She is a child. Blame the agressors. Why would you want to protect the mean girls? I actually thought NCS had turned a corner and was a school that focused on values

Anonymous wrote:
You sounded reasonable and sane until your last statement. The girl who sent the screenshots would not be "bullying" the victim. She would "tattling" on her fellow gossips.

Yeah, let's not go giving the screen shot taker too much credit. If she had really been concerned about the meanness of the conversation among her friends she would have taken a screen shot and showed it to her parents, a teacher, a counselor, or some other trusted adult. Instead, she sent it to a classmate of the current victim; there's really no logic to that beyond wanting to stir up more trouble. And haven't we all known someone like that...you know, the type who says things like, "I would never say this, of course, but you know I've heard some other people saying x, y, and z awful thing about you [or a friend or whomever]. Of course I wouldn't do it, but I just thought you should know...."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So a group of girls was cyber bullying a girl who is going to be a new classmate this coming year? So sad, and also strange. Would think that would violate school honor code or behavior code of conduct.

I think what is getting lost here is that nothing is quite so simple as it seems at first glance. For the sake of argument, let's assume the "bullies" in this case were a group of middle school girls on a private group text. Let's assume the girls in the private group text commented on the photos the victim ("V" for short) posted on her social media and a few of them did make very mean comments (let's assume for argument's sake that V's photos were clearly attention seeking). However, let's also assume the girls from the private group text never texted V directly and never posted any negative comments on V's social media in any way. The twist comes when one of the girls from the group text screenshot the texts and sent them to one of V's current classmates. After that V and her parents were made aware of the comments and demanded the school punish all the girls who were involved in the private group text regardless of whether they commented or not. So were the girls really bullying V when they never contacted V directly and were talking on a private group text? Or were they just gossiping like typical teens (which was mean, but not atypical)? The only difference from when we were teens is that their gossip was in texts that could be screenshot versus talk that could just be conveyed verbally. I'm sure the parents of the girls in the group text are not happy with their daughters' mean comments, but it seems understandable that they would not consider this bullying since the girls never intended for V to know they were talking about her and certainly never reached out to V directly with mean comments or threats. Even so, the school is taking action to punish these girls, which the girls' parents do not think is fair in this case. Now the girl who screenshot and sent the texts to V's current classmate ... I think she could legitimately be called a bully for doing that.

So is this what happened? Or shall we just assume it? Why be coy at this point?

Assume yes. And top poster, sorry, but you are victim-blaming and that is not how we go about solving issues like bullying, sexual harassment, racism, or anything else that has to do with "free speech" that is hurtful. This is why people get fired in the real world and this is also how kids get expelled from private schools who demand more from their students. When you say things that sound like you are going to ruin this young girl's life in her new school, it goes beyond "gossip" and to then blame the person to told another adult is beyond bizarre. It's like these girls who were honestly horrified at the handful who were saying these outrageous things should have kept quiet despite knowing it was completely wrong and against any code of ethics on the planet, much less what they had signed. And anything you put on the internet is NOT private. So what you are saying is these girls should have kept quiet and let this girl go to that school in the fall, have her be further tortured and likely even more so since they were all talking about her behind her back and now she would be a classmate that they had all vowed to destroy and "never talk too"? Are you saying that since she posted a photo, that she deserved that sort of vitriol? I realize you are just trying to protect/defend your own girl, but do you really believe everything you said in your entry? Think if it had been your 14 year old who had been on the receiving end of this, would you still be trying to defend their actions as private and thus privileged?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the mean girl school can't discipline the girls involved even though they broke the social media contract they signed then the school administration is weak and ineffective. Not sure I would want my child at a school where the parents have more power than the administration.

Its not a mean girl school. We don't have anything to do with the incident being discussed here and not in that grade but I can assure you that most of the girls look out for one another. Most of the girls I know at the school would never be involved with something like this. NCS does not condone this and neither do the parents. There are so many acts of kindness and community that you don't hear about online but trust me if I felt any sense of meanness in our grade or in the overall school community, I would not have kept my daughter at the school. This sounds like an unfortunate incident but it does not define NCS or the community.

Unfortunately, the bigger picture doesn't matter. While I sympathize with the OP, she's on a crusade. This is the fourth thread she's started on this topic. The first had the most offensive comments removed by the moderator and the last two were deleted in their entirety.

If the girls were texting from their phones, were they really online? and if the vast majority never had any intention of the girl they were texting about seeing the text, were they bullying? The behavior sounds awful and bad, and should be addressed appropriately with discipline and a lot of teaching, but some of the comments here do not seem to address the actual behavior.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mean girls - I thought an elite school who prides itself for emphasizing on leadership, public service, and character cultivation would not produce such graduates. I am so naive and disappointed. By self-selection, more kind girls will be less likely to attend such a school, more mean-spirited girls would flourish there. Hence a vicious cycle.

Let's see how all of this evolve...

These things happen at all schools. Some of this is happening at STA lower school. Boys don't tell but I wish they would tell more. Some of this in rising 7th grade in texts and just mean behavior. Purposely telling other boys not to talk to or invite certain boy to things. The perpetrators were all in the same homeroom class this year. They purposely ignore certain boys. Behavior equally as bad as this.

Wow! We're in DCPS so this whole thread is pretty exotic to me especially if the texting happened off-campus or outside of school hours. Good for you if you can use the school to pressure the families. That's not an option everywhere.

It should be the option. It says in the STA and NCS handbook that you must abide by the honor code on and off campus, which is why some kids get suspended or what not when drinking off of campus, because it still goes against the honor code. All schools should implement these rules regardless whether they happens in or outside of school because it it affects school life during the day. If a student doesn't feel comfortable going to school or feeling left out or whatnot, that affects their studies and how well they do.

Anonymous wrote:If the mean girl school can't discipline the girls involved even though they broke the social media contract they signed then the school administration is weak and ineffective. Not sure I would want my child at a school where the parents have more power than the administration.

Its not a mean girl school. We don't have anything to do with the incident being discussed here and not in that grade but I can assure you that most of the girls look out for one another. Most of the girls I know at the school would never be involved with something like this. NCS does not condone this and neither do the parents. There are so many acts of kindness and community that you don't hear about online but trust me if I felt any sense of meanness in our grade or in the overall school community, I would not have kept my daughter at the school. This sounds like an unfortunate incident but it does not define NCS or the community.

^ if your child signed a contract of internet use and responsibility (pretty common at privates) then they and you know that their online behavior outside of school is subject to scrutiny by the school. If your kid posts videos of themselves using swear words on you tube, the school has every right, under most of these contracts, to discipline your child if the video comes to their attention. Whether they have the balls to stand up to parents is another subject.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mean girls - I thought an elite school who prides itself for emphasizing on leadership, public service, and character cultivation would not produce such graduates. I am so naive and disappointed. By self-selection, more kind girls will be less likely to attend such a school, more mean-spirited girls would flourish there. Hence a vicious cycle.

Let's see how all of this evolve...

These things happen at all schools. Some of this is happening at STA lower school. Boys don't tell but I wish they would tell more. Some of this in rising 7th grade in texts and just mean behavior. Purposely telling other boys not to talk to or invite certain boy to things. The perpetrators were all in the same homeroom class this year. They purposely ignore certain boys. Behavior equally as bad as this.

Wow! We're in DCPS so this whole thread is pretty exotic to me especially if the texting happened off-campus or outside of school hours. Good for you if you can use the school to pressure the families. That's not an option everywhere.

Anonymous wrote:Mean girls - I thought an elite school who prides itself for emphasizing on leadership, public service, and character cultivation would not produce such graduates. I am so naive and disappointed. By self-selection, more kind girls will be less likely to attend such a school, more mean-spirited girls would flourish there. Hence a vicious cycle.

Let's see how all of this evolve...

These things happen at all schools. Some of this is happening at STA lower school. Boys don't tell but I wish they would tell more. Some of this in rising 7th grade in texts and just mean behavior. Purposely telling other boys not to talk to or invite certain boy to things. The perpetrators were all in the same homeroom class this year. They purposely ignore certain boys. Behavior equally as bad as this.

If the mean girl school can't discipline the girls involved even though they broke the social media contract they signed then the school administration is weak and ineffective. Not sure I would want my child at a school where the parents have more power than the administration.

Anonymous wrote:

So you're saying that If every single one of your texts or emails that you thought were private were made public without your intention or consent, then you should be punished for what you said? Is there seriously anyone on this board who has never said anything but positive things EVER on their texts or emails? Using this logic, then why aren't all gossipers (including those of us on the site) exposed and punished? We have an expectation of privacy here on this group forum just like the girls did on their group text. But what if Jeff could find out our identities and report us? Do you think that would be fair?

Using similar logic, the ACLU opposes Harvard's recent actions and claims that it violates free speech.

Harvard's decision and the Michelle Carter case outcome highlight the fact that people do and say things online that they would never do or say in person. Things escalate as a result. It's not about punishment so much as being held accountable. Debates online are ugly - not necessarily for the point the poster is trying to make. But because posters think they aren't accountable for what they're posting. In the open people express their points of view differently. Privacy in the digital age is something every child needs to know does not exist.

I heard recently that if everyone drove convertibles are behavior on the road would be much different. I come from a small town. People do treat each other better than here because everyone knows each other. Have you ever honked at someone driving in NW DC and then realized later that you knew them? I have and it's really embarrassing. I didn't like that feeling and try very hard to remember it when I get in my car each day. I also used to believe that I could say what I want on this forum. Then I started thinking about what if? What if someone hacked this website and could pin my posts to me? Or any number of scenarios where my words could come back to haunt me? If I have failed to see those consequences then why would I assume my children understand the message they hear from adults that everything on social media can come back to them? If my child engaged in online mean gossip about another child I would take that opportunity to remind them that they were naive to expect that it would not have consequences. I would want and expect consequences from the school. I may even turn my daughter in. Because to learn that lesson in middle school, to have the educators say to me, "we are going to come down hard on your daughter now, give her her punishment and move on once she has learned her lesson" would cause me to love that school and respect the schools leadership. They would show that they really care about my daughters character and don't want her to screw up in a more profound and far reaching way later on. What a character lesson they could instill! I know this happened with a friends son. He screwed up in 8th at a private K-8 and could have blamed the other kids as he was probably in the wrong place at the wrong time. They came down hard with an immediate suspension and after it was done they said the in incident would be forgotten and not go on his record. His parents were fully supportive and grateful to the school for teaching him, and them, that lesson. Too bad OPs school doesn't have the same kind of leadership in place.

Let's teach our kids to treat others the way they would like to be treated and give them consequences (FOR THEIR OWN GOOD) when they need a reminder. Mean girl school is religious isn't it? Why aren't they focusing on that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So a group of girls was cyber bullying a girl who is going to be a new classmate this coming year? So sad, and also strange. Would think that would violate school honor code or behavior code of conduct.

I think what is getting lost here is that nothing is quite so simple as it seems at first glance. For the sake of argument, let's assume the "bullies" in this case were a group of middle school girls on a private group text. Let's assume the girls in the private group text commented on the photos the victim ("V" for short) posted on her social media and a few of them did make very mean comments (let's assume for argument's sake that V's photos were clearly attention seeking). However, let's also assume the girls from the private group text never texted V directly and never posted any negative comments on V's social media in any way. The twist comes when one of the girls from the group text screenshot the texts and sent them to one of V's current classmates. After that V and her parents were made aware of the comments and demanded the school punish all the girls who were involved in the private group text regardless of whether they commented or not. So were the girls really bullying V when they never contacted V directly and were talking on a private group text? Or were they just gossiping like typical teens (which was mean, but not atypical)? The only difference from when we were teens is that their gossip was in texts that could be screenshot versus talk that could just be conveyed verbally. I'm sure the parents of the girls in the group text are not happy with their daughters' mean comments, but it seems understandable that they would not consider this bullying since the girls never intended for V to know they were talking about her and certainly never reached out to V directly with mean comments or threats. Even so, the school is taking action to punish these girls, which the girls' parents do not think is fair in this case. Now the girl who screenshot and sent the texts to V's current classmate ... I think she could legitimately be called a bully for doing that.

You sounded reasonable and sane until your last statement. The girl who sent the screenshots would not be "bullying" the victim. She would "tattling" on her fellow gossips. I am guessing you have some connection to the mean girls in question and feel like they were betrayed by the "tattler". In that case your argument would be that the tattler should be the one really getting in the most trouble but you failed in trying to make her the main "bully". Weakened your otherwise logically argument. Sorry. I had a girl at the famous mean girl school. I know those girls, and parents, sign a code of conduct about their online behavior, whether school related or in "private" social media, which by the way is never private, nor should they assume it is, according to many outside lecturers the school itself has brought in to educate girls and parents about the perils of social media. (If you are an adult who expects a right to privacy on social media, let alone an email, God help you). What OP should expect, and receive, from the school, is assurance that they are exacting punishment based on students and parents signature on that conduct form. If the school is not following it's own rules based on breach of contract then the OP should at least reconsider sending her daughter there, and hire a lawyer if school will not refund any tuition. Why would you want to send your kid to a place like that, a place where they don't enforce their own code of conduct rules? And pay 45k for the privilege? Get out while you still can. In retrospect my daughter got a very good education, at the expense of her self esteem. I would send her to a nicer place if I had to do it over again.

So you're saying that If every single one of your texts or emails that you thought were private were made public without your intention or consent, then you should be punished for what you said? Is there seriously anyone on this board who has never said anything but positive things EVER on their texts or emails? Using this logic, then why aren't all gossipers (including those of us on the site) exposed and punished? We have an expectation of privacy here on this group forum just like the girls did on their group text. But what if Jeff could find out our identities and report us? Do you think that would be fair?

Using similar logic, the ACLU opposes Harvard's recent actions and claims that it violates free speech.

Harvard's decision and the Michelle Carter case outcome highlight the fact that people do and say things online that they would never do or say in person. Things escalate as a result. It's not about punishment so much as being held accountable. Debates online are ugly - not necessarily for the point the poster is trying to make. But because posters think they aren't accountable for what they're posting. In the open people express their points of view differently. Privacy in the digital age is something every child needs to know does not exist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So a group of girls was cyber bullying a girl who is going to be a new classmate this coming year? So sad, and also strange. Would think that would violate school honor code or behavior code of conduct.

I think what is getting lost here is that nothing is quite so simple as it seems at first glance. For the sake of argument, let's assume the "bullies" in this case were a group of middle school girls on a private group text. Let's assume the girls in the private group text commented on the photos the victim ("V" for short) posted on her social media and a few of them did make very mean comments (let's assume for argument's sake that V's photos were clearly attention seeking). However, let's also assume the girls from the private group text never texted V directly and never posted any negative comments on V's social media in any way. The twist comes when one of the girls from the group text screenshot the texts and sent them to one of V's current classmates. After that V and her parents were made aware of the comments and demanded the school punish all the girls who were involved in the private group text regardless of whether they commented or not. So were the girls really bullying V when they never contacted V directly and were talking on a private group text? Or were they just gossiping like typical teens (which was mean, but not atypical)? The only difference from when we were teens is that their gossip was in texts that could be screenshot versus talk that could just be conveyed verbally. I'm sure the parents of the girls in the group text are not happy with their daughters' mean comments, but it seems understandable that they would not consider this bullying since the girls never intended for V to know they were talking about her and certainly never reached out to V directly with mean comments or threats. Even so, the school is taking action to punish these girls, which the girls' parents do not think is fair in this case. Now the girl who screenshot and sent the texts to V's current classmate ... I think she could legitimately be called a bully for doing that.

So is this what happened? Or shall we just assume it? Why be coy at this point?