submitted for initial review. A component checklist was developed based on the requirements of the YBPA, resulting in 9 overarching components and 43 subcomponents. Each policy was independently coded by two raters, and any discrepancies were resolved via conference. LEAs were provided a memo detailing their compliance status and were encouraged to resubmit if they were found not in compliance. Common themes and patterns of non-compliance were noted.

RESULTS: Only 28% of LEA anti-bullying policies were compliant with the YBPA on initial submission. Schools were most often non-compliant on inclusion of off-campus cyberbullying, having the correct definition, having required flexibility language around consequences, and having the required appeals process. Following technical assistance and resubmission, 70.5% of LEA anti-bullying policies were compliant by the end of the study.

CONCLUSIONS: Passing an anti-bullying law is not sufficient to ensure comprehensive school bullying prevention policies.