UK Schools Consider Searching Pupils' Smartphones
An anonymous reader writes "What right to privacy do school pupils have on their mobile phones? UK education officials are considering ways to clamp down on cyber-bullying and classroom disruption by allowing teachers to search and delete content from student handsets if it is deemed unsuitable. However, questions remain whether such a move would give teachers too much power and infringe on student rights."
The seeds of yet another encroachment on human rights by the UK
On the one hand, a proposal to allow teachers to search smartphones is an expansion of the invasive-yet-dubiously-competent surveillance state. Therefore, our limey friends on airstrip one have an obligation to adopt it, it's in their national character or something.
On the other hand, such a proposal will, almost certainly, provide teachers with a supply of kiddie porn, thus abetting the paedophile menace, perhaps the only thing that your average Daily Mail reader fears and loathes more than immigrants on the dole...
How will they decide this one?
No phones. Period.
Simple solution. "Teacher, I forgot my password. Sorry!".
I'm sure there'll be plenty of apologists here who will say
1. "I'm old and I don't like that young people have better times ahead of them so I am happy to hear about them being clamped down in some way."
2. the legal apologist who says if the law allows/denies it, it must be ok/not ok. who cares that we're discussing, at least obliquely, the effects of this scenario that it creates.
3. "when I was a kid" douchebags.
4. the wannabe tyrant who props up his insecurities by always siding with big brother tyrants.
How about just throwing out the kids who are disruptive in class? this way no property has to be ruined, no lawsuits filed, and the kids who want to be there to learn (or at least graduate) can do so. if it's the kind of thing where the kid's sitting there quietly with headphones on, leave him alone.. he's not bothering anyone else. the only reason teachers throw these kinds of 'offenders' out is because of their insecure feelings of being 'dissed.' Really, it's not necessary because the kid will fail the class...or pass it because he already knew the material. Remind him that paying attention is important and he'll need to take off the 'phones to do that. if he says 'no' just say 'remember there's a test next week, I hope you'll be prepared.' and leave it at that. if the kid keeps forgetting to turn off his cell phone ringer, then throw him out of the class until he starts remembering. none of this requires a panopticonic policy. of course such policies have a benefit for the emotional security challenged people out there who are more often than not in-charge.
The 'cyber bullying 'excuse for this new 'power' is just another form of 'for the children.' searching/confiscating phones and deleting files on them is not going to stop bullying.. in fact, all this will do is enable yet another way for faculty to bully students.
If you bring it to school then the school can impose rules on how you use it. Don't bring it to school if you don't like it. You might as well complain about having to get vaccinated or having to wear pants or leaving your bong at home.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Is this not why people have a pin on their phone? Oh wait next they are going to be slapping little bobby in jail for not giving up his password under the terrorism act
If, when I and my children lived in the UK, a teacher had tried to do this I would have sued s/his ass off.
What's a "shis"?
Now I would insert the barrel of my SIG 210 up their left nostril and politely ask them NOT to do it again.
Overreact much? Funny, I thought the barrel of the SIG P210 was far larger than any nostril, well, except maybe this guy's: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article112380.ece
What do those people think they are?
Educators of children? Hopefully they're doing a better job than those that educated you, judging from your entertaining comment history. A connoisseur of transsexuals, are you? Italy has "some of the most passable/beautiful TS outside asia". Awesome. Maybe you could publish a field guide to the world's she-males.
Absolutely not. Kids are minors, and therefore enjoy greater protection from the law, not less. They still retain basic human rights and many civil liberties. You cannot force a child to work commercially for you for free. You cannot compel a child to testify against themselves. The police may not search children without a warrant. The only reason schools enjoy greater control over their students is by arguing "in loco parentis," that they are literally acting as the child's parent while the mother and father are absent. Even under this doctrine, there are limits. You cannot compel a child to salute the flag or recite the pledge of allegiance. The school may not interfere with a child's practice of religion.
This is all how it should be.
My problem is with the implication of your post. Kids are not adults, so they have no human rights or civil liberties, so we can do what we want to them. The Great State of Texas has been a prime example of this, Kids get investigated as children with no human rights, and then tried as adults with no protections from the law.
And honestly, speaking as a teacher, demanding to see the notebook was a rookie mistake. The problem with you and your friends was that you weren't focused on the lesson. Your teacher should have put you back on task, but instead chose to make this a personal issue between you. Your teacher sacrificed the strong position of "You're not learning the lesson" for the weak position of "You're hurting my feelings."
Look at it this way. Do you remember what you were supposed to be learning that day?
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
If, when I and my children lived in the UK, a teacher had tried to do this I would have sued s/his ass off.
Under what law?
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
Someone mentioned in loco parentis, the idea that the school can do a lot of things because they are the de facto parents of the kid while at school. So, I would not be very surprised at all to see more of this in the future. Schools will confiscate phones (or tablets) under the guise of finding who cheated on the test, or who is dealing drugs, or sexting. Much like the cops searching your phone (without a warrant) when you are arrested, schools in the UK and the US will probably start doing this much more frequently.
So what's the lesson? Encryption. Password protect your data, and have remote wipe capability, etc. It's all been discussed to death here already.
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
I won't touch the debate on students' rights or cell phone policies, but it seems odd that teachers would be allowed to delete items. It puts them in a very precarious position, in a couple of ways.
Basically, if something is offensive enough to be deleted, it should be instead preserved as evidence for disciplinary action. Once the evidence is deleted it's going to be very difficult to sanction the child at all and I can just imagine parents' exasperation when informed. How can they yell at their kid about something when the only "proof" was supposedly deleted?
And if a picture or text message wasn't merely offensive but was evidence of an illegal act, the teacher will have committed destruction of evidence. And what if the teacher finds pictures of 12 year old students not fully clothed? Viewing stuff like that in class is likely to be a termination offence. Displaying it to other children could conceivably lead to a criminal conviction.
Also, it seems naive to pretend that students won't adapt by just syncing/backing up their phones more often or downloading the offensive content again. And what if the offensive content was a web page? They can just bring it up again any time they want.
If, when I and my children lived in the UK, a teacher had tried to do this I would have sued s/his ass off.
Under what law?
Article 8, ECHR:
Note that while (2) allows the government to legislate away parts of the right described, they have not done so for this situation, so it stands without exception in this case.