printer friendly >
Sticky Issues
Sticky Issues Archive >
Contribute
In this section, principals tell how they handled a challenging situation, how some policy that was in place actually worked, and the lessons learned from dealing with these Sticky Issues. Send your stories to principal@osu.edu. Please indicate if we may use your name in the “contributor” credits.
Anti-Authority Cyber Expression
by Kathy Cameron
Principals and teachers can be victims of cyber-bullying, too
Anti-authority cyber expression could be considered a close relative of cyber-bullying. Like cyber-bullying, anti-authority cyber expression involves the use of technology, such as cell phones and the Internet, to demean, threaten, belittle, or otherwise spread negative comments about a person. Unlike cyber-bullying, anti-authority cyber expression does not occur between or among peers. Anti-authority cyber expression occurs when someone uses technology to make comments against someone in authority, such as students engaging in these types of activities against teachers or school administrators. These comments might criticize the teacher’s manner of dress, appearance, hygiene, teaching styles, sexual preferences, or personality or insinuate that a teacher is involved in sexual activities with a student. This activity can have a devastating psychological effect on the teacher and can ruin the teacher’s reputation and cause embarrassment to the teacher, school, and students involved.
The fact that students are not always happy with those in authority at school is not a new phenomenon. In the past, however, students vented by passing notes, writing in a diary meant for their own eyes, gossiping, or perhaps by writing on a bathroom stall wall. Now, comments are posted on the Internet, in places publicly accessible by virtually anyone. This type of behavior has always been a complex issue, but technology has brought the issues into new spaces and into new situations. A quick look at ratemyteacher.com revealed cruel comments written about teachers that have nothing to do with the teacher’s ability to convey knowledge.
As with cyber-bullying, distinguishing how to handle the students’ right to freedom of expression in the face of anti-authority cyber expression is extremely complex. Because targeting teachers through this medium is a new phenomenon, clear procedures do not yet exist. In the midst of many sexual scandals involving teachers, sexual comments made online about teachers could result in ruining the teacher’s reputation and possibly ending his or her career because such accusations must be investigated and the media are generally quick to publicize such accusations. As with cyber-bullying, students do not always understand the ramifications of the comments they make publicly. According to Shaheen Shariff, author of Cyber-Bullying: Issues and Solutions for the School, the Classroom, and the Home, students often fail to consider the reality that the conversations they have on social networking sites can be accessed by teachers:
As more teens join Facebook, this social networking website has run into problems relating to high school and middle school students posting anti-authority cyber expression about teachers and school officials. What is surprising is that many of the kids who post the online comments argue that their conversations should not be accessed by adults (even if those adults are on Facebook and can see their postings through other people’s profiles). This fuels the debate about private and public spaces and the argument by students that they are not “wilfully (sic) bullying” their teachers but simply having conversations among themselves that are not meant for their teachers’ or school officials’ eyes. They argue that they do not intend to harass, threaten, and generally bully their teachers and that they have every right to a free conversation. (Shariff, 2008, p. 37)
Shariff shared that social networking sites are both public and private to a limited extent. The public and private nature of the sites opens up important debates about whether anyone actually has the authority and/or responsibility to intervene in cyberspace and to monitor the social communications of young people. With regard to education, the important question is When does anti-authority cyber expression reach the point where it affects the education of the students? Most teachers realize that they will not be liked by all students. When is the line crossed so that what is posted moves beyond freedom of expression to become cyber-libel? When is the education process negatively affected by these comments?
Defining boundaries in cyberspace
Conversations must occur about the sharing of space between adults and young people. In physical spaces, such as the classroom, once a teacher is present, there is generally an understanding of proper etiquette that is observed. Students understand that the teacher’s desk is the teacher’s space and that they should obtain the teacher’s permission before going into the desk drawer, for example. Generally speaking, in physical spaces, there is an understanding of the proper way for interaction to occur between adults and students. When the principal comes to the microphone at an assembly, the students should be quiet and listen. In cyberspace, however, there is no physical boundary, so students may perceive areas as places where they are “in charge” when they are actually in a public space. Do students realize that the Internet is a social and informational resource for all ages? How do students think teachers and other persons in authority use the Internet?
Students may not be aware that school officials might read the comments they are posting online. Shariff said about students that:
They insist that these comments were not meant to be read by school officials— and that these were simply private conversations between friends. In that context, students do not consider their actions to be cyber-bullying because the teachers are not the direct targets of harassment. Unlike peer-to-peer cyber-bullying, where websites are intentionally set up for the purpose of drawing the victim’s attention to his or her flaws, the expressions posted about teachers are not directed to them—and therefore any harm done is unintentional. (Shariff, 2008, p. 195)
Plenty of students talk about their teachers in a negative light. For example, students could be in the hallway venting about how much they dislike a teacher. In the quote from Shariff, it appears as though the teacher walked into the room while being talked about, but the “room” is actually cyberspace. The difference is that the situation of students who are caught talking about a teacher in the hallway involves a handful of people. When comments are posted online, their impact spreads to an infinite number of people, including people who may judge the teacher based solely on what they read online.
People work too hard to earn a reputation, and losing it because of a frivolous joke online cannot be easy. In many cases, the psychological impact has caused teachers to have nervous breakdowns or go on stress leave. This might explain the immense pressure on local and national teachers’ unions to do something to stop it. (Shariff, 2008, p. 198)
Conflict resolution skills are needed
See the Toolbox for Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management programs for Ohio schools.Why does anti-authority cyber expression occur? Sometimes, students engage in anti-authority cyber-expression because they are unhappy about a grade they receive, are unhappy at home, are mad at a friend, or are perceiving unfair treatment. According to Shariff, students have made it clear that there might be less bullying if they were in a school environment where the adults were kinder to them, where they could be kinder to others, and where they were happy (Shariff, 2008, p. 83). Being unhappy, however, is no justification for ruining the reputation of another person. Students and school officials alike must hone skills of healthy conflict resolution, rather than resorting to behaviors that are cruel and offer little chance for improving the situation. There must be a mutual respect between the school officials and the students for conflict resolution skills to be effective. Shariff commented on the importance of this reciprocal respect:
I have mentioned earlier that if students are not receiving reciprocal respect from teachers, if they sense that their teachers are not engaged in promoting their well-being and education, if they are tacitly condoning peer-to-peer bullying by turning a blind eye, then all of these might in effect contribute to the anti-authority forms of expression that emerge online. Because most students are not well equipped to raise formal protests regarding a lack of attention to their overall education, the anti-authority forms of cyber-bullying could, in fact, represent expressions of the lack of attention to students’ social development. (Shariff, 2008, p. 207)
There is a possibility that students who post comments online are really trying to draw attention to themselves, not to the teacher who appears to be the target. Sometimes, students seek attention from their peers by trying to prove that they are sillier or crazier than everyone else. Students who are actually trying to attract attention of adults may be more likely to try to show that they are productive and focus on using online tools in intelligent ways (Shariff, 2008, p. 201).
The issue of mutual respect between students and school officials may be complicated by a perceived loss of power by school authorities as students’ knowledge of technology continues to increase. Shariff stated that teachers’ lack of knowledge about and comfort with using technology in turn contributes to “a sense of disempowerment, and, for teachers who value their status and authority over that of students, it becomes a crisis” (Shariff, 2008, p. 126). School officials can feel as though their power is under threat. School officials worry about technology because it is so difficult to control. They may worry about students having too much power—so much that the power of teachers can be reduced, as students become more difficult to supervise and control.
Technology can be used to reduce cyber abuse
As with cyber-bullying, anti-authority cyber expression is new, and the advances in technology are moving so rapidly that it is difficult for schools to put policies into place quickly enough to address the issues that arise. Schools may be tempted to attempt to simply ban technology or to impose limitations and restrictions to try to eliminate the problems that occur. Banning technology is really not possible. A better approach is to work with students to teach them responsible ways to use the technological tools at their disposal and how not to abuse the power that knowledge and technology make possible. There are several things that teachers can do to gain confidence with technology and lessen the gap between their familiarity with technology and that of their students:
- Teachers must become comfortable and confident with technology and use it as a regular part of their teaching.
- Teachers should become familiar with the ways their students currently communicate in cyberspace so they will no longer feel excluded and so young people will begin to perceive cyberspace as more of a shared place where adults and young people interact in a shared space.
- Teachers should become educated in the ways technology can be useful in their field, seeking out current Internet resources, software, and peripheral devices and accessories, such as GPS devices in geography and synthesizers in music. When students perceive their teachers to be technologically incompetent, they may be more likely to take advantage of that situation by engaging in anti-authority cyber expression.
- Should anti-authority cyber expression occur between a student and a teacher, teachers should do their best to function as educators, engaging in dialogue with students about why the statements were hurtful, even if the comments do hit the teacher close to home. When students can understand how their comments hurt another person, they may be less likely to engage in the behavior again.
“It is not socially acceptable to threaten or harass those who are charged with educating our young people” (Shariff, 2008, p. 213). That statement may seem obvious, but, as evidenced by instances of anti-authority cyber expression, some people have found this behavior to be acceptable. In one instance, some students found a teacher’s cell phone. They looked on the phone and found the phone number of her fiancé and texted him, pretended to be the woman confessing to an affair. Within minutes, her fiancé called to break off their engagement (http://www.thestar.com/News/article/235885). Another example of anti-authority cyber expression involved students taking a photo of a teacher and editing it to put the teacher’s head on another naked body or body of an animal (Shariff, 2008, p. 59). As mentioned previously, ratemyteacher.com is a website with many inappropriate comments about teachers.
Sometimes, students are not really interested in hurting the teacher, but are more interested in drawing attention to themselves with their clever editing. Educators must think of ways to help students draw positive attention to themselves and to understand when pranks become abuse. There are boundaries that simply should not be crossed. Students must understand that what they may perceive to be a funny antic has ramifications beyond what they realize. School officials must be prepared to handle such situations with a solid knowledge of legal literacy, ethics, and social responsibility.
Anti-authority cyber expression is a new phenomenon that has the potential to cause serious disruptions in the education of our young people. When untrue scandalous comments are posted about teachers, teachers can lose their reputation, schools can face investigations and negative press, and students be embarrassed by the escalation of their lie. When mean comments are posted, whether “true” or not, the atmosphere in the school can change, as students become caught up in these hateful communicative acts that are rarely relevant to the teacher’s ability to teach. Teachers can become worried that they will be the next target. Fear, secrecy, and slander do not make for a positive educational environment. Instead, educators, administrators, students, and parents must understand the importance of mutual respect and create a healthy environment for voicing concerns and dissatisfaction. Good conflict resolution skills will take students much further in their quest to grow into productive and successful adults than anti-authority cyber expression ever will.
Reference: Shariff, Shaheen. (2008). Cyber-Bullying: Issues and solutions for the school, the classroom, and the home. New York: Routledge.
Kathy Cameron, former graduate assistant for The Ohio State University P-12 Project, is a candidate for the DMA in flute performance from Ohio State. She is currently on the music faculty at Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania.
