Overreaches? What does that mean exactly?

If the the law overreaches it is only because administrators were under-achieving in their duties to protect students from bullying. Now these top dogs whine and cry because they are no longer allowed to police themselves and pat themselves on the back for "pretending they were tough on bullies." The law was mandated ONLY because research proved administrators were sweeping bullying under the rug.

Osborne like all the others who cry to the Press is just mad he has to be accountable and "do his job" to ensure students REALLY are safe on HIS watch.

Toughen up Ozzy cuz if you were tough enough to begin with against bullies (and their parents who you REALLY are most afraid of) we wouldn't need this NEW law but here you are wimpering like a YOU are the victim--how does it feel?

"Overreaches? What does that mean exactly?"

Osborne added, "The law overreaches in detailing out the reporting and giving time frames. The adults in our district were following the law but the law overreaches."

So one of Osborne's three remaining supporters as he eviscerates SOM public education had their kid asked questions after abusing another student?

Aw, gee.

agree 1000% with Sam! As the parent of a child who was bullied and suffered severely as a result, at the middle school as well, in my own experience it took *months* before my child could find a way to articulate what was happening and at that point it was so advanced and psychologically debilitating it was almost impossible to address it in any constructive manner. Anyone who has read up on bullying and its victims knows that bullying thrives amidst fear, intimidation and secrecy and that the victims rarely speak up or ask for help. So the fact that a child sought help would suggest that there was some cause for concern. Unfortunately "he said, she said" doesn't reveal much, and kids are as vague in recall as anyone when asked to be accountable for wrong doings. I have yet to meet a child under these circumstances who willingly admits to wrong doing. The children involved in my child's situation all claimed innocence until we produced evidence. Then it was a claim of "we were just joking": threatening physical harm and goading someone to attempt suicide is no laughing matter. So of course the mother is objecting: no one wants to hear that their child is a bully or that they, by implication, have not done a great job parenting. I do think Osborne's response is really unfortunate because bullying thrives underground and he is pushing it back there with his archaic wishy washy response. He inspires little confidence in his leadership.

The parent at the BOE meeting was actually talking about her elementary school child. The district's attorney responded that the mandated interventions may be appropriate at middle school and high school, but that they are not necessarily appropriate at elementary school, particularly in the early grades.

I agree 100% that more needs to be done to stop bullying and to empower kids to speak up when they or someone else are being intimidated. This law is prompting some of that - with more training for teachers about what to look out for and how to handle it, and for kids about what constitutes bullying, and how to ask for help. This is necessary and good, and will hopefully help change the culture so bullying is not tolerated by peers or staff.

At the same time, the law's reporting requirements seem to me to be extreme. Minor infractions or saying the word "bully" can trigger an investigation, with mandatory communications by the principal to the parents of all the kids directly involved, a report to the BOE, and a communication from the superintendent to the families. Sometimes this level of response is appropriate. But sometimes it is not truly an incident of bullying, just a disagreement that the principal could work through with the kids in the moment. The law takes away the staff's authority to decide this and elevates minor conflicts to the same level as true bullying. This squanders our resources, which is counterproductive.

Unfortunately, bullying has grown to mean any behavior – from joking to teasing to taunting to attempted murder:

Last night the news reported a Barrington High School student in Newark, robbed and brutally beaten by a group of fellow students that left the 15-year-old in the hospital.
Mayor Corey Booker released this statement: "We are appalled that this brutal act of violence was committed by a group of Newark high school students. The City of Newark and its residents will not tolerate school bullying."

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local/new_jersey&id=8407369

These kids were not ‘bullies’. What they did was not “bullying”. They are violent monsters and criminals who need to be removed from society and thrown in jail.

Calling this behavior “bullying” is misleading. It’s just as inappropriate as our administration intimidating and bullying kids for offences so vague that the kids being reprimanded have no idea that they’ve done anything wrong.

I think more education and clarification is needed – for both students and educators – if the anti-bullying movement is to have positive effect.

A massive and misguided unfunded mandate by the state legislature that felt it had to be seen as "doing something" in light of the Clementi tragedy.

But just as over-reaching sex crime laws turned "sexting" teenagers into lifelong sex offenders, this law risks easily placing black marks on elementary school students permanent records.

To clarify -- this law was not a response to the Clementi tragedy, but was a response to ongoing bullying incidents (and, yes, student suicides) throughout the state and country. A state appointed commission had studied the issue for two years, with open hearings throughout the state to solicit public input and feedback, before the law was introduced. Their report is available here: http://bit.ly/svTAAj and some more of the history behind the law is available here: http://bit.ly/sU5Ty9 . The legislature may have sped up their timetable for passing the law following the Clementi tragedy, but it would likely have passed in any case.

Dear Ms.Mann...

What does this mean? "You can disagree without being disagreeable???" Did you mean we can agree to disagree--cuz your statement makes less sense than Ozzy's whining in your article.

And as far as what I would say sitting across the table from Osborne or any school administrator--it would not differ from what I wrote and yes in its tone or content...and YES...I have sat across the table from similar NJ school administrators while they lied to cover their *sses about bullying I witnessed and reported on in their schools.

You want civility Ms. Mann yet the topic is about kids being bullied and admin who have long overlooked it on THEIR watch. Read the link to the NJ Bullying Commission another poster provided and then Ms. Mann "maybe" you will have a better understanding why there came a need for some kind of watchdog (law) to police school administrators who have long policed themselves and in doing so...kept lying about the job they were NOT doing to minimize bullying in their schools. Where is the civility in that???

There would be no need for any such law or bill of rights IF school administrators had been doing or did their jobs to begin with. Osborne or any adminstrator repeatedly whining while failing to acknowledge why such a strict law was enacted --is showing a total lack of education on the law and about bullying in general. Last thing they should be doing is crying to the Press and the Press should do their jobs in pointing out the previous failures of admin instead of giving them headlines to continue to circumvent their culpability "again" when it comes to bullying in their schools on their watch.

Any NJ school administrator lacking the inability to recognize why this strict law was pushed through per the research founded by the NJ Commission on Bullying- is an administrator incapable of accountability for their actions (lack-of). If my kids were under his charge I would make sure he is following the law instead of whining and looking for ways to weasel away from HIS responsibility in protecting students.

With very little if any wiggle room the NJ Commission on Bullying in their extensive research...made it abundantly clear... "administrators had been failing in their duties to address bullying in their schools"-- Something both Osborne and Ms. Mann completely "overlooked" while crying about the "over-reaching" law!

Ms. Mann -let me know when you take off your rose colored glasses. Am sure being a reporter YOUR kids will be protected. The rest are in the hands of a whiner trying to devalue the A-B law and throw wrenches into why HE won't be able to protect their children. As to your name calling...trust me I refrained from much more deserving labels and am not surprised such little sarcastic name calling was met with such offense.

What is ironic is a reporter claiming to be on top of the bullying topic who failed to make the connection the supt is complaining about a law that was encated BECAUSE administrators like him FAILED at doing their jobs to begin with.

Forget your over-reaching headline...you overlooked or more likely never knew to begin with, why the law was needed. If having that brought to your attention lacks civility then so be it....makes up for the total lack of common sense reporting at your end.

How is this for real reporting...
Part 1:
This is a link that has been available to the public and certainly available to a reporter: https://homeroom2.state.nj.us/DOE_EVVRS/Incidents.do

As noted it is from NJ DOE website where it is noted per latest reports (2008-09) on bullying; (which falls under acts of violence per NJ DOE) this shows the Supt; whose job it is to report yearly totals to DOE - that report for the South Orange-Maplewood district comprised of approx 6100 students in 9 schools shows a total of ONLY 59 such incidents.

59 incidents out of over 6,000 students at 9 schools over 180 school days....really? 59 divided by 9 schools = 6.5 reported incidents of bullying over an "entire school year" at EACH school.

Anyone with a brain that accepts out of 180 days of school at any one of these schools there were less than 7 incidents of bullying ALL YEAR is a fool. Not even 1 incident of bullying per month at every school--Really?

It gets better (or worse) 6 of the 9 schools had "ZERO" reported incidents of bullying. 6 out of 9 schools essentially were a utopia where every single child got along splendidly (must be where Ms. Mann's kids attend school.)

One of 2 MS had 34 reported incidents while other had "ONLY 3" - simply unbelievable! Anyone could walk into any MS cafeteria in America & see 3 incidents of bullying in 1 lunch or gym period yet this Supt reported only "3" at his MS in 180 days? The HS had remaining 22 incidents.
Cont'd...

Sam, I posted this report on Patch last week.

Part 2:

BTW, this Supt in this ridiculous UNDER reporting (so much for OVERreaching huh Ms. Mann?) is not an exception. Unfortunately, his IS & has been the norm for NJ schools.

All of this begs the question if these statewide reported incidents over the last decade were so accurate, so trusting why did NJ enact an anti-bully law in 2002 to begin with? Why since 2002 was there a need to revamp that law & enact current strictest A-B law in the Nation?

Why is there a national frenzy & drive to stop bullying in schools when according to NJ supt state mandated reports—bullying does NOT really exist!!!

In fact in 6 of the 9 S. Orange-Maplewood schools it NEVER happened?

ANSWER (ok I’ll make it an opinion based on NJDOE facts)… Because NJ Supt / administrators given the power to police themselves in reporting bullying on THEIR watch…have been lying to cowardly protect themselves (not your kids) & to cover their *** by grossly under-reporting bullying.

Now, with help from Press Reporters, they make themselves feel like victims with “feel sorry for me” headlines & excuses why they “can’t do their 6 figure salary jobs to protect taxpayer's kids.”

OK taxpayers / nayesayers, either deal with reality of facts or keep pretending your schools are utopia run by brave administrators who care about your kids more than their images...yet aren't smart enough to figure out why NJ NEEDED to enact toughest A-B laws in the Nation!

Also I don't know why you are singling me out. I never voiced an opinion about bullying in the district. I merely asked for a civil discussion and gave assurances that I would be diligent in reporting on this topic.

Uh Nick...I have no kids in schools anywhere. I'm doing exactly what every anti-bully policy and methodology is based on and DEMANDS our kids do...I'm "stepping up" and putting the REAL problem with school bullying in its place--not what the article did in coddling the problem where you sound like you are an administrator! Tough in words but no actions! No go back to hiding behind your desk!

No Sam, you're reading WAY too much into what I'm saying. All I am saying is that you are a self-righteous bully. I'm not even paying attention to the rants, and I assure you I am not alone.

Zuzu, there is credibility in the information I provided care less what you think of mine, how about arguing against the facts provided (can you do that?).

I have kids just not in NJ schools. I also have more background in dealing with NJ school administrators than those of you like Nick ...who go through life admitting to ignoring the facts and refusing to see the 800 pound gorilla in the midst of school bullying problems (the admin). He also bullies back but was clueless to that...but I can take it so keep it coming.

So when you teach or pay your way away from teaching it yourself; to have your school bring in $$$ anti-bully assembly programs that DEMAND your kids stand-up to adrress bullying ...I doubt you resort to calling those that stand-up to stop it "bullies" as well...it will be your choice to ignore that as any different than me standing -up and putting the real problem (admin) in its place.

I'm standing up to adults incapable of recognizing why NJ has to have the toughest A-B law in the nation and a reporter who gave a big part of the problem, his space to make excuses why he STILL won't be part of the solution and the biggest part of the problem.

Has nothing to do with my kids or my cred...keep ignoring it and see where it gets you with YOUR kids!

I keep forgetting... I am trying to share the imperfections of a district administrator where 6 out of the 9 schools he runs ...have ZERO bullying....my bad!

Sam,
I reported what transpired at the BOE meeting and what is available through data and surveys. I leave it to the readers to draw their own conclusions.
I keep my ear to the ground and follow up on stories where I get tips and feedback. In the two and a half years since have been reporting on this district, I have not been contacted by any parents or teachers about instances where the school district was turning a blind eye to bullying. However, if I do hear about such instances, I will follow up. Sam, if you have information about bullying in our school district that has gone unreported, please forward it! Thanks so much.

Mary Mann,

I don't question your attendance at BOE meetings nor your involvement in the district. I do question you not asking the BIG questions that should have been answered as I stated previously and worth repeating:

Given the obvious low reports of bullying you clarified you researched and in accordance with what I provided ...how come you never asked: about the ridiculousness of the LOW reported incidents of bullying?

There is a reason no one is coming to you or even forward with bullying--the reprisals from admin I addressed ARE REAL. In your reporting what other reasons, other than admin have long FAILED and under reported bullying; have you come up with as to why their is a need in NJ schools for the strictest A-B law in the nation???

Did you ask the Supt or BOE what reasons they have for it?
All I have commented on is how you give the real reason for the law, a headline and press allowing them to further shirk the reasons NJ has this law to begin with.

If your job is to simply report than you are meeting your goal if it is to inform and god forbid make schools safer for kids--then you missed your mark.

I have taken a stronger "fact based" stance for kids in your district in these posts than anyone who lives there. Therein lies the rest of the problem...nobody cares which does not bode well for the students.

Shoot this messenger but for the sake of the kids....you do a disservice to silence the message. Moving on!

Sam,
The superintendent and district leadership would seem to agree with you to an extent — if you read the article and if you read Maplewood Patch on a regular basis. The super. does say that he agrees with the intent of the law and wants to make certain that all children are protected. The school district has also gone to great lengths, as required, to implement the new law — training teachers and implementing programs (see recent Patch stories introducing the law, and on programs at Maplewood Middle School and Tuscan School). It would seem that the new law will help rectify issues of reporting and probably capture a greater number of incidents of bullying in SOMSD schools. But, again, if you have information specific to incidents in our school district and you have evidence that Osborne has suppressed reporting of bullying, please present it. (I can't knock on every door in town and demand that people tell me their children were bullied and unprotected; but, again, I am always on the lookout for information.) Otherwise, it seems that you are casting aspersions on Osborne based on statewide data. And, yes, we do publish articles and Op-Eds here that could be seen as unflattering to the district; in fact, one could argue that this story was unflattering to the superintendent. But it is what it is, and the reader takes away from it what he or she will.

Sam,
Also, I don't know if you really know much about Maplewood and South Orange. We are far from perfect communities but we are racially and economically diverse. We also have a good amount of households with same sex parents. Bullying most certainly exists, but most would say that our towns are more accepting of differences than others; check out this Op-Ed: http://patch.com/A-mSly.
Thanks again, Sam, for your comments.

Catherine, did you watch the video? These kids robbed another kid and beat and KICKED him to the point where he needed to be hospitalized. How are the kids in the video NOT violent monsters and criminals?
Truth is that some act out violently because they are violent monsters and their behavior cannot be simply excused or justified because of where they live.

I have worked in Newark for over a decade, and most of that time I spent in child welfare. I have seen horrors for the likes that no video has ever captured. And based on my experiences, I have to respectfully disagree.

6 of 9 schools are elementary schools. You're going to see less incidents of bullying or possibly none. The two middle schools and the high school, sure. Problem with this law is that everything under the sun is now going to be considered bullying. In the past, a disagreement on the playground between third graders was quickly squandered by a teacher or lunch aides with a modicum of common sense. Soon, you're going to see a lot more reports. Yes, the schools aren't perfect, and no one wants to see kids hurt or tormented, but this will be similar to the sexting nonsense, and it will be extremely counterproductive with all the paperwork and "investigation" needed for every incident.

Look, we all know kids can be awkward, fickle, and scared. You can't expect the school or state to handle everything. Be a good parent and educate your kids in parallel with the schools. Make sure they know they can trust you and help them develop some self confidence to stand up to "bullying." No one is going to be there to coddle your kids after high school when the real world walks all over them. There is no simple answer here, everyone should do their part.

Mary, I hope you learned a lesson. Don't respond to a nut cake like Sam. Sam needs some bullying to calm him down. Move to New Jersey, Sam. Most New Jersey residents can handle a character like you without going to the authorities.

Mary Mann, you are a class act.

Great comebacks! One guy is so ignorant he actually believes bullying does not exist in elementary schools--did you go to school as a kid? As if POOF kids just turn into bullies from angels in MS (lol).

And "Vinnie" I lived and taught in NJ 22 years. If the kids were as bad *ssed as you sound and say they are then why does NJ NEED the toughest Anti-Bully laws to protect them?

Sounds like I touched a nerve about your sleepy little pretendsville town ...you have a supt who says..."he embraces the intent of the law"...but he is incapable of stating why the need for the law exists to begin with....and nobody (including the reporter) dared to ask or make it known why..so I told it like it is...and the little minded town folks got their panties all twisted and attempted to silence the messenger...guess what...my message got out loud and clear based on others keeping me in the loop so everytime you keep responding I will KEEP coming back to tell you all about the 800 pound gorilla you folks refuse to see to help YOUR kids ......attack me all you want- i don't live there ...just keep giving a free pass to a supt hiding behind his bully free schools (roflmao) pretending your kids are safe as can be on his watch.

Ten years ago, my son, who was then about 10, was a student at Jefferson School. Twice a week, he walked to a friend's house, had a snack and then was carpooled by the friend's mother to Hebrew School with her son. My son was being bullyed by kids on the walk over. I brought it to the attention of the school. Not only did they intervene, but they stated quickly that since he was walking home from school, this came under their purview. They handled it without hesitation. I know they spoke to at least one of the parents who called me to briefly discuss the matter. The bullying stopped.

My points are the school was responsive, there were guidelines that they referred to and no one denied that this was happening or it could happen. Did this go into some "count" as to how many bullying events there were? I have no idea. But the school district didn't pretend it wasn't happening, didn't deny the issue and intervened appropriately.