Tag Archives: cell phones

Smartphone Apps and Bullying

Article posted by Sameer in November 5, 2012 at 11:12 am.

(18 votes, average: 4.11 out of 5)

Loading ...

I’ve been chatting with Canadian cyberbullying educator and speaker Lissa Albert about various apps for cell phones and their potential for misuse, and it has been one fascinating conversation. As such, she volunteered to write up a summary for our blog – which really paints a comprehensive picture as to what is available out there for potential cyberbullies. Please let us and her know your thoughts based on your experiences and observations! Note: We have decided not to directly hyperlink to each problematic app so as not to give them more traffic and accessibility than already exists. Here we go.

We all know that cyberbullying takes place using technology-driven communication tools. Smartphones allow for access to social media platforms as well as texting, and provide a host of benefits to their users in the realms of communication, education, ecommerce, and entertainment. However, some misbehaviors are also enabled through these devices. But with smartphones, in addition to being able to access the Internet, email and social media platforms such as Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, and Facebook, there are downloadable applications – known as “apps” – which are user-friendly mechanisms to enable easy interaction with the site from the device. The apps market has soared with every incarnation of smartphone, and the Apple store boasts over 600,000 different apps. Apps are created by both phone manufacturers and by independent developers. There are yearly conferences for app developers, much online collaboration, and exponential growth in this industry. Some apps are freeand some run from $0.99 to $4.99.

Besides Facebook and Twitter apps, other popular social networking platforms – such as Formspring and the seemingly innocuous Club Penguin – have apps readily available for smartphones. These apps allow the user to connect directly to the service without having to go into the browser, and have therefore made it easier to engage in wrongdoing. With these possibilities, it is not surprising that someone would either invent new apps, or find a use for existing apps to facilitate various forms of cyberbullying. Below are some examples of how smartphones are actually, and actively, contributing to online cruelty.

Ugly Meter has gained a lot of popularity. After being mentioned on the radio show of a popular “shock jock” who found it amusing, this app began selling and has, to date, been downloaded over 5,000,000 times. The way it works is to scan a photo and using facial contours and patterns, allowing it to then rate the subject on the “ugly scale” of 1-100. While the developers of the app stress it is only a game, it has many experts concerned that it will be used to lower the self-esteem of already-insecure kids. Inexplicably, many mainstream talk-show personalities (Anderson Cooper, for one) have mentioned and demonstrated the app without mentioning its potential for hurtful uses. This, by the way, is very discouraging because Anderson has always been such a strong anti-bullying advocate.

Enemy Graph is an app that allows the user to take Facebook friends and add them to a list of their enemies. As soon as a user has declared someone an enemy, that declaration appears on their profile, visible to everyone. (“John has declared Jane his enemy”) It also gives the user the ability to declare one “Archenemy”. The developers defend its use, primarily stating that it is used to separate those “friends” on one’s list who have differences with the user, instead of the “likes” or similarities users share. They claim the app was created to “explore social dissonance on Facebook.”

In a test of the app, trending “enemies” listed included “Farmville” (a game-simulation as maligned as it is lauded), Justin Bieber, and various politicians and media personalities. However, it gave statistics at the top of the page, which declared the user’s number of enemies as well as how many have listed him/her as their enemy. These “enemies” are culled from the user’s member list, and this is where the danger comes into play. A disagreement or falling out between friends can easily lead them to list one or both as enemies, and with youth, we have seen that become a fast-spreading sentiment that can lead to isolation, ostracizing, and further ridicule/humiliation.

The developers do not think this will result in cyberbullying; in an interview, Dean Terry believes it will simply lead to conversation. However, it is more likelythat cyberbullying would almost naturally arise from use of this app, and the developers seem to defend it when they state: “In a way we are misusing the word “enemy” just as much as Facebook and others have misused “friend”.

If this app were used the way the developers picture it (fun, social, used only to list the “things” users dislike), there would be no risk. But as with any tool, it has both positive and negative potential. when tools make it easier. Denise Restauri, in an article for Forbes magazine, states: “EnemyGraph gives bullies and people with a sick sense of humor a great way to bully and attack.”

To be sure, this seems an an understatement – the app can lead to tragic consequences such as depression and suicide. No chances can be taken, and there is currently a movement by psychologist Dr. Barbara Lavi to try to get Facebook to remove the app.

Bully Block is promoted as a way for targets to block, report, and record the bully in action. There is a feature to block intrusions from those one feels is bullying them (by having the bully get a busy signal, or pre-recorded message). But it also employs an audio recorder – billed as a “stealth recorder to capture bullies in action”. This app secretly records the bully (ostensibly) and with one touch of a button, forwards the audio as an email or text message to authorities (again, ostensibly). A third feature captures what the developer calls “inappropriate texts, pics or videos” via text message or email. It is intended for teens to forward these to their parents or authorities. It is also intended for employees to forward those types of missives to their HR departments.

The inherent problem in this app is that it has the strong potential to be misused. It is not a huge leap of the imagination to think that a savvy bully would download this app in order to use the recorder to capture compromising audio of his/her victim, or use the forwarding feature to engage in online bullying or even sexting behavior.

It can never be assumed that any tool will be used precisely as intended, and that is a primary concern with such apps that allow for surreptitious photography capture, audio recording, or one-touch forwarding of material.

As an aside, apps that claim to prevent bullying are not as effective as taking action in the situation. As Internet Safety expert Nancy Willard has stated often, teaching kids to swim is a lot more effective than putting up fences around swimming pools. Just as filters don’t prevent users from accessing certain websites, apps don’t effectively prevent cyberbullying. Teaching youth, as well as adults, to understand and embrace a respectful digital society is a lot more effective than entrusting safety and well-being to an app. Why resort to an electronic application to do what people can do more effectively, and more potently? Smartphone apps have their place, but should never replace the interaction people have enjoyed for centuries.

There is more. Secret Camera bills itself as a camera to take photos of “friends and pets” with no shutter sound or visible thumbnail. Devil Camera does the same. Using the front-facing camera, users can take photos of people behind them and with no thumbnail or displayed capture on the screen, the subjects have no idea they have just been photographed.

In researching these apps, I found a forum user asking for such an app, saying he wanted it to take “amusing pics on the bus”. At best, this is an invasion of privacy. At worst, it is blatant cyberbullying. A respondent provided links to a camera app (TubeCrush) as well as a site where those types of photos can be posted. He says, “It was designed it to be perfect for …people wanting to play pranks on their friends, but it’s also great for taking shots in museums and galleries, or for street photography which relies on candid images. (All perfectly legal so don’t worry)!” The various apps found ostensibly promote the user’s safety while capturing video or photos; as such, those prone to cyberbullying behavior will see it as their protection while harming others with furtive photography. The fact that this poster felt it necessary to add a disclaimer of legality shows that there even s/he is aware of the more deceptive uses of the app.

Some other types of apps are worthy of mention. These are listed below.

Anonymous Texting There are a number of apps available for Android as well as iPhone platforms that allow the user to send text messages anonymously or with randomized numbers that mask their identity. There is at least one website that acts as a web-based anonymous texting app. There are even websites to instruct users how to send anonymous texts, with the disclaimer: “Please don’t use this information to stalk, harass or threaten anyone.” The problem is that no disclaimer will deter someone intent upon doing just that. And as technology evolves, cyberbullies are coming up with more inventive and insidious ways to harass their victims.

Demeaning, insulting, pranking apps A search for apps using the keyword “insult” yielded an alarming number of various apps, most free to download, that not only provide insults but the platform to deliver them. For example, there is an insult generator that allows the user to have their cell phone “say” the insult aloud, or text it to someone. There is now a “re-text” button on this app which allows the user to send newly generated insults to the most recent recipient, which could lead to a barrage of insults to one identified victim. As well, there were apps that manipulated available digital photos to ridicule the subject. Under category headings “lifestyle” and “entertainment”, the apps are readily available to anyone seeking vicious comments or graphics to hurt the feelings of another person.

Overall, though most users participate on social media sites in responsible and procial ways, these apps do provide opportunities for those so inclined to cyberbully others. Facebook used to have an app called “Honesty Box” – which encouraged its members to tell others what they thought without being identified. Not only did it encourage negative messages, many of them were filled with inappropriate sexual notes. The app was shut down in 2008, but replaced with one called “Everyword”. Signing in with Facebook or Twitter, users submit one word to other users, to describe that person. There is a box at the bottom of the dialogue box to be checked if the submission is to be made anonymously. It is still an active app, though it took a search to find it as it is not overtly publicized on either social media platform. It also has the potential to encourage a devastating deluge of humiliation and abuse.

It is obvious that as smartphones and social media apps continue to evolve, the means and methods to inflict harm online will remain. How do we combat it? How do we stop misuse of apps or the development of those with the potential to cause harm? Speak up. Speak out. Inform developers that their apps are objectionable with regard to how they are either blatantly or more furtively enabling hateful and humiliating behaviors. Inform people talking about the app, or using it, that they are contributing to a culture tolerant or even supportive of cyberbullying . Write blog entries, articles, media personalities utilizing or publicizing the apps, and emphatically point out that we must be very sensitive to the ways in which certain smartphone apps can wreak emotional and psychological havoc in the lives of others.

Tags: apps, cell phones, identity theft, impersonation, privacy.
Subscribe to this blog via RSS or Email.

(9) comments

Teens and Technology, School District Policy Issues, 2012-2013

Article posted by Sameer in September 7, 2012 at 9:34 am.

(16 votes, average: 4.25 out of 5)

Loading ...

With the beginning of the school year upon us again, I thought it might be valuable to review a very important topic. One of the most important steps a district can take to help protect their students and protect themselves from legal liability is to have a clear and comprehensive policy regarding bullying and harassment, technology, and their intersection: cyberbullying.

Almost every state requires districts to have a comprehensive policy in place, and generally involve one (or more) of the following elements:

1. requirement to add “cyberbullying” or “electronic bullying” to current anti-bullying policies;
2. provision of specific graduated consequences and remedial actions for cyberbullying;
3. provision to allow administrators to take reasonable action when off-campus actions have affected on-campus order;
4. requirement to develop new investigative, reporting and disciplinary procedures in cyberbullying cases;
5. Mandate that schools create and implement prevention programming (such as Internet safety, ethics, etiquette training and curricula).

In our award-winning book Bullying Beyond the Schoolyard, we fleshed out what we believe are the most important components of an effective school cyberbullying policy. This stemmed from our research into what schools were currently doing, and what was working, and what was not. Apart from the aforementioned elements, we believe that tying bullying/cyberbullying prevention/response to a more holistic initiative to improve school climate will be most promising. Let’s explain further the elements that should comprise these policies, so you can make sure your school has solid footing before you deal with any incidents this year.

First, it is important that the policy clearly defines the behaviors it seeks to proscribe. The more specific the policy is, the more likely it will withstand legal challenges. As William Shepherd, a Statewide Prosecutor in Florida’s Office of the Attorney General cautions, however, “The law or policy should be specific, but behavior changes over time, so you must have the ability to grow with the times.”

Also, we list below several forms of bullying that should be clearly delineated in your policy. Generally speaking, any communication that has been perceived by a student as unwanted, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, demeaning, belittling, defaming in nature, or is otherwise disruptive to a student’s ability to learn and a school’s ability to educate its students in a safe environment, or causes a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress or fear of bodily injury, should be subject to discipline.

Forms of Bullying

Bullying can occur by one individual or a group of individuals, can be direct or indirect, and can take the following forms:

A. “Physical bullying” – demonstrations of aggression by pushing, kicking, hitting, gesturing, or otherwise invading the physical space of another person in an unwelcome manner. It also includes the unwanted tampering with or destruction of another person’s property.

B. “Verbal bullying” – demonstrations of aggression through insults, teasing, cursing, threatening, or otherwise expressing unkind words toward another person.

C. “Relational bullying” – demonstrations of aggression through exclusion, rejection, and isolation to damage a person’s position and relationship within a social group.

D. “Cyberbullying” – the intentional and repeated harm of others through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices.

Cyberbullying can result in discipline whether it occurs on or off campus, irrespective of whether it involves an electronic device at school, at home, or at a third-party location, and if it results in a substantial disruption of the school learning environment as defined in this policy.

It is also important to remember that many districts already have policies in place that prohibit various forms of harassment, including harassment based on race or sex. Any behavior that constitutes sexual harassment, for example, should be handled under those provisions, irrespective of whether the behavior is also considered bullying or cyberbullying.

With regard to penalties, any student found to be participating in, contributing to, and/or encouraging acts of cyberbullying and/or harassment towards another student or staff member must be disciplined. Your policy must identify what specific actions will be taken. To determine the severity of the harassment or discrimination, the following may be considered: how the misconduct affected one or more student’s education; the type, frequency, and duration of the misconduct; the number of persons involved; the subject(s) of harassment or discrimination; the situation in which the incident occurred; and other related incidents at the school. Any cyberbullying that has been perceived as a criminal act, such as a threat to one’s personal or physical safety, will be subject to discipline and result in the notification of law enforcement.

Discipline can include a number of different actions. These can include:

• Parental contact
• Behavioral contracts
• Loss of privileges (either in-school or extracurricular)
• Conferences with students, parents, teachers, or administrative staff
• Interventions by school guidance personnel
• School service work or student work detail
• Removal of student from class
• Loss of bus privileges (parents are thus responsible for transportation)
• In-school alternative assignments or intervention programs
• Detentions (before, during, after school, or on Saturday)
• Restitution
• Restorative Justice
• Assignment to alternative program in lieu of suspension days
• Suspension – removal of student from school for up to 10 days
• Assignment to an alternative educational facility
• Expulsion – removal of student from school for remainder of year plus one additional year

We’ve discussed before that it is critical to link specific behaviors with specific disciplinary outcomes so that students know exactly what may happen if they are caught engaging in cyberbullying behaviors. Don’t be afraid to think creatively about alternative sanctions instead of relying on detention or suspension. For example, cyberbullies could be required (based on the grievance) to research and write an essay on the negative affects of cyberbullying. They could also be required to write a formal apology to the aggrieved party or parties. Disciplinary outcomes should be considered and carried out on a case-by-case basis.

We really think that you should be as specific as possible in your policy – make sure you cover harassment and cheating and disrupting the class environment by texting or Facebooking, and talk about threats and explicit pictures and pornography laws and police intervention. Clearly outline the consequences for prohibited behaviors. Get students and parents in on this discussion. Schools will have problems as the school community gets used to these changes, but hopefully the problems will be few and far between and will get better with time.

Students will learn appropriate behaviors and these should—in time—become the norm if a positive school climate is prioritized and established. For example, ten years ago, cell phones were much more of a problem in our college classrooms than they are now. University students, at least in our experience as professors, have gotten better at cell phone etiquette and are not letting the devices distract from learning. Sure, a phone occasionally will go off in class, but usually the student is apologetic and immediately acknowledges the faux pas. Of course middle and high school students are different from those in a university, but we are optimistic that we can work through the same challenges at the secondary school level.

After a policy is created or revised, the school community needs to be educated about it. Students should be informed about the circumstances under which their personal portable electronic devices can be confiscated and searched. They should also be reminded that anything they do on a school-owned device is subject to review and appropriate discipline. This should be explained to students and parents, possibly through assemblies, orientations, community meetings, and messaging strategies (voice mails, memorandums, etc.). Be intentional about conveying these messages, and don’t just assume they know your policy! As a student recently told us:

“I think it’s a good idea that all schools include in their handbook definitions of the types of bullying and sexting as well as the consequences and/ or disciplinary actions, but then perhaps kids should be quizzed on this every school year. Call me an airhead, but I never read the school’s student handbook until my family moved to Florida my junior year of high school. I remember I got in trouble the first day of school because I clearly did not read the dress code part of the student handbook. My old school handed out agendas and handbooks at the beginning of the school year, but no one ever read them. Those things would just get stuffed at the bottom of our lockers. If all schools enforced something as simple as reading the student handbook and made sure students understand what they’re reading, then I think they would be a step closer to educating kids that they can get help if they’re being bullied.
—Anonymous student from Florida

We’ll talk more about policy and school climate in our next blog, so look for that next week!

Tags: cell phones, policy, prevention, response, school, teens.
Subscribe to this blog via RSS or Email.

(2) comments

New Teen Sexting Study

Article posted by Justin W. Patchin in July 9, 2012 at 12:48 pm.

(11 votes, average: 4.91 out of 5)

Loading ...

There is a new study on teen sexting that has been published (online at least) in the journal Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine that is receiving tons of media attention. Most research that is published in academic journals is largely ignored by the media and the public, but for some reason this article has generated some interest. To be sure, articles and books that include the word “sex” in the title are likely to draw more attention. (See our new book, entitled “School Climate 2.0: Preventing Cyberbullying and SEXting One Classroom at a Time!”)

The headline that is most commonly pulled from this particular study seems to be that about 28% of the students who responded to the researcher’s survey said that they had “sent a naked picture of themselves through text or e-mail.” This figure is a lot higher than most previously published research. For example, in School Climate 2.0 we reviewed 5 previous studies and our own preliminary research on teen sexting (see also our brief Sexting Fact Sheet). Across these surveys, the percent of students who reported sending a “sext” ranged from 2.5% to 19%. Much of these differences in rates can likely be attributed to the different ways the studies were set up. The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy (2008) reported that 19% of teens had sent a “sexually suggestive picture or video.” Sexually suggestive is quite different than “naked.” Moreover, the National Campaign sample included teens who ranged in age from 13 to 19. By contrast, our sample, which found that 8% of teens had sent a “naked or semi-naked image” of themselves to others, included middle and high school students between the ages of 11 and 18. Consistent with intuition, our analysis also showed that older teens were more likely to participate in sexting and therefore by including 18 and 19 year-olds, as the National Campaign Study did, we would expect the numbers to be higher. A study sponsored by MTV and the Associated Press that recorded the second highest prevalence rate (10%) also included much older respondents (up to age 24) than the other studies.

The new study targeted 10th and 11th graders from 7 high schools in Texas and included students between the ages of 14 and 19. It is unclear from the article if students were randomly selected to participate, meaning the sample would be somewhat representative of all students in 10th and 11th grade from these schools, or if they were chosen deliberately or haphazardly. Knowing more about the broader characteristics of the population of students at the schools would help us in better interpreting the results.

Specifically, the Texas study found that 27.8% of the students had sent a sext. Digging more deeply into the results, we can see that more White/non-Hispanic youth reported that they had sent a sext than other racial groups, and like in our study, older students were involved at higher rates. Almost half (45%) of the 18 and 19 year old students had sent a sext, though this is a tenuous finding as there were only 31 students in the sample who were those ages.

The authors intentionally limited their inquiry to naked pictures and did not include semi-naked images or explicit text. This makes their high prevalence finding even more surprising. So why does this study differ so much from the other available research? Different methodologies between this and the other studies, as discussed above, is probably the most likely cause (different ways of sampling, asking questions, etc.). But it could also be that teens in Texas, or at least the 7 schools targeted in this study, are participating in sexting at a higher rate than the country as a whole. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Texas high school students are slightly more sexually active than the United States as a whole (37.7% compared to 34.2% had sexual intercourse in the previous 3 months), but this alone can’t explain the dramatic difference.

Clearly more research is necessary – at the local, state, and national level. Moreover, qualitative work can perhaps uncover in more detail why teens engage in sexting, and attempt to learn if they understand the potential consequences of the behavior. For example, Jessica Ringrose from the University of London and her colleagues recently released a report that presents the perspectives of 35 students based on an in-depth investigation that included focus groups, individual interviews, and consultations with teachers and other school staff. I was introduced to Jessica’s work when I met her last fall when we both participated in a conference at the University of London. The report describes, among other things, that teens are often pressured, subtly or overtly, into participating in sexting: “Much of young people’s talk, therefore, reflects an experience that is pressurized yet voluntary – they choose to participate but they cannot choose to say ‘no’.” The desire to fit in and be well-liked within one’s peer group results in some teens doing things that they know they shouldn’t. With this in mind, some of the variation in reporting across studies might be explained by teens under-reporting behaviors they know are wrong, or in other cases even over-reporting behaviors they think are social acceptable (see my recent blog on social norming and peer influences here).

In short, we need to continue to work to better understand why teens sext as well as evaluate efforts to prevent them from doing it in the first place. Scaring them with the threat of formal prosecution and severe criminal sanctions undoubtedly will not stop all youth from experimenting with these behaviors (just like it doesn’t stop them from using drugs or participating in other delinquent behaviors – see the work of Raymond Paternoster, and others). Instead, we all need to work to create family, school, and community cultures where sexting, cyberbullying, and other inappropriate behaviors online and off are not tolerated and simply “not what we do.” Behaviors are influenced to a much greater extent by positive relationships (that is, we behave in accordance with the people we care about), and to the extent we develop valued connections in various domains, we will have the power to shape teen behaviors for the better.

Tags: cell phones, prevention, research, response, sexting.
Subscribe to this blog via RSS or Email.

One comment

School Climate 2.0: Preventing Cyberbullying and Sexting One Classroom at a Time

Article posted by Justin W. Patchin in April 26, 2012 at 3:34 pm.

(16 votes, average: 4.69 out of 5)

Loading ...

We’ve been discussing the importance of school climate as it relates to bullying and cyberbullying quite a bit on this blog (see here and here for examples). Well, we just published a whole book on the topic! School Climate 2.0: Preventing Cyberbullying and Sexting is now in print and available from the publisher, on Amazon, or many other online bookstores. This is the first book on the topic of cyberbullying and sexting that focuses primarily on what can be done to prevent the behaviors from happening in the first place. We argue that “educators who establish a nurturing and caring classroom and school climate will make great strides in preventing a whole host of problematic behaviors, both at school and online.” The book provides concrete examples of how to do just that.

Here is an excerpt from the Preface:

This book seeks to explain and promote the importance of school climate in preventing teen technology misuse. Most of books and articles in print today simply describe the nature of cyberbullying or sexting (e.g., what it looks like, how much of it is occurring, and among whom). While this is an important first step, we seek to meaningfully build on the knowledge base and more explicitly connect the high-tech behaviors of teens to the school environment.

Much of what you will read is based on information we have learned through our decade-long exploration of the ways teens are using and misusing technology. We have completed seven formal independent studies involving over 12,000 students from over 80 middle and high schools from different regions of the United States. To guide the discussion, this book specifically features information from our most recent study, a random sample of over 4,400 middle and high school students (11 to 18 years old) from one of the largest school districts in the United States. Surveys were administered to students in 2010, and the information gathered represents some of the most recent and comprehensive data on these topics. We will also refer to the work of many others who have labored to better understand how adolescents use, misuse, and abuse these technologies.

In addition to the quantitative data collected, we have also informally spoken to thousands of teens, parents, educators, law enforcement officers, and countless other adults who work directly with youth. Our observations are essentially a reflection of their experiences. During these interactions, we have been fortunate to learn from those on the front lines about what they are dealing with, what is working, and what problems they are running into. The stories we hear are largely consistent with the data we and others have collected that will be presented throughout this text. We also receive numerous emails and phone calls on a weekly basis from educators, mental health professionals, parents, and other youth-serving adults looking for help with specific issues. These conversations help us to understand and consider the problem from a variety of angles and perspectives. All of the stories included in this book are real. In some cases the language has been modified slightly to fix spelling and grammar mistakes and improve readability, but the overall messages have not been changed.

In Chapter 1 we begin the discussion by focusing on the intersection of teens and technology and how the inseparability of adolescents from their high-tech devices affects, and is influenced by, what is going on at school. In Chapter 2, we outline the characteristics of a positive school climate along with some of the beneficial outcomes associated with such an environment.

In Chapter 3 we detail the nature of bullying in the 21st century. In many ways the bullying of today is very similar to the way it was when we were growing up. But technology has enabled would-be bullies to extend their reach, resulting in many significant challenges for educators, parents, and others who are working to resolve relationship problems. Cyberbullying, which we define as willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices, typically refers to incidents in which students threaten, humiliate, or otherwise hassle their peers through malicious text messages, web pages, or postings on Facebook or YouTube. It is clear that peer harassment that occurs on school grounds is a significant threat to a positive school climate. That said, online bullying also disrupts the ability of students to feel safe and secure at school. The vast majority of the time, targets of cyberbullying know the person doing the bullying (85 percent of the time in our research), and most of the time the bully is someone from their school. If students regularly post hurtful, embarrassing, or threatening messages to a fellow classmate’s Facebook page, for example, it unquestionably affects that student’s ability to feel comfortable, free, and safe to focus on learning at school.

Chapter 4 describes sexting, which we define as the sending or receiving of sexually explicit or sexually suggestive nude or seminude images or video that generally occurs via cell phone (although it can also occur via the Web). Some have described this problem in dismissive ways, calling it this generation’s way of “flirting” or characterizing it as a safer way to experiment sexually and come to terms with one’s own sexuality. While this may be true in part, engaging in sexting can lead to some significant social and legal consequences. We begin to tie everything together in Chapter 5, where we explicitly link school climate to online misbehaviors. Here again we argue that schools with better climates will see fewer cyberbullying, sexting, or other online problems among students. Ancillary benefits for educators who harness the power of a positive climate at school may include better attendance, higher school achievement, and more cooperative attitudes across the student body and among staff. A school with a positive climate is definitely more enjoyable to work and learn in, and can therefore lead to many other beneficial outcomes for students and staff alike. The remaining chapters of the book focus on providing you with strategies to establish and maintain a positive climate (Chapter 6) through peer mentoring and social norming (Chapter 7), assessment (Chapter 8), and appropriate response strategies (Chapter 9).

You can learn more about the book, including a full table of contents and reviews from folks who have read it, on our companion website, www.schoolclimate20.com. You can also like us on Facebook, and follow us on twitter. Let us know what you think!

Tags: cell phones, climate, cyberbullying, cyberbullying research, education, policy, prevention, sexting.
Subscribe to this blog via RSS or Email.

One comment

Why Confiscating Student Cell Phones Might Be a Bad Idea

Article posted by Sameer in September 7, 2011 at 11:30 am.

(31 votes, average: 3.58 out of 5)

Loading ...

We’ve talked in great detail about students bringing their personal electronic devices at school and the complications that may result. We have also covered standards for searching these devices, and have provided a cell phone search checklist which may help administrators in these situations. In keeping with these discussions, I wanted to take some time to focus in on seizure – or confiscation – of these devices while bracketing the thorny subject of search for a while. Specifically, I want to be clear and state that even with a suspected or actual policy violation by a student, it may not be in your school’s best interests to seize that student’s device.

I recently chatted this out with Mark Trachtenbroit, Assistant Principal at Wheeler High School in Georgia. He remarked that his school used to take students’ personal devices when they were displayed or used between the morning bell and the afternoon bell because that contravened the formal rules their school had in place. However, it became a huge chore, leading to many of the complications I wrote about last week and the huge hassle of trying to warehouse, label, and manage all of the confiscated devices (and deal with angry parents who demanded their kid’s device be returned).

As such, the school decided that they would no longer confiscate phones, but just apply moderate penalties to students who broke the rules. For instance, the first violation would be a stern verbal warning. The second violation would lead to Saturday school. The third violation would lead to In-School Suspension. This tended to work in that it reduced the number of negative outcomes but seemed to be a less-than-ideal solution. Administrators felt they were, as they say, cutting off their nose to spite their face because punishing teens in this way kept them out of the classroom where they would be learning. This directly ties into the No Child Left Behind Act and the Adequate Yearly Progress measurement that allows our US Department of Education to determine how each school and school district is doing when it comes to properly educating our students (to do well academically on standardized tests) and meeting annual targets for reading, math, and graduation. The consequences for failing to meet these goals and targets are simply not worth risking, and it just doesn’t make sense to sternly discipline kids in the 21st Century from being kids in the 21st century. That is, the big-picture costs of punishing teens for being tethered to their technology is not worth potentially compromising the achievement of federally-mandated requirements.

This is an extremely important point, and one that many people do not seem to understand.

Perhaps the bottom line is that you cannot keep or deter all students from using their phones at school. It is going to happen. You can therefore decide to be prohibitive or permissive. You can officially ban them from campuses, or allow them during certain times (or all times).

Whatever you do, though, you will have to figure out a way to get students, educators, and parents on board, and probably approach it in a way that represents the climate you are trying to build and maintain. This climate should be all about encouraging the positive and responsible use of technology, and dissuading its misuse and abuse. We’ll be giving you specific advice to make this happen in weeks ahead.

Tags: cell phones, private school, public school, response, teens.
Subscribe to this blog via RSS or Email.

(10) comments