Findings

Expected outcomes, anticipated impact, positive implications, results.

School officials have the authority to impose discipline for cyberbullying when that speech has, or a reasonable person would anticipate it will: Tinker v. Des Moines: Schools can impose discipline only if speech causes or threatens substantial disruption or interference with the rights of students to be secure.

The impact at school must be the deciding factor. School officials have an important obligation to ensure the safety of students and the delivery of instruction. Regardless of where the speech occurs, when the impact jeopardizes the safety of students or the delivery of instruction, school officials must be able to respond as they deem necessary.

A formal Cyberbulling policy can not only serve as a legal means of handling student misconduct but it also helps to bring awareness to school community. By establishing and enforcing a policy it provides a clear definition of bullying/cyberbullying. It can also provide prevention and initiated discussion on the different types of bullying/cyberbullying which include (digizen.org):

• Sexting • Racist • Homophobic • Disabilities

It can also educate the school community on how technology is used to bully students such as (teachernet.gov):

• Mobile phones • Instant Messenger • Chatrooms and Message boards • Email • Webcams • Social Networks sites • Video Hosting sites • Virtual Learning Environments • Gaming sites/Virtual Worlds

Once the school community has gained awareness and knowledge on the issue they can implement an acceptable use policy. This will also give teachers an opportunity to teach students what is deemed acceptable and the many positive uses of the cyber world.

By enforcing this strong message of no tolerance toward cyberbulling whole school-wide communities can work together and present a united from which will decrease the number of incidences.