Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Schools Are Locking Students' Phones Away to Help With Concentration (fortune.com)

Posted by msmash on from the how-about-that dept.

Students at a California high school are getting less screen time since the school implemented a ban on cellphone use during the school day. From a report: After one teacher at San Lorenzo High School brought pouches, created by the tech start-up Yondr, into her classroom to lock away students' phones, the entire school began using them from the beginning of the school day at 8 a.m. until the end of the day at 3:10 p.m. According to a 2018 study from the Pew Research Center, more than half of teens said they felt loneliness, anxiety, or upset in the absence of a cellphone. The study also found that girls were more likely to feel these sentiments than boys.

"If something feels weird about modern life to young kids who are dealing with a lot of angst and anxiety in general, maybe it has something to do with relating to the world primarily through a screen eight hours a day," Yondr's founder Graham Dugoni told CNBC. Students said they initially felt awkward and annoyed having their phones taken away during the school day, but added that they started to see more teens interacting with each other. One student added that not having a phone in class helped with concentration.

71 of 147 comments (clear)

  1. Nice advertisment by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

    Nice advertisement for "tech startup" Yondr. I thought tech startups stopped the "drop the last vowel thing" a while ago.

    1. Re: Nice advertisment by BlackOverflow · · Score: 1

      Get that 3% blockchain up to at least 7%, add in some API's and Apps, and we'll talk!

    2. Re:Nice advertisment by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      "tech startup" like "high tech" which if one asks what it is will get a circular definition. I heard the term "high tech" was invented by someone who works in one of those buildings on Sandhill Rd. in Palo Alto, CA because it sounds real cool and enables the VC money to flow.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    3. Re:Nice advertisment by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    4. Re:Nice advertisment by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      Yondre didn't do well in focus groups.

  2. Why a pouch? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just require students to keep them in their lockers (existing tech) for the duration of school. Privacy concerns can be addressed by locked/encrypted phones. Theft may be a problem, but that's an argument for not buying Buffy and Brittany a $1000 e-leash. But ... what about an emergency? Students survived for decades without phones in class...

    1. Re:Why a pouch? by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's what schools do. Or they just tell the students to turn it off and put it in their existing backpack. But Yondr paid some school to use their bags and they are going to get a mention on Fortune. It is the "new journalism".

    2. Re:Why a pouch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Schools do not have the right to deprive people of the ability to communicate.

      The fuck they don't. Students are there to learn, not to text others. Don't like it, homeschool and graduate early.

    3. Re:Why a pouch? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Students survived for decades without phones in class...

      Yes, they survived, but all those students always "felt loneliness, anxiety, or upset", because the cellphone hadn't been invented yet.

      Your kids don't need child psychiatrists . . . all they need is a cellphone.

      So I guess that teen drug use must be way down, now that they have cellphones to get high on.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:Why a pouch? by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Civic emergencies (tornado, fire, etc.) aren't a problem. The school will be notified anyway, and will take steps to keep the students safe.

      For family emergencies, back in the days before cell phones the family would just call the school's office. The office would then send someone to the classroom to collect the student (cue movie scene of student being told his parents were just killed in a car crash) and bring them to the front office to wait for another family member to come pick them up.

      There's no need for students in school to have a cell phone for emergencies. They're in a known location in a known classroom at a known time. Totally different from, say, wandering around in some random location at Disneyland.

    5. Re:Why a pouch? by Aristos+Mazer · · Score: 1

      Modern schools often do not have lockers (citation).

    6. Re:Why a pouch? by Aristos+Mazer · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's a principle called "in loco parentis" in US law that says, yes, schools do have exactly the right to limit student communications. It's why schools can have things like detention. In most US states, they have rights to do most of what a parent could do (most limits are on physical punishments). The Supreme Court has ruled explicitly on the ability to limit the First Amendment rights of students -- the school has to have strong reason to do so, but it can be done, and speech that disrupts the classroom is acceptable reason.

    7. Re:Why a pouch? by bob4u2c · · Score: 1

      I wonder how that goes with privacy laws.

      Working at a University in California we were told that we couldn't create any system that would show the location or allow someone to know the location of a student because that student could be under age and it was illegal to track them or allow them to be tracked. For example, we couldn't show a list of students in a class because someone would know Sally was in Econ 101-1 which is held in Building A between the hours of 1:00 and 2:00 every Monday/Wednesday/Friday. We could show the random student ID, but not a name. This came up because I worked on a system that allowed students to rank professors from whom they were taking classes, but we couldn't student names on the reviews because of this restriction. I suspect this is the same reason schools also wouldn't tell a parent oh Billy, he's in room 12 right now. Go on ahead and get him. No, instead they send an office staff to bring him back to the office and you pick your child up there. (*disclaimer, I have no knowledge of where Sally or Billy really are.)

      But in this modern age almost every student has a cell phone with GPS that tracks them down to within a few meters. And I'm sure all of that data is being broadcast to the world to see, you know to prevent terrorists and keep children safe.

    8. Re:Why a pouch? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      They do, just HS kids don't use them as much. However, they still generally exist and can be used to store phones.

    9. Re:Why a pouch? by b0bby · · Score: 1

      Lockers in schools are not secure at all - usually they have the same combinations year after year, and that knowledge is passed around.

    10. Re: Why a pouch? by edris90 · · Score: 1

      Children in schools do not have full rights this has been long established in a legal sense. as soon as you give children real rights you lose your ability to force them to attend

    11. Re:Why a pouch? by Paxtez · · Score: 1

      Most (all?) of the schools in my state don't have general tv-style lockers. All our campuses are open, where classes are in many different buildings and you have to walk outside to get from class to class. An open building with lockers outside would just invite break-ins at night.

      Generally the only lockers were inside of the gym, but they weren't assigned to you, you used them for the day and I don't think you even locked them.

    12. Re:Why a pouch? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Found the teenager. When i went to school in the 90's pagers and cell phones were banned, if your family even had enough money to afford a cell phone. If you needed to make calls you did it from one of multiple pay phones the school had during your lunch or in passing between classes or after school let out.

      Kids should not have or at least not be using these things at school during the time they should be paying attention to their studies. School in the 90's banned far less distracting tech like CD players, tape players, hand held game systems.

      Ok, dating myself, but in my day..they had to ban the Mattel LED electronic football games.

      Even if you had the sound off, they still made you turn them off if they caught you playing them in class.

      This is nothing new.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    13. Re:Why a pouch? by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Where did you go to a school that had that bass-akwards setup?

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  3. Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I hope more schools do this. Wean them off smartphones and their addiction to them.

    1. Re:Good. by JaneTheIgnorantSlut · · Score: 1

      It would be really interesting to see data on the number of texts and missed calls that happened while the phone was locked away. I suspect the totals would shock most parents.

    2. Re:Good. by sarren1901 · · Score: 1

      I would imagine the amount of missed texts and calls would be near zero if the entire school was locking everyone's phones up. Everyone the student knew would likely already be at school...

    3. Re:Good. by strikethree · · Score: 1

      I hope more schools do this. Wean them off smartphones and their addiction to them.

      Oooooooo.

      That is the parent's job. I hope we start relying less on schools to be the parents. They do a shitty job of it, but that is not surprising as the schools were not designed to be a surrogate family.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  4. ONE STUDENT said it helped with concentration by ljw1004 · · Score: 2

    Bad headline: "Schools Are Locking Students' Phones Away to Help With Concentration"

    (1) Only one student reported that it helped with concentration. There was no indication that it actually does help with concentration.

    (2) There was no indication that "helping with concentration" was the motive for the school doing it

    (3) The article only mentioned one school; I don't know where the headline got the plural "schools".

    (That said, I personally believe that phones are bad for concentration, and indeed my children's school also bans phones. I just want to see actual defensible data. Not a dumb article designed as click-bait to reinforce some people's prejudices and raise the ire of those who disagree with it.)

    1. Re:ONE STUDENT said it helped with concentration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Phones can be disruptive in class. Also, it is disrespectful to the teacher to be paying attention to a device rather than the teacher. Students should be required to leave their phone turned off and in their locker during the school day. I also think that most kids would benefit from spending at least two weeks a year at a summer camp where no phones or other electronic devices are allowed. I also think that kids under 13 should NOT have a phone. If helicopter parents think that their kids must have a phone before that age, it should be a flip phone without Internet or texting capabilities.

      Far too many people of all ages spend far far too much time with their attention glued to a "smart" phone instead of paying attention to the people and events around them!

    2. Re:ONE STUDENT said it helped with concentration by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      You don't need to spend a few million on a study to provide data proving that texting, playing games, watching silly videos, and posting to social media all at the same time makes it hard to concentrate in a class room. If your attention is divided then your concentration is not optimal, you are distracted. Would getting rid of the cell phone keep them from being distracted not necessarily but it's a start.

    3. Re:ONE STUDENT said it helped with concentration by shess · · Score: 2

      Phones can be disruptive in class. Also, it is disrespectful to the teacher to be paying attention to a device rather than the teacher. Students should be required to leave their phone turned off and in their locker during the school day. I also think that most kids would benefit from spending at least two weeks a year at a summer camp where no phones or other electronic devices are allowed. I also think that kids under 13 should NOT have a phone. If helicopter parents think that their kids must have a phone before that age, it should be a flip phone without Internet or texting capabilities.

      Far too many people of all ages spend far far too much time with their attention glued to a "smart" phone instead of paying attention to the people and events around them!

      Did this response set out to prove that cellphones aren't the only cause of poor reading comprehension?

    4. Re:ONE STUDENT said it helped with concentration by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      You don't need to spend a few million on a study to provide data proving that texting, playing games, watching silly videos, and posting to social media all at the same time makes it hard to concentrate in a class room.

      You also don't need to spend a few million to prove that a phone that's not used at all during class has no detrimental effect on concentration.

      Now that we have the straw men out the way, the questions are (1) what outcomes do we wish to improve? (2) is a blanket ban, a blanket acceptance or some other more nuanced rule on cellphones the most effective way to achieve it?

    5. Re:ONE STUDENT said it helped with concentration by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

      There is little need for more defensible data. It is well established that humans cannot multitask very effectively, and generally all tasks suffer in performance while multitasking. Using a smart phone while learning in class is a rather clear subset of the general phenomenon.

      That said, it could be useful to know how strongly academic performance is affected. All tasks are not affected equally, so there are still some unknown elements.

      But such details are not necessary to support a general claim along the lines of: Learning should improve if we ban smart phones from classrooms when they are not relevant to planned lessons.

      Smart phones are part of adult life now, and they are increasingly part of a professional toolkit. I believe that schools should start to impress upon children the polite and productive uses of smart phones if possible, which implies there is a time and a place for them to be in the classroom.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  5. Yay! by rnturn · · Score: 2

    But here come the arguments/complaints about one's "right" to have their digital toy with them at all times in 3... 2...

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    1. Re:Yay! by dwywit · · Score: 1

      1. food allergy, etc. The teacher is the one responsible for classroom safety and calling for help. Five or six calls to emergency services isn't going to improve the outcome. Teacher should also be aware of who in his or her class has these issues. It's a big section on enrolment forms - allergies and other medical conditions that might require intervention or assistance. Teachers have to undergo first aid training to deal with those situations, e.g. epipens, etc

      2. glucose monitor. That would be a legitimate medical exception, and arrangements are already in place for those circumstances. May also apply to #1. It's still not a reason to lift the ban on those who *don't* need it for medical reasons.

      3. Does not apply in Australia, but a legitimate concern in the USA. What training is supplied to students for "active shooter" situations? I'd be telling students to get down, under cover, shut up, and act dead - not pulling out the phone and going "beep beep beep" then screaming "HELP! SHOOTER AT JEFFERSON HIGH!" Which of those two courses of action is likely to draw a shooter's attention?

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    2. Re:Yay! by dwywit · · Score: 2

      Remember, when you resort to personal attacks and name-calling, you weaken your own argument, not the other person's.

      See, I thought your original post had some flaws, but I didn't resort to calling you names, I addressed your arguments. Perhaps you're not so secure in your own position, when you have to lash out at those who disagree.

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    3. Re:Yay! by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      You clearly can't imagine what it was like before cell phones. There's no reason someone would have to sit and wait for the teacher to return. In an emergency, someone would contact the office...do you really think the kids would just sit there? And your active shooter straw man is just ridiculous. Yes, school shootings are a problem, but they are a problem that 99.999% of the population will never have to deal with, while 100% of the school population deals with idiots in the classroom addicted to, cheating from, and interrupting normal classes with phones because the snowflakes and helicopter parents go into convulsions w/o them.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    4. Re:Yay! by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Remember, when you resort to personal attacks and name-calling, you weaken your own argument, not the other person's.

      Calling an idea stupid is not a personal attack. Calling a passive behaviour behaving like a sheep is not a personal attack.

      See, I thought your original post had some flaws,

      And then I corrected you on that. The best you can do to the corrections is complain that an attack on your opinion is a personal attack.

      Perhaps you're not so secure in your own position, when you have to lash out at those who disagree.

      Perhaps you are not secure in your own, when you cannot respond to correction with anything but the idea it was a personal attack.

      When you can come up with something that shows that banning cell phone access isn't a stupid, dangerous option, please try again.

    5. Re:Yay! by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      You clearly can't imagine what it was like before cell phones.

      Oh, please. Come up with a better argument.

      There's no reason someone would have to sit and wait for the teacher to return. In an emergency, someone would contact the office...

      In an emergency, time is critical. In the past, before everyone had a cellphone in their pocket, taking the time to send someone to find a wired landline was necessary. Today it IS NOT. The time saved can save lives. And the idea that someone is going to run from a classroom to the school office so they can call the cops about an active shooter is just ridiculous.

      do you really think the kids would just sit there?

      Why not? They've been turned into passive observers who, according to the OP, are not responsible for their own safety. It's the teacher. But no, I don't think they will. I think they will take the time to go to the office and convince someone there that they need to call 911, then run back to the victim, then run back to the office to pass on victim status, then run back to the classroom, then run back to the office ... why do that when there could be an ON SITE communications device that links the site of the emergency with emergency responders?

      And your active shooter straw man is just ridiculous.

      Really? It doesn't happen? Then boy are they wasting a lot of time teaching kids how to react.

      while 100% of the school population deals with idiots in the classroom addicted to, cheating from, and interrupting normal classes with phones because the snowflakes and helicopter parents go into convulsions w/o them.

      You will note that I've never said that kids distracting themselves with cell phones isn't a problem. I've said that a blanket ban is not the solution. Please differentiate.

    6. Re:Yay! by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Are you a teacher?

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
  6. tech start-up? by BlackOverflow · · Score: 2

    A "tech start-up Yondr" makes bags to hold phones? Ummm... that's hardly a tech company. At best, it's a packaging company.

  7. What about the next shooting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    One of the benefits of cellphones is that in the event of a school shooting potentially anyone can phone out, capture images of, or otherwise help identify the shooter(s) for situation awareness during police response as well as initial call-ins of the event.

    By taking away cellphones you are not only treating youth like children (the 6 year old kind), but also teaching them that responsibility will be handled for them, so they never become responsible for themselves.

    As PP stated, this is yet more Big Brother nanny state bullshit that neither curbs the problem nor acts as a long term solution to the larger societal malady. Sticking band-aids over a problem only helps them heal in time with regular inspection, washing, and application of further treatment. Plastering band-aids atop band-aids is only concealing the wound until it festers beyond all treatment. America's school system, as well as larger society as a whole, is part of the latter, not the former example.

    1. Re:What about the next shooting? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Sticking band-aids over a problem only helps them heal in time with regular inspection, washing, and application of further treatment. Plastering band-aids atop band-aids is only concealing the wound until it festers beyond all treatment.

      Agreed. So why are you advocating a band-aid and no treatment of the real problem?

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    2. Re:What about the next shooting? by nagora · · Score: 1

      One of the benefits of cellphones is that in the event of a school shooting potentially anyone can phone out, capture images of, or otherwise help identify the shooter(s) for situation awareness during police response as well as initial call-ins of the event.

      By taking away cellphones you are not only treating youth like children (the 6 year old kind), but also teaching them that responsibility will be handled for them, so they never become responsible for themselves.

      As PP stated, this is yet more Big Brother nanny state bullshit that neither curbs the problem nor acts as a long term solution to the larger societal malady. Sticking band-aids over a problem only helps them heal in time with regular inspection, washing, and application of further treatment. Plastering band-aids atop band-aids is only concealing the wound until it festers beyond all treatment. America's school system, as well as larger society as a whole, is part of the latter, not the former example.

      A very American solution to the gun sickness - make it easier to scream for help but do nothing about how easy it is for mentally unstable people to own guns.

      But, yeah, the regularity of school shootings is definitely a reflection on the school system.

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  8. Re:Take it away is not a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is an Authoritarian Indoctrination scheme. Teach the kids they don't have freedom, that is how you get them dependent on authority to tell them what they need to do. Creates great little democrats and republicans. You are not allowed to decide how you learn, you must do it our way or else.

    What you describe is every school everywhere. They tell you when to go to school, what rooms to go to when you get there. You have to leave at a set time and can't take more than allotted number of minutes to get to the next class room day in and day out.

    Once in a room you are required to shut your mouth, sit down and do nothing other than what the grownups want you to do for the duration of the class even if you spend 90% of your day bored to tears.

    To pour salt on the wound they make you work on even more shit even when you get home and are not even at school.

    Cell phones are an irrelevant footnote in the grand scheme of "authoritarian indoctrination".

    Let them have their devices, if they can pass while playing Farmville and texting with their friends then good for them. The only thing school should be doing is teaching them is knowledge, not what to believe or how to behave. If a child will not behave, kick them out of school and make it their parents problem.

    Once the kids start getting kicked out and parents have to start dealing with them... the problem will get fixed in much better ways.

    At least be consistent.

  9. Re:I guess I'm old now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    SACRILEGE!

    HP48 4lyfe!

  10. Re:Phones Not Allowed On Premises by aicrules · · Score: 1

    A magnet school eh? You seem totally legit. Unless your school is literally for magnets or teaches exclusively about magnets, in which case I apologize for not believing your fake story.

  11. Re:Phones Not Allowed On Premises by aicrules · · Score: 1

    well now i look pretty dumb..for some reason I thought it wasn't spelled the same. I should have checked my own work before jumping to post. I apologize even though I still don't believe you.

  12. Re:Phones Not Allowed On Premises by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

    I'm really glad to read this and hope that more schools adopt such policies.

    I'd mod you up if I had points.

  13. Re:Phones Not Allowed On Premises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    A magnet school is a high school that has a specialized rather than a generic curriculum. There are public and private magnet schools, designed to attract students with more narrowly defined, specific interests - hence the name "magnet" school.

    Of course, there is always the law that says everything on the Internet is suspect.

  14. Re:Phones Not Allowed On Premises by PPH · · Score: 1

    A school for Juggalos?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  15. Re:Change curriculum first by PPH · · Score: 1

    You can always bring a book to read if you finish early. It could even cover next years curriculum. But skipping ahead isn't going to happen. Because Chad's parents will be upset that he will be shown up by some smart kids and not get into an ivy league school on a lacrosse scholarship.

    I can see allowing cellphones as fine

    But what about that book? And studying ahead? You are just asking to drag yourself down to Chad's level.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  16. Re:School shootings by PPH · · Score: 1

    Lets say some kid goes bannanas and pulls another Columbine.

    You hide until the police arrive and clear the room. And if you DO have a cell phone with you, you just pray that your mom doesn't see the news and call you. So the crazy guy with the AR-15 doesn't hear the ring tone coming from the coat closet.

    An big earthquake collapses the school building, and kids are stuck in 'air pockets'

    We have cadaver dogs for this.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  17. Re:Change curriculum first by zlives · · Score: 1

    Chip resents your use of Chad as an example.

  18. Re:School shootings by zlives · · Score: 1

    yes i think we already solved this issue with arming students and faculty, or maybe that was hopes and prayers.

  19. Re:School shootings by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

    We have cadaver dogs for this.

    Oh, yeah, the correct solution to inappropriate cellphone use in a classroom is to ban them so people who could be rescued in an emergency will die, and a cadaver dog can come locate them. Right.

    It is much more likely that the student in the closet with a phone will be calling 911 to feed information to the cops about the location of the shooter than his mom is going to call him at just the wrong moment. And even if she does, she'll either go straight to voicemail because the phone is in use, or the phone will be in DND mode and nobody hears anything.

  20. Re:School shootings by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

    I see it now. Take away students' cell phones, and arm them with handguns. I'd probably throw in the hopes and prayers for good measure, too.

  21. Symptoms of Addiction by Zorro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If someone feels this in abcence of Alcohol they are called an Alcoholic.

    If someone feels this in abcence of a drug they are called a Drug Addict.

    It is the SAMETHING!

    1. Re:Symptoms of Addiction by dhasenan · · Score: 1

      If a kid feels loneliness and anxiety when you cut off a major means of communication (including with their emergency contact), the problem might not be the kid.

    2. Re:Symptoms of Addiction by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      If someone feels this in absence of money they are called indigent.

      If someone feels this in absence of sex they are called horny

      Is it the SAMETHING?

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  22. Re:Good by fermion · · Score: 2
    No one is going to take thier phones away in college. In college all they will do is take their tuition and fees then kick them out when they fail the year the kids will still have to pay student loans until they die.

    At thier first real job they will not have thier phones taken away. They will be fired and escorted out. When they get another job they will have a bad reference.

    At school, especially high school, kids have to be taught to use thier devices to succeed. They have to run searches, calculators, simulations to learn thier devices are not just toys. This was the problem with 1990 kids. Computer were video games and they never learned to leverage for profit.

    In lower grades, take away phones like you take away all toys, but in later grades there is no good done if you don’t let student fall, learn why they fall, and get up. If they are failing because they cannot get off their phone, they have to deal with this organically. Schools hav3 to teach, not live in fear

    It is parents who need to manage time. Kids need sleep, so they maybe need thier phones taken away at night. Kids need more time to process than adults, so having kids fighting with thier freinds all night or being bullied or never having any alone time is likely going to lead to depression and maybe even thoughts of suicide. But school cannot do this. It is the parents who bought them the phone and pay the bills.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  23. Re:Change curriculum first by PPH · · Score: 1

    Chip, Chad. Its just so hard to keep track of which knuckle-dragger my daughter is pepper-spraying this week. They grow up so fast ....

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  24. Ban in France by manu0601 · · Score: 2

    France banned phones in school up to 9th grade. Children complained of course, but they survived after all.

  25. Blatantly authoritarian by uberval · · Score: 1

    This is an example of what's wrong with the paternalistic attitude that's prevalent toward students. Acting as if high school students have absolutely no self-control by seizing their phones because they're deemed to be too distracting is certainly not a good way to form them into responsible adults who can take care of themselves.

    It's worth emphasizing that the only reason this is allowed to stand is because high school students don't have another option. If an employer imposed the surrender of phones by employees, people would quit, or collectively advocate against it with their union. But high school students are legally required to go to school, and generally don't have much (if any) choice in which school, and aren't unionized.

    1. Re:Blatantly authoritarian by nagora · · Score: 1

      This is an example of what's wrong with the paternalistic attitude that's prevalent toward students.

      School is literally there to be paternalistic - that's the idea. Otherwise kids would be in work with their actual parents.

      Acting as if high school students have absolutely no self-control by seizing their phones because they're deemed to be too distracting is certainly not a good way to form them into responsible adults who can take care of themselves.

      Well, firstly the problem is that high school students don't have much in the way of self-control. Maybe you never were one but I was and I remember how we were outside of class.

      Secondly, teaching children that certain behaviours are unacceptable in particular contexts is forming them into responsible adults.

      As far as I can see, your idea is that children in a class should be allowed to do whatever they like. If they were sitting reading a book on a different topic, or playing chess with the child beside them, no one would bat an eyelid at the teacher confiscating the book or chess set. Yet because it's your holy telephone/umbilical cord you get your knickers in a twist over nothing.

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  26. Re:Good by Locando · · Score: 1

    Let me guess, you're not a teacher?

  27. Students will get around it by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    My two sons went to a school where cell phones were banned during the school day. Students were required to keep them in their lockers. If any phone was discovered, it was immediately confiscated, and could only be returned to the student by having a parent come to the office to claim the phone.

    Did it work? Not in the least.

    One of our sons told us that "everybody" had their phones with them every day. They learned to keep them on silent, and away from the eyes of staff. Our son admitted that he was among the students flouting the rule. Never once did we have to claim his phone.

    Nice thought, but these pouches aren't going to keep phones away from the students.

  28. Re:Phones Not Allowed On Premises by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    It's okay, sometimes the poles just get reversed.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  29. Re:School shootings by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    Yup, let's use the .00000001% possibility of this actually happening to someone and continue to live with the actual problem that is seen in EVERY FUCKING CLASSROOM.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  30. Re:School shootings by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

    Yup, let's use the .00000001% possibility of this actually happening to someone and continue to live with the actual problem that is seen in EVERY FUCKING CLASSROOM.

    You simply cannot understand the difference between "this is not a problem" and "this is not the right solution to the problem", can you? Hint: I'm saying just one of the two.

    I'm also saying that the idea that "we have cadaver dogs" to solve the problem with banning cell phones is an arrogant, insulting, disgusting idea. "It's ok that people will die because they can't communicate because we can locate their bodies after they start to decompose." How sick is that? Or do you not understand what a "cadaver dog" does?

  31. Re:School shootings by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    Interesting that the first major (I'm using 10 or more as "major") school shootings started occurring ~1998. When did cell phones start showing up in schools? I know correlation != causation, but hopes and prayers apparently worked pretty well before than.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  32. Re:School shootings by zlives · · Score: 1

    technically 1966, but i think you are correct about 1999 or so. i would instead suggest a different correlation/causation... the wide spread use of internet replacing previous interactive social norms.

  33. Yondr? No thank you. by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

    https://phys.org/news/2018-04-cellphones-gaining-schools.html

    The nation's largest school system, New York City, is among those that have abandoned strict bans, which had some students paying $1 a day to store phones in specialty trucks parked nearby before heading into school. Mayor Bill de Blasio fulfilled a campaign pledge when he lifted the ban in 2015, saying it would help parents stay in touch with their children.

    Phones have offered a lifeline between students and the outside world during recent school emergencies. As a gunman rampaged through Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on Feb. 14, students used cellphones to text their parents, call 911 and to record and share their horror.

  34. Re:active shooter by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

    The teachers will have automatic weapons with which to disable any attacker.

    And in case of a problem with the armed teacher who is shooting the active shooter:

    https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/nra-proposes-having-second-armed-teacher-in-every-classroom-to-stop-first-armed-teacher-from-misfiring

  35. Re:Change curriculum first by Rande · · Score: 1

    I went to school when phones were the size of bricks.
    I wasn't allowed to read a book after I'd finished because that was 'disruptive' to the other students.
    I'd have to doodle in the margins so that I appeared to be working.