How Unique Security Factors Distinguish the Educational Campus Environment from Corporate Campus Environment

In the past, bullies were bigger children who constatntly picked on the smaller and weaker children. Bullies normally teased the children they victimized. If they got away with it, bullies also demended food and money from their victims. Sometimes, for the few unlucky ones, the bullies got physical with them. When bullyng occurred, it typically happened on school’s premises. Once the children who are being bullied got home, they were safe from the abuse. As scoiety evolve into the world of technology so has bullying. With cyberbulllying, children are never safe from the continous torture of being bullied. Yet, some states do not define cyberbullying as a form of bullying in their anti-bullying laws. Every state has a diverse definition of bullying. While some states specify physical altercation or badgering as a form of bullying, others define it as merely aggravating behavior (Maggie Clark 2). With no definite definition and no sole constitutional course of action, adults are bullie at work as well. They can only fit the crime to a punishment (Allison Ballard 3). If there is a single definition which covers all aspects of bullying, in any type of environment,, adults and children will have the protection they need.

Students do not always realize that their free speech can go against certain limits that the Supreme Court has issued on this freedom. The US Department of Education Office for Civil Rights suggests that harassment creates a hostile environment when the conduct is sufficiently severe or persistent so as to interfere with or limit a students' ability to participate in or benefit from the services, activities, or opportunities offered by the school. (Doc. G) In consonance with this, it is the school's responsibility to address harassment incidents to protect students' privacy rights. Allowing full access to the first amendment in schools can often result in the violation of the fourth amendment by infringing privacy rights. There are many forms of harassment that can violate students' civil rights. According to the same department, harassment based on race, color, national origin, sex, or disability violates the civil rights laws that the OCR enforces. (Doc. G) Cyberbullying often falls into these categories which are all violations of civil rights, and many schools may not have proper standards for this violation. It is the school's responsibility to protect the civil rights of students, teachers, and administrators, so they must take a stand against discrimination, including online speech. Not only does cyberbullying contravene with civil rights, it also causes emotional

A sudden increase of youth violence in public schools in early 1990 has caused many to raise concerns about violent behaviors in schools. In the past, the most common form of violence that took place in schools was bullying, physical fights, or

Often times it’s the student’s needs and the school being unable to meet the student’s needs that lead to the student being disciplined. Kids who are behind academically, and unable to perform at the same level as their peers often act out in frustration or humiliation (Noguera, 2003). Once these students are labelled as difficult, incorrigible, and unteachable they tend to believe these things about themselves and act out more in class which leads to a cycle of discipline that can ultimately lead to permanent expulsion. For some of these students, these continued rule violations lead to run-ins with the police and the criminal justice system. School administrators who are at times frustrated themselves from failed attempts to steer children from a “bad path” don’t realize that in throwing their hands up and giving up on these students, are in a way helping shuttle students from school to the penitentiary (Noguera, 2003).

Through my teaching experience I have found that school violence encompasses many forms such as verbal harassment, non-verbal harassment, cyber-bullying, intimidation and any act that devalues a student’s self-worth. According to Detroit Public Schools, “it is the intention of the District to provide as safe and nonviolent learning environment for its employees, students, parents, and visitors as is possible. To this end, the District strives to maintain an environment free of threats, harassment, intimidation, physical and verbal abuse, and coercion” (Detroit Public Schools, 2009). The purpose of this policy is create a safe environment where students are free from any tape of harassment. The policy goes on to state it is the staff's responsibility to, “be educated and aware of potential signs and signals of violent or threatening behavior in students”(Detroit Public Schools, 2009). In other words, it is necessary for the school staff to remain vigilant of these signs and address them as soon as appear. Based off the nature of the action the school will follow a course of discipline suited to the accused

TORTS laws offer compensation to individuals harmed by the unreasonable actions of others. TORTS claims are based on the legal premise that a person(s) is liable for the consequences of their conduct if it results in injury to others. In education-related cases, the most common TORT is negligence. Recently, several cases have occurred whereby negligence and bullying are interconnected with students suing their schools for failing to enforce anti-bullying policies and causing injury to their well being. A current case includes Maya Williams suing her former high school for negligence in regards to the enforcement of their anti-bullying policy. By looking into a precedent case, elements of negligence, and how bullying affects a student, we

In addition, we used the 2015 Florida School Laws book and the Florida State Statutes to review the K-20 Education Code. The major topics of the summary paper were bullying, due process, and FERPA. To complete the summary, I read through many legal documents, such as the Duval County School Board Policy Manual Chapter 10, Duval County Code of Conduct, Fla. Stat. §1006, §1002, §1003, and the U. S. Constitution. According to the state statutes, every school district must have a student code of conduct that includes a bullying and harassment policy. This document provides the foundation for student expectations and responsibilities at school, school-related activities, and situations that affect school culture. The state statutes specify the responsibilities and obligations of teachers regarding supervision and discipline of students. Teachers must make all decisions in the best interest of students in academics and safety. Due process of law and equality are guaranteed in the Fourteenth Amendment and forbid the basic rights of life, liberty, and property from being unfairly taken away. Substantive due process refers to government guidelines and rules that deny students of their fundamental rights. Procedural due process is a way of making sure the school system provides fair and appropriate measures to

When businesses provide computers for public use, several challenges are presented. In addition to allowing the general public this service, and ultimately growing their market share, a business must define the line between appropriate use and securing the network.

A more recent case, J. S v. Bethlehem Area School (2000), is more relevant to the issues today. This court case involves a student who was expelled from the school for creating a website that included derogatory and threatening comments about members of the school’s administration. The Supreme Court ruled that the school’s actions were deemed justified due to evidence proving an obvious disruption of the school environment. In the courts closing arguments the following is stated, “Regrettably, in this day and age where school violence is becoming more commonplace, school officials are justified in taking very seriously threats against faculty and other students.”(Herbeck, 2010)

A teacher is obligated to defuse classroom conflicts that could turn into a bullying situation due to bullying overlapping with harassment in some states. In Texas, the terms are used separately, but this is only a distinction in law, with no model policies in place for the schools to use as a guideline on how to resolve conflicts such as bullying. The implementation of anti-bullying policies and how they are handled are ultimately left to the school district to decide. Despite the policies being left to the districts, the teachers still have an ethical obligation to reasonably protect the students from an environment that is harmful to their learning, or health and safety. Due to this obligation, reporting to the principal is used and the

Samantha, that is a key in the districts of schools at all levels, we tell kid they have a voice, but where I their voice. The school will tell the students if they have concerns, something is happening, and we don’t allow bullying at our campus. But how much truth is there to that sentence? Unfortunately, students must look at angles to stay safe, in some cases where and how they need to share good a negative situation. Dean Diamond explained, “exposing kids to different characters, different ways of thinking, something so foreign it the way they live, I do think that it broadens them as people (Seider, p. 185). During school meetings, I think we need to be prepared to respond to the student’s questions, whether they be positive, their hurtful emotions, and how they feel they aren’t heard. Students can be lead if they have role models that promote positive civic development. If the faulty is not approachable, them the student body will deal with things in their way, rather than thinking that the faculty supports them.

I wanted to get another person’s point of view concerning security at the Madras COCC campus so I decided to interview Heather Van Diest-Kolb. She is the original person who really got me thinking about how the Madras

Violence in our schools is an issue that has become more prominent in the last few years. News articles about violent deeds within the school setting are on the increase. Our society demands that schools are safe for our children. In order to maintain a peaceful environment for all, we must address and inform our schools, children, and parents as well as the neighboring communities about the issue of school violence. As David W. Johnson, the author of Reducing School Violence states, “To eliminate violence and resolve destructive conflicts, schools must first admit that such conflicts are out of control.” (Johnson 7) Schools in general must identify with these issues in order to deal with them.

School violence, in recent history, seems to have taken the United States by storm. Be it a shooting, such as the Columbine High School shooting in 1999, the inappropriate relationships between teacher and student, such as Stephanie Figueroa whom initiated one such relationship with her 11-year-old karate student, or the multiple fights we see on social media that take place in schools. With each passing week, we see a new story that falls in one of these categories. Today, we look at the types of, causes of and how to prevent violence in what should be a safe place and second home for our youth.

The two issues in this case are whether or not a school should be held liable for student-on-student harassment and whether or not the principal of the middle school is liable for negligence for not having properly informed his teacher about district harassment and bullying policies and protocol. Under the law of torts, individuals are liable for the consequences of their own conduct (or lack thereof) when such actions result in physical or emotional injury to others. In a school setting teachers can be held liable for acts that do cause such injuries to a student while under the teacher’s supervision. Within education there are two main categories of tort liability: intentional and negligent torts. While intentional torts are rare in school districts, negligent torts are much more common and fall under either teacher or administrator negligence. Negligent torts are neither intended nor expected and are characterized as a “failure to exercise the standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would have exercised” (Norton, 2017). Thus, school administrators and teachers are responsible for providing reasonable supervision that is free of obvious dangers. While student safety cannot be guaranteed in all situations, it is up to administrators and teachers to anticipate foreseeable dangers and plan accordingly. Therefore, based on the theory of