Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Starting off the new year in Washington Post

Expand Messages
  • Nancy Willard
    Ok, so it does not hurt my news year s resolutions to start off the year quoted in the Washington Post (except perhaps for the resolution not to work quite as
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 1, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Ok, so it does not hurt my news year's resolutions to start off the year
      quoted in the Washington Post (except perhaps for the resolution not to work
      quite as hard. ;-))

      Story on cyberbullying.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/31/AR2008123103
      067.html

      What the reporter did not quote, however, is what I want to impart to
      educators. So sorry, but this is Ed Law 101.

      Historically, there are two philosophies that underlie the Free Speech
      Amendment:

      Common Good.
      Government has the authority to determine what speech is contrary to the
      public good, including such social values as order, morality, and religion.
      English Common Law ~ Blackstone

      Natural Rights.
      The role of government is to enforce the fundamental rights of individuals
      if those rights are injured by the exercise of speech by another. John Locke
      and Cato

      The courts have used both theories in cases involving student speech ~
      unfortunately without discussing the underlying historical-based rationale.

      If school officials understand the underlying rationale, it is far easier to
      determine when disciplinary actions are ~ or are not ~ appropriate.

      When students are on-campus, school officials have the authority to respond
      to inculcate values of a civilized society ~ Common Good ~ and protect other
      students and ensure the delivery of instruction ~ Natural Rights.

      The authority to inculcate values ends at the schoolhouse gate.
      But the authority ~ and responsibility ~ to respond to off-campus student
      speech continues ~ if the impact of that speech has come through the
      schoolhouse gates and has or could significantly interfere with the rights
      of other students or the delivery of instruction.

      School officials have the authority to impose formal discipline for
      off-campus student speech if that speech has or a reasonable person would
      anticipate it could cause a substantial disruption at school or interference
      with the rights of students to be secure. There are three typical
      situations: violent altercations between students, hostile environment
      preventing a student from participating at school, or significant
      interference with the delivery of instruction or school operations.

      N the other hand, students also retain important free speech rights -
      especially the right of petition. "Congress shall make no law Š abridging Š
      the right of the people Š to petition the Government for a redress of
      grievances." ³A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which
      may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.² Declaration
      of Independence.

      The right of citizens to petition government officials to correct a policy
      or right a wrong is fundamental to a democratic society. Students¹ right to
      petition has not been addressed by the courts. Some students are using the
      Internet to communicate their displeasure of school policies or the actions
      of school staff ~ frequently using objectionable language. This is obviously
      displeasing school officials.

      The right of students to use the Internet to petition ~ posting material
      that raises concerns about school staff or policies ~ must be supported. It
      is their constitutional right!

      But the right to petition does not extend to the right to engage in
      defamation, invade the privacy of others, or post material that shows
      someone in ³false light² ~ all of which are civil law remedies to speech
      that has ³crossed the line² from political protest to causing harm.

      Probably a bit too long for a news story.

      Ok, I will shut up now and enjoy the first day.

      Nancy

      --
      Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
      Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
      http://csriu.org
      http://cyberbully.org
      http://cyber-safe-kids.com
      http://csriu.wordpress.com
      nwillard@...

      Cyberbullying and Cyberthreats: Responding to the Challenge of Online Social
      Aggression, Threats, and Distress (Research Press)

      Cyber-Safe Kids, Cyber-Savvy Teens: Helping Young People Learn to Use the
      Internet Safely and Responsibly (Jossey-Bass)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.