Bullying is a reality for students of all ages and abilities. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, during the 2021–22 school year, approximately 19% of students aged 12-18 reported experiencing bullying at school. In addition, the Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence reports that 60% of students with disabilities are bullied in school. Sometimes, school administrators are not able to witness or identify bullying when it happens. In these cases, parents can advocate for their child by submitting a bullying report to the school. Taking the appropriate steps when reporting an instance of bullying is important, and it also makes a big difference in how the school responds. The following tips outline how to accurately report and document cases of bullying and harassment, helping to foster a school environment where students feel safe and schools are held accountable.

Refer to your complaint as a “Formal Bullying and/or Harassment Report.” In the report, cite the school district’s specific bullying policies. Referencing these shows that you understand the responsibilities of the school under state law. Schools are obligated to respond, investigate, and take appropriate action to protect every student.
Request a specific safety plan within your report. Along with reporting an incident, it is important to ensure that your child has support moving forward. This can include modifying routes, classes, seating, and providing support through counseling to reduce the risk of another incident. A general promise from the school to “look into it” or “keep an eye out” is not enough. Make your expectations for resolution clear and ask how the school plans to implement safety measures and prevent future occurrences.
Send your report to the appropriate individual. This will typically be the school’s principal, assistant principal, or their designated anti-bullying coordinator. If you do not receive a timely or appropriate answer, do not hesitate to raise your concerns to someone in a higher position. Always keep a copy of your report for your records. Taking these steps helps to ensure that your voice, and your child’s, is heard.
Set the scene. Document each incident thoroughly and get all the information. Being as detailed, thorough, and specific as possible will be key when addressing bullying concerns. This typically includes who was involved, what happened, where it occurred, when it took place, why it happened, and how it unfolded. If possible, provide witnesses and detailed information about them, especially if you do not know their names. If your report lacks information or has gaps, there may be a poor investigation, and you may not receive the outcome that you desire.
Finally, do not second guess yourself. If you are not certain whether an action qualifies as bullying and/or harassment, it is always better to report it anyway. Even if the behavior does not meet the standard of bullying, the school may still discipline the student if they were in violation of the Code of Conduct. It is always better to raise a concern and have the occurrence documented, rather than to let harmful behavior continue unchecked. Additionally, if the behavior continues, the administration can reference a written report and recognize patterns.

No student should feel unsafe at school. Formal reporting is a right of all parents and students, and it is a way to protect our students. Advocate for your child formally, specifically, persistently, and with documentation to ensure that your child remains safe and protected..

Written by Tina Kanyongo, Summer Law Intern at Abdnour Weiker, LLP

Introduction

Thomas Jefferson famously espoused that “an enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic.” He believed that the survival of our Republic was critically dependent upon the education of all citizens. The necessity of public education remains a core belief that is axiomatic for most Americans today.

Although the right to an education is not explicitly contained within the United States Constitution, it is deeply rooted in Pennsylvania Constitutional history, dating as far back as William Penn’s 1681 Frame of Government, the Commonwealth’s first charter. Penn believed that no cost should be spared in providing for education, and this principle has been carried through to subsequent iterations of the Pennsylvania Constitution in 1790, 1838, and 1874. The current Education Clause, voted on in 1967, provides: “The General Assembly shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of public education to serve the needs of the Commonwealth.” Pa. Const. art. III, § 14.

In order to effectuate this constitutional mandate, a system of public education has evolved which serves more than 1.7 million K-12 students and includes 500 school districts, over 160 brick-and-mortar charter schools, 14 cyber charter schools, 29 Intermediate Units, and 84 career and technical education centers. Ideally, this conglomeration of resources should be sufficient to deliver quality education to all Pennsylvania students, however, irrefutable data suggests access to quality education is not evenly distributed in the Commonwealth. Disparities in the allocation of educational resources have led to an historic challenge of the constitutionality of public education funding in the case William Penn School District v. Pennsylvania Department of Education.

Who brought the suit and what is the issue?

In 2014, six Pennsylvania school districts, several parents, the Pennsylvania Association of Rural and Small Schools (PARSS) and the NAACP Pennsylvania State Conference filed a lawsuit in the Commonwealth Court against the Governor, various state education officials, and the legislature, alleging a systemic failure to uphold the state constitutional mandate of providing a “thorough and efficient system” of education to all Pennsylvania students. According to the suit, Pennsylvania’s then-used education funding model relied so heavily on local property taxes to fund school districts that it excessively and unconstitutionally disadvantaged low-wealth districts.

Although school districts across the United States are funded by some combination of federal, state, and local dollars, the plaintiffs in this suit alleged that Pennsylvania was overly reliant on local money and was underfunded at the state level, thereby creating an unconstitutional disparity in funding based on local demographics.

Debra Gordon Klehr, Executive Director of the Education Law Center, and attorney for the plaintiffs, has explained, “[W]hen we filed the case, Pennsylvania was paying about 36 percent of the funds to school districts – about 10 percentage points lower than most other states. And that had a huge impact on our schools and inequity because districts then had to rely on local wealth to raise money they weren’t getting from the state.” Demographically diverse, the six petitioner school districts were selected because each had a high tax effort but low tax capacity, were efficient with what they had, but were still unable to provide for their students’ needs because of lack of state support.

The Trial

Before trial, this case toggled its way up and down the Pennsylvania appellate court system, ultimately landing in the Commonwealth Court for a trial on the issue of fairness and equity in funding. The trial was held before President Judge Renee Cohn Jubelirer and took place over four months in 2021. The individual plaintiffs shared distressing stories of the failure of the public school system to educate their children. They also presented data and expert testimony that demonstrated how Pennsylvania’s two-tiered funding system denied students in low wealth and low-income school districts a quality education.

The evidence adduced at trial demonstrated that all students in the Commonwealth need more funding, but students in the poorest school districts need significantly more funding than students in the wealthiest districts. Students in the poorest quintile of districts need 38% more funding and the wealthiest quintile students need 11% more funding than they currently receive. In order to meet proficiency goals in state assessments, school districts need an additional $4.6 billion in funding, with low-wealth districts being the most severely underfunded. Their adequacy shortfall is 11 times that in the wealthiest quintile.[1]

The Court’s Ruling

On February 7, 2023, Judge Cohn Jubilerer issued a 768-page decision that recognized that “all children can learn and succeed when given the tools.” She noted that education is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Pennsylvania Constitution, and that a “thorough and efficient” system of education includes such components as:

A sufficient, qualified, and effective staff
Safe and adequate school facilities
An adequate, modern curriculum
Modern instrumentalities of learning including technology and books

Ultimately, Judge Cohn Jubilerer held that Pennsylvania’s funding model failed to provide these critical components in an equitable manner. The Judge was persuaded by data demonstrating that students residing in school districts with low property values and incomes were deprived of opportunities and resources available to students residing in high property value and high-income districts. The Judge concluded that this disparity is not justified by any compelling government interest, nor is it rationally related to any legitimate government objective. Therefore, the resultant disparities deprive students of equal protection under the law. In order to correct this injustice, the Court ordered state officials to change the way public schools are funded. The ruling set the stage for a comprehensive overhaul of Pennsylvania’s public education funding formula; a task that would prove to be easier said than done.

Where do we stand now?

The Court did not provide specific guidance on how to achieve constitutionality in public education funding; it would be up to the legislature and state education officials to develop a strategy to do this. The work began with the creation of a bipartisan panel of legislators and Pennsylvania education officials dubbed the Basic Education Funding Commission. Throughout the fall of 2023, the Commission held public hearings and entertained public comments. In January 2024, the Commission adopted a plan that, if implemented, would make fundamental changes to the funding formula to not only increase spending across the board, but to address current inequities in spending.

On August 9, 2024, Governor Josh Shapiro signed into law the new funding formula which included a new funding formula and additional educational funds totaling $1.1 billion.

Where do we go from here?

While this is a good start, education advocates believe it is not good enough. Lancaster School District Assistant Superintendent Matt Przywara is quoted as saying, “the increase doesn’t go far enough to answer the landmark 2023 court ruling that concluded Pennsylvania’s school funding formula was unconstitutional because it short-shrifted poorer school districts.” He has accused Governor Shapiro and other state officials of not finishing the job. Many agree with him.

But it is a start. As citizens, we need to stay informed about this issue and hold our elected officials accountable to the Court’s 2023 decision and ultimately, the Pennsylvania Constitution. How can an ordinary Pennsylvania citizen stay informed? Here is a list of things you can do:

1. Attend your local school board meetings. Ask questions of your elected officials!

2. Study your local school board’s annual.

3. Monitor your district’s performance on annual assessments.

4. Stay informed about public school funding statewide at the following sources:

Fund Our Schools PA

The Public Interest Law Center

Education Law Center

As Thomas Jefferson would remind us – we must remain educated so can ensure a proper education for future generations.

[1] Case Spotlight: William Penn School District et al. v. Pennsylvania Department of Education Summary

Written by attorney Kathleen Mahoney at Abdnour Weiker, LLP

http://www.Lawyers4Students.com