Shayne Aldridge, a former teacher and special education administrator, is a school law attorney from Pleasant Plains.
Real harm is occurring in the virtual environment. For children, cyberharassment has become an unspoken harm that leaves undetected, emotional and psychological scars. As the trustees for students, school board members need to understand the social, psychological and emotional harm it causes.
There is no need to define harassment — or is there? Miriam Webster’s online dictionary defines “cyber” as “of, relating to, or involving computers or computer networks.”
In studying this topic, the National Conference of State Legislatures found three distinct forms of abusive conduct in the “cyber” environment: stalking, harassing and bullying. Since all the behaviors the NCSL wanted to define took place on a computer or computer networks, using the prefix “cyber” was very applicable.
The NCSL defined “cyberstalking” as the use of the Internet, e-mail or other electronic communications to stalk, and generally refers to a pattern of threatening or malicious behaviors. Much like regular stalking, where the perpetrator follows the victim around and desires to remain close to him or her, the cyberstalker uses the Internet to monitor the victim’s whereabouts, spending habits, Internet usage and cell phone use.
The cyberstalker then uses that information to cause emotional distress, engage in non-consensual contact, torment, terrorize or make actual threats against the victim. The computer environment is used to remain close to the target of his or her fixation. Because of the fixation and high possibility of creditable threats, law enforcement considers this form of bad-cyber-behavior to be the most dangerous. In Illinois, the criminal penalty for cyberstalking is a Class 4 felony, with a sentence from one to three years in the state penitentiary. A second or subsequent conviction for cyberstalking is a Class 3 felony, with a sentence from two to five years.
Cyberharassment differs from cyberstalking in that the harassment usually does not contain an actual threat of harm. Cyberharassment, while absent threats of harm or death, still consists of harassing e-mail messages, instant messages, or blog entries, or websites with the exact purpose of tormenting the individual.
The Illinois Criminal Code defines cyberharassment as “using electronic means to make any comment, request, suggestion, or proposal, which is obscene and with the intent to offend.” A person who commits cyberharassment is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor and a second or subsequent violation is a Class A misdemeanor, carrying a minimum of 14 days in jail or 240 hours of public or community service.
Cyberbullying and cyberharassment are terms that are often used interchangeably. While it is true that the conduct or behavior is similar, most experts limit cyberbullying to incidents of computer or computer networks used for the harassment or bullying among minors and further limits the abuse to that which occurs only within the school context. If an adult is involved, the conduct is referred to as either cyberharassment or cyberstalking.
Cyberbullying legislation in Illinois and other states reflects a trend of making school districts the policy enforcers of such misconduct. The problem is that school districts have handled this issue by amending existing anti-bullying policies so that they include cyberbullying or cyberharassment.
Some board policies provide for sanctions for all forms of cyberbullying on school property, school buses or at official school functions. Others have gone further and extended sanctions for cyberbullying activities that take place off-campus, and even those that occurred from the cyberbully’s home computer.
The Illinois School Code covers cyberbullying in its anti-bullying provision. Under the School Code (105 ILCS 5/27-23.7), “bullying” means any severe or pervasive physical or verbal act or conduct, including communications made in writing or electronically, directed toward a student that can be predicted to have the effect of: (1) fear of harm, (2) detrimental effect on physical or mental health, (3) interfering with academic performance, or (4) interfering with ability to participate in services, activities, or privileges provided by a school.
Cyberbullying happens when a student is tormented, threatened, harassed, humiliated, embarrassed or otherwise targeted by another student through the use of the Internet, interactive digital technology or cellular phones.
Cyberbullying usually is not a one-time occurrence. It is pervasive and persistent. It can overwhelm a child or teen to the point of serious mental health issues up to suicide.
Often adults focus on the obscene and lewd language while overlooking the trauma that the child feels because of the embarrassing post or rude comments. We surely must address the victim’s needs, but by studying the message behind the cyberbullying we can determine the type of bully we are dealing with.
Size doesn’t matter
It used to be that the schoolyard bully was the biggest kid on the playground. In the cyberworld it is more likely to be the 75-pound cheerleader than the 250-pound linebacker.
Researchers have determined four types of cyberbullies within the childhood and teen cultures:
• Vengeful Angels
• Revenge of the Nerds
• Mean Girls
• Inadvertent Cyberbullies
“Vengeful Angels” do not see themselves as cyberbullies at all. They see themselves as correcting the wrongs that others have done to them, or that they are protecting themselves or another student from the “bad guy” they are now victimizing.
This sometimes happens when a victim of past cyberbullying starts his or her own campaign of Internet posts retaliating for prior events. In turn, the victim of cyberbullying then becomes the cyberbully. Most often, the “Vengeful Angel” interjects herself into the situation in order to try to protect a friend who is being cyberbullied.
They may be angry because of cyberbullying occurring against a friend, so they feel they are taking warranted revenge or teaching the other cyberbully a lesson. They generally work alone, but usually with the cyberbullying victim’s knowledge.
Next, we’ve all seen it in the movies where the geeky-kid gets out of the library to exact revenge on the popular crowd. “Revenge of the Nerds” cyberbullies want to exert their authority, show that they are powerful enough to make others do what they want, and some want to control others with fear. Essentially, there is not much difference between these cyberbullies and the tough schoolyard bullies, except for their method.
A sub-set of the “Nerds” is the “Power-Hungry” cyberbullies. These cyberbullies usually need an audience, and they often brag about their actions. They mostly do their bragging online, which makes them an easier target to catch. The problem with “Power-Hungry” cyberbullies is that they want a reaction, and if they do not get one, they may escalate their activities.
The third group is not a new story, but it seems like they are taking over the cyberbullying arena as the preferred method for social ostracism rituals. So-called “Mean Girls” cyberbullies usually work in groups. Much like they do in face-to-face confrontation, their attacks are done, or at least planned, in a group, either virtually or together in one room.
The saddest aspect to this kind of cyberbullying is that it is done for entertainment. It can take place at a social gathering, a school library, a slumber party, or an after school hangout, and it is the group that plots and then agrees to commit to the cyberbullying. These cyberbullies require an audience because they want others to know who they are and that they have the power to cyberbully anyone.
The “Inadvertent Bully” also does not think of himself as a cyberbully. This one talks tough and pretends to be tough online, but mostly he is just reacting to hateful or provocative messages he has received. The “Inadvertent Bully” doesn’t lash out intentionally. He just responds without thinking about the consequences for acting out in anger or frustration. Really, this cyberbully just doesn’t think before he clicks “send.”
These are the times when the effect of cyberbullying is that it turns the victim into a cyberbully. The victim of the attacks sees the usefulness of cyberbullying and how easy it was for him or her to become a victim, so they turn to cyberbullying as retaliation for the treatment they received.
Not-so-virtual scars
The victims of cyberbullying sometimes speak out.
A 16 year-old girl from Alabama:
“It’s one thing when you get made fun of at school, but to be bullied in your own home via your computer is a disgusting thing for someone to do and I think anyone who gets kicks out of it is disgusting. It makes me feel badly about myself. It makes me wonder how people can be so rude and disrespectful of others and makes me lose faith in the human race. It decreases my self esteem and I often wonder what I did to make someone treat me that way.”
A 12 year-old girl from Michigan:
“The Internet is not a place to harass others or hurt them. The Internet is supposed to be a place that is safe and fun for people, not a place to be criticized or harassed. I used to be bullied at school frequently, and I was sometimes hurt so badly that I had to fake sick at school just so I could go home. One girl actually told me she would come and murder my parents and kill me personally. She made me cry so hard that I threw up. So, I know firsthand what its like to be bullied beyond your imagination.”
The Cyberbullying Resource Center (CRC) conducts an on-going survey of teens and pre-teens about bullying and its affects. They solicit comments from the ones who do the bullying as well, but as you might think, those stories are not as plentiful.
Where cyberbullying once was conducted on websites and individual links that the cyberbully had to invite others to see, now with the explosion of the social networking sites, youth are allowed to take cyberbullying viral. In 2010, approximately 2.7 million students were targeted by 2.1 million cyberbullies. The problem is not going away.
With only 10 percent of cyberbullying victims telling their parents about what is happening, and less than that being reported to any authorities, the problem is being left untreated.
In 2004, the studies showed that girls were the main users of cyberspace for their bullying, but in 2010 boys were catching up. Boys, however, have a tendency to make more threatening cyberattacks than girls, who usually attack the self-esteem and emotions of their victim.
Cyberbullying seems to be an attractive means of bullying for all races. If kids have computers or cell phones, they are using them for cyberbullying, no matter their color or national origin.
The problem: if adults don’t hear about the cyberbullying then nothing can be done to lessen the devastating, long lasting effects on the victims.
One of the first signs of bullying is that the student will stop coming to school. Many victims report trying to stay home from school by faking illness, but as they grow older, they tend to start skipping school. When this happens and the victim is not in school, he or she is isolated from other positive social interactions that could counter the effects of the bullying.
Moreover, missing school leads to poor grades and achievement, and limits their chances for further educational opportunities. Accordingly, student victims who may have had plans for higher education abandon those plans when the cyberbullying continues. With absenteeism being an indicator of cyberbullying, this should be an area for school administrators to question those students who have not exhibited truancy in the past.
Bullying and cyberbullying, in particular, are clear attacks on the victim’s emotional well-being. Self-esteem is destroyed. The content of the messages is not as important as the fact that they are being targeted and constantly barraged with messages of dislike, worthlessness and hate. This leads to the victim believing that there is no end to the bullying, that they are isolated and have no friends, and worst, that there is no help. This eventually leads to the victim believing the cyberbully.
Cyberbullying is a social issue and many times the cyberbullying is committed by groups of students. There may have been one originator, but soon mob mentality takes over and it becomes “fun” to pile-on and for everyone to add comments to the cyberbullying.
Teens and pre-teens seek out acceptance, so if it is “cool” to blast the latest victim on a Facebook account, they will take every chance they can to be a part of the group and add to the victim’s terror.
Kids do not like to come to the aid of a fellow student even though they may know that is the right thing to do. They are scared that they may become an outcast from the social group, or worse, become the next victim. This makes it hard for the cyberbullying victim to keep their current friends and ruins their ability to make new friends. So now, the victim is cut off from the social group, is an outcast, and is unable to find or make new friends. This has to be a terrible place for a teen or pre-teen to spend two-thirds of their waking time in school with their tormentors.
Many cyberbullying messages eventually come around to trying to convince the victim that they are not worth anything and the world would be better off without them around. This type of message has led to approximately 50 percent of surveyed victims saying that they have considered committing suicide.
The news is full of cases where a young person has taken his or her life and the reason behind it was cyberbullying. Even if the victim does not go to the extreme, the study of the effects of cyberbullying shows that the victims suffer from depression three times as often as those not victimized by cyberbullying.
The board’s response
Cyberbullied victims are reluctant to tell their parents or adults in authority of the bullying because they fear retribution and that they will have their access and use of the computer or cell phone restricted. This makes it hard for adults to intervene and help with the situation.
Cyberbullies believe they can never be found, that they have an unlimited expectation to privacy on the Internet, and that they have a right to post whatever they want online because they have freedom of speech under the First Amendment. Fortunately for school officials, those “rights” are not so unlimited.
The Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/27-13.3) includes a provision that mandates school districts to provide educational services to students in grades three through 12 regarding the safe use of the Internet. This instruction should include safe and responsible use of social networking websites and other means of digital communication.
Most telling is that the General Assembly recognized that cyberbullying is a problem and encourages school districts to educate students on how to recognize and report online harassment and cyberbullying. This section of the School Code is a start for school districts to address the issue of cyberbullying, but unless it is taken seriously and continually stressed by teachers and administrators, students will not pay attention to the message.
School officials must treat cyberbullying as they would schoolyard bullying. But the former has many more considerations for the school board to take into account when disciplining the student.
The anti-bullying policy required by the Illinois School Code must address “communications made in writing or electronically,” which covers cyberbullying. This year the Illinois School Board Association’s Policy Reference Education Subscription Service (PRESS) disseminated a new policy, “Personal Technology and Social Media: Usage and Conduct.”
This policy is optional and points out that many areas of the law regarding this topic are not settled and many aspects are continually changing. So, adoption should be carefully considered. This policy, however, is limited to school employees and does not cover students. So, school boards can only look to their anti-bullying, Internet usage and student discipline policies to address student Internet misconduct.
Most policies addressing cyberbullying use the following language:
Using a cellular telephone, video recording device, personal digital assistant (PDA), or other electronic device in any manner that disrupts the educational environment or violates the rights of others, including using the device to take photographs in locker rooms or bathrooms, cheat, or otherwise violate student conduct rules. (PRESS Policy 7:190)
Under this policy language, a school board has the authority to discipline a student when the cyberbullying “disrupts the educational environment or violates the rights of others.”
The first part is easy to understand. A school administrator knows when a disruption is taking place in a building. It can be seen. The harder aspect of the policy is how are school administrators to determine that cyberbullying has violated the rights of others?
Often, when schools get involved by disciplining the student for cyberbullying actions that took place off-campus and outside of school hours, they are challenged for exceeding their authority and violating the cyberbully’s right to free speech. To help school districts navigate this treacherous area, the Office of the Illinois Attorney General has created a helpful guide for school boards to use in cases of cyberbullying.
When faced with a cyberbullying issue, the school district should conduct intervention procedures for the student-victim.
First, collect and save any evidence that has come into the school environment. Then the administrator needs to undertake thorough assessment of the harassment or threat. If the cyberbullying message contains an actual threat of violence (“We are going to kill you at 3:15 today”), call law enforcement.
The student-victim is the one who is most affected by the harassment, so make sure that he or she is assessed for signs of depression, anxiety and suicide. Include a mental health professional if needed to get an accurate picture of the student’s mental and emotional state. You must determine if the student-victim can identify the originating cyberbully and any others who participated.
The school administrator then must determine what response to take to the cyberbullying, if any at all. If there is no nexus or connection to the school, a substantial disruption to the educational process, or real threat, the school board is without authority to discipline the cyberbully.
An end to the madness
School boards are in a tough place when it comes to cyberbullying. Here are some steps boards can take to prepare for cyberbullying before it starts:
1. Make sure the district’s policies are up-to-date and reflect the board’s attitudes and philosophy toward the issue.
2. Make sure that district administrators are educating the staff and students about the district’s policies regarding cyberbullying, the signs of cyberbullying and what steps to take if they see it happening.
3. Make sure there is a procedure for students to report cyberbullying to administrators and teachers anonymously or confidentially.
4. Make sure that there is a clear administrative procedure for investigating reports of cyberbullying.
Much of the cyberbullying literature supports an informal resolution between the victim and the cyberbully. They say school districts should bring both students together, and maybe their parents, to have a meeting to resolve the issues.
From experience, sometimes that works, but other times it does little more than fuel the fire. The school administrator must really assess the situation before offering such informal mediation.
Administrators have to know whether the victim can actually face the cyberbully, and then whether the victim’s statements will even impact the cyberbully. If you cannot say that it will be a positive resolution to the problem, informal meetings may have the opposite effect of what you wanted.
Overall, there is no easy solution to cyberbullying. Just be prepared and do your best.
References
Cyberbully definintion: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cyber
Cyberbullying Resource Center, http://cyberbullying.us/shareyourstory.php
National Conference of State Legislatures — January 26, 2011, http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=13495, retrieved September 6, 2011
Managing electronics in school
IASB Policy Services offers sample policies and procedures regarding the possession of electronic devices by students at schools. The Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/10-20.28) grants boards the authority to determine whether electronic devices will be allowed on school property at any time, so it will be up to the school board to decide how much freedom to allow students and what the disciplinary measures will be if the rules are broken.
State law (105 ILCS 5/10-21.10) still prohibits the use of pagers unless the board has specifically authorized their use or possession on school grounds, or unless permission is specifically granted by the principal.
Suggested rules for students regarding cell phones and other electronic devices may include:
• They must be kept out of sight and in an inconspicuous location, such as a backpack, purse, or locker.
• They must be turned offduring the regular school day unless a supervising teacher grants permission for them to be used, or if they are needed during an emergency.
• They may not be used in any manner that will cause disruption to the educational environment or will otherwise violate student conduct rules.
• They may not be used for creating, sending, sharing, viewing, receiving or possessing indecent visual depictions as defined in state law (i.e., sexting).
Boards also may grant permission for the use of electronic devices as study aids, or as described in the Practical PR article that begins on page 4.
Use of electronic devices may also be appropriate for students with an Individualized Education Program (IEP).
While allowing students to use some electronic devices for learning purposes, the school board also can ban other devices that it deems inappropriate for a learning environment, such as hand-held games, CD players, MP3 players or iPods, and global positioning systems (GPS).
The administration may also want to include language in the student handbook stating that the district is not responsible for the loss or theft of any electronic device that is brought to school.