1. Cyberbullying: A Literature Review
Presented by:
Buffy Sue Fegenbush
University of Louisiana at Lafayette
St. Mary Parish School System
Dianne F. Olivier
Department of Educational Foundations and Leadership
University of Louisiana at Lafayette

2. Purpose and Framework
Purpose: to provide a comprehensive analysis of the current research on cyberbullying and the implications of the issues that surround it in order to develop future researchable hypotheses in the area of cyberbullying as it relates to school policy and practice
Research framework was developed around the works of Aftab, Hinduja & Patchin, Olweus, Shariff, and Willard

3. Cyberbullying - defined
Belsey (2001) and Willard (2001 & 2003)
Aftab – (2006)
Cyberbullying is when a child, preteen or teen is tormented, threatened, harassed, humiliated, embarrassed or otherwise targeted by another child, preteen or teen using the Internet, interactive and digital technologies or mobile phones. It has to have a minor on both sides, or at least have been instigated by a minor against another minor. Once adults become involved, it is plain and simple cyber-harassment or cyberstalking. Adult cyber-harassment or cyberstalking is NEVER called cyberbullying.

4. From Traditional to Cyber: Our Kids Are Totally Wired
42% - 72% bullied online - up from the 20% for traditional bullying (Juvonen & Gross, 2008)
PEW research
93% of teens are online
62% are online daily
71% own phones
Social Networks are booming for teens
Persistence
Searchability
Replicability
Invisible Audiences
Goodstein, (2007); PEW Researchers (2000 & 2006); Boyd (2008)

5. The Cyberbully
(the medium changes the profile of the traditional bully)
4 types:
Vengeful Angel
Power Hungry / Revenge of the Nerds
Mean Girls
The Inadvertent
Aftab, (2008); Trolley, (2006); Willard, (2007)

6. The Cyberbullied Related issues: Additional issues due to medium:
Depression
Lack of friends
To “themselves”
High absenteeism
Low school performance
6% - 10% sink into severe depression
Additional issues due to medium:
Trust
Home Safety

7. Cyberbystander and Stakeholders
Frequently left out of cyberbullying studies
Hard to define
Other Stakeholders:
Parents
School Officials
School Boards

8. Cyberlaw and Legal Response
Cyberlaw: application of basic rights and legal precedents to cyber issues
Bullying is not a crime. The components that contribute to bully and cyberbullying are crimes, if proven.
Intimidation, harassment, slander, etc.
Remember child on child

9. Avenues for Cyberbullying
Flaming
Harassment
Cyberstalking
Denigration
Masquerading
Outing & Trickery
Exclusion
Language that moves dialogue to a new level
Consistent messaging and repeating the action – harassment
Harassment that is more serious in nature; this is a threat of impending harm
This is the art of putting someone down - slander
This is a person who poses as someone else to retrieve sensitive or private information - fraud
This person is pretending to be a friend. It includes collecting private information and them sharing and mocking the individual
Not allowing someone to be part of a group; intentionally leaving them or and not allow them to participate in electronic communication - exclusion
Trolley, et al., (2006)

10. Cyberbullying: The Law
Federal:
No formal decision thus far
2001 Children’s Internet Protection Act – revised
State:
36 states with 10 addressing cyberbullying
2006, Florida: Jeff’s Law: obliges school systems to address the issues of bullying, including cyber
2007, Arkansas: Public Act 115: defined material and substantial disruption as it applied to bullying
2001, Louisiana Response: ACT 230

11. Policy Implications NASSP Recommendations (2007)
Considerations for how policy should be changed
Guidelines for all stakeholders
California School Boards Association (2007)
Outlined possible revisions to cover school systems
Outlined specific, current policies to be addressed

12. Guiding Questions for Policy and Response?
Did the incident happen on campus or off? (nexus)
Can the school place restrictions on off-campus student free speech?
Does the student speech create a school climate that is not conducive to student well-being? (materially and substantially disruptive)
Were search and seizure measures followed? (reasonable suspicion)
Did the school act in a reasonable and prudent manner? (in loco parentis)
Mason, 2008

13. Willard’s Framework
Steps to review and respond to cyberbullying incidents for school administrators
Review Process
Actions and Options Form
Incident Report and Evaluation
Recommends ongoing training and proactive measures to response

14. Discussion Change of mindset needs to occur
Proactive measures are best for both
Reactive measures must be grounded in law
Acts of bullying and cyberbullying are not mutually exclusive
Research is limited in broader perspectives

15. Gaps and Future Research
Limited Perception Data from all stakeholders
Limited SES and Racial Information
Limited legal application to cyberbullying
More research in the area of bystanders
More research connecting proactive measures to bullying – not exclusive measures
Digital Gap and understanding/response

16. Thank You! Questions?