How much responsibility do schools have over cyber bullying? Intersting article

[Ember]

The (rather long) article is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/style/28bully.html?hp

Here's the first few paragraphs:

The girl’s parents, wild with outrage and fear, showed the principal the text messages: a dozen shocking, sexually explicit threats, sent to their daughter the previous Saturday night from the cellphone of a 12-year-old boy. Both children were sixth graders at Benjamin Franklin Middle School in Ridgewood, N.J.
Poisoned Web

“I had a 45-year-old father crying in my office. He kept asking, ‘Why would someone do this to my son?’ ” — Tony Orsini, principal of Benjamin Franklin Middle School in Ridgewood, N.J.

Punish him, insisted the parents.

“I said, ‘This occurred out of school, on a weekend,’ ” recalled the principal, Tony Orsini. “We can’t discipline him.”

Had they contacted the boy’s family, he asked.

Too awkward, they replied. The fathers coach sports together.

What about the police, Mr. Orsini asked.

A criminal investigation would be protracted, the parents had decided, its outcome uncertain. They wanted immediate action.

They pleaded: “Help us.”

Schools these days are confronted with complex questions on whether and how to deal with cyberbullying, an imprecise label for online activities ranging from barrages of teasing texts to sexually harassing group sites. The extent of the phenomenon is hard to quantify. But one 2010 study by the Cyberbullying Research Center, an organization founded by two criminologist who defined bullying as "willful and repeated harm” inflicted through phones and computers, said one in five middle-school students had been affected.

Affronted by cyberspace’s escalation of adolescent viciousness, many parents are looking to schools for justice, protection, even revenge. But many educators feel unprepared or unwilling to be prosecutors and judges.

Often, school district discipline codes say little about educators’ authority over student cellphones, home computers and off-campus speech. Reluctant to assert an authority they are not sure they have, educators can appear indifferent to parents frantic with worry, alarmed by recent adolescent suicides linked to bullying.

Whether resolving such conflicts should be the responsibility of the family, the police or the schools remains an open question, evolving along with definitions of cyberbullying itself.​

It's an interesting problem. Parents want schools to fix it somehow, but it's a problem that exists outside of the school, on a scale that seems impossible for a school to take responsibility for. What do you think? How much responsibility should schools take in when trying to deal with this issue?

 

[klj27]

I think it is great that schools are made aware and they can guide parents, but in this instance they need to contact the proper authorities. Coming from the wife of a school adminstrator, you can't imagine all of the things they have to deal with outside of what you would consider educating children. I know that not all schools have a school resource officer but I think that is the perfect person to talk with in this instance.

 

[Planogirl]

I think that schools can report it to the proper authorities and parents but they should not become involved in discipline unless it overlaps into the school somehow. Schools should only be responsible for their own domain and of course any outside activities that directly affect the school. Reporting this in the correct way will hopefully stop it altogether.

This nonsense is so sad!!!

 

[golfgal]

Well, I think in this case the parents need to grow a backbone and confront the other parents-especially since they know them. Wouldn't YOU want to know if your DD sent those messages to their boy??? It wouldn't even occur to me to go to the principal over something like this-they have no authority in this.

 

[luvmy3]

Well, I think in this case the parents need to grow a backbone and confront the other parents-especially since they know them. Wouldn't YOU want to know if your DD sent those messages to their boy??? It wouldn't even occur to me to go to the principal over something like this-they have no authority in this.

ITA, I have no idea why anyone would involve the school in this and expect them to do something about it. Those parents need to step the heck up.

 

[Mary•Poppins]

The following article is about an incident that happened a few summers ago in a local school district. It was horrible what these students did. However, this DID NOT happen on school grounds but was reported to the state. The state came to the district to do a thorough investigation and EVERY teacher in the district had to attend a cultural diversity workshop.

I believe there are real issues as to where school and parenting takes place. There is not enough time in a "teaching day" to address all the issues that arise from technology that takes place out of school. If it is something that happens in school ... then yes, it is the school's problem and responsibility to correct it. But out of school, it is a parental responsibility. Call the police!

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_519659.html

 

[Tink888]

Well, I think in this case the parents need to grow a backbone and confront the other parents-especially since they know them. Wouldn't YOU want to know if your DD sent those messages to their boy??? It wouldn't even occur to me to go to the principal over something like this-they have no authority in this.

ITA. If the bullying is occurring at school, or on school property during school functions then the school has authority. Otherwise it should be dealt with by the parents or police. I think it's a dangerous road to go down when school's are granted more authority over students outside of school.

If my child were being bullied I might contact school counselors for possible assistance in mediating the issue but that's it.

Too many parents give their kids a cell phone and computer access with no idea how they are using that technology.

If my child were being cyber-bullied and required adult intervention, I'd have no problem confronting a parent about it. And if it were my child doing the bullying I would want to be made aware of it and it would be the end of my child's phone and computer access.

 

[Buckalew11]

We had trouble with bullying AT school and ONLY at school and my DH talked to the girl's father directly the night we found out and we went to the school the next day.

Of course later, the bullying involved about 5 other girls (at school, in a class of about 21 kids) and we went back to the school again. The school told us we'd be wasting our time t go to the parents. We ended up just pulling her out. It was a private christian school and we paid too much to put up with the whole mess.

When it happens off school property (or not a school function off property), I think the school should not be made responsible. However, I think they should be made aware of the problem because there is great liklihood that it'll carry over to school sooner than later.

 

[worm761]

I believe the parents should be made aware and if that doesn't help, go to the police. The school should be notified since it is an ongoing issue and they should watch out for it. It will eventually carry over into school. The school should have no authority until it happens at school or a school sponsored event.

In the case of the article, the safety of my child comes above my comfort and those of other people. They should talk to the parents or the police.

 

[disneydance]

Honestly we had a case at my school of cyber bullying last May amd the school did nothing. It got so bad it made the local news amd the school still didn't care so I say schools don't really have any control unless it happens on school campus...

Here's the article of what happend at my school the girls posted videos onto YouTube making fun of freshman telling them they were fat and ugly one of the girls has lost tons of weight since and is going down the aneroxic path also they both missed over a week of school and other kids have said they have been cyber bullied by the same two girls

http://www.q13fox.com/news/kcpq-051210-cyberbullying,0,5357837.story

 

[Pea-n-Me]

MA just passed the country's most comprehensive Anti Bullying laws in response to the suicides of bullied students Phoebe Prince of South Hadley and Carl Walker-Hoover of Springfield. I think we'll be seeing more of this everywhere.

http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6727969.html?industryid=47074

The law also extends beyond the classroom to include incidents that occur in the community and online bringing a new focus on cyber-bullying and extending rules and penalties to apply to electronic and other communications.

http://www.slate.com/id/2252543

http://www.bullypolice.org/ma_law.html

 

[jlima]

Last year DS10's school expelled a 5th grader for cyber-bullying; at least that's what everyone thought when the administration starting enforcing its mobile phone rules. IMO it doesn't matter if the messages occur outside of school hours; the children interact with each other because they know each other from school and that's where the ugly messages have their effect.

 

[bicker]

The schools have no role in policing the neighborhood; that's the police's responsibility. The girl's parents lost all standing when they decided not to call that police, apparently because they didn't want to pursue appropriate action that they felt would take a period of time to resolve itself, and that they felt that perhaps would not resolve itself in their favor.

Beyond that, even on school grounds, public schools can only exert the authority granted to them by the government, and are naturally going to be limited to what they can reasonably do with the resources allocated to them by taxpayers. Most of the time when there is a problem like this, that actually happens on school grounds, and goes unresolved, it is because taxpayers refuse to fund schools at a level where they can effectively do all aspects of their jobs. So that's where all blame for failures to effectively resolve issues like this rests, with taxpayers.

 

[Art 1]

There who was thrown out of school the last 2 weeks of school and not allowed to participate in baccalaureate and graduation ceremonies this past year. She was to graduate with my daughter. She was cyberbulling this one girl.

 

[NHdisneylover]

Well, it is an interesting dilemma. We have, over the past few decades given schools more and more responsibility for handling more and more issue which are not directly involved in educating (but often have a big indirect impact--like feeding kids breakfast and lunch). So now the line of who's business this is has become more blurred. Add in the increasing tendency in our society to not take responsibility for one's self (the parents did not want to contact the other parents being a prime example of this) and this is going to continue to be a bigger and bigger problem.
My own take on it is that the school should only be expected (or allowed) to do something about ANY situation that takes place outside of school or school sponsored activities if the incident involves threats or plans that will then happen at school later on (so if on a weekend threats are being texted that someone will get beat up on Monday in cafeteria--then yes the school can and should have a say in that or if people are texting out the answers to a test that someone got their hands on before the same day).
Beyond that, in a bullying situation where a child is being bullied both in and outside of school, I think the school should be kept abreast of how tings are going out of school to give them a more complete picture (and parents should be kept abreast of what goes on in school) BUT the school should still in no way punish students for the stuff that happens outside of school. Parents can speak to one another--or involve the police if it is that bad.
It actually really frightens me that many are so willing to give so much control to the schools. I think it sets a very bad precedent.

 

[polkadotsuitcase]

Just read through some of these links. It's so painful to see the hurt caused by technology by kids, to kids -- it's a whole new set of situations we parents have to to navigate through somehow. The hard part is that it's tempting for kids who are immature (and I don't mean that negatively; I mean that they're still developing socially and emotionally) to hide in the anonymity of texting/online interactions to blurt stuff out. Too bad life can't be all Disney!

 

[bicker]

Well, it is an interesting dilemma. We have, over the past few decades given schools more and more responsibility for handling more and more issue which are not directly involved in educating

I suppose for some things, "given" would be correct, but for many things, I think "forced upon" would be more accurate.

So now the line of who's business this is has become more blurred.

However, government taking action against a person always, eventually, goes back to law enforcement. While a school can try to take such actions, when the rubber hits the road, if the person that they are trying to exert authority over refuses their authority, they can't reasonably be expected to physically impose it - they have to rely on LEOs. I mention this dichotomy over and over again in these forums - the difference between people voluntarily complying and imposing enforcement. Generally, society works most efficiently when people comply voluntarily, whether it be with laws or the terms and conditions of purchases they make. However, as we've seen recently, many otherwise-reasonable folks seem to have no compunction about doing whatever they please, rather than voluntarily complying with what they implicitly agreed to, when they perceive entitlement and no serious threat of enforcement.

When people don't voluntarily comply, it falls back to enforcement by society, i.e., the police, not teachers, school administrators, etc. If enforcement is lax, then there effectively is no standard being violated, at least in the minds of the violators, and to some extent by the law. Individual rights not defended vigorously are often thereby sacrificed. Luckily, for society, that principle tends to be cast away when the decision is made to more-strongly enforce laws. However, they must put forth the resources to stand behind assertions that the laws are going to be enforced, and that means police taking action.

Add in the increasing tendency in our society to not take responsibility for one's self (the parents did not want to contact the other parents being a prime example of this) and this is going to continue to be a bigger and bigger problem.

While I agree with you, I think that this example is really over-the-top ridiculous compared to the pervasive, and more subtle, refusal to take personal responsibility that we often discuss. Though we only heard one side of the story, it really sounds like the girl's parents were utter slackers. "We don't want to go to the police because they may not do what we want, right now."

It actually really frightens me that many are so willing to give so much control to the schools. I think it sets a very bad precedent.

Maybe it is all related, i.e., they know that the police are both too busy (see my earlier comment about the culpability of taxpayers) to bother with this stuff, and/or consider it too low-level to take the kind of action that an angry parent may want taken, under the circumstances, so they're seeking someone that they can effectively brow-beat into being their servant in this regard.

 

[NHdisneylover]

I suppose for some things, "given" would be correct, but for many things, I think "forced upon" would be more accurate.

I was trying to be a bit more diplomatic than that but yes you are correct.

However, government taking action against a person always, eventually, goes back to law enforcement. While a school can try to take such actions, when the rubber hits the road, if the person that they are trying to exert authority over refuses their authority, they can't reasonably be expected to physically impose it - they have to rely on LEOs. I mention this dichotomy over and over again in these forums - the difference between people voluntarily complying and imposing enforcement. Generally, society works most efficiently when people comply voluntarily, whether it be with laws or the terms and conditions of purchases they make. However, as we've seen recently, many otherwise-reasonable folks seem to have no compunction about doing whatever they please, rather than voluntarily complying with what they implicitly agreed to, when they perceive entitlement and no serious threat of enforcement.

I am not entirely sure I understand where you are trying to go here If a school suspend a student for cyber bullying on the weekend, a parent can object and can go though various channels (principal, superintendent, school board, court trial) to try to change the rule, bit odds are the child will have to serve the suspension in the meantime. Also, from what I can see in some instances courts have rules in favour of schools doing this and in others against--so there is no good precedent for a parent, student or administrator to follow. I think part of why you repeat this point over and over on these boards is because your train of thought is never made quite clear to most of us (or maybe it is just me). I do want to understand what you are saying--and I am generally have excellent reading comprehension skills--but I truly cannot follow what you are trying to say here.

While I agree with you, I think that this example is really over-the-top ridiculous compared to the pervasive, and more subtle, refusal to take personal responsibility that we often discuss. Though we only heard one side of the story, it really sounds like the girl's parents were utter slackers. "We don't want to go to the police because they may not do what we want, right now."

Of course this is more extreme than the norm--otherwise it would not be news. However, 30 years ago I doubt a principal would have thought twice about interfering in such an instance. 50 years ago they might well have laughed in a parent's face for making such a demand. Now, it is common enough that it is being discussed and many districts DO indeed step in and "parent" when issues happen outside of school. I think it is "over the top ridiculous" that they do, but it happens and so I think it is a valid example.

 

[bicker]

I am not entirely sure I understand where you are trying to go here If a school suspend a student for cyber bullying on the weekend, a parent can object and can go though various channels (principal, superintendent, school board, court trial) to try to change the rule, bit odds are the child will have to serve the suspension in the meantime.

First, parents don't need to get the rule changed; they just need to get the specific sanction against their own child reversed. That greatly simplifies their task. Second, while you're correct that in the interim the child may have served the suspension anyway, that's not assured (judges have been known to take quick action when there is potential immediate impact), but more importantly, the school incurs cost to defend its actions. And that's the issue I was raising: The schools don't have the bandwidth to defend themselves. They barely have enough money to teach sometimes. Parents could use very easily exploit that weakness.

Also, from what I can see in some instances courts have rules in favour of schools doing this and in others against--so there is no good precedent for a parent, student or administrator to follow.

All that's sometimes necessary is for the parents to have more political or financial clout than the schools. It sucks, but that's the way things are sometimes.

I think part of why you repeat this point over and over on these boards is because your train of thought is never made quite clear to most of us (or maybe it is just me).

Sorry, but no. Generally, it's very clear the difference between voluntarily complying with rules, versus exploiting lax enforcement of rules. The issue typically comes down to people simply not granting that the rules apply to them.

Of course this is more extreme than the norm--otherwise it would not be news. However, 30 years ago I doubt a principal would have thought twice about interfering in such an instance. 50 years ago they might well have laughed in a parent's face for making such a demand.

And 30 years ago the student-bully would have been more likely to be contrite when the principal confronted them with their transgression, and the parents more likely to be outraged at their child, instead of angry at the school for accusing their darling. Times have changed.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Yes, this line is 'blurry', to say the least.

Those who know me here in the DIS will know that ANY chance of a school having access to, and or being able to use/control, personal information, technology, etc. would be very, very, wrong.... And, I would never vote to allow that.

For example, the thread a few months ago where the school actually went thru the texts and records of a confiscated cell-phone. A complete breach of civil rights!!!!!

However, in this case... The parents presented the information. The information is very, very, clear evidence of 'sexual harassment'... which (whether the texts were sent while on school grounds or not) very clearly affects the victim while at school.

IMHO, in this case, sexual harassment of ANY kind, is (or should be) very clearly prohibited by school policy. IMHO, in this case, the parents should have a right to send their daughter to school, and have the school protect her from the affects of this sexual harassment.

I think that when parents have presented proof of bona-fide physical threat, or sexual harassment... Then, YES, by all means, the school should have a moral and legal responsibility to protect the victims and provide a safe and acceptable learning environment.

PS: No surprise to me here that while some schools may think they have the right to access a students private cellphone, or even access video surveillance of kids, at home, in the privacy of their bedrooms via loaner-laptops....... But, then, all of the sudden, when parents present the proof of serious sexual harrassment, all of the sudden the don't seem to want to assume the right, or responsibility to do anything.