University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A case study of promising practices of anti-cyberbullying efforts in a middle school

(USC Thesis Other)

A case study of promising practices of anti-cyberbullying efforts in a middle school

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 1
A CASE STUDY OF PROMISING PRACTICES OF ANTI-CYBERBULLYING
EFFORTS IN A MIDDLE SCHOOL
by
Michelle R. Nye
____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2014
Copyright 2014 Michelle R. Nye
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 2
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to my parents. They both have encouraged and sup-
ported me to educate myself and help to educate those around me. I thank them for
believing in me, reminding me of my strengths, and teaching me that the secret to success
is hard work and perseverance.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 3
Acknowledgments
I would like to sincerely acknowledge those who made this dissertation possible
due to their support and encouragement. I owe a great deal to the following people. I
thank my dissertation committee members—Chairperson Dr. Kathy Stowe, Professor
Shafiqa Ahmadi, and Dr. Eugenia Mora-Flores—for their time, assistance, and encour-
agement along the way. Dr. Kathy Stowe helped me stay on track and pushing me to be
my best; I thank her for believing in me, giving me tough love when necessary, and
helping me see my strengths. Dr. Tanaz Farzad, Dr. Jennifer Panagos, and Dr. Kyle
Bruich deserve my sincere gratitude. Although I have known them for only 2 short years,
I am confident that this process will unite us for years to come. Andrea Bates, Michelle
England, Lawrence Hom, Ashley Merrill, Marc Pioch, and Jamie Nye read drafts, fed me
when I was overwhelmed, gave me a quiet place to work, listened to my thought process
and understood when I could not fulfill engagements. Their support has been invaluable.
My friends, family, and colleagues have supported me throughout this endeavor. They
have given me the encouragement to fulfill this goal and I thank them dearly.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 4
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Tables 6
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
Chapter 1: Introduction 9
Background of the Problem 10
Statement of the Problem 15
Purpose of the Study 17
Research Questions 18
Theoretical Framework 18
Significance of the Study 21
Definition of Terms 21
Limitations and Delimitations 22
Organization of the Dissertation 23

Chapter 2: Literature Review 24
An Overview of the History of Cyberbullying 24
Bullying 25
Technology 27
Cyberbullying 28
Laws and Policies 33
Federal and state laws 33
School policies 37
Effects of Cyberbullying on Student Achievement 40
Responding to Cyberbullying 44
Whole-School Approach 45
Students 46
Teachers 47
Potential Strategies to Support Response to Cyberbullying 48
Chapter Summary 50

Chapter 3: Methodology 51
Research Questions 51
Research Design 52
Sample and Participants 53
Conceptual Framework 54
Instrumentation 55
Data Collection 56
Data Analysis 59
Ethical Considerations 60
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 5
Chapter 4: Findings, Analysis, and Discussion 62
Research Questions 64
Data Findings 65
Research Question 1: Systems and Structures 65
Response to incidents 65
Protocol for responding 66
Investigations 70
School Resource Officer 70
Counseling and consequences 72
Education of Stakeholders 75
Digital citizenship 75
Parent nights 81
Student Participation 83
Reporting incidents 83
Safe School Ambassadors 86
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question 1 88
Research Question 2: Perceived Effectiveness 90
Quick response and thorough investigations 91
Use of common language and anti-cyberbullying strategies 93
Need for further efforts 95
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question 2 97
Research Question 3: Sustainability 99
Collaborative leadership 99
Ownership of learning 101
Communication 103
Analysis of Research Question 3 105
Chapter Summary 106

Chapter 5: Summary and Implications 108
Purpose of the Study 109
Summary of the Findings 110
Implications for Practice and Policy 113
Recommendations for Future Studies 117
Conclusion 118

References 119
Appendices
Appendix A: Interview Protocol 130

Appendix B: Observation Protocol 132

Appendix C: Discipline Matrix 134

Appendix D: SRO Interview Protocol 135
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 6
List of Tables

Table 1: Summary of Data Collection Used in Study 57
Table 2: Alignment of Interview Protocol Questions 58
Table 3: Staff Members Interview for the Current Study 64
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 7
List of Figures
Figure 1: Cyberbullying applied to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model 20
Figure 2: Conceptual framework for the study 55
Figure 3: Creswell’s model for data analysis 60
Figure 4: Protocol for handling incidents at Sunny View Middle School 68
Figure 5: Responsibility throughout protocol 114
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 8
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to identify systems and structures schools used to
target cyberbullying within anti-bullying efforts. The study also examined the perceived
effectiveness and sustainability of these systems and structures. Using Brofenbrenner’s
ecological model, the study demonstrated how systems and structures intertwine to
impact the anti-cyberbullying culture. The was a case study of a phenomenon unique to
one particular school. Qualitative data were generated via interviews, observations, and
artifact analysis conducted at one middle school in southern California with promising
practices in anti-cyberbullying efforts. These data were used to triangulate the research
findings and analyzed through Creswell’s model for data analysis. The findings revealed
that the school’s commitment to response to incidents, education of stakeholders, and
encouragement of student participation promote an anti-cyberbullying culture on the
campus. An effective anti-cyberbullying culture is strengthened though preventative
measures coupled with a thorough response to incidents. This study demonstrates the
importance of open communication among all stakeholders to foster a culture of trust and
respect on a school’s campus. In light of increased technology expectations at schools,
educating students on appropriate use of technology, digital citizenship, and Internet
safety is an essential component of anti-cyberbullying efforts.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 9
Chapter 1
Introduction
Violence on school campuses continues to be a growing problem in the United
States and can take on many forms. One such form of violence is bullying. Bullying is
defined as persistent and pervasive, physical, verbal or emotional acts that create an
imbalance of power and can have lasting effects on the victim (Nansel et al., 2001;
Olweus, 2010). With advances in technology, bullies are now able to use the Internet and
cell phones as means to bully. Bullying through the use of technology is commonly
referred to as cyberbullying (Hinduja & Patchin, 2008; Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston,
2012). Traditional bullying and cyberbullying have similar negative impacts on the lives
of students who are victimized (Mishna, Khoury-Kassabri, Gadalla, & Daciuk, 2012).
Bullying can affect a student’s engagement in school through loss of concentration, dis-
engagement in classroom activities, and absenteeism (Beale, 2001; National Education
Association, 2012). Furthermore, bullying can affect a student’s mental health by causing
psychosomatic symptoms, depression, and thoughts of suicide (Nansel et al., 2001;
Olweus, 2010). A concerted effort is needed to combat traditional bullying and
cyberbullying on school campuses. These efforts to combat traditional and cyberbullying
in schools currently include state and federal laws, local school policies, anti-bullying
programs, and education and training of parents, educators, and students (Slonje, Smith,
& Frisen, 2012).
The aim of this study is to identify the systems and structures that have been
implemented in schools that lead to promising practices in an effort to stop cyberbullying.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 10
Systems are the coordinated and coherent use of resources (e.g., time, personnel, students,
parents, funds, facilities) at the institution to ensure that the institution’s vision, mission,
and goals are met. Structures are the mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place
by federal, state, and district legislation or widely accepted as the official structure of
institutions that are not subject to change. By understanding the implementation of anti-
cyberbullying systems and structures that create the programs, policies, and interventions
of a school with promising practices, current leaders can benefit from other schools’
efforts as they examine current practices in their own schools.
Background of the Problem
Bullying is a form of school violence that continues to impact schools negatively.
Olweus (1996) defined bullying as “aggressive behavior or intentional ‘harm doing,’
which is carried out repeatedly and over time in an interpersonal relationship character-
ized by an imbalance of power” (p. 266). For the purpose of this study, bullying is
defined as repeated, persistent intentional behaviors that foster a climate of fear and dis-
respect and have a traumatic impact on physical and/or psychological health (Nansel et
al., 2001; Olweus, 2010). Bullying can occur in three distinct forms: physical, verbal, or
psychological (Bauman & Del Rio, 2006). Physical bullying involves physical violence
such as pushing, hitting, slapping, kicking, or punching. Verbal bullying is anything said
or written that would create a climate of fear and disrespect. Psychological bullying
consists of nonverbal actions used either to intimidate or to isolate. Schools implement
anti-bullying policies and discipline negative behaviors. Despite these efforts, bullying
continues to be a problem for schools.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 11
In 2001, researchers found that 30% of students in Grades 6 through 10 had been
bullied (Nansel et al., 2001). Ten years later, the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (2012) distributed the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance, U.S. 2011, which
found that 20% of high school students had been bullied in the previous 12 months. In
2009, the National Center for Educational Statistics surveyed 25 million students and
found that 28% of middle and high school students had been bullied during the previous
year. While the research may vary in the percentage of students being bullied, it is clear
that bullying persists. Nishioka et al. (2011) surveyed more than 11,000 Oregon students
in Grades 3 through 8 and found that over 60% of them had been verbally bullied. That
study shows a great increase in bullying. Despite the differences in findings, research
consistently reveals that bullying is a persistent problem on school campuses.
The range of negative effects of bullying on students is of great importance. Vic-
tims of bullying are more likely to disengage in class and therefore underperform in
school (Beale, 2001; Nansel et al., 2001; Olweus, 1993). Disengagement could occur in
the form of decreased focus during class, a lack of participation in classroom activities, or
failure to do homework. Mehta, Cornell, Fan, and Gregory (2013) reported a correlation
between students’ perception of bullying at school and their achievement in school. In
that study a student did not actually have to be a victim for the bullying to affect
achievement. The researchers found that, for students who perceived bullying to be a
problem at school, achievement rates decreased. When students are bullied, their grades
reflect an average 1.5-grade drop (Juvonen, 2011). Furthermore, students who are contin-
ually bullied are more likely to miss school (Beale, 2001; Nansel et al., 2001; Olweus,
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 12
1993). The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance, U.S. 2011 reported that 6% of surveyed
high school students had missed at least 1 day of school in the previous 30 days due to
being bullied (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2012). Ten percent 10%
of students who drop out of school do so as a result of being bullied (Weinhold &
Weinhold, 1998). Therefore, bullied students are not able to fully access their right to an
education. The cause could be disengagement in the classroom, absenteeism, or dropping
out of school.
The mental well-being of a student is also at risk when the student is continually
bullied. Victims of bullying are 4 times as likely to suffer from depression as students
who are not bullied (Klomek, Marrocco, Kleinman, Schonfeld, & Gould, 2007). Bullied
students are 3 times more likely to have suicidal ideation or to attempt suicide (Kaltiala-
Heino, Rimpela, Rantanen, & Rimpela, 2000; Klomek et al., 2007; Winsper, Lereya,
Zanarini, & Wolke, 2012). Victims have more thoughts of violent retaliation and 84% of
school shooters reported having been a victim of bullying (Kimmel & Mahler, 2003).
With potential tragic outcomes, school bullying has harsh consequences.
Most bullying occurs when adults are not immediately present (Nansel et al.,
2001). For many schools, there is less adult supervision in hallways, in the cafeteria, and
on playgrounds. Isernhagen and Harris (2003) found that students in Grades 9 and 10
were most likely to be bullied at lunch, between classes, and at extracurricular events. In
each of these locations there is decreased adult supervision. A new realm where there is
little or no supervision is the Internet and the use of cell phones (Franek, 2005). As
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 13
studies have shown, a decrease in adult supervision increases the potential for bullying,
and the Internet and cell phone interactions create a place where bullying can occur.
A recent phenomenon in bullying is occurring on the Internet. Technology has
created a new environment—cyberspace—where supervision is scarce. With a lack of
supervision, bullying is prevalent via the use of mobile devices and the Internet.
Kowalski et al. (2012) defined cyberbullying as “bullying through e-mail, instant mes-
saging, in a chat room, on a Web site, on an online gaming site, or through digital
messages or images sent to a cellular phone” (p. 1). Hinduja and Patchin (2008) extended
this definition to include “when someone repeatedly makes fun of another person online
or repeatedly picks on another person through email or text message or when someone
posts something about another person that they don’t like” (p. 152). Cyberbullying has
emerged in part due to the new and increased use of technology. According to 2012 data
from the Center for Digital Education (2012), 83% of surveyed teenage students had a
personal cell phone. The average teenager has multiple online devices, sends 50 text mes-
sages a day, and spends time online every day (Lenhart, Rich, Campbell, & Purcell,
2010). With the invention of smartphones, many students have continual online access
throughout the day.
Cyberbullying is widespread among teenage students. From 2002 to 2011,
researchers reported the percentage of students involved in incidents of cyberbullying
ranging between approximately 10% and 50% (Bullying Statistics.org, 2009; Kowalski et
al., 2012). In a 2008 study (Juvonen & Gross, 2008), 72% of the participants reported that
they had experienced a “mean experience” via a mobile device. As these mean messages
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 14
continue over time, these behaviors are classified as cyberbullying. Ybarra and Mitchell
(2004) reported that 17% of teenagers in their sample said that they had deliberately set
up a fake account for the purpose of being mean to someone else. Fear is exacerbated
when the author is unknown. Due to the increased fear through anonymity of the perpe-
trator, single incidents can be classified as cyberbullying.
Similar to traditional bullying, cyberbullying incidents can lead to lower student
engagement, higher absenteeism, and higher rates of depression and suicide (Bauman,
Toomey, & Walker, 2013; Cornell, Gregory, Huang, & Fan, 2012; Klomek et al., 2007;
Mills, Guerin, Lynch, Daly, & Fitzpatrick, 2004). Cyberbullying can create a unique
emotion of fear when the attacker remains anonymous to the victim (Hoff & Mitchell,
2009). Without knowing the perpetrator, the victim has increased feelings of powerless,
even more so than with traditional bullying.
In 2002, one of the first cases of cyberbullying was brought to the public’s atten-
tion. Ghyslain Raza, a Canadian student, filmed himself reenacting a fight scene from a
Star Wars
®
movie, using a golf club as the light saber (Kowalski et al., 2012). This video
was found by other students and was posted to YouTube. Raza was nicknamed the Star
Wars Kid. He was ridiculed by other students as the video circulated. Ultimately, Raza
left school due to constant teasing and harassment.
One year later, Ryan Halligan committed suicide after being both traditionally
bullied at school and then cyberbullied through instant messages at home (Kowalski et
al., 2012; Long, 2008). Halligan was bullied while on campus. He was repeatedly teased
by fellow classmates about a learning disorder. Halligan fought back; he learned kick
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 15
boxing to defend himself. He stood up to his bullies and the abuse stopped. A few months
later, the bullying began again. The bullies turned to instant messages to victimize
Halligan. Halligan could no longer endure his tormenters, and he committed suicide.
In 2006, Megan Meier committed suicide after she was bullied through the use of
MySpace by Lori Drew, the mother of a classmate (Kowalski et al., 2012; Long, 2008;
Pokin, 2007). Drew set up a MySpace account under the name Josh Evans. Drew stated
that Josh was a boy from a neighboring town. Meier and “Josh” spoke through MySpace
and Josh acted interested in Meier. The interactions changed from friendly to mean and
ended with Josh telling Meier to kill herself. Ultimately, Meier did so. Although the
cyberbullying occurred mostly at home, these incidents affected students at school in
terms of their safety.
Cyberbullying can end with a range of devastating consequences, such as disen-
gagement in school, dropping out of school, depression, and suicide. With these potential
outcomes, it is important to know how educators, parents, and students can prevent
cyberbullying. Cyberbullying research is still in its infancy and more research is needed
in order to understand how to prevent cyberbullying and how to create an effective anti-
cyberbullying program for schools.
Statement of the Problem
Cyberbullying is a growing concern for schools. The effects of cyberbullying
mirror those of traditional bullying, yet it is unclear whether the efforts that schools are
making to prevent traditional bullying will be enough to combat cyberbullying as well.
Students who are victims of bullying may experience disengagement from school, lower
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 16
achievement, higher rates of absences, and higher dropout rates (Beale, 2001; Nansel et
al., 2001; Olweus, 1993). In some instances of cyberbullying, the bully’s identity is
unknown, which can trigger greater fear and feelings of powerlessness (Hoff & Mitchell,
2009). Victims of cyberbullying are more likely than victims of traditional bullying to be
depressed, have suicidal thoughts, and/or attempt suicide (Kaltiala-Heino et al., 2000;
Klomek et al., 2007; Winsper et al., 2012). Three characteristics specific to cyberbullying
may not be addressed in traditional anti-bullying efforts: anonymity of the perpetrator,
increased audience of incidents of bullying, and an inability to escape the bullying.
In order to combat cyberbullying, structures and systems are necessary to create
uniform definitions and procedures for intervention. State cyberbullying laws attempt to
provide such structure, but at the time of writing not all states had cyberbullying laws
(U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013). While effective programs to
combat cyberbullying exist, not all schools have designated systems to target the cause.
These programs require time, money, and efforts by the school to implement. Schools are
not required by law to implement anti-cyberbullying efforts; thus, the decision to create a
system is in the control of the schools and school districts.
Even with structures and systems in place, sustaining these efforts can be cumber-
some. The implementation of structures and systems is at the discretion of the local
school. Structures, such as laws and policies, can be in place, but schools determine how
they are enforced and some of the consequences that occur. Systems created for anti-
cyberbullying efforts are also managed by the schools. Schools determine how people
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 17
will be educated and trained, as well as how often. Without an effective implementation
of the program that includes a plan for sustainability, cyberbullying will persist.
Even with anti-cyberbullying efforts, all stakeholders must be active participants
in these efforts. Many anti-cyberbullying programs rely on students to report incidents of
cyberbullying. In a study of seventh-grade students, Li (2007) found that only 34% had
reported when they had experienced or witnessed cyberbullying. If the school is unaware
of incidents, the systems and structure that are used to combat cyberbully cannot be
deployed. Stauffer, Heath, Coyne, and Ferrin (2012) found that less than half of the
teachers whom they surveyed agreed that anti-bullying programs were unnecessary in
schools, even though almost all of the teachers agreed that cyberbullying was detrimental
to students. These beliefs and actions challenge the systems and structures created to fight
cyberbullying, allowing the harmful practices to persist.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to identify the systems and structures that schools
use to target cyberbullying within their anti-bullying efforts. While there are many
programs to reduce bullying and cyberbullying, the focus of the study was to identify
how a school implemented these programs and used them in conjunction with structures
and systems to create an effective anti-cyberbullying culture. First, the researcher identi-
fied the current federal, state, and local laws and policies related to anti-cyberbullying
efforts. Then the researcher identified the systems used to meet the goals of an anti-
cyberbullying program. Finally, the researcher the study to determine how these systems
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 18
and structures were implemented so that an effective anti-cyberbullying program could
be created and maintained.
Research Questions
This study was designed to address the following research questions:
1. What are the systems and structures that contribute to an anti-cyberbullying
culture in schools?
2. What is the perceived effectiveness of the systems and structures in place?
3. How are these systems and structures sustained to support an anti-
cyberbullying culture in schools?
Theoretical Framework
In order to study the best practices of a school’s anti-cyberbullying culture, this
case study is grounded in a theoretical framework. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems
theory has been widely used in research of bullying and cyberbullying. Bronfenbrenner’s
model is a multifaceted model that incorporates interactions of the individual and his or
her environment. This model includes four levels: microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem,
and macrosystem (Lee, 2011; Swearer & Espelage, 2004). Swearer and Espelage (2004)
described each of the four levels in Bronfenbrenner’s model. The microsystem includes
all of the people with whom the individual has interactions. The mesosystem consists of
the interactions and relationships between the components of the microsystem that help
the individual. The exosystem pertains to the interactions between two settings that are
not directly related to the individual’s environment. The macrosystem includes the poli-
cies, organization, and culture that shape the environment of the individual.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 19
In cases of cyberbullying, the center of Bronfenbrenner’s model—the individ-
ual—would be the victim of cyberbullying. The microsystem would include all of the
people with whom the victim interacts with regard to cyberbullying. The bully and all
witnesses to the bullying would be included in this system. The microsystem could also
include the victim’s parents, friends, teachers, and other community members who could
have potential interactions with the victim about the cyberbullying. The interactions and
relationships between any of the people or settings in the microsystem would be included
in the mesosystem. These interactions and relationships directly relate to the victim. For
example, this could include the actual incidents of cyberbullying, as well as other inci-
dents, such parents and teachers talking about the incident. The exosystem includes the
interactions that do not directly relate to the victim but have influence over the victim.
This could include school board decisions regarding implementation of school policy.
These decisions are not set specifically for the individual but the individual may benefit
from the implementation. Another example could be a parent’s work schedule, which
could affect the parent’s ability to supervise the student’s use of the Internet. While the
work schedule is not specifically set to help or hinder the student, it does affect the
student. The macrosystem would include things that are guaranteed to the student by the
means of the government or the community in which the student lives. This could include
laws such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and state educational codes that guarantee
students the right to an education in a safe environment. Figure 1 depicts Bronfen-
brenner’s ecological model, including elements that influence cyberbullying.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 20

Figure 1. Cyberbullying applied to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model.
This study focused on the mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem. The
research questions concentrated on the systems and structures that the school used to
implement anti-cyberbullying efforts. The structures, including laws and policies, are
components of the macrosystems. Structures establish the governing practices that set
forth students’ rights to a free and safe education. The interactions between the compo-
nents of the systems and structures encompass the mesosystem and exosystem. In order
to study how a school created an anti-cyberbullying culture, it was necessary to examine
how these components worked together.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 21
Significance of the Study
Research on cyberbullying has begun and schools are just beginning to develop
and implement structures and systems to address a growing concern for school safety.
While there is research on anti-bullying programs, understanding what else is needed to
address cyberbullying requires attention. As technology advances, further considerations
of how such technology could affect current anti-bullying programs and specific cyber-
bullying interventions may be necessary.
This research is significant to educators as they continue to strive to provide a safe
campus for an optimal learning environment. As schools look to create effective anti-
cyberbullying policies and practices, this study is a valuable aid to identify structures and
systems that have been successful in other schools. The study also examined how these
structures and systems were implemented and maintained, giving educators information
on how to start the process of implementation. For educators who are unaware of the
growing concern of cyberbullying, this study can help to identify the need for anti-
cyberbullying efforts. With schools in a variety of stages in development of anti-
cyberbullying efforts, this research will inform schools in their practices to create a safe a
campus for students.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are relevant to this study. For the purpose of this study, these
terms are defined as follows.
Bullying: Repeated, persistent intentional behaviors that foster a climate of fear
and disrespect that has a traumatic impact on physical and/or psychological health.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 22
Cyberbullying: The use of an electronic device to engage in persistent, intentional
behaviors that foster a climate of fear and disrespect while having a traumatic impact on
the victim’s physical or psychological health, especially in terms of prolonged and/or
widespread exposure to one incident due to the medium of technology.
Structures: Mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in place by federal, state,
and district legislation or widely accepted as the official structure of institutions that are
not subject to change.
Systems: Coordinated and coherent use of resources (e.g., time, personnel,
students, parents, funds, facilities) at the institution to ensure that the institution’s vision,
mission, and goals are met.
Limitations and Delimitations
The limitations of this study were beyond the control of the researcher and may
have had an impact on its results. Despite efforts to allow this study to be applicable to a
larger population of schools, this study was delimited to one case study at a middle
school, thus possibly prohibiting the findings to be transferable. The intent of conducting
a case study was to examine the best practices at a single school. Each school is unique in
climate and culture and these factors influence the interworking of an operating school.
Broad generalization may not be extracted from this research and the findings may or
may not be applied to other populations or grade levels. The research focused on the per-
ceptions of the persons who were interviewed, rather than on quantitative measures. The
researcher depended on the participants’ truthfulness throughout the interview process
but used triangulation to strengthen validity (Merriam, 2009).
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 23
Another limitation of this study was time. This study was delimited to a single
middle school, with students in Grades 6 to 8. This time constraint also limited the
sample size and observations and interviews that were conducted.
In terms of delimitations, the researcher selected several parameters for the
sample. In selecting the school, the researcher focused on middle schools located in
southern California. The criteria for selection of schools with promising practices related
to cyberbullying on the campus were (a) a school enrollment of 1,000 or more students,
(b) a public middle school, and (c) a school with positive schoolwide anti-cyberbullying
efforts.
Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter 1 provides an overview of the study, including the background of the
problem, the purpose, and the significance. Chapter 2 reviews the literature, focusing on
history of bullying and cyberbullying in the United States, the effects of cyberbullying on
student victims, and challenges in combating cyberbullying in schools; the chapter also
describes the theoretical framework for the study. Chapter 3 describes the methodology
for the study, including the reason for selecting a qualitative approach, information on the
sample, and the study’s instrumentation. Chapter 4 presents the findings of the study.
Chapter 5 reviews the findings and presents recommendations for practice and research.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 24
Chapter 2
Literature Review
Cyberbullying continues to be a concern for schools. With negative effects
ranging from poor student engagement to suicide, it is important for schools to establish
anti-cyberbullying programs and policies. The purpose of this study was to examine one
school’s anti-cyberbullying efforts. This review examines current research on
cyberbullying and its effects, as well as practices that may help to create an anti-
cyberbullying culture.
This chapter is organized around the theoretical framework and the three themes
that emerged from the literature: (a) the history of cyberbullying, (b) the impact of
cyberbullying on student achievement, and (c) the response to cyberbullying in schools.
The first section provides an overview of the definitions of bullying and cyberbullying
and the key laws and policies that have influenced anti-cyberbullying practices in
schools. The second section examines the effects of cyberbullying on victims. The third
section highlights research on student and teacher perceptions as schools respond to
cyberbullying.
An Overview of the History of Cyberbullying
Cyberbullying is a relatively new concern for schools. Changes in technology in
the past 30 years have allowed bullying to move from the school onto the Internet and
through mobile devices. State and federal laws have been enacted in an attempt to
prevent bullying and cyberbullying. In addition to these laws, schools have created and
implemented policies that focus on bullying and cyberbullying prevention and
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 25
intervention. Changes in how bullying and cyberbullying occur, along with the correlat-
ing laws and policies constructed to stop cyberbullying in schools, are discussed in this
section.
Bullying
The term bullying is often misused as a description of many negative behaviors.
Teasing, name-calling, and saying mean things are negative behaviors but on their own
do not necessarily constitute bullying. While these behaviors should be addressed, it is
important for a school to recognize when the incidents are actually bullying. The first
step in creating an anti-bullying culture at school is to clearly define bullying and to
communicate this definition to all stakeholders.
There are multiple ways to define bullying. Nansel et al. (2001) defined bullying
as
a specific type of aggression in which (1) the behavior is intended to harm or
disturb, (2) the behavior occurs repeatedly over time, and (3) there is an imbal-
ance of power, with the more powerful person or group attacking the less
powerful one. (p. 2094)
Olweus (1996) defined bullying as “aggressive behavior or intentional ‘harm doing,’
which is carried out repeatedly and over time in an interpersonal relationship character-
ized by an imbalance of power” (p. 266). Common themes in all definitions include the
use of intentional and repetitive negative behavior and an imbalance of power. For the
purpose of this study, bullying is defined as repeated, persistent, intentional behaviors
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 26
that foster a climate of fear and disrespect; these behaviors and the subsequent climate
have a traumatic impact on the victim’s physical and/or psychological health.
Even with a clear definition, bullying incidents transpire in a variety of ways.
Three distinct forms of bullying have emerged: physical, verbal and relational, or psy-
chological (Bauman & Del Rio, 2006; Nansel et al., 2001). Physical bullying is defined
as bullying that uses physical discomfort, injury, or assault (Bauman & Del Rio, 2006).
Wang, Iannotti, and Nansel (2009) surveyed more than 7,000 students in Grades 6
through 10 regarding incidents of bullying that had occurred within the 2 months prior to
the survey. Twenty percent of the surveyed students reported having been physically
bullied. Verbal bullying is defined as bullying that is displayed through written or spoken
words (Bauman & Del Rio, 2006). Verbal bullying is the most common form of bullying
(Nansel et al., 2001). Research by Wang et al. (2009) identified 53% of students as
having been verbally bullied. Relational bullying is defined as “harm that occurs through
injury or manipulation of a relationship” (Young, Boye, & Nelson, 2006, p. 297). Exclu-
sion and spreading rumors are two examples of relational bullying. Despite the differ-
ences, all three forms of bullying have commonalities in environment and effects.
Bullying can occur anywhere on a school campus, but research has shown
common characteristics of environments where bullying occurs most. Two factors were
prevalent: supervision and structure of activities (Swearer, Espelage, Vailliancourt, &
Hymel, 2010). Places that have little or no adult supervision are common locations for
bullying to occur. Typical places on school campuses with less supervision could include
the playground, the cafeteria, or the hallways. Occasions where activities are less
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 27
structured also have a higher incidence of bullying. This could be breaks in the day such
as lunch, snack, recess, or when students change classes. In these environments, students
have more freedom in their choice of activities. During incidents of bullying, perpetrators
make bad choices in the activities in which they are engaged. Research indicates that
increased structured activities coupled with increased supervision in schools can help to
reduce bullying. One may argue that it is not that simple. Other strategies will be dis-
cussed further in the literature review.
Technology
A clear definition of bullying for all stakeholders and being able to recognize
bullying when it occurs are the foundation to understanding bullying (Kowalski et al.,
2012). This subsection addresses a major change in the United States over the past 3
decades: an increase in the use of technology and the widespread use of the Internet and
cell phones.
Technology and its uses have significantly changed in the past 30 years. The
1980s brought the personal computer to homes, along with the first cell phone call.
Throughout the past 30 years, computers and cell phones became affordable to the aver-
age person. The 1990s brought the Internet to the general public, while smartphones and
wi-fi gave people access virtually anywhere and everywhere in the United States.
Throughout these changing times, schools were implementing these new technologies
into classes and campuses. In 2012, the Center for Digital Education produced a report
titled “Technology Innovation in Education” that featured many trends in technology in
education (Center for Digital Education, 2012). The report stated that 56% of schools
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 28
allowed students to bring their own devices to school. Some of the uses for these personal
devices, along with computers or mobile devices issued by the school, included reading
online textbooks, researching online, or participating in fully or partially online classes.
Technology has undergone a large number of changes in its use. The Center for
Digital Education’s (2012) national study found that 83% of teenage students had a cell
phone. This number has almost doubled compared to findings from the Pew Research
Center in 2004 (Lenhart, 2009). In addition to cell phones, students have laptops, tablets,
iPads™, and online gaming devices. Students are now using the Internet daily (Kowalski
& Limber, 2007). In addition, the invention of the smartphone created a portable device
that combined the phone with the Internet. These changes have had a great impact on
students. Having mobile devices allows students to access the Internet at any moment.
Cyberbullying
With the inventions of these technologies and increased access and use, students
are using school technology, as well their own devices, on school grounds. Monitoring all
of these devices is impossible for schools; this absence of supervision is the breeding
ground for cyberbullying (Franek, 2005). Just as traditional bullying persists in the areas
of the school that lack supervision, unsupervised Internet use can lead to bullying online,
or cyberbullying. The definition of cyberbullying, the different types of cyberbullying
and how cyberbullying occurs are discussed in this section.
Cyberbullying has been defined in a variety of ways. Many have defined
cyberbullying simply as bullying through electronic means (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010;
Kowalski et al., 2012). While this definition covers many incidents of cyberbullying, it
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 29
may negate single incidents in which the effects are more severe due to the widespread
access and dissemination that technology provides. For example, an incident may be
threatening or include pictures or insults that cannot be removed in a timely manner,
resulting in far more people “witnessing” the incident. Thus, a single incident could
torment the victim for a substantial length of time while the insult remains on the
Internet. For the purpose of this study, cyberbullying is defined as the use of an electronic
device to engage in persistent, intentional behaviors that foster a climate of fear and dis-
respect while having a traumatic impact on the victim’s physical or psychological health,
especially in terms of prolonged and/or widespread exposure to one incident due to the
medium of technology.
The forums in which cyberbullying occurs can be generalized into five categories:
text messages, instant messages, email, chat room, and websites. Text messages, instant
messages, and email are used similarly in cyberbullying incidents. Threats or harassing
messages are sent via one of these means (Beale & Hall, 2007). Unflattering or hurtful
pictures can also be sent via these means. These communications typically involve one
sender to one recipient, but it is also possible to send each of these communications to
multiple recipients. This is important to note, as the number of people who see an inci-
dent may change the categorization from a simple negative interaction to cyberbullying.
In a study by Juvonen and Gross (2008), instant messaging was the most common forum
of cyberbullying. Chat rooms and instant messaging allow for participants to exchange
messages. Chat rooms are typically more public than instant messages. One specific type
of chat room, a “bash board,” is used to post messages anonymously around a theme,
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 30
topic, or person (Beale & Hall, 2007). With a wide range in purpose of websites, the use
of websites for cyberbullying is diverse. The two most frequently used types of websites
are voting booths and social media. Voting booths are websites set up to poll opinions
(Beale & Hall, 2007). In cyberbullying, this may look like rating girls’ appearance or
polling for the “dumbest” person in the class. Social media has had a great impact on
students, with a recent national study of students ages 12–17 reporting that 80% of teens
used at least one form of social media (Lenhart et al., 2011). That study also found that
88% of the teens using social media had observed other people being mean through these
websites, while 15% of those teenagers had been victims of mean messages on social
media within the previous year. Furthermore, 21% of those teens had contributed to the
mean behavior. The public forum of both social media and voting booths, coupled with
an inability to remove the comments, can turn a single negative behavior into a
cyberbullying incident. As adults begin to learn the new technology, websites, or venues
in which cyberbullying are occurring, one forum is quickly replaced with a new one. This
makes combating cyberbullying especially difficult.
With the variety of forums of cyberbullying, incidents may have various aspects.
Willard (2005) discussed seven forms of cyberbullying: flaming, harassment, denigration,
cyberstalking, masquerading, outing, and exclusion (Willard, 2005). Flaming is the most
common form of cyberbullying. This entails a person sending or posting hurtful, angry,
or vulgar messages or pictures about another person. If these messages continue over
time, the cyberbullying is then redesignated as harassment. When these messages are
harmful or untrue, the category changes to denigration. Cyberstalking occurs when the
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 31
posted messages are intended to intimidate or threaten harm. Masquerading transpires
when a person creates a profile or account under false pretenses, either by using a false
name or pretending to be someone else. In 2004, a national study of 1,500 students ages
10–17 showed that 17% of the teenagers said that they had deliberately set up a fake
account for the purpose of being mean to someone else (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). If
private, usually embarrassing, information is disclosed, this is referred to as outing.
Outing could range from an innocent sharing of a secret crush to a devastating sharing
pictures of a sexual nature beyond the original user’s intention. Many outings describe
events or personal information that the victim does not want others to know, such as sex-
ual orientation, reports of sexual encounters, or reports of abuse. Exclusion occurs when
someone is blocked from a group such as a chat room or within a circle of online friends.
Exclusion is not as prominent a form of a cyberbullying form, since the victim may not
know that he or she is being excluded. These seven variations of cyberbullying could be
categorized as either verbal, such as flaming or harassment, or relational, especially in
instances of denigration, outing, and exclusion (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010). Since
cyberbullying occurs in a virtual world, physical cyberbullying would not exist, although
physical bullying could occur alongside cyberbullying. All forms of cyberbullying can
have negative effects on the victims. Understanding each form can help educators to
combat cyberbullying in their schools.
With an increase of technology in schools and an increase in the number of
mobile devices in the hands of teenagers, it is now possible for cyberbullying to occur
anywhere. Mishna, Khoury-Karrabri, Gadalla, and Daciuk (2012) argued that “the
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 32
Internet may therefore provide opportunities for students to extend traditional bullying”
(p. 68). In Cassidy, Jackson, and Brown’s (2009) research, 64% of cyberbullying origi-
nated from an event at school. These incidents could start as traditional bullying on
campus and move to cyberbullying. It is more likely that the cyberbullying starts as a
form of retaliation (Sourander et al., 2010). Hoff and Mitchell’s (2009) study found rela-
tional conflicts, such as breakups, envy, and intolerance, to be the catalyst of most
cyberbullying incidents. The Internet has given students a forum to vent their frustration
and anger without actually confronting the person. Unfortunately, this public forum then
creates new conflicts. Some students do not see how their public post will affect other
students, or they do not care how it will affect them. When students post to the Internet,
adults are not usually aware that it has happened.
Traditional bullying occurs more often when adults are not present. If an incident
of traditional bullying is occurring, adults may be alerted to the incident, either when
passing by or through a bystander. In cyberbullying, this is less likely. “[Cyberbullying’s]
electronic form allows it to occur in ways that are less visible and overt; it, therefore, may
not attract the attention of parents or teachers” (Hay, Meldrum, & Mann, 2010, p. 12).
Franek (2005) equated the Internet to the “wild, wild, West,” with no one policing bad
and illegal behaviors. Franek noted that students are convinced that adults are not watch-
ing their behaviors and interactions online. Currently, that is the case in many schools.
Schools are increasing the availability of technology but ignoring that cyberbullying
exists (Cassidy, Brown, & Jackson, 2012). The inability to identify cyberbullying as it is
occurring creates a situation that does not allow adults to police the situation.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 33
Furthermore, the idea that adults do not intervene even when they know that
cyberbullying is occurring suggests to students that the behavior is acceptable or at least
tolerated. This lack of supervision, coupled with a lack of ramifications, means that
cyberbullying will continue.
Laws and Policies
When bullying and cyberbullying first emerged, laws had not yet been written to
address these incidents on school campuses. Physical incidents of bullying could be con-
sidered assault and verbal incidents might be considered harassment, but corresponding
definitions, violations, and consequences were unclear. This subsection addresses the
laws and policies written to safeguard against bullying and cyberbullying, including fed-
eral laws, state laws, and school policies.
Federal and state laws. State and federal laws clearly provide all students with
the right to a free education. In 2002, NCLB declared, “Students and school personnel
need a secure environment, free from the dangers and distractions of violence, drug use,
and lack of discipline, in order to ensure that all children achieve to their full potential”
(U.S. Department of Education, 2013, para. 1). NCLB was the first national legislation to
address violence in schools and the rights of students to attend safe schools. The legisla-
tion was created largely due to the increase in violence in schools. NCLB did not specifi-
cally address bullying but laid a foundation for school safety.
In 2002, NCLB was the first national legislation to address safety in school, but
some states already had laws that required schools to secure their campuses. Every state
is responsible for its own system of education and the educational laws that govern that
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 34
system. California’s Constitution states, “All students and staff of public primary, ele-
mentary, junior high and senior high schools have the alienable right to attend campuses
which are safe, secure, and peaceful” (California State Constitution, 2008, Article 1,
§28.7). While each state defines its own rights for students, all states give students the
right to an education free of harm. Furthermore, states decide on their own educational
laws that allow schools to govern the discipline of students. These laws could aid in com-
bating traditional bullying and cyberbullying. One of Georgia’s laws prohibits “verbal
assault of other students, including threatening violence or sexual harassment as defined
pursuant to Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972” (Georgia Code, 2012, § 20-
2-751.5). This law could be used in a case of verbal bullying that is considered to be
threatening.
In the aftermath of Columbine, schools identified bullying as a problem and con-
firmed the need for specific laws to prevent bullying on school campuses. In 1999,
Georgia was the first state to adopt anti-bullying laws (U.S. Department of Education,
2011). The law in Georgia was amended to include bullying within a current law on char-
acter development that stated,
The State Board of Education shall develop by the start of the 1997-1998 school
year a comprehensive character education program for levels K–12. This compre-
hensive character education program shall be known as the “character curricu-
lum” and shall focus on the students’ development of the following character
traits: courage, patriotism, citizenship, honesty, fairness, respect for others, kind-
ness, cooperation, self-respect, self-control, courtesy, compassion, tolerance,
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 35
diligence, generosity, punctuality, cleanliness, cheerfulness, school pride, respect
for the environment, respect for the creator, patience, creativity, sportsmanship,
loyalty, perseverance, and virtue. Such program shall also address, by the start of
the 1999-2000 school year, methods of discouraging bullying and violent acts
against fellow students. Local boards shall implement such a program in all grade
levels at the beginning of the 2000-2001 school year and shall provide opportuni-
ties for parental involvement in establishing expected outcomes of the character
education program. (Georgia Code, 2012, § 20-2-145)
These laws defined bullying and required local educational agencies to create
anti-bullying policies and procedures to discipline students who committed bullying
offenses. Since then, most other states have also created policies and laws that specifi-
cally address bullying policies and anti-bullying efforts on school campuses. Two types
of laws have been created: laws that indicate that schools must have an anti-bullying
policy and laws that make bullying illegal. To date, only Montana does not have any
policy or law that specifically addresses bullying (U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, 2013). While some incidents of bullying may fall within laws regarding assault
or harassment, the need for bullying laws was evident both to create awareness of the
seriousness of the effects of bullying and to allow schools to act in response to bullying in
ways that were not already covered.
From 2000 to 2005, while most schools were just beginning to understand the
importance of an anti-bullying culture, cyberbullying emerged on campuses. Current laws
are not adequate in addressing the issue. School bullying laws and policies cover only
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 36
incidents that occur at school or on the way to and from school. In the early 2000s, most
cyberbullying incidents occurred off-campus and therefore were not under the jurisdic-
tion of schools. By 2007, five states had anti-cyberbullying laws (Kowalski et al., 2012).
These laws varied in how they addressed cyberbullying. Arkansas amended its bullying
law to include bullying by an electronic act, and Delaware amended their law to include a
definition of cyberbullying (Beckstrom, 2008). As these acts occur on campuses, laws
help to clarify these incidents as incidents of cyberbullying. Cyberbullying laws in
Massachusetts and Louisiana specifically state that cyberbullying could occur on or off
campus, but most cyberbullying laws do not explicitly give jurisdiction outside of school.
Cyberbullying laws are changing. In 2011, California adopted AB 746, a law that
extended the school’s right to suspend for cyberbullying specifically occurring on social
media (McGreevy, 2011). As the technology continues to change, the laws will need to
follow.
The First Amendment, guaranteeing freedom of speech, has come into question
regarding the assailant’s right to say or write bullying remarks. Tinker v. Des Moines
upheld students’ rights to express themselves but established a basis of how schools
would determine the application of the First Amendment to freedom of speech on school
campuses (Goodno, 2011; Lane, 2010). The decision stated that First Amendment rights
would be waived if the speech had substantially disrupted school activities (King, 2010).
When dealing with cyberbullying, it is often difficult to demonstrate substantial disrup-
tion to school activities, especially when the cyberbullying occurs off campus. The
uncertainty of a school’s jurisdiction in cases of cyberbullying was tested in 2002, with
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 37
J. S. v. Bethlehem (Donegan, 2012; King, 2010). The student had made threatening and
derogatory remarks online via the Internet against the school and its administration. The
student created a slam page featuring teachers, including threatening remarks. The courts
upheld the decision of the school that the page had created a disruption. It defined that an
incident would be deemed a disruption so long as a responsible and reasonable person
would agree. This case strengthened the school’s right to limit a student’s freedom of
speech if it disrupts the school. Further, it set the precedent that an incident that occurs
away from school could be disciplined. In most cases, Tinker v. Des Moines and J. S. v
Bethehem are applied in two ways (Beckstrom, 2008). First, the acts of one student
cannot violate the rights of another student. In this case, the victim could experience dis-
ruption of educational activities that could potentially deny the right to an education.
Second, a student’s action cannot create a substantial disruption to the whole school. One
or both of these arguments may be applied when determining students’ rights in tradi-
tional or cyberbullying incidents.
School policies. School districts and individual schools can create policies that
support and extend state and federal laws. Most of these policies help to define the
district’s interpretation of safe schools. Zero-tolerance policies are one type of district
policy that further define state laws, as well as the consequences of defying those laws.
This section focuses on the four common policies affecting bullying and cyberbullying:
anti-bullying, zero tolerance, electronic use, and bring your own device (BYOD).
School districts are beginning to create their own anti-bullying policies. These
policies define bullying and specify its consequences. Some states have mandated schools
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 38
to create these policies. In 2012, California passed a bill that “required [a] policy adopted
by the local educational agencies to prohibit discrimination, harassment, intimidation,
and bullying based on actual or perceived characteristics” (Seth’s Law AB 9, 2011). The
policies that the schools create must support existing state laws. In the case of California
law, schools are expected to create policies that identify bullying and define the conse-
quences of bullying, but these laws do not explicitly state the policy itself. Furthermore,
while these laws target traditional bullying, Dickerson (2005) has argued that these poli-
cies should also include specific language to explicitly include cyberbullying.
Some schools have zero-tolerance policies that include specific acts of bullying or
hazing. A zero-tolerance policy gives schools the ability to expel students for partaking in
acts defined in said policy. Possession of guns, explosives, weapons, or large quantities
of controlled substances typically fall under zero-tolerance policies. Some schools have
zero-tolerance policies for harassment or even specific to bullying (Stein, 2003). Stein
cautioned schools in creating zero-tolerance policies for bullying. First, zero tolerance
has not been proven effective in terminating these behaviors. In addition, zero-tolerance
policies can infringe on a student’s right to education. Although the intent of zero-
tolerance policies is to rid a school of a specific threat, one could argue that, since the
perpetrator also has the right to an education, the school is just relocating the threat. The
challenge is to find a way to eliminate the threat without removing the perpetrator.
Most schools now have a policy that defines appropriate use of electronics,
including school computers and personal devices, on the school campus. These policies
contain language that would prevent cyberbullying on campus (Beale & Hall, 2007;
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 39
Franek, 2005). Many policies state that students are to use electronic devices for educa-
tional use only. This would govern texting in class and using social media or other web-
sites for noneducational purposes. Furthermore, these policies would govern any
cyberbullying occurring on campus, as these acts are not educational.
BYOD is a new trend in education meant to increase the technology on campus
without the need for additional funding. Schools are encouraging students to bring
tablets, iPads, smartphones, and laptop computers to school to increase their ability to use
technology in classrooms. In a recent study, 100% of the information technology manag-
ers of schools polled reported that they expected their schools to have a 1:1 student-to-
device ratio within the next 5 years (Center for Digital Education, 2012). Most of these
managers stated that this will happen by encouraging students to bring their own devices,
thus creating a need for a BYOD policy. The philosophy behind BYOD lies in the belief
that, in order to create 21st-century learning environments, it is necessary for all students
to have their own electronic devices. These policies are similar to acceptable use policies,
but with the caveat that schools are specifically governing the use of the personal devices.
Although BYOD is not a policy specific to cyberbullying, schools that have BYOD poli-
cies must also be mindful that increasing students’ access to mobile devices may increase
opportunities for cyberbullying (Hockly, 2012). These schools should have an acceptable
use policy that includes students’ personal devices and ways of monitoring students’ use
of these devices (Hockly, 2012; Sangani, 2013).
While state and federal governments create many laws affecting schools and their
operations, schools also create policies to further define those laws. Those policies can
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 40
help schools to create clear expectations for students, as well as define the consequences
of violating the policies.
When the first cases of cyberbullying were identified, they involved forums such
as YouTube and MySpace. Now, just 11 years later, new forums are used, such as
Instagram and Twitter. As the technology has evolved throughout the years, so has
cyberbullying. With these changes, the laws and policies that prevent cyberbullying have
had to change, too. Schools, parents, and students will need to identify and address these
changes in order to continue to support an anti-cyberbullying culture on and off campus,
as cyberbullying can have serious effects on student achievement.
Effects of Cyberbullying on Student Achievement
Cyberbullying can have long-lasting, detrimental effects on students. Incidents of
cyberbullying resulting in suicide are well documented and there is substantial research
on depression and suicidal ideation. There is still a need for research on the effects of
cyberbullying on student engagement and achievement. In order to understand potential
outcomes of cyberbullying on student achievement, effects of traditional bullying are
discussed in this section.
Student engagement has a significant impact on a student’s academic success, but
cyberbullying can prevent that success. When students are bullied, their grades, on aver-
age, reflect a 1.5-grade drop (National Education Association, 2012). Juvonen, Nishina,
and Graham (2000) studied 243 students in Grades 7 and 8 and found a strong correlation
between victimization of bullying and a lower grade point average (GPA). Once students
are victims of bullying, there is a greater chance that their GPA will decrease. The
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 41
students may not be able to concentrate on class work or may withdraw and not engage in
class work. Buhs, Ladd, and Herald (2006) followed 380 students from ages 5 to 11 and
found that, once students were bullied, their academic success continued to be affected,
even after the bullying had stopped. While these studies did not specifically examine
cyberbullying, the results of Beran and Li’s (2008) Canadian cyberbullying study of 432
students in Grades 7 through 9 were consistent with findings reported in studies of tradi-
tional bullying. Beran and Li found that students who were cyberbullied had difficulty in
concentrating in school and had lower grades than peers who had not experienced
cyberbullying.
In addition to decreased academic achievement, students who are bullied, both
traditionally and cyberbullied, are more likely to have higher absentee rates and lower
achievement in school (Beale, 2001; Beran & Li, 2008; Juvonen et al., 2000). It has been
estimated that 160,000 students miss school each day due to bullying (National Education
Association, 2012). Students who are bullied do not feel safe at school and therefore may
miss school to avoid being bullied. When students are not in school, they are not engaged
in class activities. Research by Buhs et al. (2006) found that through continued peer
exclusion and peer abuse, students are more likely to avoid school and disengage in class-
room participation while in school, affecting student achievement. Thus, bullying may
prevent students from reaching their academic potential.
For both traditional bullying and cyberbullying, psychosomatic concerns arise for
the victim (Nansel et al., 2001; Sourander et al., 2010). Psychosomatic effects consist of
physical symptoms that originate from emotional or mental causes. In the case of
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 42
cyberbullying, psychosomatic symptoms include wetting the bed, sleep problems, head-
aches, and stomach aches (Sourander et al., 2010). These are similar to the psychoso-
matic effects found with traditional bullying. Psychosomatic symptoms can have negative
effects on student engagement as headaches, stomach aches, and sleep problems may
affect concentration and participation in class activities. In a Finnish study of more than
2,000 students ranging in age from 13 to 16, Sourander et al. (2010) found that
cyberbullying victims were twice as likely to suffer from abdominal pain, 3 times as
likely to suffer from distracting headaches, and almost 10 times as likely to have diffi-
culty in falling asleep. Students may miss school due to these symptoms, restricting their
ability to engage in class and perform to their highest potential (Buhs et al., 2006;
Juvonen et al., 2000).
There is more research on the emotional and mental health effects of
cyberbullying than on other effects. In Hoff and Mitchell’s (2009) study, victims of
cyberbullying experienced higher levels of anger, powerlessness, sadness, and fear than
did nonvictims. In the Finnish study by Sourander et al. (2010), the results showed that 1
in every 4 victims of cyberbullying feared for their safety. These feelings are precursors
of depression, and victims of cyberbullying have a higher risk of suffering from depres-
sion (Bauman et al., 2013). If depression worsens, the potential for suicidal ideation, sui-
cidal attempts, and suicide increases. Hoff and Mitchell (2009) found that feelings of
anger, powerlessness, sadness, and fear were amplified when the assailant was unknown.
When a bully does not reveal his or her identity, the incidents of cyberbullying can ter-
rorize the victim and establish a power differentiation with the victim. As anonymity of
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 43
the perpetrator increases these feelings, it could be concluded that anonymity could also
accelerate a victim to depression or suicidal ideation.
Two types of anonymity are discussed in the research on cyberbullying. The first
occurs when the bully disguises himself/herself so that the victim does not know who
he/she is. Mishna, Saini, and Solomon (2009) found that 25% of the students in their
study who had been cyberbullied had not known the perpetrator. This form of anonymity
heightens fear, paranoia, and helplessness as the victim does not know who is creating the
incidents. The second form occurs when the bully says something that he/she would
never say to the victim’s face, using the electronic device as a shield (Beale & Hall, 2007;
Kowalski & Limber, 2007). For the bully, this creates a feeling similar to anonymity. The
bully does not see the reaction of the victim and may continue to cyberbully. In tradi-
tional bullying, the victim’s reaction may cause the bully to stop. It is easy to post defam-
atory remarks on a social media site (Franek, 2005). With a quick click of a button, these
statements are displayed for all to see. In traditional bullying, the incident would require
the bully to face the victim and rumors to be spread by others. Facing the victim may
deter the bully or the incident may not be talked about by others. Both forms of anonym-
ity allow the perpetrator to post messages that might not be said aloud; thus,
cyberbullying may increase the number of perpetrators.
Victims of traditional bullying may have felt safe once they arrived home from
school. With cyberbullying, the bullying can continue past the school day and throughout
the night (Sourander et al., 2010; Wollack & Mitchell, 2000). The increased exposure to
incidents of cyberbullying can increase the level of risk for potential harmful effects.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 44
With increased exposure, students have higher risk for decreased school engagement,
increased psychosomatic symptoms, or an increase in mental health issues.
As schools begin to understand cyberbullying and its effects, the need for anti-
cyberbullying measures becomes evident. Victims of cyberbullying may be unable to
focus and achieve to their fullest potential. Further, the bullying can be so overwhelming
or intimidating that the victim is afraid to attend school. These incidents prevent the
victim from fully accessing the right to an education. As the cyberbullying persists,
detrimental and tragic outcomes such as depression and suicide can transpire. Schools
have the ability to create their own policies and programs in addition to state and federal
laws.
Responding to Cyberbullying
Laws alone will not prevent cyberbullying. Schools are responsible for the
enforcement of laws and implementation of policies that help to stop cyberbullying. In
addition, schools can implement programs, teacher training, and student assemblies to
enforce these laws and policies. Research shows that comprehensive whole-school
programs are effective in creating an anti-cyberbullying culture on school campuses
(Kowalski et al., 2012; Olweus, 1993; Wiseman, 2011). The use of an anti-cyberbullying
program in conjunction with enforcement of laws and school policies creates the best
results in responding to and preventing cyberbullying (Wiseman, 2011). This section
discusses a whole-school approach to combating cyberbullying, along with the percep-
tions of students and teachers regarding the response to incidents of cyberbullying.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 45
Whole-School Approach
A whole-school approach to bullying and cyberbullying includes curriculum,
interventions, prevention, and shifts in school environment to address anti-bullying
efforts and include all stakeholders (Limber, 2003). These efforts should be long-term,
with the means to be sustained over time. An important feature of these strategies is that
they are in line with the goals and mission of the school and are reinforced and synchro-
nized with other current interventions. As these efforts work together, they help to estab-
lish the culture of the school. With efforts aligned to prevent cyberbullying, the goal is to
create an anti-cyberbullying culture throughout the school.
The most important feature of a whole school approach is that there is consistent,
concerted effort. From this consistent, concerted effort, students receive the same
message from educators, parents, and other students (Morino, 1997). This is especially
true because cyberbullying occurs both at school and home. Inconsistencies create confu-
sion. This may lead to students believing that adults do not know enough to help or
students not knowing what to do when cyberbullying occurs. In order to create a
consistent and concerted effort, staff, parents, and students need training and information
that is clearly communicated. In a whole-school approach, the responsibility for preven-
tion and response to bullying and cyberbullying is a combination of school, parents, and
students.
As schools begin to implement anti-cyberbullying programs, a whole-school
approach should be considered. The implementation of clear definitions and responses
throughout all stakeholders will maximize efforts (Kowalski et al., 2012; Limber, 2003).
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 46
With all stakeholders invested in combating bullying, a consistent message is sent
throughout the campus to all students.
Students
As cyberbullying persists on school campuses, schools rely heavily on students to
report incidents as they occur, yet many students are not willing to report these incidents.
Cassidy et al. (2009) surveyed 365 middle school students and found that 25% of the
students would not tell anyone if they were cyberbullied. Further, of those who would tell
someone, most reported that they would tell a friend, with only 42% saying that they
would report the incident to a teacher or school official. The study also asked the students
whether they would report if they witnessed cyberbullying. The findings revealed that the
percentage of students reporting increased, as 82% of the students said that they would
tell someone when they witnessed cyberbullying, although the responses did not specify
whether they report would be to an adult or another student. The study focused on what
students anticipated that they would do if cyberbullying occurred. In contrast, Li (2007)
surveyed 177 seventh-grade students and found slightly different results when they were
asked what they had done when they had experienced or witness cyberbullying. Li found
that, after either experiencing or witnessing cyberbullying, only 34% of the students
reported the incidents to an adult. Further, Juvonen and Gross (2008) surveyed middle
and high school students and found that 90% had not reported incidents of cyberbullying
to adults. These studies highlight that students are unwilling to report incidents of
cyberbullying to adults. With schools relying on students to report incidents but students
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 47
reluctant to report, cyberbullying will continue to be a problem. Many schools may not
even know the extent of cyberbullying incidents on their campus.
In a study by Cassidy et al. (2009) of 365 middle school students, the students
were asked why they would not report incidents of cyberbullying. The most popular
response was that the students felt that, if they reported the incident, they would face
some form of retaliation. Other reasons that students did not report included feeling that it
was not the school’s responsibility to intervene, that nothing would be done by adults,
that adults could not do anything to help, that they were afraid of being labeled a “rat,” or
that their own Internet usage would be restricted as a result (Cassidy et al., 2009; Juvonen
& Gross, 2008; Mishna, Saini, & Solomon, 2009). Students have many reasons not to
report incidents but, when cyberbullying goes unreported, it can persist. Schools must
find ways to get this information in order to stop further cyberbullying.
Teachers
Teachers are often the first adults on campus to know about incidents of
cyberbullying because they have more interactions with the students. Stauffer et al.
(2012) conducted an online survey of 66 high school teachers with the intent of deter-
mining teachers’ perceptions of the effects of cyberbullying and effective intervention
strategies. The study found that 94% of the teachers agreed that cyberbullying has lasting
effects on its victims. Despite this high rate, less than half of the teachers agreed that an
anti-bullying program should be implemented at their school. Furthermore, when asked
what they would do if an incident of cyberbullying presented itself, the most likely
strategy the teachers would employ was to report the incident to administration. This
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 48
increased when the incident occurred away from school and it became more likely that
they would do nothing at all. As previously stated, one of the reasons that students do not
report cyberbullying is that they believe that adults will not act on the information. The
research by Stauffer et al. (2012) confirms the students’ belief.
Although the research on anti-cyberbully efforts is clear, teachers disagree with
the effectiveness of these efforts. Research has shown effective strategies for creating an
anti-cyberbullying culture, including multiple educational activities, having clear rules
and procedures, enforcing these rules, training bystanders to intervene on behalf of the
victim and to report incidents to school staff, and training teachers on cyberbullying and
intervention strategies (Couvillon & Ilieva, 2011; Franek, 2005; Kowalski & Limber,
2007; Limber, 2003). Stauffer et al. (2012) found that teachers perceived school assem-
blies on anti-bullying, classroom lessons, and professional development for teachers to be
less likely to be helpful in reducing cyberbullying. Kowalski et al. (2012) found that
effective anti-bullying efforts included training for teachers and parents, curriculum for
students, and programs with efforts from staff, parents, and community members. The
researchers also noted that increased supervision and clear policies that are consistently
monitored and enforced are essential in anti-bullying efforts. While teachers were
focused primarily on consequences, the research suggests that a combination of preven-
tion and intervention is needed.
Potential Strategies to Support Response to Cyberbullying
When students were surveyed on potential strategies that could help stop
cyberbullying schools, two strategies emerged as the best in their point of view:
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 49
anonymous phone-in reporting and teaching students and teachers about cyberbullying
and its effects (Cassidy et al., 2009). In addition to these, students also said that programs
that helped students to develop better self-esteem and that punished the perpetrator would
support anti-cyberbullying efforts. An anonymous phone-in reporting system would help
to circumvent some of the reasons that students do not report cyberbullying, such as
feeling that they are informing on peers and fearing retaliation. In the study by Cassidy et
al. (2009), 53% of the 365 middle school students who responded agreed with the state-
ment, “If adults treated youth more kindly, students would treat each other the same way”
(p. 398). This statement, coupled with their support for programs that teach people about
cyberbullying and develop self-esteem, shows that students are focused on changing the
culture rather than just implementing punitive measures.
In contrast, teachers focused more on supervision and punishment. Stauffer et al.
(2012) found that teachers contended that more parent involvement, increased conse-
quences for cyberbullying, and increased warnings about the consequences of cyber-
bullying would help to prevent cyberbullying. Also, 52% of the teachers responded that
implementation of an anti-bullying program would not be effective. The focus from the
teachers was on reacting to the incidents rather than on preventive measures.
Teachers and students drastically disagreed on how to create an anti-
cyberbullying culture. Students seemed to focus on helping the victim, whereas teachers
were more focused on punishing the perpetrator. Teachers’ perceptions of what is likely
to reduce cyberbullying are counter to current research. Research has identified effective
anti-cyberbullying strategies yet some of these strategies are challenged as students are
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 50
unwilling to report incidents and teachers do not agree that some of the proven strategies
in the whole-school approach are effective. Schools must find a way to overcome these
issues in order to create an anti-cyberbullying culture and prevent further incidents of
cyberbullying.
Cyberbullying can have lasting detrimental effects on the victims. Schools must
attempt to create a positive learning environment so students can reach their fullest
potential. While the implementation of laws, policies, and programs can begin to address
the needs of a school in its efforts to create an anti-cyberbullying culture, continual atten-
tion to changes in technology and close monitoring of changes in the school climate are
essential. In addition, schools should work with teachers, students, and parents to extend
concerted effort so students feel safe to report incidents and adults know how to respond.
Chapter Summary
This literature review has established that, although the history of cyberbullying is
relatively short, schools should be proactive to create anti-cyberbully efforts because
cyberbullying can have potentially deadly results. The research supports efforts that
extend beyond the scope of single training sessions or assemblies and requires schools to
put forth an effort that empowers students and enables adults to feel confident in identi-
fying and acting on incidents of cyberbullying. The present study was an attempt to iden-
tify these efforts in one school, highlighting the implementation of programs and a plan
for sustaining these programs.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 51
Chapter 3
Methodology
Cyberbullying can have a negative impact on a student’s academic performance,
as well as physical and mental health. State and federal laws have been established to
prevent incidents of cyberbullying in schools and some schools have implemented anti-
cyberbullying efforts to reduce cyberbullying on and off campus. Despite these efforts,
cyberbullying persists. Cyberbullying requires schools to examine their current anti-
bullying systems and structures to ensure that they address the aspects unique to
cyberbullying, such as use of technology, anonymity of the bully, occurrence of incidents
both on and off campus, and the increased breadth of audience. While effective anti-
bullying programs have been studied, school efforts in addressing cyberbullying have just
begun. This study examined a school with promising practices in anti-cyberbullying
efforts.
This chapter describes the methodology of the study, including the research
design, the sample and participants, the conceptual framework, and the method of data
collection and analysis. Some of the methodology was created and reviewed by the
researcher’s thematic dissertation group to ensure that the methods were responsive to the
research questions of the study. In addition to the methodology, ethical considerations are
addressed.
Research Questions
In order to determine how one school used systems and structures to target
cyberbullying, three research questions were posed to guide the study:
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 52
1. What are the systems and structures that contribute to an anti-cyberbullying
culture in schools?
2. What is the perceived effectiveness of these systems and structures in place?
3. How are these systems and structures sustained to support an anti-
cyberbullying culture in schools?
Research Design
This purpose of this study was to examine promising practices of a school focused
on anti-cyberbullying efforts. The study was a case study of a phenomenon unique to the
particular school. Since the focus was on understanding what occurs at this school to
create such a phenomenon, qualitative research was the appropriate method to address the
research questions. Qualitative research allows the researcher to explore people’s experi-
ences and perceptions of how and why a phenomenon exists (Merriam, 2009).
Qualitative research relies on thick and rich description to gain understanding of
the phenomenon being studied (Merriam, 2009). These descriptions allowed the
researcher in the present study to gain insight on the interviewee’s experiences and per-
spectives and can paint the picture of what has occurred in this school. Through these
interviews, the researcher could identify the systems and structures that the school had
put in place to create an anti-cyberbullying culture and how the systems and structures
worked together to create this culture. Qualitative research allows the researcher to focus
on understanding the relationships within the phenomenon, as well as the programs and
people that helped create the phenomenon. For these reasons, qualitative research was the
most appropriate method for this study.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 53
Sample and Participants
In qualitative research, purposeful sampling allows the researcher to observe the
phenomenon that he/she is researching. Purposeful sampling enables the researcher to
select a specific site where the phenomenon has occurred. While this may decrease the
generalizability of the findings, it allows the phenomenon to be studied. (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam, 2009). The present study required purposeful sampling to ensure that the phe-
nomenon of promising practices in anti-cyberbullying efforts was evident.
The selection criteria were determined by the doctoral thematic dissertation group
to substantiate continuity within the dissertation group. The group determined that the
study would be of one comprehensive school that had implemented efforts to combat
cyberbullying. The school needed to have systems and structures in place that created a
culture where cyberbullying was being addressed. These systems and structures could
include policies, funding, curriculum, professional development, or leadership efforts that
specifically targeted cyberbullying. Many schools do not have specific anti-cyberbullying
efforts; thus, finding such a school was difficult. In order to expand the search of the
school, the thematic group determined that emerging practices in the realm of anti-
cyberbullying efforts could also be used. This choice would allow the study to include a
school that was just beginning to address the issue of cyberbullying but might not have an
established anti-cyberbullying culture.
A potential school was identified and a recruitment letter was sent to the school’s
principal. The recruitment letter requested participation in the study, included a brief
summary of the study, and outlined the requirements for participants. Through this
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 54
process, Sunny View Middle School was selected and agreed to participate in the study.
Sunny View Middle School is a public school that serves 1,200 students in Grades 6
through 8.
Once a target site is identified and permission for the study is gained, participants
must be identified (Merriam, 2009). Purposeful sampling, specifically snowball
sampling, was used to identify participants for the interviews. Snowball sampling occurs
when initial participants are identified and then additional participants are identified
during participant interviews (Merriam, 2009). In this case, the interviews with the
school’s administration led the researcher to additional participants.
Conceptual Framework
According to Bronfenbrenner’s model, multiple layers affect and influence an
individual. These layers interact to create the culture of the school. Within each of these
layers are many components, including funding, policies, professional development,
staffing, and various stakeholders. These components work together to create the systems
and structures that the school has in place to foster an anti-cyberbullying culture. In addi-
tion, the systems and structures can influence the components to establish expectations
that help to create the anti-cyberbullying culture. These components, as well as the entire
school culture, are in constant flux with changes within the ecological systems. Staffing,
funding, professional development, and students’ needs are endlessly fluctuating. Leader-
ship is required to manage these changes. Leadership can identify the needs of the school
to continue efforts in combating cyberbullying so that the systems and structures that are
in place are sustainable. Figure 2 displays the conceptual framework, illustrating the
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 55
cyclical relationship of individual components as they work with the systems and
structure to develop the anti-cyberbullying culture through the influence of leadership
while maintaining sustainability.

Figure 2. Conceptual framework for the study.
Instrumentation
Instrumentation for this study included semistructured interviews with partici-
pants, as well as observations and artifact analysis. Semistructured interviews allowed the
researcher to focus on the research questions but allowed flexibility to gain further infor-
mation when needed (Merriam, 2009). Interview protocols were used (Appendix A) to
develop semistructured questions, but probing questions were posed as needed.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 56
Observations on the school campus were conducted to provide a context of the setting,
using an observation protocol (Appendix B). The observation protocol focused the
researcher and reminded the researcher of the specific data desired, but also allowed for
additional notes. The interview and observation protocols were created for this study by
the thematic dissertation group to ensure that the research questions were adequately
addressed.
Data Collection
Data collection consisted of interviews, observations, and artifacts. Six partici-
pants agreed to be interviewed. The participants included administration, counselors,
teachers, technology support personnel, and the School Resource Officer. These inter-
views lasted 45 to 60 minutes each, and each participant was interviewed one or two
times. Observations of the campus were conducted on three occasions: one parent meet-
ing, one professional development meeting, and one student lesson. The intent of these
observations was to gather data on how the education of staff, parents, and students is
conducted and implemented at this school. Data were also collected through analysis of
school documents. Documents requested and obtained from the school’s administration
included the school’s vision and mission statement, single school plan, disciplinary
matrix, discipline statistics, school calendar, meeting agendas, curriculum, and anti-
cyberbullying policy. These artifacts included policies, their implementation, funding
associated with the policies, and implementation of the school’s anti-cyberbullying effort.
Triangulation is important to substantiate qualitative research. Triangulation is the
use of multiple points of data to conclude the same outcome (Merriam, 2009; Patton,
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 57
2002). Triangulation allows the researcher to show similar data through multiple sources.
In this study, data triangulation was achieved through the use of the multiple interviews,
observations, and artifacts. Table 1 specifies the data that were used to address each
research question. Table 2 indicates the specific interview questions that addressed each
of the three research questions.
Table 1

Summary of Data Collection Used in Study

Research question Interviews Artifacts Observations

1. What are the
systems and
structures that
contribute to an
anti-cyberbullying
culture in schools?
Administrator
Counselor
Information Tech-
nology Staff
Teacher
School Mission/ Vision
Single School Plan
Disciplinary Matrix
Profession Develop-
ment Agendas
Lesson Plans
School Calendar
Anti-Cyberbully Policy
Professional
Development with
Staff
Student Lessons

2. What is the per-
ceived effective-
ness of the systems
and structures in
place?
Administrator
Counselor
Teacher
Disciplinary Statistics

3. How are these
systems and struc-
tures sustained to
support an anti-
cyberbullying cul-
ture in schools?
Administrator
Counselor
Teacher
Single School Plan
Professional Develop-
ment Agendas
Lesson Plans
School Calendar
Professional De-
velopment with
Staff

ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 58
Table 2

Alignment of Interview Protocol Questions

Research question Interview question

1. What are the systems
and structures that con-
tribute to an anti-
cyberbullying culture in
schools?
4. What is your role or your involvement in promoting anti-
cyberbullying at your institution?
5. What was the driving force behind the start of the anti-
cyberbullying efforts?
7. Explain the basics of the anti-cyberbullying efforts your
institution has in place.
7a. What policies and preventive measures does your school
have in place to prevent cyberbullying?
7b. What other factors influence your school’s anti-
cyberbullying efforts?
8. What is the process that occurs when there is a
cyberbullying incident?
9. What type of training is provided to the staff to identify
and prevent cyberbullying?
9a. What offices or staff is involved in anti-cyberbullying
intervention training?
9b. How prepared does your staff feel in relation to
cyberbullying?
10. How are teachers, staff and administrators involved in
anti-cyberbullying efforts?
11. How are students involved in anti-cyberbullying efforts?
11a. Tell me what is being done to help students feel more
connected to your institution.

2. What is the per-
ceived effectiveness of
the systems and struc-
tures in place?
3. How do you feel about the culture of the institution?
7d. What changes have you seen in students’ behaviors, inci-
dents of cyberbullying and reporting of cyberbullying?
9c. How prepared do you feel to handle cyberbullying?

ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 59
Table 2 (Continued)

Research question Interview question

3. How are these sys-
tems and structures
sustained to support an
anti-cyberbullying cul-
ture in schools?
4. What is your role or your involvement in promoting anti-
cyberbullying at your institution?
6. Tell me about the instances of cyberbullying at your
school. Who was involved and how was it handled?
7c. Have these efforts changes? If so, how?
9. What type of training is provided to the staff to identify
and prevent cyberbullying?
9a. What offices or staff is involved in anti-cyberbullying
intervention training?
9b. How prepared does your staff feel in relation to
cyberbullying?
12. How are other stakeholders involved in anti-
cyberbullying efforts?
13. What data do you use to evaluate your school’s anti-
cyberbullying efforts?
13a. How is the data used to sustain and improve the efforts?

Data Analysis
Data analysis was completed through the six steps in Creswell’s model for data
analysis. The interviews were recorded using a digital recording device. These recording
were then transcribed. Creswell (2003) suggested starting the analysis process by reading
over the data, then beginning to code. The transcriptions, researcher’s interview notes,
and artifacts were each coded. Merriam (2009) suggested using an open coding process in
which the researcher does not restrict the codes but rather allows them to emerge from
the data. In contrast, the researcher could use phrases or concepts from the literature to
develop some of the codes. For this study, open coding was used. All codes were then
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 60
categorized as Creswell advised. Glense (2011) suggested that, as categories emerge, the
researcher can look for patterns and relationships in the data to create themes. Once
themes are established, in-depth analysis can begin. A diagram of Creswell’s model was
developed by the thematic dissertation a group to illustrate the data analysis process
(Figure 3).

Figure 3. Creswell’s model for data analysis.

Ethical Considerations
Throughout the study ethical practices were considered by the thematic group.
Prior to data collection, the thematic group submitted and received approval from the
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 61
University of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) to proceed with its
study. The group adhered to the IRB rules and regulations during data collection.
Each participant in the study signed a consent form that described the purpose of
the study, the risks and anticipated benefits, and contact information to address questions
about the study. The consent form also stated that participation in the study was voluntary
and that the participant could withdraw from the study at any time. Confidentiality was
assured and each participant and the school were given pseudonyms to secure anonymity.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 62
Chapter 4
Findings, Analysis, and Discussion
This chapter presents the findings from the case study of a school with emerging
anti-cyberbullying efforts. In order to learn more about these efforts, one middle school
was selected to serve as the subject of the case study. The systems and structures of the
anti-cyberbully efforts at this school were identified, as well as their perceived effective-
ness and sustainability.
Sunny View Middle School (Sunny View) is a high-achieving middle school in
southern California with approximately 1,400 students in Grades 6 through 8. The Aca-
demic Performance Index (API) for this school exceeds 900 points and continues to
increase each year. According to the school’s website, while the majority of the students
(66%) are White, Latinos and Asian students are also significant subgroups, representing
11% and 9% of the population, respectively. Sunny View Middle School’s certificated
personnel consist of 57 teachers, four counselors, two psychologists, one speech thera-
pist, one librarian, and two administrators.
One element that is unique to Sunny View is their 1:1 iPad program. In 2011, all
science classes had a classroom set of iPad for students to use during those classes. In
2012, this program was expanded so that every student in the school was required to have
an iPad for use in class for the entire day. While many of these devices are personally
owned, students are also able to purchase an iPad through the school district, using a pay-
ment plan, or the students are loaned a school-owned device. These school-owned
devices were purchased largely though a donation from the district’s education
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 63
foundation. While the current study did not address technology in the school, it is
important to note that the students’ access to technology has dramatically increased over
the past 3 years at Sunny View, just as cyberbullying occurs through the use of electronic
devices.
Findings in this chapter are based on interviews, observations, and artifacts col-
lected over the course of 3 months. The six interviews conducted for this study included
two teachers, a counselor, the School Resource Officer (SRO), and two administrators:
the principal and one assistant principal. During the interview of Administrator B, Coun-
selor A, the counselor for at-risk students, was identified as an integral member of the
staff who was involved in the anti-cyberbullying efforts. Administrator B suggested that
Teacher A be interviewed based on her efforts in implementing the digital citizenship
lessons in her classroom. In addition, as a sixth-grade Humanities teacher, Teacher A has
implemented a schoolwide anti-cyberbullying lesson. Last year, Teacher B assumed the
role of Twenty-First Century Teaching and Learning Teacher on Special Assignment
(TOSA), overseeing the iPad implementation at the school. She was in charge of various
aspects of implementation of the 1:1 iPad program, including loading applications on the
iPads; troubleshooting for teachers, parents, and students; creating professional develop-
ment modules for teachers focusing on implementation of the iPads; and assisting with
lessons for anti-cyberbullying efforts for students. This year, Teacher B has returned to
the classroom, teaching seventh-and eighth-grade science. Through the interviews, the
SRO was identified as an integral part of the anti-cyberbullying efforts, which led to a
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 64
decision to interview that person. Table 3 identifies the administrators, counselor, teach-
ers, and SRO who were interviewed.
Table 3

Staff Members Interview for the Current Study

Years at Years in
Interviewee Position the school education

Administrator A Principal 9 22
Administrator B Assistant Principal 3 15
Counselor A At-Risk Counselor 1 1
Teacher A 6th Grade Humanities 2 2
Teacher B 7th & 8th Science 13 14
SRO Police officer 1 ---

In addition to the interviews, a parent meeting, a student assembly, and a class-
room lesson were observed. Various artifacts, such as the district’s discipline matrix and
electronic use policy; PowerPoint
®
presentations for parents, staff, and students; and
individual teachers’ lesson plans were also analyzed. Each of these pieces of data
informed the research questions that were reviewed and analyzed. This chapter is
organized to present the qualitative data in response to each research question.
Research Questions
This study was designed to address the following questions:
1. What are the systems and structures that contribute to an anti-cyberbullying
culture in schools?
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 65
2. What is the perceived effectiveness of the systems and structures in place?
3. How are these systems and structures sustained to support an anti-
cyberbullying culture in schools?
The data were interpreted, analyzed, and triangulated to substantiate the research.
Triangulation of data served to increase the validity and reliability of the findings (Mer-
riam, 2009; Patton, 2002). Data triangulation was achieved through use of multiple inter-
views, observations, and artifacts.
Data Findings
Research Question 1: Systems and Structures
The first research question asked, What are the systems and structures that con-
tribute to an anti-cyberbullying culture in schools? Through the interviews, observations,
and reviewed artifacts, three themes emerged: (a) response to incidents, (b) education of
stakeholders, and (c) participation by students in anti-cyberbullying efforts. While other
systems and structures were present, these themes were consistent throughout the data
analysis. Other systems and structures that may contribute to the anti-cyberbullying
efforts include teachers’ classroom technology policies, adult supervision during passing
periods and lunch and snack, and the Internet restriction that is enforced through the dis-
trict’s server. Since these systems and structures were not addressed in the interviews,
they are mentioned only in relation to the three prominent themes: response to incidents,
education of stakeholders, and participation by students.
Response to incidents. Limber (2003) advocated a consistent response to
cyberbullying. One way to accomplish this is to establish a clear protocol to ensure that
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 66
all parties know the steps to take when cyberbullying occurs. This protocol should
include reporting incidents, thorough investigation of an instance, consequences for the
bully, and follow-up with the victim. This section discusses the protocol that has been
established and highlights key components of that protocol, the investigations, use of the
SRO, and consequences for students.
Protocol for responding. Sunny View has created and implemented a protocol
for responding to incidents of cyberbullying. The protocol was created at the time of the
1:1 implementation of iPads so that teachers would know how to respond to incidents in
their classrooms. The purpose of the protocol is to respond to violations of the school district’s
Anti-Cyberbullying Policy and Electronic Use Policy, which is addressed in the district’s
anti-bullying and harassment policy.
The district will not tolerate bullying/cyber-bullying/harassment or any other
behavior that infringes on the safety or well-being of students, staff or any other
persons within the district's jurisdiction whether directed at an individual or
group. This includes but is not limited to bullying/cyber-bullying/harassment or
any other behavior based on race, color, creed, national origin, ethnicity, religion,
gender, language, sexual orientation, political affiliation, physical or mental dis-
ability, academic or athletic ability, physical appearance and/or social/economic
status.
Since cyberbullying occurs through the use of electronic devices, it is important to
note that the district also has a policy on appropriate use of technology at school.
According to the school’s website, the district’s Electronic Use Policy reads, “Access to
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 67
the [school district’s] technology is a privilege, not a right, and students enrolled in dis-
trict programs or activities must follow district guidelines and procedures regarding
acceptable use of technology.” These policies are distributed to all parents and students
through registration and both parents and students must sign an agreement to follow these
policies. While these policies are not unique to Sunny View, it is the response to viola-
tions of these policies that is important to highlight. Cassidy et al. (2009) concluded that
many students do not report incidents of cyberbullying because they believe that the
school will do nothing in response. Thus, simply having these policies is not enough to
create an anti-cyberbullying culture at the school. Sunny View is committed to enforcing
these policies in order to contribute to an anti-cyberbullying culture at the school. The
school personnel listen to students’ reports of cyberbullying, investigate the incidents,
and apply the district’s discipline matrix to determine consequences as appropriate and
necessary.
In addition to the electronic use policy, the district has approved progressive dis-
cipline for violations of school policy that include consequences of cyberbullying (see
Appendix C for discipline progression). The consequences can range from a formal
warning to suspension to expulsion, depending on the severity of the incident and number
of infractions of the policy by the student. The discipline matrix that Sunny View uses to
enforce rules is consistent with that of most schools and follows the California Education
Code sections that require schools to practice progressive discipline.
Evident from the interviews, the Electronic Use Policy and Anti-Cyberbullying
policies were strictly followed by the staff and administration when an incident occurred.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 68
Every person who was interviewed reported very similar approaches to handling inci-
dents of cyberbullying, including interviewing students, reporting to counselors and
administration, and use of the SRO. Teacher B stated, “We each have grade-level
advisors, so we report to them first the incident . . . and then if needed, I know they go to
the administration when it’s been escalated enough.” Figure 4 depicts the protocol that
Sunny View uses when investigating an incident of cyberbullying.

Figure 4. Protocol for handling incidents at Sunny View Middle School.

In each of the interviews it was reported that the students, both bystanders and
victims, can report incidents of cyberbullying to any staff member on campus, typically
to teachers, counselors, or the administration. Once a student reports an incident, the staff
member ascertains as much information as possible, then disseminates this information
appropriately. Teachers report this information to counselors and counselors report the
information to administration. Administration is always involved in these incidents, but
sometimes the counselors conduct a substantial part of the investigation. The SRO
shared, “Most of the time it’s handled through our adviser. If it’s something that can be
potentially serious, I would handle with the counselor. Then we’ll get [Administrator B]
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 69
involved and then we’ll talk to the student and work with him.” Each interviewee spoke
about the SRO, Administrator B explained,
It’s been really helpful to have our own SRO on campus, our School Resource
Officer, because it allows us the freedom to have the School Resource Officer
step in and get involved and do the investigation, contact parents, and go through
the chain of consequences that can occur based on the creation of these negative
or derogatory pages that are created anonymously.
Both administrators indicated two situations that call for the use of the SRO:
when the administrators have exhausted their means to determine the perpetrator or when
the incident requires legal action. After the report and investigation, a conference with the
victim and his/her parents and a conference with the bully and his/her parents are con-
ducted. Both Administrator B and Counselor A noted the importance of these meetings.
Counselor A recounted that, when she addresses the perpetrator, it is important that the
person understand how his or her actions on the Internet can resonate even after posts
have been removed. “It is important to understand how to talk to a student about it and
it’s not just how they said it right then and there but they have the bigger implications of
it, following them around in cyberspace.” Consequences are imposed by the school or the
SRO, depending on the incident. Administrator B disclosed that this is usually just a
warning for students, but she has involved the SRO on a few occasions as the incidents
were more severe.
In each of the interviews the staff was clear on how to proceed when an incident
of cyberbullying was reported. Teacher B reported, “When [an incident of cyberbully]
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 70
comes to me, I try to get all the information I can from [the student]. Then I tell the coun-
selor. She takes that and either does some investigating or takes it directly to [Adminis-
trator B].” Communicating the incidents to the appropriate person from the perspective of
the adults was consistent throughout every interview.
Investigations. Investigations of cyberbullying can become quite time consum-
ing, especially when some of the websites that students use to post information allow
people to be anonymous or do not require the use of real names. Despite this, the staff of
Sunny View is determined to utilize many resources, including time, personnel, and the
SRO, to ensure that the investigation is complete. Counselor A stated, “They usually
don’t know who the perpetrator is, so from there it’s kind of you know, CSI, trying to
gather where it might come from.” From the literature, one study reported that 25% of the
students who were cyberbullied did not know the perpetrator (Mishna et al., 2009). When
this occurs on the Sunny View campus, determining the perpetrator and other people
involved requires investigation. The SRO shared, “As far as my investigation goes, once I
get a name, I pull that student in, that student confesses because at this age, they’re afraid
of police officers, so they’re going to confess to us.” Administrator B echoed this state-
ment, explaining that during their investigations students usually share their knowledge
of the situation. From the interviews, Sunny View continues the investigation until the
staff can identify the students involved. The next section discusses how the school uti-
lizes the SRO during these investigations.
School Resource Officer. In addition to the counselors and administration inves-
tigating incidents of cyberbullying, the school relies on the SRO to aid in investigations
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 71
as needed. The SRO is involved in two ways: (a) retrieving information that can assist in
the investigation, and (b) educating students regarding the legal consequences of
cyberbullying. The SRO stated,
If there’s some sort of thing that a picture turned into a prank, let’s say for
instance cyberbullying where there’s threat as a comment on a photograph or
Instagram, then I’ll take it. I’ll investigate it, making sure there’s appropriate
action.
Administrator B explained that the SRO was able to investigate some aspects of
anonymous posting on the web that she could not. She specifically identified two web-
sites, ask.fm and Formspring.me, in which the SRO was able to identify the person who
had posted defamatory remarks about another student. Further, the conversations that the
SRO has with students are compelling. Many times these conversations result in the
students either admitting to participating in the cyberbullying incident or helping to iden-
tify others who were involved.
Due to rare interactions, a “scared straight” approach works with this population
of students. The SRO added,
I think it’s just the authoritative figure. This is the reason why I’m in uniform on
campus because they’ll see this as a symbol of respect, of security, of feeling safe,
and they understand my job. They know that, if somebody does something wrong,
then I take the appropriate action. . . . I think that they feel that they can’t get
away when they start sitting in front of me, and that probably scares some of
them.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 72
Students are usually willing to disclose the information to the SRO because they see him
as an authority figure who is there to help keep the community safe. Thus, utilizing the
SRO is an effective technique for this school, especially when more information is
needed.
Counseling and consequences. Based on thorough investigations, the bully or
bullies are usually identified. Once a student has been identified as the perpetrator in an
incident of cyberbullying, the school can react in a variety of ways, including confer-
ences, counseling, or suspension. At Sunny View, the staff and administrators work to
remove the offensive post immediately if it is on the Internet. Administrator B stated that,
when incidents are posted on social media, she notifies the sites to have the material
removed. The administrators record these incidents in the student information system for
documentation.
Furthermore, students are often counseled to ensure that they understand the rami-
fications of their actions. Both teachers shared that students do not know what is and is
not appropriate. Teacher A stated, “Just even the lack of awareness, students didn’t real-
ize that taking a picture of someone else is never okay; even if they’re your friends, you
have to have their permission and their knowledge.” In these incidents students need to
see how their actions, intended or not, affect others and may not be appropriate or may
violate school policy. The conferences with the student give the counselors and admin-
istration the opportunity to speak to the importance of a cyberbully-free campus and to
help the student to understand the full impact of his or her actions. Counselor A indicated
that these conversations often lead to discussions about digital citizenship and digital
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 73
footprint. Administrator B said that these conversations include a warning that the
behavior and discussion about the incident must cease. The SRO summarized these con-
ferences:
The main thing that I’m here for is just to help counsel the student. I’ll bring him
to my office, I’ll sit him down, I’ll make him explain the reason why they did
what they did, make them understand that it’s completely wrong and it’s hurtful. I
want to let the student understand that the main thing here is whatever is posted
online stays online no matter if it’s deleted or not. They have to really think about
what they’re putting on as far as posting pictures and comments about themselves
or about anyone else.
Once the investigation is concluded, students are issued consequences such as warnings
or suspensions as appropriate. Since the administrators indicated that they did not often
have repeat offenders, the majority of the incidents ended with conferences and warnings.
Cyberbullying incidents are difficult to contain because, once information is
posted, anyone has access to it. In addition, there is no record of who has viewed the
information. If the incident occurred through a social media site, the audience that may
have witnessed the incident is virtually limitless. Sunny View utilizes its conferences
with students to try to prevent further harm to the victim. Administrator B explained:
It’s more of these one-on-one student conferences, either with the counselor or
myself, where we’re talking to students saying, “If I continue to hear that you’re
bringing this up and you’re talking about it on campus, there will be
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 74
consequences” . . . contacting parents, giving them strategies and tools for lan-
guage when other students approach them.
The administrator discussed ways in which the bully can become part of the solu-
tion. Some strategies include ceasing discussions about the incident and discontinuing
posts via the Internet regarding the incident. The administrators noted the importance of
helping the victim to feel safe on campus and ensuring that the cyberbullying does not
continue. Through the student conference, the staff increases the student’s awareness of
his or her part in the incident and how he or she now should respond so that the incident
is contained and further consequences do not occur.
These school policies and consequences may not be unique to Sunny View. How-
ever, three factors that aid in creating a school with promising practices are implementa-
tion of a protocol for addressing cyberbullying incidents, a thorough investigation of
incidents, and the ability to use the SRO on campus for further investigation. Whereas
many schools have policies against cyberbullying, Sunny View has created a structure
that allows the school to enforce these policies even when the perpetrator may be identi-
fied immediately. In addition to policies and consequences, the staff uses the conferences
to educate students on Internet safety, how to interact while on the web, and how to pre-
vent future incidents. Education on cyberbullying and prevention is presented to the
entire school. The next section highlights some of Sunny View’s strategies to educate its
stakeholders.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 75
Education of Stakeholders
The implementation of clear definitions and responses to all stakeholders max-
imize efforts to combat cyberbullying (Kowalski et al., 2012; Limber 2003). Education in
terms of an anti-cyberbullying effort is threefold: (a) identification and response to inci-
dents, (b) prevention of cyberbullying incidents, and (c) appropriate use of current tech-
nology. Sunny View focuses on promoting being a positive digital citizen and Internet
safety. This education includes training for teachers, lessons for students, and information
for parents.
Digital citizenship. Digital citizenship is the idea that one should act responsibly
with regard to electronic devices and the Internet. Teacher A indicated the importance of
communicating how to use technology in the classroom.
I try to have conversations with my class just in regards to appropriate use of
technology and so I do start in the classroom. We discuss social media and things
like that which tend to permeate in the classroom…no matter how much moni-
toring you do it’s going to make its way into the classroom. It’s a little naive to
think it wouldn’t. We definitely start in the classroom
With students using technology at Sunny View, teachers are taking steps to encourage the
responsible use of technology. In order to aid in this education, teachers employ the
resources from Common Sense Media. Common Sense Media has created a digital citi-
zenship curriculum with the purpose to “empower students to think critically and make
informed choices about how they create, communicate, and treat others in our ever-
evolving 24/7 digital world” (Common Sense Media, 2014, para. 5). The curriculum that
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 76
Common Sense Media created is not always specific to cyberbullying; it encompasses a
variety of topics that work together to promote an anti-cyberbullying environment. The
education that the students receive regarding cyberbullying includes a wide range of
topics on Internet safety concepts, including digital citizenship and digital footprint.
While digital citizenship includes the norms of appropriate and responsible use of tech-
nology, a digital footprint is the idea that anything that a person posts on the Internet is
always connected to that person in the digital world; nothing is truly anonymous. A
digital footprint is the mark that one leaves virtually as one interacts on the Internet.
I guess my involvement in promoting anti-bullying or anti-cyberbullying is really
about driving home the message of what it means to create your own digital foot-
print, your digital reputation online, what that looks like in the future, how the
Internet works, what it means to post on www, adequate in terms of posting and
tagging your friends and pictures, asking permission for that sort of thing, to be
wary of the information and content that they do find on the web, what’s a cred-
ible source, what’s not a credible source, making sure that they’re savvy consum-
ers of what’s released on the web and clear about the fact that what they do online
now can stay with them and follow them. (Administrator B)
Administrator B informs students that things posted on the Internet are permanent
and can be linked to the person who posts them. She emphasizes that students should
think about what they are posting and how it affects other students. Counselor A spoke
about the sixth-grade digital citizenship lessons:
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 77
It started by identifying when things look like bullying online so it was a chance
for them to talk amongst one another. Then I led a discussion talking more about
what it means to leave their digital footprint online. That was sort of the main idea
of it is these footprints that we leave that don’t get erased, necessarily, and that
can follow with us.
Beale and Hall (2007) stated that people post things that they would not normally
say to another person face to face. The authors noted that the Internet gives people a false
sense of anonymity. Students do not fully understand the impact of posting information
on the web and proper cyber etiquette. Just as students are taught to be respectful and
kind during face-to-face interactions, education on virtual interactions can also be
learned. Administrator B stated that creating a curriculum that incorporates all of the con-
cepts of digital citizenship could work to dispel the belief that posts to the Internet are
anonymous. Furthermore, she stated that incorporating all aspects of the digital citizen-
ship curriculum, including that of cyberbullying prevention, could help to create a posi-
tive Internet community that would carry over into the real world in which the students
live.
Digital citizenship is a new concept to both students and teachers. The term
digital citizenship emerged more than 20 years ago but became more widely used at the
turn of the 21st century. In order to educate the students at Sunny View in digital citizen-
ship, the teachers had to be trained first. Before the school implemented the 1:1 iPad
program, the administration offered a full day of professional development in the summer
to educate and train teachers on various programs and issues related to technology. This
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 78
professional development day is called TechCon; it has occurred for the past 2 years.
This day includes five breakout sessions spanning topics such as learning how to use
iPads, keeping a safe and secure classroom, and using specific applications such as
eBackpack
®
, iMovie™, and Keynote™. The administration at Sunny View have invited
presenters from Common Sense Media to their annual TechCon for the past 2 years.
Common Sense Media is a nonprofit organization that provides information to parents,
students, and educators regarding many forms of media; it has developed a digital citi-
zenship curriculum for Grades K–12. The company provides free online materials and
information to assist adults as they educate youth (Common Sense Media, 2014). Teach-
ers at Sunny View were encouraged to attend the sessions presented by Common Sense
Media in order to incorporate some of these lessons on digital citizenship in their class-
rooms.
Common Sense Media (2013) has developed curriculum that spans eight themes:
Internet safety, privacy and security, relationships and communication, cyberbullying,
digital footprint and reputation, self-image and identity, information literacy, and creative
credit and copyright. Each of these lessons integrates one or more of these strands and is
focused on specific grade levels. These lessons address issues related to technology with
which students may be dealing at that grade level. While not all lessons are specifically
on cyberbullying, they help students to use technology safely and appropriately and to
identify when others may be interacting in a negative or unsafe way. Teacher A consid-
ered the presentation to be helpful in infusing digital citizenship, or cyber etiquette, in her
classroom. Through the presentation, she obtained lessons and information on
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 79
cyberbullying. The presentation also included a guide through the Common Sense Media
website, which contains lessons on digital citizenship for students K–12. She shared,
“They also send resources and videos as well. They are helpful resources even finding
student friendly information.” This teacher created a lesson from the Common Sense
Media curriculum for her humanities class at the beginning of the year that addressed the
topic of relationships and communication on the Internet. For the lesson, students com-
posed three forms of writing: an email to a teacher, a blog post, and a tweet. The lesson
allowed her to revamp her usual assessment of the students’ summer reading assignment
so she could incorporate concepts of cyber etiquette and digital footprint.
Teacher A plans to continue to educate her students on digital citizenship,
including lessons on cyberbullying. She said, “I think [student awareness] is the biggest
hurdle because what a big concept cyberbullying is and trying to get that across to a
group of kids who have been in cultured to love technology and be on it all the time.”
Counselor A also teaches a study skills class in which she has addressed some of the
concepts of the digital citizenship. She stated that her focus is on “how to be a digitally
responsible student online.”
Teacher B stated that, while she is not using the curriculum specifically in her
classroom, she uses the ideas, themes, and vocabulary from the Common Sense Media
curriculum in her classroom. The Common Sense Media curriculum covers the spectrum
of digital citizenship and helps students to become aware of the impact of the Internet and
potential consequences of misusing it.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 80
In addition to individual teacher lessons, whole school lessons have been imple-
mented at Sunny View. When Teacher B was working as a technology specialist, she
used the Common Sense Media curriculum to develop a lesson with Administrator B and
Counselor A that was presented to the sixth-grade class in their physical education
course. Teacher B said that the lesson focused on “how to handle [the Internet], how to
treat it, how to use Internet safety, what it means to leave a digital footprint, and that all
kind of falls under that cyberbullying umbrella.” In addition to this lesson, Teacher A,
Teacher B, and Administrator B spoke of a follow-up lesson that all sixth-grade humani-
ties teachers incorporated in their classes. The humanities teachers assigned an activity in
which students created iMovies with their iPads. These movies were in the form of a
public service announcement (PSA) video and some of the best were played over the
school’s video bulletin. Administrator B stated,
I knew that there needed to be some comprehensive plan as well to address now
that we’re all using it. Now we’re all on the same page, I want to make sure we all
have a level playing field start in terms of what it means to be a digital citizen.
Currently, the development of the aforementioned lessons is in its infancy. The
administrators and counseling staff have been working on flipped-classroom lessons in
which the instruction is assigned for homework, either something to read or a video to
watch. Administrator B indicated that these flipped lessons include the eight strands from
the Common Sense Media curriculum. Through the readings or video, the information
needed for the activity is presented. These flipped lessons can be assigned through a spe-
cific class and a follow-up activity, such as the iMovie, could be used to supplement the
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 81
lesson. All five staff members indicated that these whole-school lessons were important
to guarantee that all students receive the same message.
The idea of understanding digital citizenship is new to students. Many do not
understand the enormity or power of the Internet. One teacher shared that, when
approached on an incident of cyberbullying, the student responded, “But I didn’t mean
for it to go viral or for it to be all over Instagram.” Reactions such as this reaffirm that,
along with consequences, students need further education about the Internet and how to
interact while on the web.
Parent nights. In addition to educating students and teachers, Sunny View edu-
cates parents at parent nights. This year Sunny View hosted two nights, one before
school, attended by approximately 100 parents, and one after school, attended by
approximately 60 parents. The focus of these talks was not specifically on cyberbullying,
but rather on Internet safety. Administrator B presented a parent meeting partially on the
topic of Internet safety. She offered this presentation both before school started and 1
month after the start of the school year. With the implementation of the 1:1 iPads, the
staff wanted to help parents understand how to limit students’ access to various websites
through the Internet on the iPad.
The parent night presentations give many suggestions to help parents to under-
stand how to limit students’ access, as well as how to keep them safe. The school allows
parents to choose the extent to which Internet access is limited on their iPads. One option
is to approve access individually to every website that the student can use. A second
option is to route all Internet access through the school’s secured browser. A final option
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 82
is to allow students access to all websites while they are off campus. Students use the
school’s server during the school day, thereby limiting Internet access during school
hours. During the presentation, Administrator B admitted that this works only for the
iPad, not for students’ smartphones, although she mentioned that similar restrictions
could be placed on the phones.
Administrator B addressed restricting access to iPad applications by installing an
application that locks a student into a specific application while working on homework at
home. For example, if a student should be working in the Keynote application, a parent
could set up the iPad so that the student could not exit from Keynote until the parent
unlocked the iPad. Administrator B also addressed the importance of parents knowing the
sites that their students visit, as well as the people with whom they are talking online, and
restricting both time and location of use of these devices. Administrator B recommended
checking the student’s Internet history, as well as becoming familiar with the applications
on their iPads.
During this presentation, Administrator B walked parents through the process of
creating these restrictions on the iPads. As the administrator gave these instructions, the
researcher observed parents locating these restrictions on their own iPads. It was evident
by the questions that they asked and the need for repeated directions that the parents were
not fluent in these processes. The researcher observed that a large portion of the crowd at
the parent night either set up the features described by the administrator or took notes on
the process.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 83
Education of teachers, students, and parents is evident at Sunny View. Teachers
and students are learning about the importance of being positive digital citizens and being
aware of their own digital footprints. Parents are gaining valuable information on how
they can provide their students with the technology necessary for school but also restrict
access and use. This education can help the school to create a positive virtual community
for its students. Sunny View has taken the first steps of education and is planning to
enhance the education of its stakeholders.
Student Participation
The students of Sunny View are active stakeholders in the anti-cyberbullying
efforts. In order to identify when bullying occurs, the process that the school has estab-
lished relies on students to report incidents. Sunny View has created an environment that
encourages students to report incidents. In addition, students are active members in the
anti-cyberbully efforts as they have created PSA videos and are involved in the Safe
School Ambassadors (SSA) Program.
Reporting incidents. Students have many points of contact where they can report
an incident of cyberbullying. The message that the students receive about reporting
cyberbullying is to tell any adult on campus. During each of the interviews, the staff and
administrators reported that students feel comfortable reporting incidents and that they
report to a variety of people. Counselor A stated, “Some students who have rapport with
the counselors will come in and bring it to their attention.” At Sunny View, Humanities is
a three-period block with a duration of 2.5 hours. Teacher A, a Humanities teacher,
addressed the students’ comfort level in reporting incidents. “They feel pretty
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 84
comfortable with us. . . . We tend to be someone who is confided in.” The initial report of
incidents comes mainly from students, and these students have a variety of people in
whom they are willing to confide.
While the students are willing to report incidents of bullying and cyberbullying,
Teacher A conveyed that students who report these incidents want to remain anonymous.
“They also worry about being a tattletale or having the teacher look at them and say,
‘How come you’re telling on so and so?’” Further, she reported that some students give a
disclaimer: “I don’t usually do this but . . . .” The teacher revealed that, despite open
communication between students and teachers, there still is a stigma of reporting
cyberbullying incidents to an adult. Despite the stigma, students are reporting incidents of
cyberbullying.
The investigation of cyberbullying incidents relies heavily on students to report
incidents (Cassidy et al., 2009). The researcher found that, although there was not one
specific place where students reported incidents, the interviews revealed that the students
were able to locate an adult to tell. Students who reported incidents included victims and
bystanders. Teacher A shared that students report incidents primarily to their Humanities
teacher. She hypothesized that, since the students are in these classes for three periods
each day, spanning almost 3 hours, they feel closely connected to these teachers. Other
than teachers, students have a counselor who is dedicated to each grade level, along with
counselor for at-risk students. These counselors are another point of contact for students,
giving them other adults to whom to report incidents of cyberbullying.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 85
On the district’s website a Bullying/Cyberbullying/Harassment Complaint Form
is available. This form includes the names of the students involved, both the victim and
the perpetrator, and the person filing the complaint. The form includes a section to
describe in detail the incident; it is submitted to the principal. This form may give
students a means of reporting incidents anonymously, yet it was not mentioned in the
interview and does not seem to be used.
Cassidy et al. (2009) suggested that an anonymous reporting system gives
students more opportunities to report incidents of cyberbullying without fear of retalia-
tion or being labeled a “snitch.” Teacher A indicated that, while students are reporting
incidents to teachers, counselors, and administrators, some students are still reluctant to
report incidents of cyberbullying and even the students who report want to remain anon-
ymous. She indicated that, even when students report incidents to her, they want her to
know that they usually do not report things to a teacher, saying, “I normally do not do
this, but I noticed . . .” before describing the cyberbullying situation, indicating that the
student does not want to be labeled as a “snitch.” The SRO shared,
I think the relationships that the students have with administrators or with their
teachers [is] a great relationship. I think that they trust their teachers here. If they
come across anything to work with the victim or if they see this going on, they
will speak up about it. After my presentation, I had so many kids come up to me.
At this time the school does not have an anonymous reporting system and stu-
dents report incidents only to adults. Even without an anonymous reporting system,
students report incidents of cyberbullying to the staff of Sunny View.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 86
Safe School Ambassadors. Sunny View has an active SSA program. This
program was designed by Community Matters in 2000; it has been shown to help schools
to decrease the number of incidents of bullying and to improve relationships on school
campuses (Community Matters, 2014). “The Safe School Ambassadors program empow-
ers student bystanders to speak up and intervene with their peers in bullying-related inci-
dents” (Community Matters, 2014, para. 2). Students are chosen to participate in the
program based on their affiliation with a variety of cliques and influence over other
students. These are not necessarily the most popular students, but they are students who
span the student body. These students are trained to identify bullying and to use strategies
to defuse situations.
Sunny View started the SSA program in 2012 as a result of a district initiative that
introduced SSA to every school in the district. Teacher A explained that students are rec-
ommended to participate in the program. Once chosen, the students are trained in the
SSA strategies and techniques. Administrator A shared that, since the elementary schools
were also participating in SSA, current sixth-grade students were already trained when
they entered Sunny View. Currently, more than 200 students participate in this program.
Teacher A described one of the students in the program: “All the kids loved him. . . . It
was quite clear the influence that this student had over even just my classroom. I can only
imagine other students though having him involved was influential for his peers.” The
students chosen for this program were specific and purposeful; a wide range of peer
groups were represented in the program, but also those students were respected across
peer groups.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 87
SSA teaches students how to intervene when they see bullying occurring either in
their presence or via the Internet. The SSA students model appropriate behavior and
inform the school on issues related to the school community through monthly meetings.
Teacher A indicated that the program teaches students to be responsible at school, to set a
good example, and to befriend students who may not have many friends. Administrator B
explained that the students and faculty meet regularly. “[These meetings] help make [ad-
ministration] aware of the types of situations the kids are facing and the types of scenar-
ios that may become uncomfortable or may be perceived as the beginning signs of
bullying.” Teacher A reiterated this as she said, “I think we got a lot of feedback from
them on what’s happening.” The school not only uses this program to try to curb negative
behaviors as they occur but also to gain insight into what the students are experiencing
and issues that affect them on campus. Administrator B stated, “I use curriculum from
Common Sense [Media] and ideas from what is happening [on campus].” She shared that
some of these ideas come from SSA students and may become part of future flipped-
classroom lessons in the anti-cyberbullying efforts.
The students at Sunny View are active participants in the anti-cyberbullying
efforts. Students are crucial in the response to incidents of cyberbullying, as they are usu-
ally the ones to report the incidents. They also create PSAs for the entire school to watch
through their video bulletin. Finally, the students are positive role models, taught to inter-
vene in all bullying and alert the faculty regarding issues that affect students.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 88
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question 1
Through interviews, observations, and artifact analysis, three major themes
emerged in response to Research Question 1, What are the systems and structures that
contribute to an anti-cyberbullying culture in schools? The themes were (a) response to
incidents, (b) education of stakeholders, and (c) student participation in anti-
cyberbullying efforts.
The literature reviewed in Chapter 2 identifies many strategies to create an anti-
cyberbullying culture, including multiple educational activities, having clear rules and
procedures, enforcing these rules, training bystanders to intervene on behalf of the victim
and to report incidents to school staff, training teachers on cyberbullying, curriculum for
students, and intervention strategies (Couvillon & Ilieva, 2011; Franek, 2005; Kowalski
& Limber, 2007; Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston, 2012; Limber, 2003). It was evident
from the data gathered at Sunny View that many of these strategies were being employed
there. The school had clear rules and procedures and enforced these rules through their
response to incident protocols. Teachers attended professional development training on
digital citizenship and the school has begun development of a curriculum for students to
learn how to be positive digital citizens. In addition, programs such as SSA enable stu-
dents to intervene in any bullying incident. These systems and structures help to create an
anti-cyberbullying culture at Sunny View.
Stauffer, Heath, Coyne, and Ferrin (2012) found that teachers stated that most
effective way to create an anti-cyberbullying culture was to strictly enforce rules. At
Sunny View, the staff repeatedly cited responses to incidents of cyberbullying, including
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 89
thorough investigations and enforcement of rules. Conversely, the staff did not focus on
consequences given to students who were engaged in cyberbullying. The interviewees
reported that the school was equipped to investigate incidents and identify perpetrators.
The school concentrated more on ensuring that the cyberbullying stopped and that all
involved students were counseled.
The findings also revealed that the school began to implement the curriculum of
Common Sense Media, which helps students to become positive digital citizens. All
interviewees spoke of the idea of digital citizenship. It was evident that this idea is wide-
spread among the staff. They all also revealed that much more is needed and that it
should be done schoolwide. Since there were only a few schoolwide activities, some of
the staff did not acknowledge these beginning efforts as significant steps in the direction
of anti-cyberbullying efforts. Their desire to have more activities seemed to disregard
their current efforts. One could argue that, as most schools have not implemented any
form of education on digital citizenship or cyber etiquette, the mention of digital citizen-
ship and its curriculum by participants in this study means that Sunny View is making
efforts in this direction.
The students of Sunny View are active participants in anti-cyberbullying efforts,
especially as reporters of incidents of cyberbullying. Cassidy et al. (2009) surveyed
middle school students regarding their likelihood of reporting incidents of cyberbullying.
In most cases, the students reported that they would not report incidents. Their top
reasons for not reporting included fear of retaliation and a belief that the school would
not react to the report. At Sunny View, the students’ actions do not support this research.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 90
The research also stated it is important that schools have an anonymous reporting system
for reporting incidents of any bullying (Cassady et al., 2009). At this time, Sunny View
does not have this type of reporting system, but students are still making these reports to
teachers, counselors and administration. The students are willing to report incidents of
cyberbullying to adults. One reason may include Sunny View’s commitment to respond
to these incidents. The school staff counsels both the victim and the perpetrator in order
to stop further incidents and help those involved resolve issues. In addition, Sunny
View’s SSA program trains bystanders to report incidents; teaching students that it is
important to report these incidents and help other students.
Many of the strategies for an anti-cyberbullying culture that the literature recom-
mends are being employed at Sunny View. Specifically, the school has a protocol for a
response to incidents of cyberbullying and uses the necessary resources in ensure that
these incidents are investigated thoroughly. In addition, the school has begun imple-
menting a curriculum that teaches students appropriate actions on and use of the Internet
through the Common Sense Media curriculum on digital citizenship. While the school
does not have an anonymous reporting system, the students are reporting incidents of
cyberbullying to the staff at the school. Finally, the school has trained students in the
SSA program to help them feel confident in standing up for victims of bullying. These
systems and structures have created an anti-cyberbullying culture at Sunny View.
Research Question 2: Perceived Effectiveness
The second research question asked, What is the perceived effectiveness of the
systems and structures in place? While the efforts for anti-cyberbully are in the infancy
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 91
stage at Sunny View, the interviewed faculty shared beliefs about the effectiveness of the
program. Three themes emerged through the interviews: (a) Stakeholders agree that the
school is responding well to efforts to limit cyberbullying, (b) training and education are
utilized, and (c) further efforts are needed.
Quick response and thorough investigations. During the interviews, it was clear
that the faculty understood the protocol for reporting incidents. The staff agreed that the
school was using the protocol and resources available to them effectively. The staff
seemed to agree that the school’s ability to identify the perpetrator was one of the most
effective means of creating an anti-cyberbullying culture. The interviewees agreed that
the staff was quick to respond to reports of cyberbullying and thoroughly investigated
these reports, utilizing counselors, administrators, and the SRO to investigate deeper into
the situation. The interviewees agreed that, as the school responds quickly and thor-
oughly, the anti-cyberbullying culture is strengthened.
Sunny View’s response to incidents of cyberbullying is perceived by the admin-
istrators, counselors, and teachers who were interviewed to be effective. Interviewees
reported specific instances in which students were willing to speak to an adult when they
saw or experienced something that was potentially cyberbullying. Students are reporting
instances because they believe that the staff will take action, including investigating the
incident, and the interviewees agreed that this demonstrates an effective system to
combat cyberbullying. Administrator B stated, “[The teachers] feel pretty confident that
we have a system that works, that we’re responsive to a situation or issue.” Both teachers
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 92
and the counselor spoke about the thoroughness of the investigations. Describing a par-
ticular incident, Counselor A stated,
It was hard for them to name one person. It was sort of like a ring, and there was
usually a ring leader and a few of them were involved, so it’s like, “Who actually
typed it?” Okay, but yeah, there was four other people involved in it so then it’s
trying to determine in that group kind of who to narrow it down to and having the
resource officer getting involved, having the administration get involved.
In this example, multiple students were involved and both the SRO and the administra-
tion were needed to identify the culprits. Both administrators spoke of the thoroughness
of the investigation; Administrator A said that they are usually able to find out who is
behind the cyberbullying incident. The staff agreed that the school’s response to incidents
achieves their desired goals.
In addition to students reporting incidents, the staff reported that the use of the
SRO was an effective means to acquire information regarding incidents of cyberbullying
from students. Counselor A shared that many of the students do not interact often with
the local police. Thus, SRO interviews with students in cases of cyberbullying have a
strong impact. Counselor A shared, “Being kind of scared straight works for this popula-
tion because . . . they haven’t seen a lot of that interaction with the resource officer.” The
use of the SRO gives the school an added layer of investigation that, coupled with the
students’ willingness to reveal information to the SRO, enables the school to identify the
perpetrator. Without the SRO, incidents of cyberbullying might not be resolves. The use
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 93
of the SRO allows the school to complete the investigation and therefore the staff agrees
that this interaction helps to create an effective response to incidents.
The ability to investigate incidents of cyberbullying thoroughly was frequently
addressed in the interviews. The staff stated that the administration, SRO, and counselors
identified involved students and their investigations helped to stop cyberbullying on the
campus, thus establishing an effective anti-cyberbullying culture. Without the ability to
identify the perpetrator, cyberbullying could persist.
Use of common language and anti-cyberbullying strategies. Sunny View has
implemented a variety of training programs, informative meetings, and programs for
teachers, parents and students. This training has provided staff, students, and parents with
common language related to cyberbullying, especially in the area of digital citizenship. In
addition, the training has provided strategies for students, staff, and parents to combat
cyberbullying when it occurs. The staff was not clear on the impact of these efforts on the
entire school. Some components seem to be more prevalent than others, such as the edu-
cation of students and parents, and the staff stated that the impact of the programs may
not be observable yet. Three efforts that the staff reported having a positive effect on the
campus were the parent informational meetings, the education of students in digital citi-
zenship, and the SSA program. One consistent theme was the need for more data to study
the effectiveness of the efforts on campus.
During observation of the parent meeting, active participation in the strategies for
preventative measures to ensure Internet safety was noted. Parents installed applications
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 94
on iPads to restrict access to the Internet and took notes on other websites and strategies
to create a safe virtual environment for their students. Administrator B shared,
I’ve definitely seen parents say, “Oh, this has been really helpful in terms of
monitoring my student’s social media” once I show them how to access the iPad
and enable some restrictions. I definitely can see that the parents have gained a lot
from our information meetings.
The information is also provided on the school’s website, along with other tech-
nology and digital citizenship information. While not all parents attend these meetings,
the administrators shared that this was the most effective means of providing this infor-
mation to parents. Administrator B stated that, in addition to providing parents with the
information, the parent meetings allowed her to help parents with any difficulties with the
devices.
In addition to the parent meetings, students are beginning to receive information
on digital citizenship. There have been whole-school lessons, as well as efforts by indi-
vidual teachers. Most of the interviewees shared that the program’s infancy limited their
ability to speak to its effectiveness. Administrator A shared that, although they had just
begun efforts in digital citizenship awareness, the change to the campus had been signifi-
cant. Administrator B conveyed that there was still much more work to be done in the
realm of digital citizenship, but she was beginning to see a change in the students. “I do
think that there’s definitely some knowledge across grade levels here about what is
appropriate use and what is not appropriate use. I think that that piece has come across
loud and clear.” Both Teacher A and Teacher B indicated that there should be more
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 95
education of students in order for the program to be fully effective. Teacher B said, “We
need more . . . repeating [the information] will help, but there is much more, other stuff
with digital citizenship.” Counselor A also indicated that more was needed. She said that
there should be something each trimester for the entire school. The administrators and
teachers agreed that more education is needed to make a significant impact on the student
body.
The SSA program has begun to make an impact on campus as well. With more
than 200 students trained in SSA strategies, the campus has a significant population of
students who can employ these strategies. Administrator B described the program’s
effects on the campus. “I feel like we are starting to see the efforts of SSA in terms of the
kids coming up and saying, ‘You know, we’ve tried a couple of the strategies. It’s not
working. This kid is still being bothered.’” She noted students who are actively using the
ideas from SSA to help other students. Furthermore, Counselor A shared that, even
though she agrees efforts through the SSA program and the digital citizenship lessons are
helping students to be more responsible in all areas.
Need for further efforts. While each person interviewed found value in the
current efforts, four of the five interviewees were looking for the school to do more in its
efforts in cyberbullying. Two general themes emerged: (a) schoolwide training, and col-
lection of more data.
While efforts have begun, most of the interviewees agreed that more needed to be
done. Teacher A and Teacher B discussed the value of attending training provided by
Common Sense Media during the school’s TechCon. Even though this training has been
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 96
available for the past 2 years, not all staff members have attended. In addition, Teacher A
shared that the staff’s knowledge of Internet usage by teenagers, especially social media
websites, is largely generational. The younger the staff member, the more likely the staff
member is to be knowledgeable about the Internet usage by teenagers. She expressed a
concern that not all staff members understand social media and not all have attended
Common Sense Media training. She concluded that this training should be mandatory.
Both Counselor A and Administrator B cited lessons on digital citizenship that
they are planning to create. These lessons would be implemented across an entire grade
level through a common class such as Humanities. Teacher A shared that most teachers
were aware of the lessons on digital citizenship and were helping students with these
concepts, but note that formal schoolwide lessons were needed.
With many of these efforts in their infancy, only limited data have been collected
regarding their effectiveness. Teacher B said that many of the social concerns addressed
in middle school do not affect students until later in their lives.
[Middle school students] are just scared little kids, and they’re confused about
who they are, but that will come out when they’re high school age. It will be
interesting to follow this group of kids, the seventh graders and eighth graders,
and see what happens to them as they progress through school.
Administrator A shared that most of their current data is anecdotal and Counselor
A and Administrator B shared that they wanted quantitative data to evaluate effectiveness
of the current effort. Administrator B especially wanted data that show efforts in digital
citizenship decreasing the incidents of cyberbullying. Counselor A commented, “What
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 97
would be nice to do is come up with some sort of pretest for these kids . . . to say that
have the incidents gone down . . . but how do you know if they’re all being reported or
not?” The concern about limited quantitative data on the effectiveness of the anti-
cyberbullying efforts was a common theme among interviewees.
Still more data are needed in order to assess the effectiveness of the anti-
cyberbullying efforts. Despite this, there seems to be a protocol for responding to inci-
dents that is working at Sunny View and the education of various stakeholders is making
an impact on those who participate.
Analysis and Discussion of Research Question 2
The perceived effectiveness of the anti-cyberbullying efforts by the staff included
three themes: (a) a thorough investigation of incidents, (b) common language among the
staff, and (c) the need for continued education and data collection to strengthen the effec-
tiveness of the efforts.
Response to incidents of cyberbully was a theme from Chapter 2. Wiseman
(2011) concluded that the best anti-cyberbullying effort would include both an education
for prevention and enforcement of school policies. Cassidy et al. (2009) contended that
students need to believe that a school will react to incidents of cyberbullying and take
appropriate action. This is the case at Sunny View. The staff spoke about the extensive
investigations that were necessary to understand the key players who are involved in
these incidents. The school seems to be willing to dedicate time and resources to ensure
that this occurs. The administrators cited the school’s discipline matrix and stated that
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 98
they strictly follow the matrix to deter cyberbullying incidents. The use of the protocol to
respond to cyberbullying has created a perception of an effective effort on the campus.
The education of all stakeholders was also a key theme in the literature review.
The literature explained that a clear understanding of cyberbullying and prevention of
cyberbullying should be disseminated to the students, staff, and parents (Kowalski et al.,
2012; Limber, 2003). A common language related to cyberbullying and digital citizen-
ship demonstrates collective understanding of the issue. Furthermore, the use of this lan-
guage signifies ownership of the learning needed to understand the concepts.
At this time, the staff at Sunny View saw their efforts as emerging, as they are
beginning to generate training for parents and staff and lessons for students. Despite their
belief that their efforts are just emerging, each person shared elements of the training and
education that have been effective, especially with students and parents. Based on these
observations, it would seem that the staff members see their efforts as adding to the anti-
cyberbullying culture at the school but they agree that more is needed to create a more
effective system. The interviewees spoke of wanting more data to see how the efforts
were affecting the anti-cyberbullying climate at the school. This echoes the idea that the
staff spoke of aspects of the efforts being effective but wanting a more whole-school
approach to the education of staff and students. Stauffer, Heath, Coyne, and Ferrin (2012)
reported similar results with the teachers whom they surveyed. Those teachers usually
perceived consequences to be more effective than education and preventative measure.
Potentially, with more data on consequences related to cyberbullying, the staff may be
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 99
able to identify more finitely how the education of students about digital citizenship is an
effective way to prevent cyberbullying.
The staff at Sunny View has a strong sense that investigations, use of the SRO,
and consequences that the bully faces are effective means to promote an anti-
cyberbullying culture at their school. There is some disagreement regarding the impact of
current education and training on the desired outcome. Most agreed that more training is
necessary for teachers and the students, especially regarding digital citizenship. Some
sought more data on its impact, while others contended that they will need to examine the
data as the students continue through their education, since the impact may come later in
their educational careers. Either way, more data could be useful in solidifying the effec-
tiveness of their efforts.
Research Question 3: Sustainability
Research Question 3 asked, How are these systems and structures sustained to
support an anti-cyberbullying culture in schools? Through data analysis, three themes
emerged that addressed the sustainability of the efforts employed by Sunny View:
(a) collaborative leadership, (b) ownership of learning, and (c) communication.
Collaborative leadership. In looking at the anti-cyberbullying efforts at Sunny
View, a number of people have helped to create and implement lessons, programs, and
presentations. This collaboration results in a unified leadership on anti-cyberbullying
efforts. With multiple people involved with the beginning efforts on anti-cyberbullying at
the school, sustainability is strengthened due to a shared vision and leadership.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 100
The principal and assistant principal at Sunny View work together to focus the
school’s efforts and to reach the school’s goals. Administrator A shared,
Everything kind of disseminates from me, but really the counselors, our at-risk
counselor, our school resource officer, and the AP kind of handle the day-to-day
things about that. Administrator B and I make the decisions on where we’re going
to go, where we’re going to put our resources with our time and effort.
Administrator B supported this statement: “Administrator A really does treat us as a co-
principalship, so there’s pretty much no task I don’t get an opportunity to be involved
with.” Decisions are made together through shared vision and goals. While Administrator
A admitted that Administrator B is the driving force for digital citizenship lessons and
efforts, the decision to implement these efforts was a unified decision. Administrator B
was aware of this:
My role is primarily creating that curriculum, creating a library that will be
something that will be sustainable for the school long after I’m not here so that
there is this constant review of what does it mean to be a digital citizen, and how
can I safeguard myself, and what does it mean every time I go on the web and I
join a social media site.
Administrator B emphasized that creating lessons will start the efforts but that, in order to
sustain these efforts, she cannot work in isolation. This administrator has collaborated
with other staff members to create lessons and has plans to continue this collaboration.
In addition to a cohesive administration, multiple members of the staff have been
involved in the planning, creation, and implementation of lessons and programs. The
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 101
group consists of three consistent members: Administrator B, Counselor A, and the 21st
Century Teaching and Learning TOSA. However, grade-level counselors and other
teacher have also been involved in creating lessons. Both Counselor A and Teacher B
were involved in planning and creating a schoolwide sixth-grade lesson. Counselor A
shared that she had expressed an interest in the digital citizenship lesson, so Administra-
tor B enlisted her to help with the project. In addition, the new TOSA is now helping to
create lessons on digital citizenship that can be used in individual classes.
A collaborative leadership allows multiple people to understand the vision of the
efforts and increase the sustainability of the program. With Administrator B as the
driving force behind the digital citizenship education, other members of the administra-
tion and staff support and contribute to those efforts.
Ownership of learning. Professional development is offered regularly. Merely
participating in professional development does not guarantee that the staff will use the
new knowledge gained in the profession development sessions. At Sunny View the staff
has begun to implement the knowledge that they have gained through the professional
development opportunities, as demonstrated in the lessons that teachers are creating and
the common language related to digital citizenship that is used by staff.
Teacher A, Teacher B, and Counselor A spoke of the lessons that they have cre-
ated for classrooms. Topics include cyber etiquette, digital footprints, and cyberbullying.
In addition, the teachers have had informal conversations about the use of the Internet.
Teacher A stated,
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 102
I think all you can do is keep trying to make them more and more aware of their
digital footprint. I think that is the biggest hurdle because what a big concept
cyberbullying is and trying to get that across to a group of kids who have been
encultured to love technology and be on it all the time.
Teacher B reiterated this statement as she spoke of how teachers help students to
understand appropriate use of technology. Teacher B noted that this is done in a more
informal setting when issues arise. “It’s not like we are doing digital citizenship lessons
fully . . . more like we talk about that stuff all the time.” Four of the five interviewees
cited future plans to implement more lessons from the Common Sense Media curriculum.
During the interviews the staff used a common language specifically around the
digital citizenship curriculum. They used terms such as digital citizenship, digital foot-
print, cyber etiquette, netiquette, and digitally responsible. Their fluency with the vocab-
ulary demonstrates their understanding of digital citizenship concepts. Furthermore, this
fluency and understanding reveals that they have taken ownership in the digital citizen-
ship curriculum.
The leadership at Sunny View gave the teachers the opportunity to attend the
Common Sense Media professional development session for the past 2 years and the
some of the teachers have utilized these lessons and resources. In addition, there is a
common language among the staff that includes concepts from the Common Sense Media
curriculum. These two factors demonstrate that the staff has taken ownership of what
they have learned through the digital citizenship curriculum. This ownership of their
learning in the realm of digital citizenship will aid in sustaining the digital citizenship
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 103
program. As the teachers and staff have an understanding of the concepts, they can edu-
cate their students.
Communication. Communication among all stakeholders is a key element in cre-
ating a supportive culture at a school. A supportive culture with open communication can
strengthen sustainability of anti-cyberbullying efforts by allowing these efforts to adapt to
the needs of the school. With open communication, schools may be more informed about
new issues and concerns. Parents can be the voice for their children and can alert the
school regarding potential problems.
All five interviewees cited extensive parent involvement with the school. Admin-
istrator A stated that a large percentage of the parents are involved in the school though
volunteering and the parent-teacher group. Parents can give the staff feedback on current
issues within the school with an open line of communication. As the staff responds to
these issues, the parents recognize that their communication of concerns is valued by the
staff. Teacher A said, “I’ve noticed there is a lot of parent involvement here. I feel as
though there’s a greater sense of community in that I feel like everyone kind of knows
each other somehow.” Parent involvement allows the school and parents to have an open
line of communication so the school can hear parents’ concerns and address these
concerns.
Teacher A, Teacher B, and Administrator B discussed one specific parent
concern: the implementation of one-to-one iPads. While the school was considering the
many advantages of having these devices in the hands of all students, parents were con-
cerned about the potential for increased cyberbullying at school. Teacher B reported,
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 104
The driving force was the community, because parents are very hesitant to go to a
one-to-one program because of Internet safety. I think people see a story on the
news and latch onto that can happen to anyone, which it can, but they auto-
matically assume that’s going to happen to every child in Sunny View Middle
School.
Parents voiced concerns to the school regarding potential problems with the iPad
implementation. Listening to the parents’ concerns, the school decided to create initia-
tives that would counter cyberbullying. Administrator B had experience with digital citi-
zenship, and the administration decided that this could be one way that the school could
help to educate students on cyberbullying and responsible use of technology and address
the concerns of the parents at the same time.
My mind automatically went there in terms of, “How am I going to be able to
support parent concerns?” . . . I guess that was the driving force for me, was that I
knew we’re going to one-to-one, I knew that there needed to be some compre-
hensive plan to address [the parents’ concern about implementation].
Three interviewees specifically discussed the school’s willingness to listen to the parents’
concerns and take appropriate steps to address those concerns.
Sustainability of anti-cyberbullying efforts at Sunny View centered on three
themes: (a) collaborative leadership, (b) ownership of one’s own learning, and (c) open
communication between the school and parents. While Administrator B may have initi-
ated anti-cyberbullying efforts at the school, it is evident that she shares responsibility for
communicating these efforts and introducing new lessons with multiple people on staff.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 105
In addition, the staff has an understanding of the concepts of the digital citizenship cur-
riculum and has begun to teach students these concepts.
Analysis of Research Question 3
Three themes emerged from the interviews in relation to Research Question 3,
How are these systems and structures sustained to support an anti-cyberbullying culture
in schools? The themes were (a) collaborative leadership, (b) ownership of learning, and
(c) communication.
Limber (2003) advocated for a whole-school approach to cyberbullying, including
curriculum, interventions, prevention, and shifts in culture. She stated that this approach
increases longevity and sustainability of programs. While Sunny View’s anti-
cyberbullying effort are still in infancy, a clear effort has created a shared vision in a
team of staff members who are leading the charge in anti-cyberbullying efforts.
The school has nurtured open communication between students’ parents and the
school. Open communication allows the school to understand issues and potential threats
to the anti-cyberbullying culture. The school’s response to the issues that the parents dis-
close demonstrates a validation of the parents’ concerns. Sunny View is responding to
parents’ concerns, as demonstrated by implementation of digital citizenship and anti-
cyberbullying education and parent meetings on Internet safety. Fostering open com-
munication encourages parents to be active in the anti-cyberbullying culture of the school
and creates a culture of trust and respect that is necessary to continue to engage in discus-
sions.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 106
Based on the conceptual framework presented in Chapter 3, leadership is at the
center of sustainability of an anti-bullying culture on a school campus. The framework
illustrates how leadership oversees implementation of systems and structures, such as
professional development and interactions among stakeholders. In this case, the shared
leadership strengthens sustainability at Sunny View.
The interviewees demonstrated that they not only were trained on the concepts of
digital citizenship but also took ownership of their learning and understood the magnitude
of some of the concepts in the curriculum. They were fluent in the language and concepts
of digital citizenship and shared their knowledge with students. Some staff members cre-
ated lessons and assisted Administrator B in creating lessons, which demonstrated their
own knowledge on the subject. Ownership of their learning demonstrates buy-in by the
staff, which will strengthen the whole-school approach.
Sunny View has collaborative leadership that allows the school to have a whole-
school approach to anti-cyberbullying efforts. While Administrator B is a driving force
behind current efforts in anti-cyberbullying on campus, the staff is also invested in edu-
cating students on Internet safety and cyber etiquette. The school has created an open
forum in which parents report to the school regarding issues that they feel should be
addressed. The school listens and responds to their concerns. These three factors help to
strengthen the school’s ability to sustain anti-cyberbullying efforts over time.
Chapter Summary
This chapter reviewed the findings based on data collected for this case study,
followed by detailed analysis and discussion of the research questions. In addition, the
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 107
analysis reflected on the literature review presented in Chapter 2. The findings were
based on interviews, observations, and artifact analysis to ensure validity.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 108
Chapter 5
Summary and Implications
Over the past 2 decades, school violence has come to the forefront of the nation’s
attention. With school shootings such as those at Columbine and Sandy Hook, the need to
examine anti-bullying efforts is crucial. To compound the matter, technology has taken a
starring role in current trends in bullying. Cyberbullying creates new challenges for
schools that did not exist 15 years ago. To address this recent change in bullying, schools
have adapted anti-bullying efforts to include the new threat of cyberbullying.
Olweus (1993) contended that the best approach to addressing bullying in a
school was to take a whole-school approach. A whole-school approach creates a common
understanding of the meaning, policies, and response to bullying by all stakeholders.
Research has shown that this approach is effective in anti-cyberbullying efforts
(Kowolski et al., 2012). Through this approach, all stakeholders have a clear definition of
cyberbullying (Kowolski et al., 2012; Limber, 2003). Education of adults, including
teachers, staff, and parents, regarding cyberbullying should include definitions and poli-
cies regarding cyberbullying, as well as education regarding technology used in
cyberbullying incidents. In addition to understanding definitions and policies related to
cyberbullying, a whole-school approach stresses enforcement of these policies. Students
may be unwilling to report incidents of cyberbullying because they believe that nothing
will be done to stop the behaviors (Cassidy et al., 2009). Wiseman (2011) found that, to
combat this belief, schools can enforce laws and policies of cyberbullying and educate
students on the process that will be followed when an incident is reported.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 109
Research has generated a variety of strategies for responding to cyberbullying:
having clear procedures, training teachers and bystanders to intervene in incidents of
cyberbullying, and educating teachers and students on the appropriate use of technology
(Couvillon & Ilieva, 2011; Franek, 2005; Kowalski & Limber, 2007; Limber, 2003).
Response to incidents, in conjunction with education of stakeholders, can strengthen
efforts to create an anti-cyberbullying culture on a school campus.
Cyberbullying has been studied in schools throughout the country, but it continues
to be a problem that students are forced to endure. While there is ample research on how
schools can address the issue of traditional bullying and cyberbullying, cyberbullying
continues and many schools have not been able to promote an anti-cyberbullying culture
on their campus. In contrast, some schools, such as Sunny View, have implemented
systems and structures that have led to an anti-cyberbullying culture. The anti-
cyberbullying efforts of successful schools should be investigated to provide insight for
other schools and school leaders as they begin to implement anti-cyberbullying efforts.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to identify the systems and structures that one
school uses to target cyberbullying with anti-bullying efforts. Cyberbullying can have
unique challenges that traditional bullying usually does not present, such as anonymity of
the bully, widespread audience, or continual access to victims even when the students are
at home. Cyberbullying is a relatively new concept, yet schools are required by law to
address these distinct conditions. The focus of this study was to examine the measures
that one school has taken to create an anti-cyberbullying culture. The study also
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 110
examined the perceived effectiveness of these systems and structures, as well as their
sustainability. This study was guided by three research questions:
1. What are the systems and structures that contribute to an anti-cyberbullying
culture in schools?
2. What is the perceived effectiveness of the systems and structures in place?
3. How are these systems and structures sustained to support an anti-
cyberbullying culture in schools?
Summary of the Findings
Chapter 4 presented the study’s finding and outlined the systems and structures
that contributed to anti-cyberbullying efforts at Sunny View. While many systems and
structures existed in the school’s organization, the results identified three key elements to
have the greatest impact on the anti-cyberbullying efforts at Sunny View: the response to
incidents, education of stakeholders, and student participation.
Sunny View has created a clear protocol for responding to incidents of
cyberbullying. District policies have been established to create a clear understanding of
the definition of cyberbullying. The staff understands the importance of reporting inci-
dents of cyberbullying and where to report incidents. In addition to knowing the protocol,
the school has dedicated efforts to investigating incidents of cyberbullying. The school
counselors, administrators, and SRO combine efforts to determine the source of the
cyberbullying and identify all who are involved. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model
(1997) demonstrates the relationship of how policies that govern a school work in con-
junction with the people who enforce those policies to create an environment for the
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 111
individual (Lee, 2011; Swearer & Espelage, 2004). Through this model, policies and
protocol in the macrosystem are enforced by people in the microsystem, such as teachers,
counselors, administrators, and SRO, to create the mesosystem that supports an anti-
cyberbullying culture. Wiseman (2011) stated that enforcement of laws and policies is a
key element of an anti-cyberbullying culture. With enforcement of policy and investiga-
tion of incidents, students can feel confident that their reports of cyberbullying will be
examined. Students often believe that schools will not or do not have the means to inves-
tigate reports of cyberbullying (Cassidy et al., 2009). Sunny View has demonstrated oth-
erwise. Through thorough investigation, the school has used its resources effectively to
create a feeling among staff members that students are willing to report cyberbullying
and that the school is able to address it.
Cyberbullying is a relatively new concept—one that is unfamiliar to many of the
adults involved. Education of the adults as well as the students is an important element of
anti-cyberbullying efforts at Sunny View. While general understanding of cyberbullying
is presented to staff and students, digital citizenship and digital footprint have become
common language among staff members. Furthermore, the curriculum from Common
Sense Media is employed in classrooms to teach students these concepts. Digital citizen-
ship and digital footprint focus on appropriate use of the technology and preventive
measures to avert cyberbullying. Parents are informed of technology safety during meet-
ings provided by the administration. These meetings focus on appropriate use of and
restrictions on use of iPads. The need for education of stakeholders developed when the
school implemented its 1:1 iPad program. Applying Bronfenbrenner’s (1997) model, the
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 112
increase in technology at Sunny View is a part of the exosystem as the decision indirectly
influenced the anti-cyberbullying effort. From this decision, digital citizenship, digital
footprint, and technology education became a focus. Researchers would agree that edu-
cating the whole school, creating a consistent concerted effort, and identifying effective
preventative measures constitute the foundation for effective anti-cyberbullying efforts
(Kowolski et al., 2012; Murino, 1997; Olweus, 1993). Sunny View has focused on edu-
cation of its stakeholders in appropriate use of technology and understanding
cyberbullying.
In addition to educating all stakeholders, the school provides opportunities for all
stakeholders to participate in anti-cyberbullying efforts. Students are trained to become
SSAs, empowering them to take a stand against bullying. Students are also an integral
component of the response to incidents, as they primarily report incidents to staff
members. Staff member are encouraged to participate in the Common Sense Media pro-
fessional development so they can create lessons for their classes on the use of
technology and digital citizenship. Teachers and counselors collaborate with administra-
tors on whole-school presentations related to cyberbullying, digital citizenship, and digi-
tal footprints. Just as teachers give input to the administration, an open line of
communication has been established with parents.
The interaction between two separate environments is an example of the
mesosystem found in Bronfenbrenner’s (1997) ecological system. In this case, the two
environments are the school and the students’ homes. Parents express concern about
issues that affect their students. As the school increased its technology, parents were
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 113
concerned that cyberbullying would increase. The school administration heard their
concerns and implemented new anti-cyberbullying efforts. Olweus (1993) contended that
a whole-school approach was needed to create an anti-bullying culture at school, includ-
ing participation by all stakeholders. At Sunny View, the stakeholders have a variety of
ways to participate in anti-cyberbullying efforts and work together in the mesosystem of
Bronfenbrenner’s (1997) model to create an anti-cyberbullying culture. Sunny View
increases its sustainability and effectiveness with a variety of stakeholders vested in the
anti-cyberbullying effort.
Implications for Practice and Policy
The findings from this study have implications in the field of education with
regard to school safety and the well-being of students. This study focused on the systems
and structures that promote an anti-cyberbullying culture at one school. While much of
what was observed was specific to Sunny View, the results of the study may be helpful
for future efforts in creating an anti-cyberbullying culture in other middle schools.
Study data suggest the importance of follow-through with regard to response to
student reports of incidents of cyberbullying. Investigations of cyberbullying reports
demonstrate the school’s commitment to eliminate cyberbullying from its campus. With
the capability of anonymity and advent of new technology and websites, cyberbullying
investigations can require more investment in time and energies to identify the perpe-
trator. Schools may not have adequate resources to investigate such incidents. In the case
of Sunny View teachers, counselors, administrators, and the SRO are at the school’s dis-
posal to investigate incidents. The literature states that students are reluctant to report
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 114
incidents of cyberbullying, predominantly because they believe that nothing will be done
(Cassidy et al., 2009). Creating a community where students know that the school is
committed to finding the perpetrator fosters a culture that will not tolerate cyberbullying
and will investigate all reports. This demonstration of the willingness to investigate
reports of cyberbullying encourages students to come forward, creating a relationship of
trust and respect. Thus, while the literature suggests using an anonymous reporting
system for cyberbullying incidents, Sunny View has created a sense of community that
fosters reporting directly to a staff member. This contrast may suggest that a greater sense
of community and connectedness to one’s school supersedes the need for anonymous
reporting.
In addition to the thorough investigations, Sunny View follows through with each
step of the protocol once an incident of cyberbullying has been reported. Figure 5 depicts
the person(s) responsible for each step of the protocol.

Figure 5. Responsibility throughout protocol.
Students, both victims and bystanders, report incidents to various staff members
on campus. The teachers, counselors, administration, and SRO may be responsible for
some portion of the investigation. Once the investigation has been completed, the coun-
selors, administrators, and SRO may be involved in the conferences with the perpetrator
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 115
and victim. The administrators and SRO may deliver consequences to the perpetrator. In
the case of Sunny View, there was not a specific person responsible to ensure that the
protocol is followed, but follow through is consistent. Four of the five staff members
who were interviewed indicated that the counselor took a large role to ensure that this
occurred but this was not specifically designated. The school should consider revising
the protocol to include one point person, potentially the counselor, to oversee the proto-
col. With numerous people involved in the process, there could be confusion about who
completes the next steps, although at this time this is not the case.
In addition to responding to incidents of cyberbullying, Sunny View has made a
concerted effort to educate its stakeholders about cyberbullying and preventive measures,
especially those related to the use of technology. Using Common Sense Media’s cur-
riculum, the staff understands and uses the terms digital citizenship, digital footprint, and
cyber etiquette clearly. While most schools have an acceptable use policy that defines
what technology is acceptable and when a person can use it, Sunny View addresses how
to use technology appropriately through the Common Sense Media curriculum. Specifi-
cally, the staff educates students on digital footprint and cyber-etiquette. This under-
standing has been conveyed to the students through whole-school presentations, as well
as in lessons in some teachers’ classrooms. The leadership at Sunny View has the expec-
tation that students will be educated on issues related to the Internet. Through this educa-
tion, students are aware of how to act on the Internet and how to avoid potential dangers.
This knowledge can also help students to safeguard themselves from potential
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 116
cyberbullying threats. As the school educates all stakeholders, students may be less likely
to be perpetrators or victims of cyberbullying.
Acceptable use policies alone are not enough to ensure appropriate use of tech-
nology by students. While many schools are giving students access to this technology,
they are neglecting to teach students how to use these tools appropriately or how to inter-
act with others via the Internet. Even though almost all of the staff who were interviewed
in this study cited a need to improve efforts to educate students on digital citizenship,
Sunny View should be commended for its beginning efforts to teach its students these
skills through the digital citizenship curriculum. Some schools are reluctant to teach these
skills and concepts due to lack of knowledge on the part of their staff. Teacher A shared
that at Sunny View much of what the staff knows about issues related to students’ use of
the Internet is inconsistent. Furthermore, the use of technology is ever changing. This
constant change may lead one to believe that, in addition to further education of students
regarding digital citizenship, the staff may need more trainings on current trends of Inter-
net usage by teenagers.
In the literature, the importance of a consistent, concerted effort by all stakehold-
ers was evident (Kowolski et al., 2012; Murino, 1997; Olweus, 1993). The findings from
the current study demonstrated a strong presence of multiple stakeholders in the anti-
cyberbullying efforts at Sunny View. Staff member are dedicated to eradicating
cyberbullying from their campus. Students are willing to stand up for victims of bullying
and to report incidents of cyberbullying. Parents voice concerns for their students and
participate in meetings that keep themselves informed and their students safe.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 117
With all stakeholders involved, efforts against cyberbullying become stronger.
The school should consider strengthening their whole-school approach by including a
wider range of stakeholders in their cyberbullying efforts. Specifically, the findings of
this study show that Administrator B plays a large role in sustaining the efforts at Sunny
View. The school should consider intentionally developing an anti-cyberbullying leader-
ship team with representation from all stakeholders that could monitor and evaluate
current anti-cyberbullying efforts, as well as design, create, and implement further edu-
cation on digital citizenship for all stakeholders. The leadership team’s work to evaluate
anti-cyberbullying efforts may bring to light the impact of the current work and identify
future professional development needs for staff, curriculum for students, and informa-
tional meetings for parents.
Recommendations for Future Studies
The following recommendations for future studies reflect what could be done to
understand the systems and structures that affect anti-cyberbullying efforts.
Student and parent perspectives were not included in this study; these perspec-
tives might reflect a different aspect of the systems and structures in place at a school
with promising practices of anti-cyberbullying efforts. These two stakeholders could
offer insight into the daily lives of students and the struggles related to cyberbullying that
they face at school and at home.
Sunny View recently implemented a 1:1 iPad program. With many schools
increasing students’ access to technology, it might be advantageous to study how access
to technology affects incidents of cyberbullying and anti-cyberbullying efforts at a
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 118
school. In addition, it might be useful to examine the correlation between the level of
technology provided by the school and the school’s anti-cyberbullying efforts.
Research has shown an increase in teenage use of social media websites as stu-
dents enter high school. A continuation of the current study on the impact of current
systems and structures of anti-cyberbullying efforts implemented at Sunny View Middle
School as the students matriculate to high school could provide information on the effec-
tiveness of these efforts by the middle school.
Conclusion
Bullying continues to be an issue in schools across the country. Technology has
created a new forum in which bullying can persist beyond the school day, reaching a
massive public audience. Cyberbullying presents additional challenges to schools in cre-
ating a safe environment for learning. Despite such challenges, some schools have cre-
ated an anti-cyberbullying culture and are paving the road for others through effective
response to incidents, education for all stakeholders, and student participation to foster a
positive and safe learning environment for all students. As schools continue to increase
students’ access to technology on campus, ongoing education of staff, parents, and stu-
dents on how to use the technology appropriately through a digital citizenship curriculum
can contribute significantly toward creating and sustaining an anti-cyberullying culture.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 119
References
Bauman, S., & Del Rio, A. (2006). Preservice teachers’ responses to bullying scenarios:
Comparing physical, verbal and relational bullying. Journal of Educational Psy-
chology, 98, 219-231.
Bauman, S., Toomey, R. B., & Walker, J. L. (2013). Associations among bullying,
cyberbullying, and suicide in high school students. Journal of Adolescence, 36,
341-350.
Beale, A. V. (2001). Bullybusters: Using drama to empower students to take a stand
against bullying behavior. Professional School Counseling, 4, 300-306.
Beale, A. V., & Hall, K. R. (2007). Cyberbullying: What school administrators (and
parents) can do. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues
and Ideas, 81(1), 8-12.
Beckstrom, D. C. (2008). State legislation mandating school cyberbullying policies and
the potential threat to students’ free speech rights. Vermont Law Review, 33, 283-
321.
Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2008). The relationship between cyberbullying and school bullying.
Journal of Student Wellbeing, 1(2), 16-33.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1997). Ecological models of human development. Readings on the
Development of Children, 1993, 37-43.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 120
Buhs, E. S., Ladd, G. W., & Herald, S. L. (2006). Peer exclusion and victimization:
Processes that mediate the relation between peer group rejection and children's
classroom engagement and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychol-
ogy, 98(1), 1-13.
Bullying Statistics.org. (2009). Stop bullying, harassment and violence. Retrieved from
http://www.bullyingstatistics.org/content/cyber-bullying-statistics.html
California Education Code, § 234.1(b)(1) (2011).
California State Constitution, Article 1, § 28.7 (2008).
Cassidy, W., Brown, K., & Jackson, M. (2012). “Under the radar”: Educators and
cyberbullying in schools. School Psychology International, 33, 520-532.
Cassidy, W., Jackson, M., & Brown, K. N. (2009). Sticks and stones can break my bones,
but how can pixels hurt me? Students’ experiences with cyber-bullying. School
Psychology International, 30, 383-402.
Center for Digital Education. (2012). Technology innovation in education. Folsom, CA:
Author.
Common Sense Media. (2014). President Bill Clinton supports Common Sense Media’s
digital driver’s license. Retrieved from http://www.commonsensemedia.org/
about-us/news/press-releases/president-bill-clinton-supports-common-sense-
medias-digital-drivers
Community Matters. (2014). Safe school ambassadors. Retrieved from http://
community-matters.org/downloads/SSASynopsis.pdf
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 121
Community Matters. (n.d.). The problem: Bullying and violence. Retrieved from
http://community-matters.org/downloads/SSASynopsis.pdf
Cornell, D., Gregory, A., Huang, F., & Fan, X. (2013). Perceived prevalence of teasing
and bullying predicts high school dropout rates. Journal of Educational Psychol-
ogy, 105(1), 138-149.
Couvillon, M. A., & Ilieva, V. (2011). Recommended practices: A review of schoolwide
preventative programs and strategies on cyberbullying. Preventing School Fail-
ure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55(2), 96-101.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dickerson, D. (2005). Cyberbullies on campus. University of Toledo Law Review, 37(1).
Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1087800
Donegan, R. (2012). Bullying and cyberbullying: History, statistics, law, prevention and
analysis. Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, 3(1), 33-
42.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2013). Crime in the United States 2012. Retrieved from
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-
2012/tables/8tabledatadecpdf/table-8-state-cuts/table_8_offenses_known_to_law
_enforcement_by_california_by_city_2012.xls
Franek, M. (2005). Foiling cyberbullies in the new wild West. Educational Leader-
ship, 63(4), 39-43.
Georgia Code. Education. O.C.G.A § 20-2 (2012).
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 122
Glense, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Goodno, N. (2011). How public schools can constitutionally halt cyberbullying: A model
cyberbullying policy that survives First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, and due
process challenges. Wake Forest Law Review, 46. Retrieved from http://
wakeforestlawreview.com/how-public-schools-can-constitutionally-halt-
cyberbullying-a-model-cyberbullying-policy-that-considers-first-amendment-due-
process-and-fourth-amendment-challenges
Hay, C., Meldrum, R., & Mann, K. (2010). Traditional bullying, cyber bullying, and
deviance: A general strain theory approach. Journal of Contemporary Criminal
Justice, 26(2), 130-147.
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2008). Cyberbullying: An exploratory analysis of factors
related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behavior, 29(2), 129-156.
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Suicide Re-
search, 14, 206-221.
Hockly, N. (2012). Tech-savvy teaching: BYOD. Modern English Teacher, 21(4), 44-45.
Hoff, D. L., & Mitchell, S. N. (2009). Cyberbullying: Causes, effects, and reme-
dies. Journal of Educational Administration, 47, 652-665.
Isernhagen, J., & Harris, S. (2003). A comparison of 9th and 10th grade boys’ and girls’
bullying behaviors in two states. Journal of School Violence, 2(2), 67-80.
Juvonen, J. (2011). Bullying and violence as barriers to academic achievement. San
Francisco, CA: WestEd.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 123
Juvonen, J., & Gross, E. F. (2008). Extending the school grounds? Bullying experiences
in cyberspace. Journal of School Health, 78, 496-505.
Juvonen, J., Nishina, A., & Graham, S. (2000). Peer harassment, psychological adjust-
ment, and school functioning in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psy-
chology, 92(2), 349-359.
Kaltiala-Heino, R., Rimpela, M., Rantanen, P., & Rimpela, A. (2000). Bullying at school:
An indicator of adolescents at risk for mental disorders. Journal of Adolescence.
23, 661-674. doi:10.1006/jado.2000.0351
Kimmel, M. S., & Mahler, M. (2003). Adolescent masculinity, homophobia, and vio-
lence: Random school shootings, 1982-2001. American Behavioral Scientist, 46,
1439-1458. doi:10.1177/0002764203251484
King, A. V. (2010). Constitutionality of cyberbullying laws: Keeping the online play-
ground safe for both teens and free speech. Vanderbilt Law Review, 63, 845.
Klomek, A. B., Marrocco, F., Kleinman, M., Schonfeld, I. S., & Gould, M. S. (2007).
Bullying, depression, and suicidality in adolescents. Journal of American Acad-
emy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 46(1), 46-49.
Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2007). Electronic bullying among middle school stu-
dents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6), S22-S30.
Kowalski, R. M., Limber, S. P., & Agatston, P. W. (2012). Cyberbullying: Bullying in the
digital age. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Lane, D. K. (2010). Taking the lead on cyberbullying: Why schools can and should
protect students online. Iowa Law Review, 96, 1791-1811.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 124
Lee, C. H. (2011). An ecological systems approach to bullying behaviors among middle
school students in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 1664-
1693.
Lenhart, A. (2009). Teens and mobile phones over the past five years: Pew Internet looks
back. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Lenhart, A., Madden, M., Smith, A., Purcell, K., Zickuhr, K., & Rainie, L. (2011). Teens,
kindness and cruelty on social network sites: How American teens navigate the
new world of digital citizenship. Retrieved from http://www.pewInternet.org/
2011/11/09/teens-kindness-and-cruelty-on-social-network-sites/
Lenhart, A., Rich, L., Campbell, S., & Purcell, K. (2010). Teens, cell phones and texting:
Text messaging becomes centerpiece communication. Retrieved from http://
67.192.40.213/Reports/2010/Teens-and-Mobile-Phones.aspx
Li, Q. (2007). New bottle but old wine: A research of cyberbullying in schools. Comput-
ers in Human Behavior, 23, 1777-1791.
Limber, S. P. (2003). Efforts to address bullying in U.S. schools. American Journal of
Health Education, 34(5), S23-S29.
Long, C. (2008). Silencing cyberbullies: Digital sticks & stones can’t break bones—but
they can hurt even more. What educators can do to curb bullying in cyber-
space. NEA Today, 26(8), 28-29.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.).
Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 125
McGreevy, P. (2011, July 9). Brown signs law on cyber-bullying, in-home care provid-
ers. The Los Angeles Times [online]. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes
.com/2011/jul/09/local/la-me-new-laws-20110709
Mehta, S. B., Cornell, D., Fan, X., & Gregory, A. (2013). Bullying climate and school
engagement in ninth-grade students. Journal of School Health, 83(1), 45-52.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mills, C., Guerin, S., Lynch, F., Daly, I., & Fitzpatrick, C. (2004). The relationship
between bullying, depression and suicidal thoughts/behaviour in Irish adoles-
cents. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, 21(4), 112-116.
Mishna, F., Khoury-Kassabri, M., Gadalla, T., & Daciuk, J. (2012). Risk factors for
involvement in cyber bullying: Victims, bullies and bully-victims. Children and
Youth Services Review, 34(1), 63-70.
Mishna, F., Saini, M., & Solomon, S. (2009). Ongoing and online: Children and youth's
perceptions of cyber bullying. Children and Youth Services Review, 31, 1222-
1228.
Morino, M. (1997, March). The impact of technology on youth in the 21st century.
Address to the Children's Defense Fund, Washington, DC.
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P.
(2001). Bullying behaviors among U.S. youth: Prevalence and association with
psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285,
2094-2010. doi:10.1001/jama.285.16.2094
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 126
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Student reports of bullying and cyber-
bullying: Results from the 2009 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime
Victimization Survey. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011336.pdf
National Education Association, NEA Human and Civil Rights Center for Advocacy.
(2012). Bullying prevention in public schools. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/
assets/docs/PB43bullyingprevention2012.pdf
Nishioka, V., Northwest, E., Coe, M., Burke, A., Hanita, M., & Sprague, J. (2011).
Student-reported overt and relational aggression and victimization in grades 3–8
(Issues and Answers Report, REL 2011, No. 114). Retrieved from http://eric.ed
.gov/?id=ED518227
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Oxford, UK:
Blackwell.
Olweus, D. (1996). Bullying at school: Knowledge base and an effective intervention
program. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 794, 265-276.
Olweus, D. (2010). Understanding and researching bullying: Some critical issues. In S.
Jimerson, S. Swearer, & D. Espelage (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An
international perspective (pp. 9-33). New York, NY: Routledge.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 127
Pokin, S. (2007, November 11). “My Space” hoax ends with suicide of Dardenne Prairie
teen. St. Charles County Suburban Journal [online]. Retrieved from http://www
.stltoday.com/suburban-journals/stcharles/news/stevepokin/my-space-hoax-ends-
with-suicide-of-dardenne-prairie-teen/article_0304c09a-ab32-5931-9bb3-
210a5d5dbd58.html
Sangani, K. (2013). BYOD to the classroom [bring your own device]. Engineering &
Technology, 8(3), 42-45.
Slonje, R., Smith, P. K., & Frisén, A. (2012). The nature of cyberbullying, and strategies
for prevention. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 26-32.
Sourander, A., Klomek, A. B., Ikonen, M., Lindroos, J., Luntamo, T., Koskelainen, M.,
. . . Helenius, H. (2010). Psychosocial risk factors associated with cyberbullying
among adolescents: A population-based study. Archives of General Psychia-
try, 67(7), 720-728.
Stauffer, S., Heath, M. A., Coyne, S. M., & Ferrin, S. (2012). High school teachers’ per-
ceptions of cyberbullying prevention and intervention strategies. Psychology in
the Schools, 49, 352-367.
Stein, N. (2003). Bullying or sexual harassment: The missing discourse of rights in an era
of zero tolerance. Arizona Law Review, 45, 783.
Swearer, S. M., & Espelage, D. L. (2004). Introduction: A social-ecological framework
of bullying among youth. In D. L. Espelage & S. M. Swearer (Eds.), Bullying in
American schools: A social-ecological perspective on prevention and intervention
(pp. 1-12). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 128
Swearer, S. M., Espelage, D. L., Vailliancourt, T., & Hymel, S. (2010). What can be done
about school bullying? Linking research to educational practice. Educational Re-
searcher, 39(1), 38-47.
U.S. Department of Education. (2011). Analysis of state bullying laws and policies. Re-
trieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/bullying/state-bullying-laws/state-
bullying-laws.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Stop bullying now. Retrieved from http://
www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/nclbreference/page_pg31.html#iv-a
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2012). Youth risk behavior surveil-
lance, United States, 2011. Surveillance Summaries, 61(4). Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss6104.pdf
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2013). Policies and laws. Retrieved
from http://www.stopbullying.gov/laws/index.html#listing
Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., & Nansel, T. R. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in
the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 45, 368-375.
Weinhold, B. K., & Weinhold, J. B. (1998). Conflict resolution: The partnership way in
schools. Counseling and Human Development, 30(7), 1-2.
Willard, N. (2005). Educator’s guide to cyberbullying: Addressing the harm caused by
online social cruelty. Retrieved from http://cyberbully.org
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 129
Winsper, C., Lereya, T., Zanarini, M., & Wolke, D. (2012). Involvement in bullying and
suicide-related behavior at 11 years: A prospective birth cohort study. Journal of
American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 51, 271-282.
Wiseman, B. (2011). Cyberbullying in school: A research study on school policies and
procedures (Doctoral dissertation). University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Wollack, J., & Mitchell, K. (2000). Youth Internet Safety Survey. Durham, NH: Univer-
sity of New Hampshire, Crimes against Children Research Center.
Ybarra, M. L., & Mitchell, K. J. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors, and targets:
A comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology
and Psychiatry, 45, 1308-1316.
Young, E. L., Boye, A. E., & Nelson, D. A. (2006). Relational aggression: Understand-
ing, identifying, and responding in schools. Psychology in Schools, 43, 297-312.
doi:10.1002/pits.20148
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 130
Appendix A
Interview Protocol

1. What is your role in this institution?
2. What has been your experience at this institution?
3. How do you feel about the culture of the institution?
4. What is your role or your involvement in promoting anti-cyberbullying at
your institution?
5. What was the driving force behind the start of the anti-cyberbullying efforts?
6. Tell me about the instances of cyberbullying at your school. Who was
involved and how was it handled?
7. Explain the basics of the anti-bullying/cyberbullying efforts your institution
has in place
a. What policies and preventive measures does your school have in place
to prevent cyberbullying?
b. What other factors influence your school’s anti-cyberbullying efforts?
c. Have these efforts changed? If so, how?
d. What changes have you seen in students’ behavior, incidents of
cyberbullying and reporting of cyberbullying?
8. What is the process that occurs when there is a cyberbullying incident?
9. What type of training is provided to the staff to identify and prevent
cyberbullying?
a. What offices or staff is involved in anti-cyberbullying intervention
training?
b. How prepared does your staff feel in relation to cyberbullying?
c. How prepared do you feel to handle cyberbullying?
10. How are teachers, staff and administrators involved in anti-cyberbullying
efforts?
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 131
11. How are students involved in anti-cyberbullying efforts?
a. Tell me what is being done to help students feel more connected to
your institution
12. How are other stakeholders involved in anti-cyberbullying efforts?
13. What data do you use to evaluate your school’s anti-cyberbullying efforts?
How is the data used to sustain and improve the efforts?
ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 132
Appendix B
Observation Protocol

School Name: _______________________________________ Date: _______________

Type of Observation:
_____________________________________________________

Participants: ______________________________ Materials:
____________________________

Researcher: ________________________________________________________

Time Started: ____________ Time Ended: ____________ Total Time: ___________

Environment
What are you looking for? Notes
Location:

What does the environment look like?

Physical setup:

How are the participants grouped?

Who is leading?
What is the agenda?

What are you looking for? Notes
Purpose/goal: (Education, prevention,
intervention)

Script presentation: (just highlights)

ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 133

Engagement of participants:

ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 134
Appendix C
Discipline Matrix
The district will not tolerate bullying/cyber-bullying/harassment or any other behavior
that infringes on the safety or well-being of students, staff or any other persons within the
district's jurisdiction whether directed at an individual or group. This includes but is not
limited to bullying/cyber-bullying/harassment or any other behavior based on race, color,
creed, national origin, ethnicity, religion, gender, language, sexual orientation, political
affiliation, physical or mental disability, academic or athletic ability, physical appearance
and/or social/economic status. (Education Code 48900.2, 48900.3 and 48900.4)

First Offense Second Offense Third Offense Fourth Offense
Bullying, including
but not limited to,
bullying/cyberbully-
ing/harassment or any
other behavior based
on race, color, creed,
national origin, eth-
nicity, religion,
gender, language,
sexual orientation,
political affiliation,
physical or mental
disability, academic
or athletic ability,
physical appearance
and/or social/
economic status.
Student Con-
ference
Warning
Parent Contact
Student Confer-
ence
Detention
Parent Contact
Student Confer-
ence
Saturday School
Parent Contact
Student Confer-
ence
Suspension
Parent Contact

ANTI-CYBERBULLYING 135
Appendix D
SRO Interview Protocol
1. What is your role in this institution?
2. What has been your experience at this institution?
3. What is your role or your involvement in promoting anti-cyberbullying at your
institution?
4. Tell me about the instances of cyberbullying at your school. Who was involved
and how was it handled?
5. Explain the basics of the anti-bullying/cyberbullying efforts your institution has in
place
a. Have these efforts changed? If so, how?
b. What changes have you seen in students’ behavior, incidents of
cyberbullying and reporting of cyberbullying?
6. What is the process that occurs when there is a cyberbullying incident?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to identify systems and structures schools used to target cyberbullying within anti‐bullying efforts. The study also examined the perceived effectiveness and sustainability of these systems and structures. Using Brofenbrenner’s ecological model, the study demonstrated how systems and structures intertwine to impact the anti‐cyberbullying culture. The was a case study of a phenomenon unique to one particular school. Qualitative data were generated via interviews, observations, and artifact analysis conducted at one middle school in southern California with promising practices in anti‐cyberbullying efforts. These data were used to triangulate the research findings and analyzed through Creswell’s model for data analysis. The findings revealed that the school’s commitment to response to incidents, education of stakeholders, and encouragement of student participation promote an anti‐cyberbullying culture on the campus. An effective anti‐cyberbullying culture is strengthened though preventative measures coupled with a thorough response to incidents. This study demonstrates the importance of open communication among all stakeholders to foster a culture of trust and respect on a school’s campus. In light of increased technology expectations at schools, educating students on appropriate use of technology, digital citizenship, and Internet safety is an essential component of anti‐cyberbullying efforts.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A case study in promising practices in anti-hazing education training for fraternity advisors

PDF

Policies and promising practices to combat bullying in secondary schools

PDF

Promising practices of anti-bullying: safe and supportive environments for all students

PDF

Promising practices in preventing bullying in K-12 schools: student engagement

PDF

Promising practices for building a college-going culture for LatinX students: a case study of a large comprehensive high school

PDF

Why culture matters: a case study to determine the promising practices in the prevention of bullying in K‐12 schools

PDF

Promising practices in the prevention of bullying: using social and emotional skills to prevent bullying

PDF

Middle school teachers' perceptions of cyberbullying

PDF

A case study of promising practices in the prevention of sexual assault in postsecondary institutions

PDF

Promising practices for building a college-going culture: a case study of a comprehensive high school

PDF

Promising practices to promote and sustain a college-going culture: a charter-school case study

PDF

Building a college-going culture: a case study of a continuation high school

PDF

Teachers' perceptions of cyberbullying

PDF

Promising practices: promoting and sustaining a college-going culture

PDF

Understanding the factors that contribute to successful school reconstitution: A promising practice

PDF

Supplemental literacy instruction for students with Down syndrome: a program evaluation

PDF

School-wide implementation of systems and structures that lead to increased achievement among students of color: a case study of a high-performing, high-poverty urban school

PDF

Lack of African-American undergraduate male student retention: an evaluation study on perspectives from academic advisors

PDF

Model of excellence: a qualitative case study of an outperforming magnet middle school

PDF

Success in reflective practice: a case study of an outperforming non-traditional urban high school

Asset Metadata

Creator Nye, Michelle R. (author)

Core Title A case study of promising practices of anti-cyberbullying efforts in a middle school

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/14/2014

Defense Date 03/17/2014

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag bullying,cyberbullying,digital citizenship,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Stowe, Kathy (committee chair), Ahmadi, Shafiqa (committee member), Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee member)

Creator Email chelinye@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-377619

Unique identifier UC11297190

Identifier etd-NyeMichell-2350.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-377619 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-NyeMichell-2350.pdf

Dmrecord 377619

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Nye, Michelle R.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA