Categories: News

Criticisms Re: NJ’s Anti-Bullying Legislation

Both The Record and the Star-Ledger have editorials out urging the State to keep the anti-bullying law even though the NJ’s Council on Local Mandates ruled that the new legislation amounts to an unconstitutional unfunded mandate.

The Editorial Boards of both papers praise NJ’s far-reaching law as an honorable attempt to protect kids who suffer bullying by peers. That’s true. And both editorials assume that the costs incurred by local districts are largely teacher and staff training (including everyone from custodians to school board members). That’s part of the cost, although the greatest expense to districts is probably the diversion of time spent filing reports, mounting investigations, and complying with rigid time schedules.

New Jersey School Boards Association has commented on the law’s impact on districts. So has the NJ Principals and Supervisors Association, which conducted a survey of its members. Some of the conclusions:

  • The legislation is a hefty time commitment (e.g. paperwork) for staff assigned to lead, or are involved with, investigations, taking them away from their existing duties;
  • Where districts have assigned guidance counselors or school psychologists to the role of the Anti-Bullying Specialist (ABS), the role of counselor or advocate is in direct conflict with their new investigatory responsibilities assigned under the new law. Such respondents also voiced concern about their lack of investigatory experience;
  • Teachers have experienced significant stress due to the strictures of the reporting requirements of the new law. Many are fearful that not reporting will lead to liability, even where they do not believe an incident rises to the level of HIB. They often report incidents that would have been traditionally handled in the classroom for fear of reprisal if they do not;
  • Students have lost valuable instructional time due to the substantial investigatory requirements of the law;
  • Students and parents have been hyper-sensitized to the topic, sometimes labeling normal adolescent conflict as HIB;
  • The written report follow-up requirement to parents often reanimates conflict that had been resolved.
Laura Waters

View Comments

  • Unfunded mandate aside, the real problem with this law is its establishment of three undefined terms of art: harassment, intimidation and bullying.

    Assemblywoman Huttle seems to think we should instinctively know where the line is drawn.

    Not so in practice. It will take more than a financial band-aid to stabilize the situation.

Recent Posts

BREAKING: Statement from JerseyCAN on State’s Long-Delayed Release of Student Test Results

This is a statement by Paula White, Executive Director of JerseyCAN, on the New Jersey…

2 years ago

NJEA: Murphy’s Elimination of Teacher Performance Test Is a Major Win for Students and Educators

This is a press release. Earlier today, Gov. Phil Murphy signed a bill to eliminate…

2 years ago

Murphy Signs Bill Eliminating EdTPA Test for Teacher Certification

Today Gov. Phil Murphy signed Senate Bill 896, which prohibits the New Jersey Department of…

2 years ago

LILLEY: Blue States Had More School Closures and More Learning Loss — Just Like NJ under Gov. Murphy

The 74 conducted a study of the relative learning loss in Democratic (Blue) and Republican (Red) states and…

2 years ago

One of Newark Superintendent’s New High Schools Tolerates Racism Against Black Students

In October 2020 Newark Superintendent Roger Leon announced with great fanfare the opening of district’s…

2 years ago