The OPC has assisted principals in the investigation of cyberbullying that has involved student-to-student, student-to-staff, staff-to-staff and parent-to-staff cases. Increasingly, however, the target of the cyberbully is the principal or vice-principal. Cyberbullies are often either endeavouring to force the principal to change a decision or to punish the principal for the disputed outcome by causing “fear, distress, or harm” (PPM 144).
There are several challenges facing the principal in the investigation of cyberbullying. The first task is finding and preserving the evidence. Through a search engine, such as Google, it is critical to identify all of the sites used to communicate the bullying and to preserve the evidence through screen captures. Determining the author(s) can be a particularly difficult task. Unless the bully self-identifies or an informer provides a name or list of names, the principal is faced with the fact that one can remain anonymous on the Internet. The bully can create a pseudonym, pretend to be someone else or merely remain nameless. Without specific identifying characteristics or an ability to trace the source device, it may be impossible to stop and/or punish the defamer. Searching for the identity can be very time-consuming. While it can be effective if done systematically, one must be prepared for the long haul.
When ascertaining the impact on school climate, the principal must assess the scope of the commentary. For example, counting the number of hits on a particular site or measuring pick-up in the school or the larger community can present more than technological challenges. The investigation must be conducted in such a way as to minimize the potential for further dissemination of the information in question. Another gauge of the impact on school climate is the amount of time the principal is occupied with this investigation and dealing with the ramifications across the school community (e.g., student, staff, parent contacts). In other words, is the event dominating to the point of interfering with school operations?
The task of eliminating the offending material, e.g., website, blog, or other forums, can be frustrating for many reasons. It requires a great deal of time, detail and attention. First, it is necessary to check all search engines with the principal’s name and derivatives. The recommended steps are:
- Determine and record the domain host, search engine, author and administrator.
- Access and record all external websites.
- Cut and paste all hits into a list.
- Identify the target audience.
- Assess traction and/or pick up in the school or larger community.
- Gauge impact on Board.
The goal of the investigation is to identify places where the negative commentary is being published. Efforts must be made to compel the website host to remove the information and cached copies. Such demands are best produced when distributed on district school board letterhead, preferably signed by Board counsel, but at minimum signed by a Board official. If the host agrees to remove the derogatory content after a reasonable request, a resort to legal action may not be necessary.
When assisting Members who believe they have been targets of cyberbullying, the OPC advice centres on the potential damage to reputation. More than hurt feelings, the (false) commentary could cause grave harm to one’s professional reputation and potentially trigger an investigation by police (criminal behaviour); by the employer (just cause); by the Ontario College of Teachers (misconduct); or by a child protection agency (allegations of abuse). References include relevant statutes, regulations, or board policies that speak to, among others, freedom of expression, defamation, safety and confidentiality, harassment (workplace, human rights), pornography, acceptable use of technology, freedom of information, protection of privacy (identity theft) and public vs. private discourse.
The principal who is the target of cyberbullying by student, staff, parent or anonymous source should be able to rely on the employer-board for vigorous and overt support. This support could range from the collection of evidence to the vigorous defense and even possible prosecution of the perpetrator. The Protective Services Team is available to assist administrators in these situations.
A principal who is the subject of cyberbullying has a public stature that may require a careful communication plan in response to the extent to which the comments have been read by students, staff, parents and community members. The nature and scope of a communication plan is specific to the case and should not further exacerbate the defamation.
There are pros and cons to all plans. One must balance a candid and open response with the potential of spreading the defamation into new territory. A statement such as: “The [name] district school board has investigated and found allegations to be untrue” could go a long way to express the support of the employer in a determined venue or venues (staff, students, school council and wider community). Any official statement should be the consistent message delivered in all venues, either by the principal or by a Board’s official spokesperson.
The experiences of OPC Members who have been the target of cyberbullying have underlined the importance of having emotional supports in place during the investigation phase. For example, it may be necessary to respond to postings on new websites as they appear, and there is the risk of allowing the endeavour to take over one’s life, job and sleep.
When an OPC Member who believes that s/he has been a target of cyberbullying calls for assistance, the immediate directions are to contact the supervisory officer, assist in the investigation, manage the message and call in one’s personal support network. The Member is often disappointed that legal action is not immediately launched. It is difficult to accept that the decision of whether or not to commence legal action is very complicated and nuanced. Even if the decision is made to proceed legally, the nature of the response will require careful planning and may require even more time. There is rarely a quick fix. For further information on defamation, see Chapter 9, Section B of this handbook.
An OPC Member, a principal-target of cyberbullying, advised: “It will take longer than you hope to get it off the Internet ... Sort of like a home renovation project – it always takes more time and money than you planned!” One reason for the apparent delay in response from a host could be the sheer volume of information: Google, for example, deals in billions of hits per year.
The OPC is responding to the challenges of the cyberbullying of its Members through professional development, training and advocacy in the following areas:
Training - It is imperative that the adults in schools be as adept and familiar with information technology as the students. This expertise exists among district school board personnel and should be shared with principals. There is also a serious knowledge gap in certain parent populations; it would be a responsible community service to provide training for parents in the supervision and safety of their children on the Internet.
Responsible & Acceptable Use Policies and Education - The responsible use of electronic communication devices must be seamlessly woven into education programs. “Acceptable Use” policies need to be responsive to changing capacities and innovations, and consequences for violations of the policies must be both enforced and enforceable.
Reputation, public profile - There is a growing recognition that a changing demographic is challenging traditional notions of professional behaviour. Society has held teachers and principals to a higher standard of behaviour as evidenced in legislation and under such regimes as the Ontario College of Teachers. Defamation of a principal’s reputation, therefore, should concern the employer and prompt the Board to undertake an active and consistent response. At the same time, educators are accountable for their reputation and public profile, which must not be undermined by their own actions, such as inadvisably candid remarks, photos and discourse on social network sites.