Although in recent years there has been increased attention on bullying prevention and bullying legislation in the United States, there is limited research on the implementation of anti-bullying policies. Moreover, few studies have addressed the use of anti-bullying policies to protect LGBT youth from bullying. The present study seeks to examine the role of anti-bullying policies as a means to protect against bullying based on perceived sexual orientation and gender identity. Qualitative interviews with high school teachers, administrators, and staff members within an urban school district in the United States were conducted to gain insight into how those charged with the task of protecting LGBT youth engage with their school and district policy in efforts to create a supportive environment for their students. In this study, I argue the following: 1) the policy structure, both in the language of the state law and district policy on bullying, created barriers for schools to implement the anti-bullying policy; 2) the barriers created by the policy structure limited teachers' ability to protect LGBT youth from bullying; and 3) despite the evident barriers, teachers found ways to create supportive classroom environments for their students. Results indicate that teachers are not knowledgeable of the contents of their school's anti-bullying policy, and have had limited exposure to the policy through training specific to their school's anti-bullying policy. Similar results occurred when teachers and administrators were questioned about their awareness of trainings specific to the prevention of bullying against LGBT youth, posing significant barriers to effective policy implementation. In addition, interview data suggests that although teachers lack the sufficient support in terms of training on the anti-bullying policy, there were multiple examples of teachers serving as advocates for LGBT youth in both their classrooms and in their schools more broadly. The displays of advocacy by teachers, in addition to the presence of district and school administrator support for LGBT students, serve as an example of how school districts can find ways to implement school policies, address bullying in their schools, and raise awareness for the unique experiences of LGBT youth in terms of bullying.

This study looks at the concepts of organizational commitment and communication. Multiple methods of ethnography and interviews were used to study teacher commitment to their school. Specifically, I focused on teachers within private elementary and secondary schools. Meyer and Allen’s (1991) conceptualization of organizational commitment was used as the basis for understanding commitment. Questions were asked of participants during the interview that focused on their commitment as it related to their attachment or identification with the organization, the costs associated with leaving the organization, and their sense of duty or moral obligation to the organization. I found that teachers demonstrated a five stage process towards organizational commitment. The first stage for the teacher is the calling to the vocation and/or school. The calling was found to have confirmations, be dynamic, and sustain commitment. The second stage is the enactment of the calling in the form of action. A distinction was made between action that was aligned with the job description and action that was sacrificial and went beyond what was required in the job description. The third stage is the result of this action in the form of conflict. Conflict was seen as an iterative process that involved the elements of person, peers, administration, and policies. It is at the point of conflict that a teacher enters the fourth stage towards commitment. This stage is seen as the decision stage. The decision to remain with or leave the organization was also based on the elements of person, peers, administration, and policies. The final stage along the way to commitment is perseverance. It is in this stage that the individual decides to persevere or commit to the organization. This study also found that negative communication, in the form of complaining can be perceived as lacking commitment to the organization. Distinctions were made between complaining that was aimed at organizational change and complaining that appeared to be for the sake of complaining. Teachers who complained for the sake of complaining were viewed as lacking commitment to the organization. This paper concluded with implications for future research. / text