Harassment Policies at Schools to Be Studied

Ventura County school officials said Monday that they will review policies and increase training of school employees in light of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling holding schools legally responsible for sexual harassment among students.

Several officials said the ruling in favor of a Georgia family whose daughter was harassed at school will probably cause teachers and administrators to pay closer attention to how students are treating each other.

Most local districts already respond aggressively to allegations of sexual harassment. In fact, state law allows school officials to suspend or expel students who harass their classmates. And California court cases have held districts financially responsible for incidents of sexual harassment in the schools.

“We are already held accountable,” Oxnard Elementary School District Supt. Richard Duarte said Monday. “This just brings a heightened awareness.”

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that schools could be forced to pay damages if they ignore severe sexual harassment of one student by another. The girl whose family filed suit said a classmate harassed her for five months, making obscene comments and trying to touch her in a sexual manner. Despite her mother’s complaints, school administrators did nothing, according to the suit.

Ventura County schools Supt. Chuck Weis said he plans to work with local superintendents to make sure that administrators can identify sexual harassment, are aware of the procedures and are following through with discipline.

Gwen Gross, superintendent of Ojai Unified School District, said her district will take a second look at the harassment policy and remind students and teachers what it says. The district will also hold additional training sessions for students and staff, she said.

Jon Light, who works for an Oxnard firm that represents local school districts, often leads that training. In those sessions, Light said he defines sexual harassment, explains the law and asks students to act out possible scenarios. It is crucial, he said, for students to understand what is and isn’t sexual harassment.

“The policies are already there,” Light said. “The key is that you can have all the laws in the world, but if the kids don’t know them, it doesn’t matter.”

Ironically, some local attorneys said the Supreme Court standard requiring the harassment to be severe and repeatedly ignored by school officials appears at first to be higher than the standard now in use at California schools, possibly making it harder for parents to prevail if a lawsuit is filed.

Until now, schools in California were held accountable if they “knew or should have known” about continual sexual harassment. But under the ruling, schools can be held financially responsible only if they act with “deliberate indifference.”

There have been a few well-publicized cases of sexual harassment in Ventura County schools. In 1993, three male Newbury Park High School students were expelled after female classmates accused them of restraining and groping them on several occasions.

And in 1997, a Simi Valley fourth-grade girl said that a boy in her class made a sexual innuendo with a pickle. The district found that the boy did not understand the possible sexual connotations and that his actions did not constitute sexual harassment.

Superintendents from Santa Paula and Hueneme school districts said they don’t expect the ruling to have a major effect on their districts.

“We have practically a zero-tolerance policy in that area,” said Supt. Bill Brand of Santa Paula High School District. “We think of this as one of the most serious offenses.”

Hueneme Supt. Robert Fraisse said the court ruling simply reaffirmed what he has believed all along--that students have to feel physically and emotionally safe at school.

“Now the writing is clear on the wall,” Fraisse said. “Schools are responsible for preventing sexual harassment.”

SUPREME COURT RULING: High court finds that schools can be held liable for sex harassment by students. A1