Testimony of Bo Shuff on H.B. 276 (the "Safe Schools Bill") before the Senate Education Committee
December 12, 2006

Good afternoon members of the committee. Thank you for the chance to testify before you today on this important issue. My name is Bo Shuff, and I serve as the Director of Education and Public Policy for Equality Ohio. Equality Ohio is the state-wide advocacy organization for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) and allied community. We believe in an Ohio where everyone feels at home; an Ohio where all students feel safe and can succeed.

Numerous studies, including two separate studies by the American Association of University Women, have demonstrated a direct link between academic performance and experiences of harassment and an unsafe learning environment in school. In the December edition of the Richland County School News, bullying was identified as the issue of most importance to the community by Dr. Norine Johnson, 2001 President of the American Psychological Association.(1) Clearly, ensuring safety for students is an issue that rises to a high level of importance for Ohioans. It is up to you, the state leaders, to establish a high priority for safe schools in our state. All students across the state need a safe and comfortable place to learn.

As you are considering this piece of legislation, there is just one question that must be asked – Do the most at risk students in Ohio need an state-wide anti-bullying law that includes an enumerated definition of bullying to protect them? The answer is a resounding yes.

Today my role is to present evidence to you that shows that enumerated laws make students feel safer and more ready to learn.

Testimony has been presented before this body that “An anti-bullying bill will not help the situation and may indeed make it worse.” This could not be further from the truth. In states and localities that have anti-bullying laws or anti-harassment policies students report feeling more safe and are less likely to report harassment or negative remarks.(2)

“From Teasing to Torment,” a national survey on bullying in America’s schools, found that 71% of secondary school teachers believe that anti-bullying and anti-harassment policies would be helpful in ensuring a safe learning environment. Further, the study went on to show that one in every ten students who are harassed or bullied do not report the incidents because they believe teachers or staff are powerless to do anything to improve the situation.(3)

In addition, students from schools that had an inclusive school safety policy were more likely to feel safe at school.(4) We know that the safety of students across Ohio is of paramount interest to this body. The question today is whether the legislation ultimately passed will ensure that all schools have a policy that works hard to protect students.

Now, we must focus on the definition of bullying. Should this legislation include enumeration of student groups that are particularly at-risk and need protection. The answer is yes. Enumerated categories should be included because certain groups of students are fiercely targeted by bullies at school. Sexual orientation and gender identity and expression are some of those categories. Equality Ohio believes they, like all students, must be protected by this legislation in its final amended form.

The Harris Interactive survey also asked educators and students about bullying or harassment specifically based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. Seven in ten students frequently hear expressions that are derogatory or worse based on sexual orientation. Fully one-third of students reported that they are frequently harassed based on real or perceived sexual orientation.(5) When the survey focuses in on self-identified LGBT students, 90% of them report being harassed or bullied in the last year.

Whether you include enumeration of categories will determine, for Ohio's students, the success or failure of this legislation meant to protect them. If this body wants to protect students in the most effective way possible, this legislation must set out clear definitions of harassment and bullying, and those definitions must include enumerated, inclusive categories. Continuing from the Harris report, “…having an inclusive policy is associated with students feeling safer and describing less harassment or negative remarks at their school. Students whose schools have such a policy are also less likely than others to skip a class because they feel unsafe.”

The most compelling evidence comes from the National School Climate Survey of 2005. This survey documents the experiences of LGBT students in secondary schools. The survey showed:

states with ‘generic’ anti-bullying laws and states with no law at all had equally high rates of harassment. States with inclusive policies that specifically enumerate categories including sexual orientation and gender identity, however, have significantly lower rates of verbal harassment.

Clearly, if the goal of this body is to protect all students in Ohio schools, and to create a learning environment where students feel safe enough to come to class, participate and learn, HB 276 must be adopted with amendments to enumerate and define bullying. To do anything less is to leave many of Ohio’s children defenseless at school.

I thank you for your time, and for your consideration of both HB 276 and the amendment before you. On behalf of Equality Ohio and our 10,000 members across Ohio, I urge you to amend HB 276 and pass it. Thank you.

Citations:

(1) School News Roll Call (Richland County), December 2006, pg. 1

(2) From Teasing to Torment: Scholl Climate in America, October 2005

(3) Ibid.

(4) Ibid.

(5) National School Climate Survey, April 2006