Response Post: Candidates will read all Discussion Posts. They will select two different case scenarios to which to respond (i.e., if candidate is assigned to Scenario 1, he/she should select one response post from Scenario 2 and one from Scenario 3). Besides the response post requirements outlined in Section C: Discussion Board Expectations, the post should include how/why the candidate’s actions would be similar or different and an analysis and discussion of additional case law and statutes that might have been included.

Scenario 2: You are a principal of a high school and it has been brought to your attention that a male student has been sending harassing texts about a female student. The female student has shown you the texts, which consist of vulgar and offensive language accusing the girl of sexual promiscuity. In addition, it has come to your attention that the student has sent texts to other students encouraging them to “make an example” of the girl by making vulgar facial gestures whenever the girl is presenting something in front of the class in order to “shame her.” Upon questioning, the male student admits to sending the texts, but tells you that you can do nothing about it because the messages are sent outside the school day and are thus “private” and “none of your business.” What are the principal’s best actions and what court cases are most applicable to address this situation?Scenario 2:

This is an excellent time to assess yourself and your school by reflecting on the current and historical influences that shape your school’s culture. Consider the following: school mission and policies, how students interact with one another, the racial and gender dynamics among students, the extent to which parents and families are involved and engaged, how celebrations approached, the curriculum and instruction materials, etc. From there, develop meaningful action plans that maximize existing strengths, address areas of improvement and establish goals to create positive change by applying principles of anti-bias education. Further, encourage individual staff to do their self-assessments of their anti-bias approach and codes. 
This situation will challenge your leadership skills; likely, many students are not aware of all the legal implications accompanying sexting. Educating students about the consequences of sexting can also prove to be a protective factor. Students who have supportive families, friends and have received accurate information about the effects of sexting are less likely to participate in the act. To prevent sexting, school personnel should focus on protective factors in students when designing prevention and intervention programs. 
As principal, changing the dynamic with families and students’ attitudes changes and clear set policies regarding sexting is critical. For example, teens are accustomed to forwarding anything exciting and may not think before sending an inappropriate picture to dozens of friends and acquaintances. Educating students about the consequences of sexting behaviors, including both taking and forwarding images, e.g., being charged with the distribution of child pornography, long-term effects that will follow them into their future can deter them from participating in sexting behaviors. Preventatively, because most teens cite peer pressure as a reason for sexting, students should incorporate the issue of sexting into the existing curricula, which target saying “no” to peer pressure.

Stader, D. (2013). Law and ethics in educational leadership (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education ReplyReply to Comment