Analysis: Should Schools Be Allowed To Limit Students Online Speech?

Did you know that 43% of kids have been bullied online? Many students are very negatively affected by being bullied online. Many people believe that schools should limit students under the age of eighteens online free speech, but others think that they should, not because it would be a violation of the first amendment.

This document supports limiting online student speech because the court ruled that even though it happened out of school, the school’s reason was strong enough to justify their actions toward K.K.

Did you know that females are more likely to be cyberbullied, compared to girls? Most people, nowadays, have access to the internet, which makes it easier people to cyberbully others. Only 15.1% of British teachers have been a victim of cyberbullying, with the other 84.9% not being a victim. An assistant Secretary of Civil Rights has noticed that there are many forms of harassment. Schools should take more action when it comes to any type of bullying off school grounds. This is making people wonder if schools should be more restrictive to the student’s online speech freedom.

In modern society today, freedom of speech has been a main concern to delinquents as to what they say on the web. Although, cyberbullying has turned into a major issue online that has gotten the schools’ attention and turn towards the security of their students. To accomplish nurturing their students’ safety, they have punished pupils for what they say on the Internet that is harmful in account of others. Alternatively, the Constitution believes this goes against the First Amendment and violates the students’ rights. Schools should be authorized to limit students’ online speech to decrease the matter of cyberbullying which has affected us in many ways.

The purposes of schools include protecting and educating its students. Therefore, naturally, when a student is cyberbullying someone else, the school seeks to intervene. However, many argue that a school’s intervention of its students’ online speech is in violation of their First Amendment rights. Should schools be allowed to limit students’ online speech? That is, should schools be allowed to punish the things its students post online, even if they are done outside of school, and from their personal devices? The answer is clearly yes. From the concept, to the precedence, to the data, to a letter from the US Department of Education, evidences everywhere supports limiting students’

Freedom of speech is one of our rights listed in the first amendment, but there should be a limit on what we can and cannot say. Because of the internet, there's a better chance of people getting bullied. People can hide behind a computer screen and say what the want to others without the person knowing who they are. Schools should care about this because this can put students in harm's way. I feel that school should be able to put a limit on students online speech. Three main reasons why there should be a limit on students online speech is boys and girls get bullied everyday over the internet, it causes disturbances in school, and it puts more stress of the schools because they have to deal with it according to law.

On the issue of whether or not schools should be allowed to limit students’ online speech, I firmly believe that they shouldn’t. Doing so directly infringes upon the student’s first amendment rights to the freedom of speech, and for what? Numerous surveys have shown that cyberbullying isn’t a huge problem. Further, one document affirms the conclusion that cyberbullying is just another phase in the long-running evolution of bullying. With this essay, I aim to convince you that schools should not limit their students’ online speech, using my vast knowledge as well as cold hard facts.

Cyberbullying is defined as, ¨...bullying that takes place using electronic technology¨ by stopbullying.gov. Recently, schools have been taking actions to punish students for what they do or say online. There have been many debates and trails to figure out whether or not schools should have the power to limit and punish students’ speech online. The Supreme Court ruled that if online speech is disruptive, schools can punish students. School districts should not have the power to limit online speech because online speech does not affect most students and teachers, is not very disruptive, and free speech is a precious right.

Imagine being bashed on my over a dozen kids online saying rude hurtful comments, would you not want someone to help solve this problem? In my DBQ there is seven different documents with seven different examples. After reading and doing extra research on the documents I think schools should be allowed to limit students’ online speech. I believe that the schools are trying to make this a safer place for students.

This paper addresses a situation in which a student notified this author that she was being subjected to bullying through another classmate’s Facebook page. A discussion of steps required by Oregon’s statutes, the Lake Oswego School District 's board policies and the student handbook, will provide a basis for examining any First Amendment arguments that the bullying has raised, with a discussion of the author 's First Amendment responses consistent with applicable Supreme Court cases.

Des Moines Independent Community School District applies to the speech of students on their social media accounts remains to be unanswered by the Supreme Court. In fact, the court denied the case of Taylor Bell, who was suspended and sent to another school due to a “threatening, intimidating, and harassing” rap song he wrote that included negatives about his school at the time. If the court took this case it would have set a precedent for student social media cases all around. Instead we are left to ponder the application of the constitution and how suppression of speech should affect the media. So far, courts have mostly sided with the administrations of schools, rather than the students who believe their rights have been violated. Although In some cases, like the one of college student Navid Yeasin, Tinker’s case has been upheld, while in others, such as the case of college student Craig Keefe, it has been disregarded. It depends on the case’s details and how offensive and frightening the posts seem. Although courts try to justify rulings with pure facts, opinion is a prominent source when deciding if a post is too extreme or not. Within the controversy, the panel has came to one consensus regarding if Tinker v Des Moines should apply to social media. If a student posts something about a staff member that is dangerous and potentially harmful then that should be a very serious offence and have serious consequences. Although,

Bullying has been around for several years, now that students have a lot of social media at their fingertips bullying has become more common on this media websites. This is called cyberbullying and in order to stop this schools have to limit their speech. mostly if not every time this bullying occurs it affects their everyday life. A student way not want to come to school because their classmates are bullying them. And because this form of bullying is affecting the student's’ day at school the school should have a right to stop it.

Freedom of speech is a right of every American that is protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. This democratic freedom allows citizens to speak and express themselves freely. Public school teachers and students are also free to express themselves, however they can both be limited by school administration. The goal of this paper is to analyze free speech as defined by the First Amendment and discussed limitations placed on teachers and students by schools and upheld by the courts. There will also be a discussion of potential areas of liability for public schools concerning freedom of expression and recommendations to mitigate these liabilities.

" The question on whether or not we should allow the schools to maintain supervision over social media is one thats been circulation frequently across the nation. Honestly i believe that is overstepping the rights of the public school systems. They shouldn't have access to the social media pages of the students. It crosses the line of privacy, and i feel infringes on the Fourth Amendment as well as the Fourteenth right of protection towards unlawful search and the natural rights given to the members of the United States. Considering they are taking the ability of us to manage our social life away it kinda crosses the line of acceptable privacy violation. I understand they want to be able to keep an eye on the cyber bullying epidemic but there's a line that can't be crossed no matter what the cause is that they hide

The Center presented the officials with a made-up scenario in which a student, using the web, threatened to inflict bodily harm on another student. On a scale of one to ten, one meaning no law enforcement role was required and ten requiring a “significant” role, the respondents rated the situation a 9.1. This was the scenario that drew the strongest approval of police intervention (Patchin). Interestingly, one of Rebecca Sedwick’s tormentors told her to die via a Facebook post (Slifer, Fla. Girls). In such a case, the Cyberbullying Research Center instructed law enforcement officials to discuss publicly the consequences of cyberbullying for education and deterrence purposes (Patchin). Obviously, talking things over cannot prevent everything, but it increases awareness in school administrators and parents. The Center also asserted officers should “discipline students for conduct outside of school if it infringes on the rights of other students or causes material disruptions to the school’s learning environment” (Patchin). Ultimately, the Center left interpretations of cyberbullying incidents and the required responses to the officers themselves. In fact, the Center more clearly defines law enforcement’s role in cyberbullying cases in its general statement found on its homepage. The document says officials should