District Cybersafety Program John Woodring


Published on

This was part of a project for a Conflict Resolutions class I recently took. It is a comprehensive plan for school districts and schools to plan for educating students on cybersafety and handling any incidents. Here is the paper that goes with this presentation: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nuohirfzwgbkszt/School_District_Cybersafety_Plan_John_Woodring.pdf

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Currentlycybersafety education methods are uncoordinated which leaves schools and school districts exposed to fall out because of incidents involving technology. This proposed plan based on research and personal experience will help standardize cybersafety education so students will understand the dangers misusing technology can bring. The ribbon is the symbol of cyberbullying based on cyberbully victim Megan Meir’s fondness of painting her fingernails black with white polka dots.
  • This slide shows the percentage of students who use the Internet and have a personal means of Internet access. Also, this shows how mobile devices are used to commit cybersafety violations.
  • This shows incidents at school play a part in starting cybersafety incidents.
  • Students do not understand what they post on the Internet stays on the Internet. Posts made during their youth could be found and used against them when a students wants to attend a competitive college or seeking a position in a desired career field.
  • CIPA clearly states the requirement for cybersafety education.
  • While there have been few if any cases involving schools and school districts involvement in litigation over cybersafety incidents it is only a matter of time before a plaintiff party attempts to hold schools and school districts liable for a lack of cybersafety education as a cause of an incident.
  • Students frequently use electronic devices but do not have any concept of how cyberbullying and sexting can harm them when using these devices.
  • Schools should be encouraged to discuss the threats of identity theft and computer viruses and malware with students. However, cyberbullying and sexting potentially have a greater impact on the instructional process and the personal safety and security of students. Identity theft along with virus and malware threats should be taught but these subjects can be inserted into other subjects such as technology classes.
  • There are other issues regarding cybersafety such as identity theft or viruses and malware. However, cyberbullying and sexting have the potential of causing the most disruption of the educational process.
  • The key information to take away from this slide is the average shown.
  • The key information is the average of students who admit to being cyberbullies.
  • These numbers might not seem significant, especially the female numbers but there is greater chance of serious harm coming to these students.
  • This slide shows the need for students to be reminded of cybersafety issues each year. Especially in the high school years.
  • This slide shows the potential harm to victims of cyberbullying.
  • This slide shows the potential harm to victims of cyberbullying.
  • This shows the harm that could come to cyberbullies.
  • Students have a way of quickly finding ways to misuse new technologies before adults may be aware of them. This is why there should be ongoing research about new technology trends.
  • Data from these surveys can direct districts and schools on where to focus cybersafety education efforts.
  • Many programs are targeted more to adults so great care needs to be taken when evaluating such programs. Cybersafety issues can differ from school to school which is why ongoing research is needed to target areas of instructional needs. Students should be consulted for them to buy-in to cybersafety programs and determine potential effectiveness.
  • Many programs are targeted more to adults so great care needs to be taken when evaluating such programs. Cybersafety issues can differ from school to school which is why ongoing research is needed to target areas of instructional needs. Students should be consulted for them to buy-in to cybersafety programs and determine potential effectiveness.
  • Training required administrators, guidance counselors, and teachers is key to a successful cybersafety program.
  • Constant changes in technology and cybersafety issues require someone to manage a cybersafety program but it should not require an FTE. Some of these duties may be done by different people but should be consolidated into one position to maintain continuity in the program.
  • The candidate for DCC should be someone who is comfortable talking with the press. This PR duty is crucial to showing the public the school district takes the issue of cybersafety seriously.
  • The key point is cybersafety instruction should take place in classes all students must take to achieve maximum coverage. While technology courses might seem a logical place for cybersafety instruction not all students take these courses every year.
  • Because cyberbullying and sexting cause unique problems that differ from normal school discipline issues, greater care needs to be taken in dealing with cybersafety issues. An example would be when a female student’s explicit pictures are spread around campus she would feel a shame and guilt that may make her more suicidal. A counselor needs to understand this unique situation and be able to treat it while an administrator would work with the parents to encourage support for the student.
  • Victims ofcybersafety violations may not be easy to spot so teachers need to understand what to look for in students and how to report violations quickly to minimize damage.
  • Communication with parents is key in any safety programs. However, many parents may not know what to look for or believe misinformation that focuses attention elsewhere.
  • Districts should offer classes to parents to educate them more on what can be done at home to safeguard children against cybersafety threats.
  • District Cybersafety Program John Woodring

    1. 1. Comprehensive District Cybersafety Program John Woodring Liberty University
    2. 2. Comprehensive District Cybersafety Program NEED FOR A CYBERSAFETY PROGRAM
    3. 3. According to Research • 90% of youth aged 12-17 are online on a daily basis (Snakenborg, Van Acker, & Gable, 2011). • 23% of teens age 12-17 own a smartphone. • 31% of teens age 14-17 own a smartphone. • 8% of teens age 12-13 own a smartphone. • 77% of teens age 12-17 own a cell phone (Lenhart, 2012). • 23% of teens own a tablet computer (Rainie, 2012). • Cyberbullying is most often done through mobile phones (Toshack & Colmar, 2012).
    4. 4. While most cyberbullying incidents take place outside of school, incidents often originate in school (Paul, Smith, & Blumberg, 2010).
    5. 5. College admissions staff and human resource departments are asking for access to personal web pages (or searching for them) to view what the applicant has posted (Dowell, Burgess, & Cavanaugh, 2009).
    6. 6. Children’s Internet Protection Act of 2012 (CIPA) “Schools may not receive E-rate discounts unless they certify they provide an educational program for students about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms, and Cyberbullying awareness and response” (Federal Communications Commission, 2013).
    7. 7. (Stauffer, Heath, Coyne, & Ferrin, 2012) (Stauffer, Heath, Coyne, & Ferrin, 2012) School Districts and Schools may be held legally accountable for failing to respond to cybersafety violations if any harm is caused by these violations.
    8. 8. Students need to be taught cyberbullying safety strategies explicitly if they are going to protect themselves when using electronic devices (Toshack & Colmar, 2012).
    9. 9. Comprehensive District Cybersafety Program UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM
    10. 10. While there are other cybersafety threats such as identity theft and computer viruses and malware, cyberbullying and sexting pose the greatest threat to disrupting the educational process.
    11. 11. Definitions • Cyberbullying • Using computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices to commit willful and repeated harm to others (Hinduja & Patchin, 2011).
    12. 12. Definitions • Sexting • Sending or receiving of sexually explicit or sexually-suggestive images or video via a cell phone or other electronic device. • This could mean students taking and distributing nude or seminude photos of themselves. • While photos are meant for a boyfriend or girlfriend, they can be sent to unintended people. (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010)
    13. 13. (Hinduja & Patchin, 2011) Scope of the Problem: Cyberbully Victims
    14. 14. (Hinduja & Patchin, 2011) Scope of the Problem: Cyberbully Offenders
    15. 15. (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010)
    16. 16. (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010)
    17. 17. Potential Harm: Cyberbullying • Victims often have a variety of mental issues such as: • Depressed • Sad • Angry • Frustrated • Some victims have suicidal thoughts, attempted suicide, or committed suicide. (Hinduja & Patchin, 2011)
    18. 18. Potential Harm: Cyberbullying • Show signs of physical illnesses. • Low self-esteem • Embarrassed or afraid to go to school. • Family and academic problems. • School violence or delinquent behavior. (Hinduja & Patchin, 2011)
    19. 19. Potential Harm: Cyberbullying • Cyberbullying has an anonymity factor that leads to less social accountability (Sbarbaro & Enyear Smith, 2011). • Cyberbullies develop a lack of empathy (Hinduja & Patchin, 2011). • Those who engage in cyberbullying often become targets of traditional bullying or cyberbullying (Accordino & Accordino, 2011).
    20. 20. Potential Harm: Sexting • Shame • Cyberbullied • Harassed and bullied at school. • Called derogatory names. • Unwanted attention making someone feel uncomfortable. • Mental, physical, and emotional problems. • Up to and including suicide. • Belief no one cares. (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010)
    21. 21. Comprehensive District Cybersafety Program DISTRICT LEVEL
    22. 22. Challenges to a Cybersafety Program • Anonymous nature of Cyberbullying. • Wider audience. • Lack of supervision online. • Easy and continuous access to technology. • Rapid changes in technology. (Pearce, Cross, Monks, Waters, & Falconer, 2011)
    23. 23. Cybersafety Student Survey • The district and individual schools should know what kind of cybersafety problem they have and how big it is. • This information should guide district and school administrators on an appropriate response and they type of cybersafety education program needed. • One instrument to use is the Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey developed by Hinduja & Patchin (2009) (Sbarbaro & Enyear Smith, 2011).
    24. 24. Select Appropriate Programs • Programs should provide uniformity of instruction but allow flexibility to address unique school needs. • Program should be appropriate and engaging for • Elementary • Middle School • High School (Ahlfors, 2010)
    25. 25. Select Appropriate Programs • Programs such as the European CyberTraining programcan train adults on how to run a cybersafety program (Jager, Amado, Matos, & Pessoa, 2010). • Students should be consulted when selecting a cybersafety program (Toshack & Colmar, 2012).
    26. 26. Budgeting for Programs • Ensure proper training and professional development. • Provide needed materials to schools.
    27. 27. District Cybersafety Coordinator • Additional duty assigned by the district superintendent. • Coordinates school cybersafety programs. • Researches latest trends in cybersafety. • Trains school Cybersafety Coordinators. • Helps set consequences and guidelines for cybersafety violations. • Ensures the district is compliant with E-rate cybersafety requirements.
    28. 28. District Cybersafety Coordinator (continuted) • Speaks at parent and community functions but cybersafety and district cybersafety initiatives. • Works with law enforcement on cybersafety issues when necessary. • Readily available to the media to address cybersafety issues in cooperation with district public relations.
    29. 29. Comprehensive District Cybersafety Program SCHOOL LEVEL
    30. 30. Implementation • Cybersafety units must be taught in courses all students are required to take. • Elementary (Proposed) • Technology classes or Homeroom periods. • Middle School (Proposed) • Health Classes • English Language Arts assign an informative research and writing assignment on a cybersafety topic. • High School (Proposed) • English classes have an informative research and writing assignment on a cybersafety topic.
    31. 31. School Cybersafety Response Team • Research does not show what happens after cybersafety incidents are reported to administrators (Stauffer, et al.). • School administrator designated as School Cybersafety Coordinator. • Selected Guidance Counselor • Receives special training in handling cybersafety issues involving: • Victims • Offenders • Parents
    32. 32. Staff Development • Research shows students are not willing to report cybersafety incidents to teachers (Accordino & Accordino, 2011). • Teachers need to understand the impact of cybersafety violations on their students (Stauffer, et. al., 2012). • Understand the process of reporting cybersafety violations to the school’s Cybersafety Response Team.
    33. 33. Annual Presentation to Parents and Community • Schools must make efforts to inform and work with parents about the dangers of cyberbullying and sexting (Accodino & Accordino, 2011). • Explain cybersafety issues • Present information from cybersafety surveys. • Explain school cybersafety initiatives. • Explain what parents and community members can do to promote cybersafety.
    34. 34. Parent-School Cooperation • Parents often feel they are not able to effectively respond to online dangers because they did not grow-up in that environment (Hannah, 2010). • Parents should be encouraged to follow cybersafety recommendations provided by the school. • Encourage parents to educate themselves about technology tools and their uses. • Offer classes if there is enough interest. • Provide support and guidance to their children when using technology.
    35. 35. References Accordino, D. B., & Accordino, M. P. (2011). An exploratory study of face-to-face and cyberbullying in sixth grade students. American Secondary Education, 40(1), 14-30. Retrieved August 22, 2013. Ahlfors, R. (2010). Many sources, one theme: Analysis of cyberbullying prevention and intervention websites. Journal of Social Sciences, 6 (4), 513-520. Dowell, E.B., Burgess, A.W., & Cavanaugh, D.J. (2009). Clustering of internet risk behaviors in a middle school population. Journal of School Health, 79 (11), 547-553. Federal Communications Commission. (2013). Consumer guide: Children's Internet Protection Act (United States, Federal Communications Commission, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau). Washington: Federal Communications Commission.
    36. 36. References Hannah, M. (2010). Cyberbullying education for parents: A guide for clinicians. Journal of Social Sciences, 6 (4), 530-534). Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2009). Cyberbullying and online agression survey instrument 2009 version. Cyberbullying Research Center. Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J.W. (2011). Cyberbullying identification, prevention, and response. Cyberbullying Research Center, 1-5. Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J.W. (2010). Sexting: A brief guide for educators and parents. Cyberbullying Research Center, 1-4. Jager, T., Amado, J., Matos, A., & Pessoa, T. (2010). Analysis of experts’ and trainers’ views on cyberbullying. Australian Journal of Guidance & Counseling, 20 (2), 169-181. Lenhart, A. (2012). Teens, Smartphones & Texting. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved February 16, 2013.
    37. 37. References Paul, S., Smith, P. K., & Blumberg, H. H. (2010). Addressing cyberbullying in school using the Quality Circle approach. Australia Journal of Guidance & Counseling, 20 (2), 157-168. DOI: 10.1375/ajgc.20.2.157 Pearce, N., Cross, D., Monks, H., Waters, S., & Falconer, S. (2011). Current evidence of best practice in whole-school bullying intervention and its potential to inform cyberbullying interventions. Austrailian Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 21 (1), 1-21. DOI:10.1375/ajgc.21.1.1 Rainie, L. (2012). Tablet and E-book reader Ownership Nearly Double Over the Holiday Gift-Giving Period. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved February 16, 2013. Sbarbaro, V. & Enyart Smith T. M. (2011). An exploratory study of bullying and cyberbullying behaviors among economically/educationally disadvantaged middle school students. American Journal of Health Studies, 26 (3), 139151.
    38. 38. References Snakenborg, J., Van Acker, R., & Gable, R. A. (2011). Cyberbullying: Prevention and intervention to protect our children and youth. Preventing School Failure, 55 (2), 88-95. DOI: 10.1080/1045988X.2011.539454 Stauffer, S., Heath, M.A. Coyne, S. M., & Ferrin, S. (2012). High school teachers’ perceptions of cyberbullying prevention andintervention strategies. Psychology in the Schools, 49 (4), 353-367. DOI: 10:1002/pits.21603 Toshack, T., & Colmar, S. (2012). A cyberbullying intervention with primary-aged students. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 22 (2), 268-278. DOI: 10.1017/jgc.2012.31 Woodring, J. (2008, June 25). [Cyberbullying Ribbon]. Retrieved October 12, 2013.