Name: _____________________________________

Introduction Grabber Background Restate the Question How free are students? Technology, such as cell phones, texting, email, and Facebook, has changed communications. Online bullying has become a problem for some schools. Should schools be allowed to restrict and use consequences based on what students say through texting and on the Internet? FOR LIMITING: Some students abuse technology and use it to bully others at school, which is why (Chicken Foot Thesis Statement) schools should limit students online speech. Reasons include the (Road Map/Chicken Claw #1) belief that it is a widespread problem affecting both students and teachers, (Road Map/Chicken Claw #2) that online bullying is disruptive to the classroom environment, and, finally, (Road Map/Chicken Claw #3) online bullying violates the civil rights of those who are the victims. AGAINST LIMITING: Although there are some students who abuse technology and use it to bully others at school, schools should not limit students online speech. Reasons include the idea that online bullying is not as widespread a problem as many believe, it is not abnormally disruptive to the classroom environment, and, finally, limiting online speech violates a students right to speak freely as protected by the United States Constitution. Body Paragraph 1 Baby Thesis #1 Road Map/Chicken Claw #1 One reason why schools should limit students online speech is because (Road Map/Chicken Claw #1) cyberbullying is a widespread problem that affects both students and teachers. (DOC A) According to Sameer Hinduja and Justin Patchins graph published by the Cyberbullying Research Center in February 2010, (#4) 25% of girls and 17% of boys have been cyberbullied over their lifetime and it would make a positive impact to see those numbers go down. (DOC B) Further, a joint ATL and Teacher Support Network Press Release from London that was published in April of 2009 (#2, #3) showed that 15% of teachers surveyed have been cyberbullied with very negative effects such as reduced confidence and self-esteem.

Thesis and Road Map

Evidence Supporting details from the document with citation

Argument Connecting evidence to the thesis

Some may argue that these numbers are not very high and do not justify limiting online speech, these percentages do show that cyberbullying is impacting the school environment is some way. Teachers who are affected by cyberbullying (DOC E, #3) may begin to question their abilities as an educator while student victims may see a decline in their performance in classes.

DBQ: Limiting Students Online Speech

Norris, 2013

Name: _____________________________________ Body Paragraph 2 Baby Thesis #1 Road Map/Chicken Claw #1

Evidence Supporting details from the document with citation

Argument Connecting evidence to the thesis

Body Paragraph 3 Baby Thesis #3 Road Map/Chicken Claw #3

Evidence Supporting details from the document with citation

Argument Connecting evidence to the thesis

DBQ: Limiting Students Online Speech

Norris, 2013

Name: _____________________________________ Conclusion There are some who will argue that schools should not limit students online speech. Reasons they may state include the idea that online bullying is not as widespread a problem as many believe, it is not abnormally disruptive to the classroom environment, and, finally, limiting online speech violates a students right to speak freely as protected by the United States Constitution. However, the fact that many students are irresponsible with technology and often use it to bully others is problem enough to justify schools limiting students online speech. It is a widespread problem affecting both teachers and students negatively, it is often disruptive to the classroom environment and, most importantly, cyberbullying can result in violation of the civil rights of its victims who feel as if their confidence and self-esteem have been stolen from them.

Although statement followed by convincing restatement of thesis and road map

DBQ: Limiting Students Online Speech

Norris, 2013