WHY DOES ABR COMPLIANCE NOT GUARANTEE
THE USE OF EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICES FOR PREVENTING AND RESPONDING TO BULLYING?
There Are Many Reasons ABR Compliance Strategies Might Be Inconsistent with Evidence-Based Practices and the Welfare of Students

Although the requirements of the New Jersey "Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights" (ABR) are based on evidence-based practices, the law is not an exact reflection of these evidence-based practices, and ABR compliance does not guarantee that evidence-based practices are being used to prevent and respond to bullying. This page is the gateway to the section of the ABR segment of this website that explores the differences between legal compliance and the use of evidence-based practices. The better the difference between the goals of statutory compliance and effective anti-bullying programming is understood, the more successful schools can be in choosing strategies that meet both goals.

On the "Similarities" page of this section of the website, the ways in which the ABR does reflect evidence-based practices are outlined.

On the "Underlying Issues" page, four major sources of discrepancies between the requirements of ABR compliance and the advice given by professional anti-bullying experts are outlined, and each of these four issues is further explored on separate pages.

These four underlying issues are:

  1. ABR requirements are not an exact reflection of evidence-based effective practices,
  2. Differences in the statutory definition of "HIB" compared to the evidence-based definition of "bullying,"
  3. The legal system and the educational system are based on fundamentally different approaches to influencing human behavior, and
  4. The interests of schools as social institutions, and the interests of the different groups of people within them--staff and students, in particular--are different from each other.