The primary purpose of this study was to investigate year two of the implementation of the New Jersey Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act (ABBRA). The environment of accountability has become increasingly prominent through the ongoing development of regulatory policy in the field of education (Anderson, 2011; Fowler, 2009; Limber & Small, 2003; Peterson & West, 2003; Rudalevige, 2003; United States Department of Education, 2011; White House, 2011). This investigation focused on the gap between crafted policy and implementation of policy due to prior anti-bullying legislation throughout the country having been unsuccessful in the implementation phase (Glover, Cartwright, Gough, & Johnson, 1998; Kester & Mann, 2008; Smith-Canty, 2010). Analysis procedures utilized the method of qualitative research as grounded theory with case study as a strategy (Charmaz, 2010; Glaser & Strauss, 1999; Yin, 2012). Versus Coding provided the method for analysis (Saldana, 2009). Data indicated that several codes emerged illuminating a single explanatory theme of Control versus Freedom. Implications were suggested for policy implementers, policy makers and further theory development.
","abstract_html":"<p>The primary purpose of this study was to investigate year two of the implementation of the New Jersey Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act (ABBRA). The environment of accountability has become increasingly prominent through the ongoing development of regulatory policy in the field of education (Anderson, 2011; Fowler, 2009; Limber & Small, 2003; Peterson & West, 2003; Rudalevige, 2003; United States Department of Education, 2011; White House, 2011). This investigation focused on the gap between crafted policy and implementation of policy due to prior anti-bullying legislation throughout the country having been unsuccessful in the implementation phase (Glover, Cartwright, Gough, & Johnson, 1998; Kester & Mann, 2008; Smith-Canty, 2010). Analysis procedures utilized the method of qualitative research as grounded theory with case study as a strategy (Charmaz, 2010; Glaser & Strauss, 1999; Yin, 2012). Versus Coding provided the method for analysis (Saldana, 2009). Data indicated that several codes emerged illuminating a single explanatory theme of Control versus Freedom. Implications were suggested for policy implementers, policy makers and further theory development.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Douma, Kara"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Ed.D. Educational Leadership","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Educational Leadership","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Ieva, Kara"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2014,"date_issued":"2014-05-05T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2014-05-05T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:13:03Z","subjects":["Bullying in schools--Law and legislation--New Jersey","Elementary and Middle and Secondary Education Administration"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/255","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Ieva, Kara"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Douma, Kara"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2016-05-05T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Educational Leadership"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ed.D. Educational Leadership"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Bullying in schools--Law and legislation--New Jersey","Elementary and Middle and Secondary Education Administration"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/255"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The primary purpose of this study was to investigate year two of the implementation of the New Jersey Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act (ABBRA). The environment of accountability has become increasingly prominent through the ongoing development of regulatory policy in the field of education (Anderson, 2011; Fowler, 2009; Limber & Small, 2003; Peterson & West, 2003; Rudalevige, 2003; United States Department of Education, 2011; White House, 2011). This investigation focused on the gap between crafted policy and implementation of policy due to prior anti-bullying legislation throughout the country having been unsuccessful in the implementation phase (Glover, Cartwright, Gough, & Johnson, 1998; Kester & Mann, 2008; Smith-Canty, 2010). Analysis procedures utilized the method of qualitative research as grounded theory with case study as a strategy (Charmaz, 2010; Glaser & Strauss, 1999; Yin, 2012). Versus Coding provided the method for analysis (Saldana, 2009). Data indicated that several codes emerged illuminating a single explanatory theme of Control versus Freedom. Implications were suggested for policy implementers, policy makers and further theory development.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act (ABBRA) in New Jersey: a case study of the implementation of regulatory policy"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Ieva, Kara"],"dc:creator":["Douma, Kara"],"dc:date.available":["2016-05-05T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["The primary purpose of this study was to investigate year two of the implementation of the New Jersey Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act (ABBRA). The environment of accountability has become increasingly prominent through the ongoing development of regulatory policy in the field of education (Anderson, 2011; Fowler, 2009; Limber & Small, 2003; Peterson & West, 2003; Rudalevige, 2003; United States Department of Education, 2011; White House, 2011). This investigation focused on the gap between crafted policy and implementation of policy due to prior anti-bullying legislation throughout the country having been unsuccessful in the implementation phase (Glover, Cartwright, Gough, & Johnson, 1998; Kester & Mann, 2008; Smith-Canty, 2010). Analysis procedures utilized the method of qualitative research as grounded theory with case study as a strategy (Charmaz, 2010; Glaser & Strauss, 1999; Yin, 2012). Versus Coding provided the method for analysis (Saldana, 2009). Data indicated that several codes emerged illuminating a single explanatory theme of Control versus Freedom. Implications were suggested for policy implementers, policy makers and further theory development.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/255"],"dc:subject":["Bullying in schools--Law and legislation--New Jersey","Elementary and Middle and Secondary Education Administration"],"dc:title":["Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act (ABBRA) in New Jersey: a case study of the implementation of regulatory policy"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Educational Leadership"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ed.D. Educational Leadership"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:13:03Z"}