Alexis Michael

Infogathering
November 28, 2015
Research Paper

Proposed Topic: Anti-Cyberbullying

Revised question: Should public school systems be required to have cyberbullying policies that

outline their ability to monitor, confiscate and discipline students for both on- and off-campus

conduct that disrupts the learning environment?

Table of Contents

Preface..3
Abstract7

Introduction..8

The Issue..8

The effects of cyberbullying ..9

Supporting .12

Opposing ...14

School policies...16

Effectiveness of Schools involvement with Cyberbullying....17

Conclusion19

References.20

Preface

During the writing process of this research paper, I have come to realize that I have not

only learned more about the challenges schools face when monitoring, confiscating and
disciplining students for both on- and off-campus inappropriate usage electronic devices, but I

have seen an improvement in my writing and have learned more about myself as a writer.

Throughout the writing process I struggled with formatting, referencing creating persuasive

arguments and had many grammatical errors, all while dealing with unexpected events that had

come up in my personal life like my computer crashing and a family member who had

unexpectedly passed away. These challenges were difficult struggles that I had faced, but they

had taught me the importance of asking for help when it is needed, being more detailed focused

and effectively prioritizing my time.

I strongly believe I am a better writer from the challenging assignments given over the

course of this semester. Writing has never been a strong skill of mine and which posed as a

struggle throughout the semester. I have the tendency during the writing process to have run my

sentences, which included many several sentences that can be broken up into separate sentences.

When I include unnecessary words, run-on sentences and grammatical errors they act as

syntactic noises that disrupt my readers ability to understand the presented arguments. Along

with run on sentences, I had many APA formatting errors, I rarely hyphenated when I needed to

and did not know how to properly reference sources in the text and in the reference section. After

reviewing each of my assignments including the feedback that I had received from my

professors, I worked hard to strengthen and improve my writing by omitting needless words,

grammatical errors and referencing.

I also found that it was also necessary for me to focus on important details to support my

arguments. I had struggled at times to find ways to formulate my arguments supported by

evidence that is presented in a summarized and clearly format, including by sub points and sub

arguments. While writing this research paper, I became better at writing more persuasively be
critically evaluating various types of sources and the sources credentials. I realized the

importance of forming arguments based on factually information from reputable sources, as well

as, analyzing articles are not biased but rather address both sides of an argument. It is important

when presenting arguments to include evidence that supports the argument and to present it in

clear and appropriate ways. During the compare and contrast assignments which I have

improved on doing since my first compare and contrast assignment, I learned that within my

arguments it was necessary at times to present sub points and sub arguments. When writing I did

my best to remain unbiased by presenting supporting and opposing arguments for each source

that I analyzed.

By evaluating and including various arguments, it enabled my writing to give a better

understanding of the issues and the discussions on this topic. The research process of finding

sources that addressed both sides of this topic took a substantial amount of time. I had learned a

lot about the importance of understanding the credentials of the authors and the publishers of

each of my sources, and how those sources influence the arguments in the writing. I have

become more aware of the importance of basing arguments not on my opinion but by relying on

facts. Using fact-based information from data, research, studies, scholarly sources and

government documents allows my arguments to be supported by good evidence.

Even though there were many challenges that I had faced throughout the semester, they

have taught me many things and have pushed me to work through those challenges to improve

my writing. I learned a substantial amount from the errors I made in my writing, which had

improved my writing skills and the process of the time it takes for me to write over this semester.

After evaluating each of the assignments that I had received from my professors, I found that I

became more aware of the errors I was making which had helped me work to prevent those
mistakes for my future assignments. I found that not only were there areas in my writing that

needed to be improved but I had also learned new writing techniques that had helped improve the

time it took me to write my assignments but also how I located my sources.

I strongly recommend for the future students that they should have be prepared to have

the necessary tools to write and back up the assignments. It is important to have various places to

back up assignments, which can consist of the iCloud, Google documents, a flash drive or can be

saved to an email. I had mentioned earlier that I had my computer break down, over this

semester. Students should be prepared just in case this happens to them. It would be a shame to

see even one of the assignments be lost due to a computer failure. Luckily I had saved my

assignments to my email every time I took a long break or turned off my computer. I had also

uploaded my assignments and worked on Google documents so that I can use various computers

throughout the library without having to use a USB. It is also important for students to manage

their time wisely and efficiently. As a softball player, we had training for the first month the class

which had forced me to use any of the free time that I had to finish my Information Gathering

assignments, As the semester went on, the assignments become more challenging and some

require contact sources outside of Linfield, which supports my point of making sure that time is

used efficiently. I also had faced a death in my family which set me back on one of the

assignments. I wish I would have finished that assignment the day after it assigned. Even though

incidents like these arent common or can be predicted, it is important to get the work that is

needed to be done in case anything serious comes up. Having assignments done ahead of time

also gives time for students to have a break from focusing on their paper so that they can have

some time to look over their errors with a fresh mind. This allows students to have extra time to

edit errors and proof read over their papers. It important for students who take Information
Gathering to not only listen to the instructor's feedback but to also learn from the past

experiences of students like myself who have taken this class. This has been the most

challenging class I have yet to take, but I have learned a substantial amount of information that

has helped shaped writing and the way I prioritize my time.

Abstract: This paper will evaluate the public school systems jurisdiction over combating and

stopping cyberbullying both on- and off-campus. It will compare the supporting and opposing

arguments on this topic. According to StopBullying.gov (2014) when both bullying and

harassment occur, schools that are federally funded are obligated to resolve the harassment.

According to the U.S. Department of Education (2011) states have the ability to create and

implement their own anti-bullying laws and policies addressing behavior both on and off campus
that creates a hostile learning environment. In contrast, some sources like the Constitutional

Rights Foundation Chicago (2011) and Nichole Yetter (2014) argue various concerns that may be

seen when schools discipline for off-campus cyberbullying. However, other sources such as

Kevin Judkins (2015) and Denise Farag (2015) agree that schools should have jurisdiction to

discipline conduct that disrupts the learning environment, however, there needs to be technology

and bullying policies to hold students and administrators accountable for their actions. This paper

will present both sides of the argument and evaluates whether public schools should have

policies detailing their ability to monitor, confiscate and discipline students for both on- and off-

campus usage of personal and school-provided electronic devices that disrupts the learning

environment.

Public Schools Involvement with Students use of Technology

Introduction: Students are creating negative and unsafe learning environment by using either

school-provided or personal electronic devices to target victims both on- and off- campus.

Howard and Phillip (2014) say that cyberbullying can happen every hour of the day, by reaching

a child when he or she is at home. With social media and smartphones being used worldwide by

teens and children, the authors say bullies are emerging from the traditional school playgrounds

to a new playground to target victims online. Howard and Phillip say that since cyberbullying
happens off campus it makes it more difficult to prevent and intervene. However, according to

StopBullying.gov (2014) when both bullying and harassment occur, schools that are federally

funded are obligated to resolve the harassment. According to the U.S. Department of Education

(2011) states have the ability to create and implement their own anti-bullying laws and policies

addressing behavior both on and off campus that creates a hostile learning environment. In

contrast, some sources like the Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago (2011) and Nichole

Yetter (2014) argue various concerns that may be seen when schools discipline for off-campus

cyberbullying. Denise Farag (2015) says there are concerns about parental liability, due process,

First Amendment rights for students and the school's liability for taking action when reports of

cyberbullying. She says these concerns should be addressed in school policies to prevent

confusion. In support to Farags argument Judkins (2015) says public schools should be able to

combat cyberbullying on- and off-campus with the support of school board policies with

elements detailing when administrators can monitor, confiscate and discipline in response to

students using technology that disrupts to the learning environment.

The Issue: Students are using both school-provided or personal electronic devices to target

victims both on- and off-campus. Howard and Phillip (2014) say that cyberbullying can happen

every hour of the day, by reaching a child when he or she is at home. With social media and

smartphones being used worldwide by teens and children, the authors say bullies are emerging

from the traditional school playgrounds to a new playground to target victims online. Howard

and Phillip say that since cyberbullying happens off campus it makes it more difficult to prevent

and intervene. StopBullying.gov (2014) addresses that when both bullying and harassment occur,

schools that are federally funded are obligated to resolve the harassment. According to the U.S.
Department of Education (2011) there are no federal laws addressing bullying, however, states

have the ability to create and implement their own anti-bullying laws and policies addressing

behavior both on and off campus that creates a hostile learning environment. Kevin Judkins

(2015) and Denise Farag (2015) agree that schools should have jurisdiction to discipline conduct

that disrupts the learning environment, however, there needs to be technology and bullying

policies to hold students and administrators accountable for their actions. However, some sources

like the Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago (2011) and Nichole Yetter (2014) argue

various concerns about schools ability to discipline students for off campus cyberbullying may

be in violation students rights of free speech.

Effects of Cyberbullying. Students are using both school-provided and personal electronic

devices to target victims both on- and off-campus. Zickuhr (2010) says 73 percent of online users

use social media sites and 37 percent send messages through social media every day. Zickuhr

says 39 percent of students report being cyberbullying victims. The U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services (2013) released a survey that reports 14.8 percent of students have been

cyberbullied through e-mail, chat rooms, instant messaging or texting during the year before the

survey was taken. The survey also reports that cyberbullying among students was higher among

females at 21 percent more than males who were at 8.5 percent. (U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services, 2013). Students who are cyberbullied can be affected in many profound ways.

There are many psychological effects associated with bullying, cyberbullying and suicide

in students that disrupt the learning environment. According to Dupper (2013) Bullying impacts

the school's learning environment as well as students psychologically in many profound

negative ways. Students are negatively impacted psychologically with feelings of depression and
isolation, and they have increased risks of suicides attempts and rates of dropping out. According

to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2013) female students were more likely

than male students to report not going to school because of safety concerns, being electronically

bullied and being bullied on school property. The Center of Diseases Control (2015) argues that

bullying may cause physical, social and educational harm by the infliction of harm or distress. In

comparison to the negative effects cyberbullying inflicts, Alice Walton (2015) argues that based

on a study from the American Journal of Psychiatry that children who are bullied have

psychological effects that last from adolescence to middle aged adults. The author states that

those who were victimized by bullies had more problems in life. The author says that children

who are bullied frequently have a higher risk to develop depression, suicidal thoughts and

anxiety by the age of 45. In comparison Bauman, Toomey and Walker (2013) report on a study of

high school students, that depression is associated with bullying and victimization. However, the

study had shown that females who were cyber-victimized had more suicide attempts than males.

These arguments among these authors have information and data presented showcasing the

psychological harm that bullying can cause harm on students.

Current Anti-bullying Legislations. Federally funded schools have the obligation to step in and

to resolve cases when harassment and bullying overlaps (StopBullying.gov, 2014.)

when both bullying and harassment occur, schools that are federally funded are obligated to

resolve the harassment. According to Amanda Taurino (2013) there are no federal laws

addressing bullying The U.S. Department of Education (2011) states are 46 states with anti-

bullying laws and 31 states have anti-bullying policies for schools. There is also 36 out of 46

states that have anti-bullying laws in place and 13 have statutes that allow schools to address

behavior off campus that creates a hostile learning environment. McGrory (2013) says what
further complicates the matter is that cyberbullying takes place outside of school and is

traditionally considered off limits for school administrators. These questions also complicate the

issue of how schools can control the conduct of students off campus. McGrory says 16 states

have anti-bullying laws that include internet-based harassment and taunting. Ten of those include

actions that take place off campus.

Monitoring: Austin Berg (2015) says based on an Illinois law established in 2014 that in the

state of Illinois if a school has reasonable cause to believe that a student's account on a social

networking website contains evidence that the student has violated a school disciplinary rule or

policy, the school has jurisdiction to request a students login information for Facebook, Twitter,

Instagram and any other online accounts. This article contrasts to the stance of the Snohomish

School District monitoring actions that Judkins had mentioned.

Support for Schools involvement: Public schools should have the authority to monitor,

confiscate and discipline students when both on- and off-campus usage of personal and school-

provided electronic devices disrupts the learning environment. Sameer Hinduja and Justin W.

Patchin (2015) give an example of off-campus conduct that disrupt the school environment by

citing the court case J.S. v. Bethlehem Area School District. This case consisted a student who

had made a webpage including derogatory and threatening comments about certain school board

staff. During this ruling the court said that schools do have the authority to discipline students

off-campus speech or behavior that disrupt the school environment. Yvonne Craig (2015) says

the Dayton School District provides Chromebooks for students to use for educational purposes.

The Chromebooks block all social media sites and the activity use on the computers are
monitored. Craig says the technology workers who monitor the computers have full access to see

what is on the computer and can shut off specific programs. Craig says the Dayton School

District has a technology policy that does not allow technology devices to be used on campus

during school hours, unless it is the Chromebooks. She says the teachers and administrators have

the jurisdiction to confiscate technology used throughout the school day that causes disruption to

the learning environment. Austin Berg says (2015) based on an Illinois law established in 2014

that in the state of Illinois if a school has reasonable cause to believe that a student's account on a

social networking website contains evidence that the student has violated a school disciplinary

rule or policy, they have the jurisdiction to request a students login information for Facebook,

Twitter, Instagram and any other online accounts. According to Wallace (2014) Students Against

Fear is a submission program that works to monitor students public social media activity when a

tip is submitted of a possible threat. Florida Orange Public school officials are only monitoring

for criminal activity, suicidal thoughts or cyberbullying. Monitoring is being conducted by

software programs searching on social media sites to find keywords that would raise concerns

(American School Board Journal, 2015). Schools have the legal obligation to resolve harassment.

According to the StopBullying.gov (2014), when both bullying and harassment occur, schools

that are federally funded are obligated to resolve the harassment.

Dominic Rushe's (2015) article is mainly focused on the bill that states that students must

open up their social media accounts if a school has a reasonable cause to believe that a student

has violated a schools social media policy, both on and off campus. The superintendent says that

the change in the Illinois law requires all school districts to investigate all instance of

cyberbullying, regardless of the location of the incident. The author says that last year Illinois

had another law that authorized school districts to obtain social media passwords from students if
there is evidence of a violation of school rules and policies, and that the parents are informed that

the school wants access to the children's accounts.

In an additional article, Michael Martinez (2013) reports on a California school district that has

hired a firm to monitor students social media use to search for violence, drugs and bullying. The

article makes the argument that by the monitoring students social media the school will be able

to detect and prevent drug use, suicides, bullying and planned violent acts. In comparison to

Martinezs article, Leslie Postal (2015) says that schools in the Orange County School District

are also monitoring students social media to stop crime, cyberbullying and suicide. Contrasting

to Martinezs article the Orange County schools are only monitoring social media messages that

are posted by both students and teachers just on campus. This article was the only article out of

the three that included a statement that this monitoring service had already found a student who

was threatening to self-harm, whereas the first two articles made statements that nothing has

been found and no actions have been taken.

The American School Board Journal (2015) provides the example that Floridas Orange

County Public school officials are only monitoring for criminal activity, suicidal thoughts or

cyberbullying. The journal says monitoring is being conducted by software programs that search

on social media sites to find keywords that would raise concerns. In support for the American

School Board Journals argument on if schools should do more to monitor students technology

use, Wallace (2014) says schools in Alabama, along with other schools that have joined in on

combatting social media threats among students by paying firms to monitor middle and high

school students public social media profiles. A school district in California has set up a

submission program that works to monitor students public social media activity when a tip is

submitted of a possible threat. Wallace sites a Florida law that came into effect after a student
was cyberbullied and had taken her life. The Florida law allows schools to have the authority to

monitor students Facebook posts and emails if a tip is submitted to schools about a suspicion of

cyber bullying off campus. Wallace includes the opinion of Wayne Blanton, executive director of

the Florida School Boards Association, and says its key to notify schools about threats or

bullying schools should campaign for students and parents to report concerns seen online.

Blanton argues it would be easier to stop bullying and threats if teachers, principals and school

resource officers if they were provided with in-depth training.

Opposition of Schools Involvement with disciplining. Schools involvement with

monitoring, confiscating and discipling on- and off- campus cyberbullying presents many

challenges. Public school systems face many challenges when monitoring, confiscating and

disciplining students for both on- and off-campus usage of personal and school-provided

electronic devices that disrupt the learning environment. Nichole Yetter (2014) says concerns are

raised for violating students free speech rights and rights of educators when disciplining students

for off-campus cyberbullying through technology. She says teachers are unsure of how to report

and document bullying and threats. The First Amendment may prevent schools from censoring

students; however, speech can be can be limited if it interferes with the schools learning

environment. The authors say the Fourth Amendment may allow schools to search students

belongings if there is a reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred (Cyrus and Dunham,

2015). The Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago (2011) provides a document on its website

about whether or not the government should allow schools to discipline for off-campus

cyberbullying. It provides reasons saying that educating students is more effective than punishing

students, schools are in danger of violating students freedom of speech rights for punishing off
campus cyberbullying, and policies and courts of law should discipline students who violate civil

or criminal laws by sending offensive messages.

Linfield student, Jasmine Fojas (2015) says that her brother, who was a football player at

Honokaa High School, was kicked off the football team along with five other males for posting a

picture on Instagram that had of inappropriate gestures. Fojas argued the schools decision was

handled poorly and that the school did not make a clear what the boys are and are not allowed

to do online. Fojas addresses from the perspective from a collegiate athlete that there students

should be informed what they can and cannot do. She also admits that as a collegiate student-

athlete that they have to sign a paper that states that anything they post on social media can be

used against them. It is important for public school systems to inform and educate staff, students

and parents about the consequences and effects of cyberbullying. Sameer Hinduja and Justin

Patchin (2013) make a research-based argument that parents, educators and students need to

work together to prohibit, discipline and condemn bullying at school in the community. The

authors say that youths would be less inclined to partake in cyberbullying if they knew that

adults in their life would discipline them. Jessica Drews (2015) explores the importance of

educating staff, students and parents about online issues and cybercrimes. Drew uses an example

of a Bolivar High School meeting in Montana focusing on educating school staff, students and

community members to create awareness of the issues of cyberbullying and how to combat it.

Education of Cyberbullying and Bullying through trainings and policies:

Dupper (2013) argues that schools and parents can effectively combat cyberbullying by

implementing empathy trainings. Dupper says that by implementing empathy trainings in

schools, teachers would be educated about cyberbullying and how they can educate students on

the issues of being a bystander, a victim, bully, how to report a bully, how to resist bullying, and
the negative consequences of bullying. Jessica Drews (2015) also explores the importance of

educating school administrators, students and parents about online issues and cyber-crimes.

Drew uses an example of a Bolivar High School meeting in Montana focusing on educating

school staff, students and community members to create awareness of the issues of cyberbullying

and how to combat it. In comparison to the other two articles 'desire to advocate awareness for

these issues, Knight Albright (2015) says the Perrysburg Junior High School administration in

Ohio has planned and implemented educational meetings for students and parents on

cyberbullying to make a difference. The Perrysburg Junior High School administration is

advocating for a stronger digital citizenship for the community as a whole.

It is important for public school systems to inform and educate staff, students and parents about

what bullying and cyberbullying. Sameer Hinduja and Justin Patchin (2013) make a research-

based argument that parents, educators and students need to work together to prohibit, discipline

and condemn bullying at school in the community. The authors say that youths would be less

inclined to partake in cyberbullying if they knew that adults in their life would discipline them.

Jessica Drews (2015) explores the importance of educating staff, students and parents about

online issues and cybercrimes. Drew uses an example of a Bolivar High School meeting in

Montana focusing on educating school staff, students and community members to create

awareness of the issues of cyberbullying and how to combat it.

State Laws and School Policies on Technology use and Anti-bullying: Public schools should

have school board policies with elements detailing when administrators can monitor, confiscate

and discipline in response to students using technology that disrupts to the learning environment.

(Judkins, 2015) Schools should stay up today with current state and federal legislation to make
sure their actions are consistent with what is expected. Nicole Yetter (2014) says a Massachusetts

bill prohibits students from cyberbullying by email and social media. The bill requires school

staff members to report bullying to administrators who then are required to investigate and take

disciplinary action. Oregon Department of Education (2010) states in the Oregon Statute

regarding cyberbullying, bullying or other disruptive behaviors are classified as conducts that

disrupts a students ability to learn and the learning environment.

Public school systems should work with law enforcement. Stuart-Cassel, Bell and Springer

(2011) suggests that state and local education agencies should seek official guidance to make

sure their actions are consistent with all the applicable federal and state laws. According to

Boyce and Liffri (2015), school administrators should follow requirements made by state anti-

bullying law. The authors argue that it this is important because if a school fails to follow the

requirements of the state anti-bullying laws, individuals may be able to sue for violation of the

state laws and the school can be held for negligence. McGrory (2013) says 16 states have

bullying laws that include internet-based harassment and taunting. Ten of those include actions

that take place off campus. McGrory says the proposed bill in Florida prohibits harassment

taking place in cyberspace both on- and off-campus through technology that creates a hostile

environment. This gives principals in some cases the ability to intervene outside of school.

Administrators must work with their school attorneys and stay up to date on school board

policies, guided by the state laws, when discipling cyberbullies (Waggoner, 2015).

School Board Policies should have elements detailing when administrators can monitor,

confiscate and discipline when there is a disruption to the learning environment. Farag (2015)

shares that there are concerns about parental liability, due process, First Amendment rights for

students and the schools liability for taking action when reports of cyberbullying should be
addressed in school policies to prevent confusion. She says schools should include definitions of

harassment, intimidation, bullying and cyberbullying, procedures for reporting, investigating and

preventing cyberbullying, and language that specifies that if students do disrupt the learning

environment or violate the rights of other students that the school can discipline. The Forest

Grove High School student and parent handbook (2015) was evaluated and the teacher Katy

Brosig addressed during the observation at Forest Grove High School (2015) that the school

recognizes a concern when confiscating technology use, that students do have the right of

privacy and freedom from unreasonable search and seizures backed up by the Constitutions

Fourth Amendment. However, she also said that even though students have their rights, the

school has the responsibility to protect the health and safety and wellbeing of the students. Forest

Grove students who use a cell phone, which disrupts the educational environment, can be

disciplined and have their cell phone confiscated.

Kowalski, Limber and Agatston (2008) say that these policies should provide clear

prohibitions against cyberbullying and related behavior, and clarify procedures for monitoring or

searching students internet records. The authors say that many school administrators are

concerned about meeting their ethical and legal duties to protect students without infringing on

their protected rights. The authors say students should expect limited privacy in the contents of

their computers at school and that administrators may make inspections of school computers and

internet accounts on a regular basis. Searches of computers or accounts may be conducted when

school personnel have reasonable suspicion of the presence of illegal content or evidence that

consist of activities that are against school rules

A report, prepared for and published by the U.S. Department of Education (2011) suggests

that state and local education agencies seek official guidance to make sure their actions are
consistent with all of the applicable federal and state laws. The report provides a letter from the

U.S. Department of Education sharing the urgency for making efforts to assist school officials to

reduce bullying in the nations schools. According to Samus Boyce and Ryan Liffri (2015),

school administrators should follow requirements made by state anti-bullying law. The authors

argue that it this is important because if a school fails to follow the requirements of the state anti-

bullying laws, individuals may be able to sue for violation of the state laws and the school can be

held for negligence.

According to Judkins (2015) technology and bullying policies hold students and

administrators accountable for messages sent and content posted from their own devices and

school devices on school grounds, school events and sponsored events. It is important for public

school systems to establish school policies on technology use and bullying that to inform and

educate staff, students and parents that there is a zero tolerance for bullying and cyberbullying. In

comparison to Judkins argument a study by Bauman, Toomey and Walker (2013) states that

schools need to implement bullying prevention efforts like a zero tolerance policies for

bullying and cyberbullying. Bauman, Toomey and Walker says that there is a need for

intervention and prevention programs based on the effects that cyberbullying has on students

psychologically to protect students.

Conclusion

Cyberbullying in the public school system is a complex issue and has profound negative effects

on the schools learning environment and the students mental health. As is illustrated in this

paper, there are no there are no federal laws addressing bullying. Anti-bullying statutes and

policies vary state-by-state and many dont have cyberbullying policies. Only 46 states have anti-
bullying laws and 31 states with anti-bullying policies for schools. However, 36-out-of-46 states

that have anti-bullying laws in place and 13 have statutes that allow schools to address behavior

off campus that creates a hostile learning environment (U.S. Department of Education, 2011.)

Public school systems should have cyberbullying laws and policies, based on the states current

anti-bullying laws. By creating school board policies detailing when administrators can monitor,

confiscate and discipline when there is a disruption to the learning environment, students and

faculty will be held accountable for their actions and educated of what is expected of them.

(Judkins, 2015) By allowing schools to have the cyberbullying policies, it will help better the

digital citizenship in the community, improve and maintain safe learning environments and

reduce the criminalization of students who cyberbully.

References

American School Board Journal. (2015). Monitoring students social media posts. American

School Board Journal, 202(5), 12. Retrieved from Ebscohost Academic Search Premier.

Berg, A. (2015, January 23). Illinois law allows schools to demand students Facebook

passwords. Illinois Policy Institute. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/o5v82pa

Boyce, S., & Liffrig, R. (2015, April). Bullying and the law. National School Boards

Association. Retrieved from Ebscohost Academic Search Premier.

Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago. (2011). Cyberbullying: Should our democracy allow

schools to punish students for off-campus cyberbullying? Constitutional Rights

Foundation Chicago. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/qxudknp

Craig, Y. (2015, October 18). Interview by Alexis Michael. From notes. Linfield College,

McMinnville, OR.
Cyrus, L. & Dunham, M. (March, 2015). Legal matters: Combating cyberbullying. National

Association of Elementary Principles. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/q36bhll

Donovan, D. (2015, July 25). Anti-bullying statute not a restriction on free speech, appeals court

says. North Carolina Lawyers Weekly. Retrieved from LexisNexis Academic Search

Premier.

Drews, J. (2015, October 1). Parent meeting Monday to focus on cyberbullying. BolivarMoNews.

Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/no5e4v4

Dupper, D. R. (2013). School Bullying: New Perspectives on a growing problem. New York:

Oxford University Press.

Farag, D. (2015, September 28). Interview by Alexis Michael. From notes. Linfield College,

McMinnville, OR.

Forest Grove High School. (2015, October 27). Observation by Alexis Michael. From notes.

Forest Grove, OR.

Forest Grove School District. (2015). Student and parent handbook and conduct code. Retrieved

from http://tinyurl.com/nkkk6hv

Howard, G., & Phillip, R. (2014, May 9). Cyberbullying - A new face on an old problem.

Community Matters. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/ozzjs2s

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2013). Social influences on cyber bullying behaviors among

middle school and high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence.. Retrieved

from Ebscohost Academic Search Premiere.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J.W. (2015, January). Cyberbullying legislation and case law:

Implications for school policy and practice. Cyberbullying Research Center. Retrieved

from http://tinyurl.com/omvx92y
Judkins, K. (2015, October 18). Interview by Alexis Michael. From notes and audio recording.

Linfield College, McMinnville, OR.

Kowalski, R., Limber, S., & Agatston, P. (2008). Cyber bullying: Bullying in the digital age.

New York, NY: Blackwell.

McGrory, K. (2013, March 19). Cyberbullying proposals win support, raise legal questions.

Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/ndy8wtv

National Womans Law Center. (2015). Cyberbully and sexual harassment fact sheet. National

Womans Law Center. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/oneoqec

Oregon Department of Education. (2010, June 29). School bullying Oregon revised statutes

2010. Oregon Department of Education. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/p2rhndu

StopBully.gov (2014, March 31). Federal laws. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/oz4uo4y

Stuart-Cassel,V., Bell, A., & Springer, J. F. (2011). Analysis of state bullying laws and policies.

U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/nmqsntz

Wallace, K. (2014, November 4). School system hires former FBI agent to probe social media.

CNN. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/q94ha6s

Waggoner, C. (2015). Cyber bullying: The public school response. Insights to a Changing World

Journal, 2(1), 2-20. Retrieved from EbscoHost Academic Search Premier.

Yetter, N. (2014, January). Using technology to tackle and track cyberbullying. National

Association of Secondary Principals. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/paxxsbv

U.S. Department of Education. (2011, December 11). U.S. Education Department Releases

Analysis of State Bullying Laws and Policies. U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved

from http://tinyurl.com/87zp8dy
U.S. Department of Health and Human services. (2013). Youth risk behavior surveillance -

United States, 2013. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (63), 4-47. Retrieved

form http:/tinyurl.com/owmlq2j

Zickuhr, K. (2010, December, 16). Generations 2010. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from

http://tinyurl.com/nantupt