Ask a New Question
Menu

Use the excerpt from Arkansas law to answer the question. “(ii) Following the completion of the investigation into the alleged incident of bullying conducted under subdivision (d)(2)(A) of this section, an individual licensed as a public school district building-level administrator or his or her designee may without limitation: (a) Provide intervention services; (b) Establish training programs to reduce bullying; (c) Impose discipline on any of the parties involved in the incident of bullying; (d) Recommend counseling for any of the parties involved in the incident of bullying; or (e) Take or recommend other appropriate action; . . .” Critique the systems approach to Arkansas law on bullying. What part of the bullying prevention system does this fall within? (1 point) Responses the individual student level the individual student level the district level the district level the teacher level the teacher level the school administrator level

1 answer

The excerpt from Arkansas law outlines a structured approach to addressing bullying incidents within schools, highlighting key actions that can be taken following an investigation. The systems approach to bullying prevention typically considers multiple layers of intervention, including policies, practices, and the roles of various stakeholders in the school environment. Evaluating this law against that framework can reveal its strengths and potential gaps.

The actions specified in the law fall primarily within the school administrator level of a bullying prevention system. This is because it empowers licensed building-level administrators or their designees to take decisive actions, such as providing intervention services, establishing training programs, imposing discipline, recommending counseling, and taking other appropriate action.

Critiquing the effectiveness of this system approach, the following points are relevant:

  1. Intervention Services: The provision of intervention services is vital in addressing the immediate consequences of bullying. This appears to provide tangible mechanisms for supporting victims and addressing the behaviors of aggressors.

  2. Training Programs: Establishing training programs is a proactive step. It suggests a commitment to cultivating a positive school climate and educating all staff and students about bullying prevention strategies. However, the effectiveness of such programs would depend on their quality and comprehensiveness.

  3. Discipline and Accountability: Imposing discipline addresses accountability, which is crucial in bullying situations. However, without clear guidelines or support for those discipline measures, there may be inconsistencies in how bullying is addressed among different administrators or schools.

  4. Counseling Recommendations: Recommending counseling for involved parties reflects a supportive approach, emphasizing that both victims and aggressors may need additional help. However, the efficacy of this recommendation hinges on the availability of quality counseling resources.

  5. Broader System Needs: While this law addresses immediate responses to bullying incidents effectively at the administrative level, a comprehensive bullying prevention system should also integrate the individual student level (providing education and support directly to students), teacher level (training teachers to recognize and address bullying and support students), and district level (setting overarching policies and procedures).

In conclusion, while the Arkansas law incorporates several important elements at the school administrator level, a holistic approach that includes all levels of the bullying prevention system would enhance the overall effectiveness of strategies designed to combat bullying in schools. Building strong connections between school administrators, teachers, students, and the district can create a more cohesive and supportive environment for bullying prevention.