The new bullying numbers come from an annual report by the New Hampshire Department of Education presented to the State Board of Education this month. (Getty Images)
The number of reported bullying incidents among New Hampshire public middle school students ticked up 12.5 percent this past school year, state data shows, after it had appeared to plateau since the pandemic.
But other metrics have been more steady. The number of reported public high school bullying incidents has decreased slightly from last year, and public elementary school numbers have stayed about the same.
The new numbers come from an annual report by the New Hampshire Department of Education presented to the State Board of Education this month. But the chairman of the board, Drew Cline, argues they might not tell the full story.
In total, there were 805 reports of bullying incidents among the state’s 82,714 elementary school students; 684 reports among 30,097 middle school students; and 376 incidents among 52,124 high school students, according to the department numbers.
The report suggests cyberbullying incidents are easier to prove than in-person incidents.
Of the total 805 elementary school bullying reports, about 2 in 5 – 321 – were substantiated by the school. Among middle schools, just under half – 328 – were confirmed; high schools substantiated exactly half, or 188. But for each age group, cyberbullying incidents specifically had a higher than 50 percent chance of being substantiated.
Rich Farrell, the state Department of Education’s investigator, argued the rise in middle school bullying is not particularly significant.
“I’m a little jaded, I think, because I think middle school is where you’re going to find the majority of your bullying,” Farrell told the board. “So although it might jump off the page – a 12.5 percent increase in middle school – I personally don’t see it as a big outlier.”
And he noted that the Department of Education was contacted 92 times last school year by parents who had complaints about alleged bullying and cyberbullying cases in their schools, a 16 percent decrease. The department followed up in five of those cases to determine whether schools followed the law, and in all five determined the schools had done so, Farrell added.
But Cline has taken issue with the overall numbers being reported, and said the final numbers are likely a drastic undercount. And he said a state law could be impeding schools’ ability to fully report and take action against bullying.
“Statistically, I don’t think it’s possible that we had 328 middle school bullying cases last year. We might have had 328 a day last year. But this is just simply not believable, these numbers.”
The state’s report indicates that while all school bullying reports plummeted to near zero levels in the 2020-2021 school year – when most public schools were conducting remote learning – they have begun to creep back to pre-pandemic levels. Adjusted for school enrollment changes, the number of elementary school reports is about at the level it was in the 2015-2016 school year, while the number of middle school reports is higher and the number of high school reports is lower.
In middle schools last school year, bullying incidents related to physical characteristics made up 16 percent of all substantiated reports; incidents based on race made up 11 percent; incidents based on disability made up 8 percent; incidents based on sexual orientation made up 7 percent, and incidents based on gender made up 4 percent. The remaining reports were not categorized.
Cyberbullying made up 21 percent of all substantiated bullying incidents in middle schools, 16 percent in elementary schools, and 35 percent in high schools.
Department of Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut suggested at the board meeting the low numbers could be explained in part by a fear of speaking up.
“There’s sometimes just a reluctance for somebody to report bullying, because then that exacerbates bullying that actually takes place,” he said.
But in an interview, Cline argued it is also because schools are restrained by state statute.
RSA 193-F lays out New Hampshire’s anti-bullying laws. It requires that school districts must take action against bullying, communicate any investigations and discipline proceedings to parents of victims and perpetrators, and annually report all bullying incidents to the state.
The law also includes a definition of bullying, which counts it as a “single significant incident or a pattern of incidents” directed at a pupil, where one pupil physically harms another pupil, causes them emotional distress, interferes with their educational opportunities, creates a hostile educational environment, or disrupts orderly school operations.
To Cline, that first part of the definition is fine. The second part causes problems.
The statute continues to state that: “ ‘Bullying’ shall include actions motivated by an imbalance of power based on a pupil’s actual or perceived personal characteristics, behaviors, or beliefs, or motivated by the pupil’s association with another person and based on the other person’s characteristics, behaviors, or beliefs.”
The provision is vague, Cline argues, and can be interpreted in different ways. One interpretation is that the second part is an optional addition to the first – but not necessary to prove bullying.
But the other reading is that the state’s anti-bullying statute applies only to situations in which the alleged bully was “motivated by an imbalance of power,” and that if a school district cannot prove that motivation, it can’t take action.
Cline says that latter interpretation has been used before the State Board of Education during recent bullying appeals processes. Attorneys have quarreled over the law.
Most school districts have procedures that allow parents to appeal school principals’ decisions to the superintendent and school board – whether they believe their child was falsely accused or that their child was bullied but the district did not take action. Parents can eventually appeal all the way up to the State Board, which determines whether the school principal was justified.
In one case the board heard recently, a student was appealing because the school had not taken action against another student for bullying, Cline said. But attorneys argued the student had not sufficiently shown that the alleged bullying was “motivated by an imbalance of power.”
Bullying appeals before the State Board are held behind closed doors, and Cline said he could not name the school district involved.
According to Cline, the board ultimately sided with the school district, determining that the statute should be interpreted strictly and because motivation was not proven, the lack of action was justified. But Cline says the decision doesn’t sit well.
“I’m really uncomfortable with that interpretation,” he said. “I don’t like it. But the board was torn, and I think still is torn, on whether that is the actual interpretation of this. But because it’s so badly worded – we don’t have a Supreme Court case telling us what the guidance is on it – it’s a problem.”