Introduction
Bullying and harassment behaviors imply intimidation, humiliation, or other unwanted actions. However, they are not always obvious and can occur in the workplace, school, or other public places (“Harassment,” n.d.). Such incidents can involve only two persons and sometimes even groups of people. Bullying and harassment might take different forms. These unwanted behaviors occur in written communication, on the Internet, and in real life (Australian Catholic University, n.d.). There are various bullying policies that are applied by different organizations. The main goal of this paper is to compare two bullying policies that are used in Walton School District and the University of Georgia in order to identify common and different elements.
Language
The sample bullying policy language in Walton School District is very similar to the language in the policy of the University of Georgia. Reasons that determine the languages are almost identical in both organizations. First, bullying prevention policies aimed at providing people with an emotionally and physically secure environment, reducing the risk of harm. For example, the University of Georgia states that it provides “a safe and non-discriminatory environment” (University of Georgia, n.d., para. 14). A similar statement is in Walton School’s policy. Its personnel “sustain healthy, positive, and safe learning environments for all students” (“School board policy,” n.d., p. 12).
These policies utilize the language that allows developing an understanding that any form of harassment is forbidden. Also, they explain explicitly what should be considered bullying and what should not. The policies utilize a descriptive language to give definitions of different types of bullying. For example, the university defines harassment as “unwelcome verbal or physical conduct,” and the school states that bullying is “chronically inflicting physical hurt or psychological distress” (University of Georgia, n.d., para. 9). In addition, they describe the roles and responsibilities of all the involved parties. Another important reason is to implement bullying prevention strategies. Such strategies support people to react to harassment in a proper manner. They describe procedures that should be applied when it comes to reporting such incidents.
Also, these policies emphasize the importance of responding to every reported incident of harassment and encourage planning interventions. The next important aspect described in both samples is to ensure support to every person who has been harassed. The language in both policies allows identifying patterns of abusive, intimidating, offensive, or aggressive behaviors. The university explains that “invasion of sexual privacy” is an example of sexual harassment (“Definitions of sexual harassment terms,” n.d., para. 16). The school describes other patterns such as “unwanted teasing” and “social exclusion” (“School board policy,” n.d., p. 2). It helps to develop a communication plan that is necessary to promote the main principles described in both policies and establish harassment prevention practices. However, the main similar aspect of the bullying policy languages is that the policies are accessible and easily understandable within the communities. Therefore, the main principles presented in both samples are very similar as they implement similar strategies.
Procedural Steps
As mentioned above, the policy in Walton School District presents procedures that should be applied to respond to incidents involving bullying behaviors. There are several procedural steps described in the document that completely match with policies of the University of Georgia. First, it is necessary to conclude whether a particular action violates the policy. Therefore, all facts should be identified and thoroughly investigated. The next step is to determine an adequate response to the violation. It varies from behavioral interventions to suspension or even expelling in the most serious cases. It matches with sanctions described in the policy of the university. They might include mandatory training or counseling, probation, expulsion, and some others. Such measures might be applied to any person involved in the conflict. Also, the same measures might be applied in cases of groundless accusations. In addition, the procedures require reporting to law enforcement officials.
The policy states that the District designee has to document all complaints that allege the violation of this policy and address them as fast as possible. A similar procedure is presented in the university’s policy. It states that all reports “will be promptly evaluated and appropriate action will be taken as expeditiously as possible” (University of Georgia, n.d., para. 25). The next step deserves particular attention. It is necessary to ensure that the complainant will not be negatively affected due to their reports. Some of the aspects that should be considered more carefully are a working or learning environment, grades, and assignments. Another important aspect is that anonymous reports alone cannot be considered a basis for a disciplinary response. However, they should be taken into account when analyzing the incident. Such anonymous reports can be put in the special reporting box. All the mentioned procedural steps match with the policies in the University of Georgia, though certain variations of some procedures still take place. For example, an investigation in the university should be conducted in accordance with the evidence standard (the University of Georgia, n.d.). It states that information that supports allegations is more reliable than the information that refutes it.
Components
However, some components of the bullying policy of the University of Georgia can be improved, using the example of the policy of Walton School. The first component is the definitions. This part is presented in the Walton School sample more comprehensively than in the university. Walton School provides multiple examples that help to define different forms of bullying and harassment. The school’s policy describes such forms as threats, intimidation, stalking, physical violence, theft, public humiliation, and sexual, religious, racial, or ethnic harassment (“School board policy,” n.d.). In addition, the school’s policy describes these forms of harassment in detail. For example, it states that conduct that puts a person at risk of harm or negatively affects their educational performance or opportunities is a type of bullying.
The policy also explains that harassment might include acts of revenge, reporting bullying with a humiliating intention, coercion, and other behaviors that have a bullying effect. It also specifies methods by which people might be harassed. For example, computer software, hostile gestures, and various verbal and non-verbal communications can be used with the intention to humiliate a person. Another important component that requires further elaboration is false accusations. This part of the university’s policy does not provide enough explanation. On the other hand, the school’s sample demonstrates more profound insight into the issue. The school’s policy describes consequences for individuals who groundlessly accuse other people of bullying. Such sanctions, which should be determined by the school administrator, including but not limited to suspension or expelling. The mentioned above components of the university’s policy should be complemented as they do not provide adequate enough explanation regarding the matter.
Ineffective Elements
However, not all elements presented in the school’s sample would be effective for the University of Georgia. For example, the school’s policy requires “immediate notification to the parents” or guardians about the incidence of bullying (“School board policy,” n.d., p. 8). The designee has to inform the parents or legal guardians of a student about any occurrence of harassment on the day when an investigation has started. Such requirement might not always be relevant for the university’s students due to their age. Another requirement that might be unnecessary in the university but is very important in the school is mandatory to collaborate with parents in order to establish a safe learning environment. The university staff cannot be obligated to build relationships with students’ parents or legal guardians as the nature of the university’s educational programs is totally different from the school’s.
Distribution of the Policy
There are several methods that are applied in the University of Georgia to communicate the bullying policy to the university’s personnel. First, all employees are informed about changes in the policy in advance. Prior to launching a new policy or procedure, the university administration updates the personnel and students, explaining why the information is important and what exactly will be changed (“Prohibited discrimination & harassment,” n.d.). Second, the personnel are provided with the opportunity to leave feedback regarding the changes.
It engages employees in developing new policy documents, which also helps to promote new principles within the university’s community. Third, the administration issues special brochures to inform a wider audience (“Non-discrimination and anti-harassment policy,” n.d.). Fourth, except for the feedback, the personnel can assess a new policy or procedures. Not only does this strategy help to communicate necessary information to employees but also improve the proposed plan. Fifth, as some procedures are not very easy to comprehend, training programs are involved in the promotion of new policies. Such courses ensure the proper understanding of how these policies can be applied to the staff. Finally, all employees are obligated to sign off after reading a new document. It is necessary to familiarize each of them with the proposal.
Assessment
The policy describes all the most important aspects of the issue. It suggests procedures that are necessary to prevent bullying behaviors among students, employees, and visitors. It is a comprehensive document that substantially addresses the problem from different angles. Therefore, I believe that the policy provides very effective methods to eliminate bullying, harassment, and other aggressive and dangerous behaviors.
This assignment has considerably broadened my knowledge regarding the issue of bullying and harassment. First, the policies that I compared offered clear definitions of such behaviors. It is very important to understand what exactly can be perceived as bullying (“Workplace bullying policy,” 2014). Also, they describe various behavioral patterns. Second, the policies provide specific procedures that are aimed not only at dealing with harassment behaviors but also at preventing them. Third, the comparison revealed that each organization needs individual policies as some methods might be effective for one but inadequate for another.
Conclusion
The comparison of two bullying policies is very important to improve awareness regarding the matter. They have different elements that can complement each other. However, the differences reflect the nature of two organizations. Therefore, bullying policies cannot be universal and have to address individual needs of each organization.
References
Australian Catholic University (n.d.). Workplace bullying policy. Web.
Definitions of sexual harassment terms. (n.d.) Web.
Harassment. (n.d.). Web.
Non-discrimination and anti-harassment policy (n.d.) Web.
Prohibited discrimination & harassment. (n.d.). Web.
School board policy manual for school district of Walton county. (n.d.). Web.
University of Georgia. (n.d.). Non-discrimination and anti-harassment policy. Web.
Workplace bullying policy. (2014). Web.