California High School In Silicon Valley Is Locking Up Students' Cellphones (nbcnews.com) 319
San Mateo High School administrators have instituted a new policy to lock up students' cellphones. "Each school day, nearly 1,700 students place their devices in a Yondr pouch that closes with a proprietary lock," reports NBC News. "School administrators unlock them at the end of the day." The goal is to help students focus on the teacher and other students. From the report: While administrators and teachers say they have already noticed a positive effect on students, the policy has elicited mixed reactions from researchers who argue its long-term effectiveness. Devices remain in the student's possession, but they aren't able to access them, the school said. The program was funded with a $20,000 grant. The pouches have been assigned to students at no cost, but losing one will cost the high-schoolers a $25 replacement fee.
Some technology experts feel the new policy is a step in the right direction and will curb distraction in the classroom. "Taking cellphones out of the classroom is a no-brainer," said Calvin Newport, a professor of computer science at Georgetown University. Students tend to perform worse when they have access to network connectivity in the classroom, he said. "The ability to be free of distraction and concentrate on things is increasingly valuable, so it's a good general function of our schools to be a place where our students get trained to keeping their concentration on one thing at a time," he added.
While many researchers have focused on the benefits of cutting out devices from the classroom, others worry about taking away something young people depend on. Larry Rosen, a research psychologist at California State University, said young people constantly check their phones to alleviate anxiety. They are anxious about staying on top of things, and that anxiety will build up if they are forced to ditch the devices cold turkey, he added. Taking away phones doesn't work for everyone, he argues. Instead, he believes "technology breaks" are a much happier medium.
Some technology experts feel the new policy is a step in the right direction and will curb distraction in the classroom. "Taking cellphones out of the classroom is a no-brainer," said Calvin Newport, a professor of computer science at Georgetown University. Students tend to perform worse when they have access to network connectivity in the classroom, he said. "The ability to be free of distraction and concentrate on things is increasingly valuable, so it's a good general function of our schools to be a place where our students get trained to keeping their concentration on one thing at a time," he added.
While many researchers have focused on the benefits of cutting out devices from the classroom, others worry about taking away something young people depend on. Larry Rosen, a research psychologist at California State University, said young people constantly check their phones to alleviate anxiety. They are anxious about staying on top of things, and that anxiety will build up if they are forced to ditch the devices cold turkey, he added. Taking away phones doesn't work for everyone, he argues. Instead, he believes "technology breaks" are a much happier medium.
If they are that dependent... (Score:5, Interesting)
If they are that dependent on their phones then it will serve them some good to not have the stupid things. If they are restricted from using their phones, it will show them that it really will be okay to not have a phone, even if just for a brief time.
It really is a no-brainer to take cell phones out of the classroom. Should of been that way from day one. It never made sense to let things go like this for so long.
Re:If they are that dependent... (Score:4)
Do not disturb is helpful too. And a bit less aggressive than forcibly locking them.
Of course, that's no help if you don't want to pay attention in the first place. There's any number of ways around this.
Needs to look locked, but they can't do a rollcall on everyone who's got a locked phone? Just "lose" one case and cut a slit in it.
They check to make sure you locked it, assuming everyone has a phone, and they can get a listing: use $5 android prepaid phone.
My point is, there's a deeper issue where the students will to maintain continued focus for indicated periods of time and the expectations of administrators don't align.
Re:If they are that dependent... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's similar to the problem of "class has started, please stop talking", and "please don't send notes to your friends", and so forth. However what seems different is that the students feel much more put out to not have the phone. Ask the student to not talk and they'll shut up (maybe glower), but ask them to turn off the phone and they're suddenly saying that it's not fair. There definitely is an addictive quality to the phones that you don't see with other distractions.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
At my daughter's high school, if your phone rings in class, you have to come to the front of the class and dance La Macarena [youtube.com].
The threat of public humiliation is a surprisingly effective deterrent.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:If they are that dependent... (Score:4)
At which point, it turns from a milder form of punishment, to one more severe. EG, expulsion from class and being sent to the principal's office. Repeated offenses = suspension. Now parent's can't complain that their kids are 'humiliated', but of course it's much worse for the kid.
Good job parent!
Re: (Score:3)
"humiliate yourself or be punished" sounds like blatant illegal bullying to me.
That's not a complaint, that's a fucking court case.
Re:If they are that dependent... (Score:5, Insightful)
Except, it isn't bullying. Public humiliation is a mild form of punishment that has proven to be very effective for centuries. About time to see it brought back. If your precious little snowflake can't follow basic rules and you decide not to teach them, then society will.
Re:If they are that dependent... (Score:5, Insightful)
Exposing someone to public ridicule on purpose is bullying
No, the humiliation *is* the punishment. And it's not like California schools have invented this idea and are foisting it on the poor oppressed students.
Public humiliation [wikipedia.org] has been a form of punishment since time immemorial - pillories, shaving the heads of women suspected of collaborating with the enemy, scarlet letters, tarring and feathering all have an ancient tradition. And punishment via humiliation is not some new innovation in schools either - do you think dunce caps were worn because they looked fetching?
Re: (Score:3)
Let's make one thing clear. If you are not a parent then your participation in this conversation is at an end.
Now then. It's not bullying and it's not petty revenge. By this definition all discipline is bullying and petty revenge, which it isn't. Sending a child to the principal for a minor rules infraction is a waste of resources when simple in class discipline is simpler and more effective. This form of punishment has been used for hundreds of years in schools. From making the child sit in a corn
Re: (Score:2)
In which case the student can enjoy the wonders of detention and in school suspension.
Re:If they are that dependent... (Score:4, Interesting)
I remember back when the Mattel Electronic Football game handheld toy came out and hit in full force.
They were all over school...till they cause a problem, then, they were banned from school.
Plain and simple.
Why can they not do this with cell phones?
Did everyone that's a parent forget suddenly that they grew up just fine without them?
Re: (Score:2)
It really is a no-brainer to take cell phones out of the classroom.
True, but technically they haven't: the phones are in an expensive $20k prison in the classroom. They could have easily saved that money by just banning kids from bringing the phones to school.
Re: If they are that dependent... (Score:3)
Re: If they are that dependent... (Score:3)
Schools have landlines in abundance, especially in the office. There is zero need for a cellphone in a classroom.
Re: If they are that dependent... (Score:2)
Re: If they are that dependent... (Score:4)
Somehow we survived before cell phones (Score:3)
Those same children come from somewhere and leave to somewhere, and that somewhere may not be straight from or straight to their home. They may use the phone to keep in touch with parents and maybe even arrange transportation.
So what? I grew up long before cell phones were widely available and somehow we all managed to arrange rides, keep in touch with parents, and communicate with people. Worked fine for literally centuries. How did we accomplish such a miracle? We discussed plans ahead of time, we showed up where and when we said we would, and we used land lines on the (rare) occasions when we needed to call someone. Event details were distributed via meetings and paper which worked just fine. If my parents were picking
Re:Somehow we survived before cell phones (Score:5, Insightful)
yes, but we also were trusted to get ourselves home safely. And sometimes *gasp* entertain ourselves at home alone for an hour before mom and dad arrived.
The kids could probably still handle that, but society no longer considers it acceptable parenting, so here we are.
Re: (Score:3)
But some how even though you may have missed a few opportunities by not having instant access to someone via a cellphone you managed to make to today so you could post to this thread?
"Why the fuck do we give children toilet paper and special indoor shitting places? Tree bark in the woods was great."
Nice straw man argument.
Solvable with dumbphones (Score:2)
...which is a type of problem that can 100% be solved with old-school dumb phones:
- Have the same feature set as landlines and payphones (call, SMS).
- Have none of the distractions (instead of whatever "optimized to maximize addiction and FOMO" Social network app du jour, you get boring old Snake).
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely.
They're all going to buy the cheapest, crappiest, most crippled phone possible, and let the school lock that up while hanging onto their iPhone.
If you try an adversarial solution to a problem that needs a cooperative one, you'll just get an arms race.
Re: (Score:3)
Parents would never allow it. It is an instinct of parents to defend their children from all danger - and if there is not sufficient danger, they will imagine it. Parents live in a world where every man is a potential child molester and every driver is drunk. The road to school is a dangerous one, and phones offer parents some level of reassurance.
Children today are ridiculously safe (Score:3)
Parents would never allow it. It is an instinct of parents to defend their children from all danger - and if there is not sufficient danger, they will imagine it.
You think parents protecting their children is some sort of new phenomenon that schools in the 1980s and earlier never had to deal with?
The road to school is a dangerous one, and phones offer parents some level of reassurance.
Provably wrong. Phones are generally entirely unnecessary for this purpose unless the parents aren't doing their job.
A) Parents have the option of either transporting their child door-to-door thereby negating any need for a phone.
B) Parents have the option of watching their child right to the moment they board a very reliable school owned bus, again negating any need for a
Child lives too close to school for the bus (Score:2)
Parents have the option of either transporting their child door-to-door thereby negating any need for a phone.
In many cases, exercising this option involves taking a substantial pay cut at work.
Parents have the option of watching their child right to the moment they board a very reliable school owned bus
This doesn't help if the school refuses to provide bus service for children who live within a certain distance of school. In my home town, a child living 2.05 miles from a high school is eligible for bus service, whereas a child living 1.95 miles from school is not.
Re: (Score:3)
Parents being protective is not new. But busybodies making it socially unacceptable to _not_ be an overprotective helicopter parent is a relatively recent development.
Re: (Score:3)
I went to school before there were smartphones.
Surprisingly, most of managed to arrive in school alive, and according to rumours, many children actually manage to return home without being eaten by wild animals after school. And, imagine that, parents had no way to check if their kid is still alive during the school day - and everyone was ok with that!
I know it sounds crazy and irresponsible, but we sometimes didn't see or talk to our parents for the entire day! We would go to sports or friends after school
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Today's parents are as addicted to phones as kids. The love being able to message kids constantly, and being in constant contact. In effect, we're raising children that won't be able to function, as adults, in isolation.
Regardless of all that, the point is -- parents want to be able to reach their kids after school. They want their kids to be able to call then when needed. They think that, being able to message their children, somehow creates safety. In reality of course, it just removes parental anxiet
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You missed the bit about going cold turkey. The psychologist isn't saying that removing phones is necessarily a bad idea, but that having them removed suddenly with no period of adjustment is.
Remember that children's psychology is not as robust as adults'. An adult hopefully has the mental tools to deal with this kind of experience, kids may not.
Re: (Score:2)
No.
Re: (Score:3)
"which is a little bit dramatic but also rather undermines you "it's a toy" comment."
In what way is it dramatic? Heroine is accidentally habit forming, whereas the phones were explicitly designed to be habit forming using everything we know about addiction. The difference is heroine develops a physical dependence and there are physical consequences to withdraw. Would you prefer I said crack or nicotine? For anything else cold turkey is exactly how you drop an addiction successfully.
You seem to think that fo
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
So true. I felt I was becoming dependent on it -- taking pictures when I should be observing, checking messages when I should be present etc. Being a more seasoned adult I imposed my own "cold-turkey" method. It took a while, like any bad-habit, but I am starting to rely less on it. At work I make sure to leave the browser closed (except for true work stuff).
Now I know what my kids are doing. Interact more directly. I even go for walks/bike rides WITHOUT the phone (try it sometime - it's hard).
yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:2, Insightful)
just wait till there is an emergency with some student being away from others, who can't call....
get the popcorn...or the body bag...
How about just requiring phones to be in zipped faraday bag during class? In bulk you can get those for $3 each.
Re:yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:4, Informative)
Believe it or not, kids didn't die in mass numbers at school before phones... twenty years ago.
Re:yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:5, Interesting)
>"Believe it or not, kids didn't die in mass numbers at school before phones... twenty years ago."
Really. How the hell did I, and millions like me, survive going through all of school without a cell phone? There is *no way* that we would have been allowed such a distraction in classrooms back then, regardless of what type of distraction it was.
And this excuse about it "alleviating anxiety", give me a break- it is what CAUSES anxiety in the first place. I, for one, completely support the idea of locking them.
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIK, the first school shooting with double-digit casualties was Columbine, in April of 1999, i.e. twenty years ago. The world was a different place before that. So any numerical comparisons would be problematic.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe there were a few in the 1800's. Of course, revolvers have fewer shots, but the classes were smaller, too.
(OTOH, I'm not absolutely sure of my data, so maybe you're right. But that's not the way I'd bet.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The GP said "this year". Your stats for people killed in various wars are for the entire war, not this year or even one year.
It is accurate to say that more civilians have been killed in US mass shootings than in military personnel in wars *this year to date*.
Re:yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:4, Insightful)
We didn't have people bringing assault weapons in schools on a daily basis 20 years ago.
And a cell phone is going to do what for them?
Nokia 3310 (Score:3)
if the phone in question used by your kid is one of your old Nokias, the kid can use is an extremely good bullet shield and/or deadly effective buldgeonning weapon~~
Plus, as a bonus, when you hand it out to the kid, the battery is probably still at 63%, left over from when you last left it in the drawer~~ :-D
Re:yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:5, Informative)
We didn't have people bringing assault weapons in schools on a daily basis 20 years ago.
The gun homicide rate in America is about half what it was in the early 1990s.
Overall gun deaths have not declined as much because suicides, which are the majority of gun deaths, have risen.
Some of this is driven by demographics. Young people, who tend to commit crimes, are a smaller portion of the population, while the elderly, who are more likely to kill themselves, are a larger portion.
Much of the reduction in violence appears to be a result of the removal of lead from gasoline. There is still much more we could do, since black kids average nearly twice the blood lead levels of white kids, and violent prison inmates have three times the average blood lead levels.
Perhaps we should focus less on banning guns and more on getting lead and other neurotoxins out of our environment.
Re: yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:2)
"Perhaps we should focus less on banning guns and more on getting lead and other neurotoxins out of our environment."
No no no. We need to ban guns, knives, cars, sticks, stones, and free speech. For the children's sake!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
First, "assault weapon" is a meaningless classification.
Second, in the first half of the 20th century and earlier, particularly in rural areas, bringing a rifle or shotgun to school was not unusual.
Re: yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:2)
I remember a time before answering machines. If you called a friend and noone picked up, you tried a different friend or went over to their house to see if they were playing outside.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Because America somehow seems to forget how we ever POSSIBLY survived without having a cell phone in our pocket at school before cell / smartphones were even a thing.
There's a time and a place for them and the classroom isn't one of them.
( Neither is a movie theater or restaurant but that's an argument for another day )
Re: (Score:2)
I agreed and said the classroom wasn't the proper place for them.
I'm old, and more than half my life cell phones weren't common. Some relatives and friends of mine died because there was no way to call for help. There will be times and places when students need them.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Some relatives and friends of mine died because there was no way to call for help. There will be times and places when students need them."
Before and after school, sure. Just not in school. The schools have land lines, and I am sure the teachers and other faculty all have phones on their person. And there is a PA system. Even way back in ancient times when I went to school, they had a TWO WAY PA system that could intercom with any classroom from the main office.
I doubt there would be enough delay t
Re: (Score:2)
Some relatives and friends of mine died because there was no way to call for help. There will be times and places when students need them.
If we get that far . . . our civilization is doomed anyway.
Having cell phones won't help.
Re: (Score:2)
Not a problem, society did well for quite a long time without mobile phones. If there's an emergency, the school should be getting the call and not the student. They are not forbidding the front office from having phones. And in any case, if there is an emergency and the student is being called then the good students won't answer the phone anyway (or probably put it on silent). After all you don't see teachers stop talking during a lecture and say "oops, gotta see who this is on the phone, it might be an
Re: (Score:2)
A money-operated public telephone could be used.
Re "faraday bag during class?" Does every smartphone get its own?
How resilient is the average, expensive and low end consumer smartphone to been placed in a bag with a set of other smartphones?
One smaller faraday bag per smartphone? One larger bag per class with every smartphone collected and placed in the bag?
The one big faraday bag is carefully placed on a desk?
How many times a day? Per week? By the end
Re: yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:3)
Yes, this is why our school doesnâ(TM)t collect them. Teachers arenâ(TM)t allowed to even touch a studentâ(TM)s phone because they donâ(TM)t want to be accused of breaking it. Instead they send the kid to the office if they catch them using it.
They donâ(TM)t ban them because many kids need them for safety reasons before and after school.
Re: (Score:3)
Yondr pouches are not exactly indestructible.
There is a high chance that students already have a pair of scissors that can cut through it.
These pouches are a deterrent, not a security product.
Re: (Score:2)
For $20,000 maybe they can get the school a landline.
Re: yup lawsuit locked and loaded (Score:3)
There is a simple solution to that. Instead of locking them away, use a tamper proof seal that is easily broken in an emergency.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a simple solution anyway. Put in the classroom a drawer unit or a condo multiple letterbox. Students put their cellphone in at the start of the lesson and retrieve it at the end.
They could be allowed also tu put stationery and snack in. Actually at my hrade school we had a drawer unit, pre cellphone days exactly to put stationery in.
Re: (Score:2)
just wait till there is an emergency with some student being away from others, who can't call....
No need. Those kids will survive. The ones chatting away on their phones will be the ones that perish first during an active shooter incident.
Anxiety... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd strongly suggest that (most) people whose anxiety is relieved by checking their phones constantly have anxiety which is artificially generated by that phone in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
You haven't seen anxiety until one of those phones rings, chimes or vibrates a few times from an incoming text or call and they're unable to see or answer it.
( assuming they're not turned off before being placed in the bag )
They'll lose their minds.
Re: (Score:2)
>>Instead, he believes "technology breaks" are a much happier medium.
How about a few hours a day? Maybe use some kind of locking bag to ensure the break? Except for that break they can still facetweet away and indulge the "anxiety", reassuring our friend Larry.
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately, he is one of the (many) people who think that "technology" is "anything invented later than my childhood".
Or is he planning on calling for "no electricity in schools"? Electricity isn't magic, it's technology....
Re: (Score:2)
He's probably just not that pedantic an used the word in the common sense, not the more specific dictionary definition.
Re: (Score:2)
"Larry Rosen, a research psychologist at California State University"
Larry Rosen seems to be one of those guys who has made his career being a talking science guy on TV, saying interesting things that aren't too wrong.
Looks like a locksport challenge (Score:2)
I'm intrigued as to the "proprietary lock".
When I was in school.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think the school staff ever thought it was OK, but over time more and more students were distracted by them, more and more refused to put them away when asked, and it reached the point where the administration decided that enough was enough and wanted to lock the phones up during school hours.
Re: (Score:2)
No brainer (Score:2)
Allowing cellphones in the classroom is a different kind of no-brainer.
Overreacting a bit? (Score:2)
I was an undergrad when cell phones made their 2-year ascent from extravagant luxury item to virtually a permanently attached appendage. Every professor I remember having a cell phone policy at all basically took the position of: "Don't disturb others. Otherwise, IDGAF.". Having one ring basically meant the offender being booted from the classroom for the day. But that's about it. No bans. No special bags. No shenanigans in general.
Is "controlling your own classroom" not a thing when teaching anymore
Re: (Score:3)
Every professor I remember having a cell phone policy at all basically took the position of: "Don't disturb others. Otherwise, IDGAF."
Being a professor of graduate students is very different than being a teacher in a high school. High School students don't pay to be there.
Not needed during classes (Score:2)
The only reason I have given phones to my teenagers is so that they can call me after school if they are staying back for a practice and for safety while they walk to and from school. The phones are not needed during class and are a distraction especially with the epidemic of robocalls going on.
My kids already switch the phone off and put it in their backpack once they reach school and text me they reached safely and they switch it back on after school is over.
This may help kids who dont have the willpower
Re: (Score:2)
"This may help kids who dont have the willpower to do it on their own."
Maybe they need to learn that willpower.
But kids are dumb.
Calling it (Score:2)
Students will schedule alarms to ring on their phones all day. Whoops, can't get to it, it's locked up tight!
And unless that pouch blocks bluetooth and cell signals (or even if they do, with smartwatches that connect directly to cell towers), you can bet smartwatches will become more popular among students.
Re: (Score:2)
Anxiety when not connected, seriously? (Score:2)
"They are anxious about staying on top of things, and that anxiety will build up if they are forced to ditch the devices cold turkey"
Maybe the kid needs rehab more than his/her device.
They just DUG for some conflicting expert (Score:2)
Asking the right questions to many experts such as "what are some downsides to taking cocaine away from an addict? should we remove it suddenly?" you are going to find answers that sound in opposition to removing the item of addiction.
So we have somebody saying let them get their fix because they suffer from their addiction? LET KIDS HAVE SMOKING BREAKS? If you know a smoker, they get quite strong feelings physicaly and emotionaly when they are waiting for their next fix.
It calms me down (Score:2)
I always enjoy a comp sci or physics lecture more when I am watching cute kitty videos on my phone at the same time.
Unbelievable (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Believable. A simple tech is sold to schools with proprietary parts and they go all in. Business is goid if you want to pick the low hanging fruit. Solve someone's problem, get paid. That's the economy, guvnah.
Every school needs this (Score:3)
Too many grown adults lack the willpower to put their dopamine phone away. What chance does an emotionally undeveloped child's brain have against a flashing gizmo that is the center of their social connection to their peers?
Kids are sheep if this doesn't happen (Score:3)
Any kid I ever met would be bright enough to bring their old cell phone to be locked up, and the take their current phone in their pocket in silent mode.
The problem isn't cell phones. The problem is assholes with cell phones and the over-needy with cell phones.
Re: Kids are sheep if this doesn't happen (Score:2)
So, the problem is those who have cellphones then.
Re: (Score:2)
Any kid I ever met would be bright enough to bring their old cell phone to be locked up, and the take their current phone in their pocket in silent mode.
The problem isn't cell phones. The problem is assholes with cell phones and the over-needy with cell phones.
Congratulations on not being a teacher. If you were you'd realise the job here is not to deal with the nefarious sneak who is intentionally bypassing rules, but rather to stop normal kids being enticed by the distraction in the first place.
No child left behind was a failure. If one or two kids want to play with phones that desperately then more power to them. But kids don't need distractions in the class and 95% of students sure as heck don't bother trying to sneak phones in.
what is a 'technology expert' (Score:2)
I want to get a PhD in Technology. Where can I go for that? Or can I just say "Hello. I am an expert in Technology." Is the money good in the field of "Technology"? Wouldn't you want to ask someone who is skilled in the art of Education rather than Technology? I am guessing that no one was actually asked anything though in this case.
ditch vs breaks (Score:2)
"Larry Rosen, a research psychologist at California State University, said young people constantly check their phones to alleviate anxiety. ... They are anxious about staying on top of things, and that anxiety will build up if they are forced to ditch the devices cold turkey, he added. Taking away phones doesn't work for everyone, he argues. Instead, he believes "technology breaks" are a much happier medium."
it's only during school time, that is a 'break' and not a 'ditch', they still can use their phones b
Device Addiction (Score:2)
Device Addition is a thing when it comes to phones and technology, and dopamine is just as addictive as any other drug like nicotine, caffeine, or what have you.
It is difficult to decide where the line is. When do we start intervening with someone who is addicted to a substance?
Caffeine is a drug that hundreds of millions of people are addicted to, but that addiction generally doesn't interfere with ones ability to function. So, we don't have laws that regulate caffeine.
Alcohol is a drug that certainly dimi
There are jobs that do not allow cell phones (Score:2)
From Wealthy to Just Not Dirt Poor (Score:4)
First, cool, rich, white kids had them (Zack Morris). It was a symbolic of wealth/high disposable income and subsequently your greater societal social status. Then as the tech got way cheaper in the early 2000s, many middle class teens and adults could afford them. If you had one, it was cool because your friends could reach you anywhere, anytime and you had the money to afford it. Then came group messaging and eventually the smart phone as we know it with behaviorally engineered apps and services to be addictive.
So, now we come to a point where the phone is no longer a symbol of wealth/high disposable income; instead it is a common symbol that you are not VERY poor and without a cellular phone, socially isolated/left out. That probably does create a fair amount of anxiety among a peer group where many or most have a smart phone and various social media and messaging accounts.
However, if no one is allowed to use them in your school then what are you nervous/anxious about missing? None of your friends should be posting much, if anything. This is all about setting expectations in school and telling parents to piss off for all the pseudo-reasons their child needs access to a cell phone in school. Cell phones are a distraction in school. While incorporating them into education can be engaging and beneficial, it's hard to tell if an individual is genuinely paying attention.
Yes, tech tools exist to mitigate this, but who's paying for it and how effective are they?
Mixed feelings (Score:3)
I'm sure they're distractions at times too, but I don't see why teachers can't handle that on a case-by-case basis. It seems like it'd be pretty obvious if someone's goofing off on their phone; just take the thing away and give it back at the end of class. Maybe have a policy where the thing has to be in airplane mode during class; e-books can be downloaded beforehand and notekeeping/recording can both be done while offline.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Found this in under 1 minute:
The key to opening a Yondr bag was posted on YouTube by a friend of mine and got taken down. Simply use the magnetic "key" from a Tot-Lock (securing cabinets and such for kids) in a manner quite similar to your video. They sell a universal magnetic key on Amazon for $6.99
Plus it doesn't seem to feature any sort of faraday cage that I can tell. These kids can just connect one of these:
https://www.rubydevices.com.au... [rubydevices.com.au]
to their shit with bluetooth. If this catches on I'm sure we'll see color graphic touch screen calculators in the future
Re: (Score:2)
What will happen is what schools will do when their rudimentary measures are breached... call the resource officer to arrest the perp and make an example of him, throwing him into juvi until age 23. All it does is teach children contempt of the school (and legal) system.
Just let the kids have their fscking phones, and call them out if they have them when they shouldn't. Teachers have been doing this for decades with note passing. We don't need more feel-good security theater that accomplishes nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
It's called "staying after school", and "detention". It's called suspension and even expulsion.
Why would you call the cops? These tools have been used forever. If a kid can't have enough discipline to handle his phone being in a bag, and not open it repeatedly (with escalating responses each time), then that kid probably isn't of much use to society, and dragging down everyone else isn't worth it.
Kick the kid out. Just like with other aberrant behaviour which results in eventual expulsion.
Re: (Score:3)
When a brain-dead clerk forgot to take a couple of tags off the clothes I bought, I just took them off with the high-strength neodymium magnet on my mounted bottle opener. (It catches the caps, and can hold like 30 of them at a time.) It was then and there I realized how utterly stupid such things are. The only people this stops are really dumb, unmotivated people.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Go back to bed betsy devos. You need your beauty sleep.
Re: (Score:2)