Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Student off Campus Social Media Use Effecting the School Day
Nicole Darby
Abstract
This policy analysis reviews a school district’s role in handling the issue of bullying through
social media and protecting the rights to freedom of speech for students. Review of past
litigation and Supreme Court rulings were referenced. Key factors in determining the major
players in creating a change in policy were identified by researching activist groups focused on
protecting the First Amendment Rights. Three solutions have been provided to solve the
problem statement of defining how schools should handle students off campus conduct
disrupting the normal school day. The solutions include an education program, outside agency
Introduction
Student discipline regarding freedom of speech has become a topic of discussion with
implications both locally and nationally. More recently, a national student walkout occurred
across school district campuses for students to protest against school violence. Other avenues for
students to convey their feelings on different forms of social media are being created every day.
Students can document their experiences on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and other blogging
sites. They can also use social media to bully other students or administrators through cyber
bullying.
Problem Statement
What is the responsibility of the school district to discipline a student who breaks a code
of ethics using social media or participates in cyberbullying? Also what are the implications for
discipline if not occurring on school grounds? Recent court decisions, such as Layshock v.
Hermitage School District have made schools rethink how they are handling these types of
situations. More pressure has been placed on schools to discipline bullying and social media
attacks between students and school educators. Students that have free speech misconduct off
campus and it disrupts the school day put schools in a predicament. Requiring school districts’
to discipline could potentially cross the line of freedom of speech and diminish their students’
Constitutional rights.
One of the areas drawing the most attention is when a student makes a threat to the safety
of a school, whether it be against another student, teacher, or administration team via social
media. The school has the responsibility to determine whether or not the threats are for school
wide acts of violence. Districts currently do not have a guide book for these types of situations
and must carry out investigations on a case by case occurrence. Supreme Court cases have ruled
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 4
on the threats based on if true danger was eminent when the school took action. One case, Burge
v. Colton School District (2011), ruled in favor of the student because his threat was perceived to
have been an empty threat with no indication of follow through (Keierleber, 2015). Therefore
schools need to be prepared with a policy for instructions on how to proceed with discipline on
students making social media threats while also not violating their democratic right to freedom of
speech.
More attention has been drawn to cyber bullying in recent years with the increased use of
technology. However, the severity of the issue depends on who is involved in the activities. For
example, student on student bullying is more often upheld by the courts as a responsibility of the
school district. Administrators have to determine when to step in and take action to protect
students against any type of bulling that may inflict harm on to other students.
When it comes to situations where a student uses social media to express opinions on a
teacher, the schools ability to discipline can often be questioned. The Supreme Court typically
does not rule in favor of the school if a threat of danger is not eminent. In this case, schools have
to proceed with caution and should consult their attorney’s before taking any form of action
against their students. The Layshock v. Hermitage School District case is a current example of
ruling in favor of the student. This case involved a building principal, a high school student, and
social media. Unauthorized MySpace profiles were created for the principal by the student and
reflected inappropriate behavior (Wossom, 2011). Major factors in the decision include that the
profiles were done outside of school and did not interfere with the learning process on school
grounds, (Layshock v. Hermitage School District, 2011). Another instance of a student and
administrator case involved Clayton Valley Charter High School. A picture from an off campus
fitness locker room was taken of the administrator and then shared on social media. Law
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 5
enforcement actually stepped in for this incident and took legal action against the student
(Herold, 2017).
The major players influencing an increasing need for a change in policy include students,
activist groups, teachers, school administrators, and lawmakers. In March of 2018, students
demonstrated a national walkout to protest against school violence. Organizing this public event
on a national level put schools on high alert as they prepared for how to handle the walkout.
Students are no longer standing by when their school day is threatened with violence. Although
students do not set policy, their actions prove that they want changes put into place before more
One voice that cannot be quieted is the one of grieving parents who have loss children to
bullying and school violence. Although it is hard for families to get new policy initiated, they
often gain media support through their tragic stories. However families can take a negative
action and then turn it into something positive with the help of lawmakers. This is true in the
Matt Epling was a victim of a hazing incident which was then followed by threats and
more bullying. Although Matt’s family was in the process of getting charges filed against the
students who assaulted him, Matt took his own life. In response to their tragic loss, Matt’s
family created a Website to help gain traction for new proposed anti-bullying legislation. His
parents also joined the Bully Police USA to continue to foster positive change (Eppling, 2006).
Through the work of the Epling family and support from lawmakers, Matt’s Safe School
Law was passed. The revised school code Act 451 enacted changes that prohibit bullying and
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 6
require schools to take action before and after incidents occur. School boards are required to
pass a policy that has been shown to contain all of the necessary components to meet the law
policies by May 31, 2015 if they did not have a policy currently in place (State of Michigan).
Although many schools had policies in place, they had to be adjusted to meet all of the new
enacted components.
The required components include that a school official has to be identified for handling
matters regarding the policy and a procedure task list also has to be established. Reports also
have to be filed should an incident occur. The law also defines bullying at school and what the
school means as far as on the premises or use of computers. Cyberbullying was also defined in
the revised school code. It states the term bullying is applicable if effecting physical and mental
School educators also play a role in creating and following the policies set in place for
them by administration. Teachers and administrators have a duty to operate with restraint with
dealing with student free speech. If a teacher overreacts in a heated situation, the school could
pay the ultimate price. For example, if a student wears a t-shirt that promotes a political party,
and the teacher disagrees with the t-shirt, he or she should proceed with caution. Wearing the t-
shirt itself it not disrupting class especially if it is not vulgar. However if the teacher comments
on the t-shirt, it could turn the situation into an issue. An administrator’s role is to prepare staff
with appropriate training to avoid situations, such as the t-shirt example. Sometimes
The American Civil Liberties Union, (ACLU) has been working since 1920 to, “defend
and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the
Constitution and laws of the United States”. Although the ACLU works with multiple liberties
such as human rights, voting rights, women’s rights, and racial justice, the focus for this paper
will be on student free speech. The ACLU Website gathers information for visitors and
organizes it in a user friendly way. Based on student speech and privacy, they have links for
Another activist group raising awareness on freedom of speech is the National Coalition
Against Censorship, (NCAC). Per their Website, the mission is to, “promote freedom of
thought, inquiry and expression and oppose censorship in all its forms” (NCAC.org). A key
concept to take away from the NCAC and other activist is that freedom of speech is not checked
at the door when a student or educator enters the school (NCAC.org). They also provide a list of
actions that are protected and items that could result in school discipline for students. Protected
items include off campus student protests or protest during non-instructional time. Schools may
be allowed to take action against any person promoting violence against a district or using
explicit language.
One of the most well-known court cases involving student freedom of speech is Tinker v.
Des Moines Independent School District. In this case, students protested the Vietnam War by
wearing black armbands to school to mourn the war death toll. Mary Beth Tinker was one of the
students involved in the protest. The school took action against the students, and the Supreme
Court ended up ruling in favor of the students. The black armbands did not disrupt the
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 8
instructional learning of students and therefore the school could not discipline the students
according to the Supreme Court. (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, 1969). The
ACLU participated in the defense for the Tinker v Des Moines case. Several years later, Mary
Beth Tinker has been working with the group again. In 2013, she traveled on a “Tinker Tour” to
reach out children (Tinker 2013). She is still a relevant player even today in promoting changes
Three solutions for the problem statement include an education program for students,
administrative rules for discipline, and the use of an outside agency for handling the situation.
Each answer takes the schools role from a different view point and also determines who the role
Education Program
The first solution calls for Legislatures to pass mandates for an education program to be
created to teach students appropriate online etiquette and the dangers on social media. This
option would give schools the opportunity to get to the root of the underlying social issues,
causing students to act out both on and off campus. Since the judicial system has ruled many
different ways on whether schools have acted appropriately in disciplining students, this option
gives districts’ an option to prevent the situation before it occurs. It would involve a curriculum
being established for schools to use for multiple grade levels. A funding source would also have
to be established to make sure schools could afford to offer the new education program for all
students.
Administrative Guidelines
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 9
The second solution involves students and educators meeting in the middle to find a
balance between free speech and discipline. With this option, schools would accept the
responsibility of helping to alleviate social problems both in and outside of schools. Students
would work with administration to set standards for expected activities and outcomes. They
could work together to set a time prior to the start of the school year to organize guidelines.
Students would be allowed to express their views openly as long as it does not disrupt the
learning of fellow students. Bullying in this example would be disciplined only if it became an
issue at school and created problems during the school day. The student walkouts that took place
in March of 2018 fall under this solution. Media outlets reported on the incidents in various
schools. The events were peaceful and students acted with restraint and control to keep the focus
on their initiatives. Therefore, school administrators did not have to take action. This solution
would have the school take action, but only when necessary to keep learning from being
uninterrupted. In order for this to work, a clear understanding of policies should be established
regarding social media, planned protests, and bullying. Here in lies the issue where a policy
change could be more developed to guide schools in setting up sample procedures. If schools
had more backing from the Department of Education, they could enforce discipline without
opening the district up to litigation claiming acts of diminishing students’ freedom of speech.
The third solution would make schools keep a hands off approach to off campus bullying
and social media misconduct. Law enforcement would assume this responsibility. This option
protects the free speech of students and allows students to express themselves without school
involvement. With this answer, the scenario of cyber bullying would not become a school issue.
Schools would not be held responsible for what students do via social media against other
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 10
students or staff. The responsibility of the social issue would switch back to police if a situation
would happen to get out of control. Law enforcement would be responsible for investigating
student conduct and taking legal action if necessary. If the misconduct was causing a disruption
during the school day, an officer would be contacted for handling the problem.
The use of social media and cyber bullying amongst young kids has grown exponentially
In order to aid schools in handling students off campus social media and bullying
activity, education programs should be established. Milner references that 81% of teenagers use
social media, (Milner, 2017). The statistics on how many of those kids were either bullied or
acted as a bully is astounding. Rather than schools enforcing discipline, they can educate
(2012), recommends reaching, “Reasonable balance between teachers’ rights to free speech, the
protection of students, and the use of social media as a learning tool that is viable for bona fide
school business.” Transparency of the policies for students and staff is very important. This
could potentially prevent a situation that could lead to unwanted media attention and litigation.
Target Audience
The target audience for getting the policy put into place is on the Federal and State
legislative level. Lawmakers need to setup the mandates for educators to follow and then
enforce the implementation nationwide. This needs to be a Federal mandate so schools all act in
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 11
the same manner. Schools should be provided with direction from a Federal backing otherwise it
Dr. Smith was interviewed on this topic and explained the perception from the local level.
He stated that schools’ currently have to act with little guidance from the state or federal
governments. When schools respond differently to situations they open themselves up for
liability. The only reference for a school to use would be past court cases. Typically a school
does not have time to research a situation before having to respond to a situation where a student
has performed an act of misconduct off campus. Administrators often take action to solve the
immediate problem and then call their lawyers for recommendation before the school board takes
NEOLA policies help districts’ stay compliant with law changes if they subscribe to their
service. This helps a school stay on top of the latest changes when court cases get settled and set
new precedents. An example of this would be Matt’s Safe School Law. Once the changes were
mandated, NEOLA created sample language for schools to update their policies to remain
Instruments
There are two policy instruments that can be used for the problem solution. Mandates
and redistributive instruments are recommended for fixing the problem. Mandates from the state
level would provide schools with guidelines and curriculum for teaching children how to deal
with social media and technology appropriately. The new programs could be setup as a class or
special programs built for different grade levels. For example, a program for elementary, middle
Parts of the new program could be setup to model requirements with Matt’s Safe School
Law. First off, getting recognition by the board of educations’ as they pass the new policy and
curriculum will help it be more successful. Then schools can also report back to the department
of education on participation. There would also be a penalty for failure to follow the
implementation. Once schools use the program, overtime it may reduce the number of student
discipline cases which could be used as an indicator of success. If the number of reportable
incidents does not get reduced, then lawmakers can use this evidence to make adjustments to the
guidelines.
However to roll out a new program, funding will be necessary to get participation. If the
mandates were unfunded, it would likely be unsupported by schools. Schools would have the
difficult choice of doing the minimum to meet the new requirements due resource allocation
elsewhere. Redistributive as a policy instrument could be used to get funding for the new
programs. In an interview with Dr. Smith, Region II MASA Legislative Committee Chair, he
discussed the importance of designated money for programs to educate children in social media
and online bullying. He went even further to suggest funds for additional social workers and
guidance counselors could help tackle the problem, (MASA Region II Legislative Committee
Criticisms
One of the criticisms for education programs on is that what happens off campus should
not involve the school. Therefore is it the schools responsibility to take action to discipline
students off campus activities that are disrupting the school day? When it comes to activities
involving freedom of speech, the coalition groups mentioned earlier would have criticisms. First
off, they would probably argue that the school should not be able to teach their students what or
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 13
how to speak their minds via any social media or any other avenue. Coalition groups working to
protect civil liberties such as free speech would likely lobby against the Federal government
establishing classes or afterschool programs for such activity. This could result in testimony or
In order to offer rebuttal against this criticism, with the help of legal counsel to review
the program, Legislatures could ensure Democratic rights are not being diminished. Attorneys
would vet the curriculum prior to it being released for educators to put into the curriculum in
their schools. The coalition groups could also offer input as well, prior to it being released for
A second criticism is that teaching this curriculum to elementary, middle school, and high
school students may be over excessive. A solution could be to eliminate it in the lower grades,
but that is not recommended. Preparing students at a younger age is necessary because IPADS
and Chromebooks are used often in the lower level grades. Therefore more kids are getting
Also teaching lessons on social media etiquette does not prepare students for the MSTEP
tests or meet graduation requirements. This argument is not relevant because kids are not
educated for test taking purposes only. They also do not learn only the core subjects such as
math, English, or science. If this was the case, schools would not offer elective courses for
students to choose from in middle and high school grades. After discussing with a high school
principal, this criticism did not hold much ground. Mr. Moran, Principal for Kingsley Area
Schools, stressed the need for mentoring and guidance through an education program. He also
pointed out the extra curriculum would be better during the regular school day as opposed to
after school programs (High School Principal, personal communication, April 24, 2018).
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 14
One group not previously mentioned that may have an issue with the new program is
parents. This could possibly tie into the argument of what is the educational purpose of the
program. Parents may wish to keep their kids in rigorous classes and not a mandatory elective
class for social media/bullying. If parents had concerns about the program they could express it
with building administrators and the Board of Education for their school. Another option for this
problem would be for a school to send home permission slips for parents to sign off if their kids
can attend the social media and bullying training programs/classes. This way a parent would
have to give consent for their kids to participate. However, this would have to be established in
the guidelines so all schools followed the protocol per getting parent permission slips.
Funding for the new program is also a criticism of putting a new mandate in place. If
funding for this education plan comes from the school aid fund then it takes funding from
another area. Also will the funding be supported over time or will it be a one time funding
sources? Districts that implement the program will want funding that can cover the cost from
year to year and not only for the kick off year. Funding will need support from Legislatures and
interest groups to carry longevity. A catalyst for longevity will be as school violence continues
due to kids off campus actions, more groups will get on board with supporting the new program
funding sources.
Implementation
The implementation change theory that best represents the roll out of the solution for
schools to handle off campus activities interrupting the school day would be Fullan’s model of
change. There are four parts to Fullan’s change model which includes initiation,
implementation, continuation, and outcome (Fullan, 1982). Each step is important for a new
In order for initiation to work educators need to stand behind the research presented on
bullying and social media misconduct affecting the classroom. Buy in from school leadership
teams, teachers, and communities is necessary. Without this support, the program will not get
off the ground to reach children of all ages. As a social issue that has pushed its way into the
classroom, parents have to understand why the need for an education program is necessary.
Children may not want to participate, especially in after school programs if their parents are not
in agreement that it is beneficial. Having parents sign permission forms allowing their kids to
participate in the program can aid in getting kids to attend. If parents can feel as though they
have a say in the new program perhaps it would increase participation. Another option to
influence buy in would be to offer to let parents watch a class. They would not participate, but
The first step in implementation is for funding allocations to be determined for each
school. The allocations could be setup as a per pupil funding allotment. Therefore the
distribution would be the same amount per student. Another option would be a flat rate for each
district to be funded based on the number of buildings. Schools can use the funding to offset the
salary and benefit cost of a teacher or guidance counselor to administer the program. Another
option would be an afterschool enrichment program to be created for all students. It would be up
to the school to determine the best use of the funding allocation based on their resources
available.
The Department of Education should develop an application schools can use to report
how they will plan to use the available funding. Then the Department of Education can either
approve or deny the application. This system could be setup to mirror how schools apply for
Title I funding through a consolidated grant application process. This would make sure the funds
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 16
are spent appropriately. This will help the continuation of the program with financial backing
The final piece of the implementation process is a year-end review or report stating the
Education showing how the money was spent for salaries and benefits or material costs. Schools
could also submit data on the number of students by grade level who received training.
Collecting data on the number of students whose parents opted out for their kids to receive the
training is also important. This figure will tell the Department of Education if parents are
approving of the new program or not. Also what or how should schools package the program to
Over time schools could look at the statistics of bullying and social media discipline
incidents to track if the program has made an impact on their student activities. Which at this
point, the program could be reconfigured based on the results to reach the most desired outcomes
Conclusion
In conclusion, federal and state legislation for schools has not caught up with the
advancements in technology. Students are online and connected more than ever both on and off
campus. It is unrealistic to think that what a student does off campus does not translate in to
chaos in the classroom. Especially when the students’ actions are recorded or documented
online and shared with the public. A negative outcome of this has been reflected in the violence
occurring across school campuses nationwide. Students do not know how to handle the
increased amount of exposure, which can result in personal or mass violence. Kids are more
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 17
vulnerable online because their peers can access their information or post information about one
another.
Schools can either be reactionary after the fact or work to prevent the behavior that
disrupts the learning process during the normal school day. After researching and conducting
interviews on the issue, the preventative solution is the most agreeable choice. Schools need to
take action to put procedures in place until the law has the opportunity to catch up with
technology. This is evident in actions schools are already taking to be proactive. Schools are
making decisions on a local level until guidance can be delivered from the Federal and State
level of government.
An example of how one school acted preventive in preparation for the student walkouts
that happened in March 2018 was discussed with Mr. Tousley, Superintendent for Frankfort-
Elberta Area Schools. They chose to get ahead of the game and work with students and families
to make the walkout orderly. The activity was not necessarily a walkout as the students gathered
in the gym as opposed to walking out of the school. Although the activity was setup by the
students, the school wanted to make sure student safety was a priority as the event was held
inside. The student council group organized the event and held a presentation in the gymnasium.
They led a presentation in the school gym with posters promoting kindness as opposed to a
protest. The school had about 150 students participate in the event (Superintendent, personal
In summation, the Federal government should work with schools to help prevent the
cyber bullying and social media issues disrupting the school day. With proper planning and
guidance, as seen in the example of the student walkout, a school can benefit from warding off
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 18
disruptive behavior before it becomes an issue. The need for the policy change is more
important than ever due to the increasing amount of social media use.
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 19
References
Fullan, M. (1982). The meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
Herold, B. (2017, July 6). 10 Social Media Controversies That Landed Students in Trouble This
Keierleber, M. (2015, May 7). Oregon Student Wins Free-Speech Lawsuit Against School,
Overturning Discipline for Critical Facebook Post, Student Press Law Center. Retrieved from
http://www.splc.org/article/2015/05/oregon-student-wins-free-speech-lawsuit-against-school-
overturning-discipline-for-critical-facebook-posts
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/oct17/vol75/num02/Cultivating-
Problem-Solvers-in-Shifting-Cultural-Contexts.aspx
Moran, M. (2018, April 24). High School Principal Kingsley Area Schools
O’Donovan, E. (2012, July 25). Social Media: Guidelines for School Administrators, District
guidelines-school-administrators
State of Michigan Legislative Council. (2017). Revised School Code Act 451 of 1976. Retrieved
from
SOCIAL ISSUES AND DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS 20
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(esfi0qyoxbm3dj0ot5rffpny))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&obj
ectname=mcl-380-1310b
Tinker, M. (2013, May 23). Standing Up for the Rights of Students to Free Expression. American
students-free-expression
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Wassom, B. (2011). Social Media and Student Discipline in Public Schools. Retrieved from
http://www.wassom.com/social-media-and-student-discipline-in-public-schools.html
Watch What You Tweet: Schools, Censorship, and Social Media. NCAC.org. Retrieved from
http://ncac.org/watch-what-you-tweet-schools-censorship-and-social-media