FINALLY...doing something about #$@! cell phones

[Tony]

Not "all humanity", merely a general representation of cardrivers.

Then were you being intentionally dishonest when you implied that driving bad while talking on cell phones was a human trait?

So unless Tony considers himself a Homo Superior instead of a Homo Sapiens, he's subject to the same human limitations as the rest of us.

All you've given so far is your personal, ego driven belief that a cellphone doesn't impede your ability to drive safely. Supported by the conviction that studies about effects on other people are invalid in your particular case.

I am skeptical of the studies. What was their sample size? Did 100% of subjects exhibit bad driving while on the phone? How did driving while doing other activities compare?

 

[slingblade]

They don't have that problem in college classes.

Yes they do, are you kidding me? All of my professors announced at the beginning of term that cell phones were to be shut off, and were not even to be brought to class on test days.

Most people complied with that easily, and the few, rare times they forgot, they shut the phone off right away. However, professors did let us know that if anyone had a problem with this rule, or if it was broken too many times, the student could and would be asked to leave, and could even be withdrawn from the class. Professors have that discretion.

 

[Tony]

"Having the kids" do something sounds a lot like herding cats. Why don't we just "have the kids" behave themselves at all times? Then we'd never have to worry about anything! Heck, if we just "have the kids" learn conscientiously on their own, we wouldn't even need schools at all!

Kids will misbehave. There's already a rule in a lot of schools that cell phones have to be off, but kids disregard it. Why do you think they'd take a rule about setting them on vibrate any more seriously? And a vibrating cell phone is a distraction to the student even if it's not a distraction to the rest of the class. Children are there to learn, not to play around with their electronic toys in class. If there's an emergency, the school office is there to take the call. There's absolutely no reason a kid needs to have an active cell phone in school.



They're children. Children are not mature enough to make their own choices. That's why they have legal guardians.

Who the fk are you talking about? I'm talking about 15,16,17,18 and 19 year olds. "Children" they are not. Did you think I was talking about 10 year olds and kids in grade school?

 

[Tony]

The point is that you don't need cell-phones to get hold of a pupil in case of an emergency, so the argument that "cell phones are necessary in case of emergencies" is inane.

Well. I don't need a car to get to work. I could ride a horse or walk. But the great thing about technology is that it makes it easier to accomplish tasks that in times past were more difficult.

 

[toddjh]

Who the fk are you talking about? I'm talking about 15,16,17,18 and 19 year olds. "Children" they are not. Did you think I was talking about 10 year olds and kids in grade school?

Last I heard, 15, 16, and 17-year-olds were considered children. 18-year-olds are a gray area. And I doubt there are many 19-year-olds in high school.

And anyway, in my state, those 16 and over do have a choice, if they really, REALLY want to use their cell phone: don't go to school. But if you do choose to go to school, don't whine when you're expected to comply with the school's perfectly sensible rules about electronic toys in class.

 

[Tony]

Last I heard, 15, 16, and 17-year-olds were considered children...

...by an arbitrary legal classification.

Thinking people know what a child is. I trust you do to.

And anyway, in my state, those 16 and over do have a choice, if they really, REALLY want to use their cell phone: don't go to school. But if you do choose to go to school, don't whine when you're expected to comply with the school's perfectly sensible rules about electronic toys in class.

That's good. Since cell phones aren't electronic toys, I take it they're allowed? Furthmore, didn't I already make my position clear about phones in class? Just take the call, if you must, outside. It's really sad that people piss and moan that "kids today" too immature, too disrespectfull blah blah blah ad nauseam. Perhaps the reason they're so immature/disrespectful/whatever is because you treat them like chattle or inmates in a prison camp?

 

[slingblade]

Well. I don't need a car to get to work. I could ride a horse or walk. But the great thing about technology is that it makes it easier to accomplish task that in times past were more difficult.

In its proper place, fine. But my classroom is not the proper place for you to take a phone call of any kind.

I get the feeling, Tony, that you are more an anarchist than a liberal. Even liberals see the need for reasonable rules.

ETA: cell phones are too toys. You can play games on them. That makes them toys. However, that isn't the point. It isn't just a ban on toys. You can't have your iPod on in my class, either, and that's not a toy. You can't have a laser pointer, and it's not a toy.

You're going to have to face it sometime, Tony, or else persist in irrationality. A school is a learning environment, and anything which interferes or potentially interferes with learning is reduced or eliminated whenever possible.

The other thing you need to know is that teachers don't have autonomy on this issue. They aren't making the policies--the school district is, and the teachers can't keep their jobs and buck the system. I'm not interested in losing my job so your kids can take calls during class.

 

[Tony]

In its proper place, fine. But my classroom is not the proper place for you to take a phone call of any kind.

That's why I said they can take it outside of the class. I agree that a class is not the proper place to take a call (I never took a call in class).

I get the feeling, Tony, that you are more an anarchist than a liberal. Even liberals see the need for reasonable rules.

I see the need for reasonable rules. I just don't see how an outright ban of cell phones (unless it's a test day, in which case, they can leave it in their bag at the front of class) is a reasonable rule.

 

[toddjh]

Thinking people know what a child is. I trust you do to.

Yes, and I see no reason to regard the average 16-year-old as a full adult.

That's good. Since cell phones aren't electronic toys, I take it they're allowed?

Cell phones have no utility in the context of a classroom, or at least no utility that couldn't easily be provided in a better way. They are little more than electronic toys there.

Furthmore, didn't I already make my position clear about phones in class? Just take the call, if you must, outside.

So the kid can come and go as he pleases, then? It's a school, not a social club. It really has nothing to do with the fact that they're kids; it has to do with the fact that school is supposed to be about learning, not about standing in the hallway yakking with your friends.

If you don't want to be there, don't go -- above a certain age, I don't think anyone can force you to. But if you do go, accept the fact that you'll be expected to pay attention in class.

It's really sad that people piss and moan that "kids today" too immature, too disrespectfull blah blah blah ad nauseam. Perhaps the reason they're so immature/disrespectful/whatever is because you treat them like chattle or inmates in a prison camp?

Huh? Who is "pissing and moaning" about "kids today?"

 

[slingblade]

That's why I said they can take it outside of the class. I agree that a class is not the proper place to take a call (I never took a call in class).

No, they can't. They are interrupting their own learning for something that can wait. If it can't wait, call the office and let them handle it. That's school policy.

I see the need for reasonable rules. I just don't see how an outright ban of cell phones (unless it's a test day, in which case, they can leave it in their bag at the front of class) is a reasonable rule.

Don't do that. Who told you there was an "outright ban" on cells at school?
I told you they could have them, and they could be turned on during passing periods and at lunch. But they must turn them off during class or risk having them confiscated.

If there is a true emergency, the policy of most schools is "call the office." Not "call your kid on his cell phone." How do I know that? I used to work in the factory that makes those neat day-timer/calendar books for schools, and as I assembled the damned things, I was able to read the school handbooks for schools all over the country. (If your student has an "Action Agenda" or got one from "Envision," you can thank me for making it for him. At your convenience, of course. )

And dude, there isn't room in the classroom for 30 kids to stash their backpacks. Where the hell am I supposed to stand, or how am I supposed to walk? Students don't do that. They leave their cell phones in their backpacks, next to their desks, and they turn them off. Once they leave class, they can turn them back on, and they do.

Forget the rules: how about a little common courtesy and a little respect for your own education?

Sheesh, Tony, give up. You are wrong about this particular issue, period.

 

[Tony]

No, they can't.

They should be able to. That's what I'm arguing.

They are interrupting their own learning for something that can wait.

That's is their choice, is it not?

Don't do that. Who told you there was an "outright ban" on cells at school?

I don't think anyone told me that. But someone mentioned that they shouldn't be allowed in school.

If there is a true emergency, the policy of most schools is "call the office." Not "call your kid on his cell phone." How do I know that?

I understand that, but what I'm saying is that that method has been rendered obsolete because of cell phones (well, and that I think kids of a certain age should be treated like mature human beings).

I used to work in the factory that makes those neat day-timer/calendar books for schools, and as I assembled the damned things, I was able to read the school handbooks for schools all over the country. (If your student has an "Action Agenda" or got one from "Envision," you can thank me for making it for him. At your convenience, of course. )

I'm not calling your background into question.

And dude, there isn't room in the classroom for 30 kids to stash their backpacks.

We never had problems when I was in school. But considering some of the posts in this thread, I seem to have lived the life of an aristocrat and .

Forget the rules: how about a little common courtesy and a little respect for your own education?

Absolutely. I'm there with you 100%. But again, that is a person's decision.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

The have no choice but to sign it.

Correct.

Something signed under duress isn't a binding contract.

For an adult, AFAIK. Kids are under guardianship of their parents. If their parents tell them to sign, they have to, and it's binding.

So? It's their choice.

Wrong. The state mandates that they attend school up through a certain age.

You obviously have never used a cell phone. When you press "ignore", the phone goes to silent.

Ah. So the phone has to ring and disturb the class in order for the student to press "ignore". Can't it be on "silent" to begin with? And if "silent", then it may as well be off.

They don't have that problem in college classes.

Oh, of course not, since college students are much more mature and responsible. And since adults are even more so, you'd never find this problem in, say, a business meeting or movie theater. Riiiiight.

 

[slingblade]

That's is their choice, is it not?

No. Their choices are limited. And in this case, the choice to take a call and leave the classroom interrupts my teaching, disturbs the other students, and encourages students to waste everyone's time by calling each other to get each other out of class. They aren't just making a choice regarding their own learning--they are making choices about the learning of others as well, and that choice is not their right.

If you choose to come to school, you must obey the rules of the school.

You can choose to come, but not participate or obey. If you do make that choice, however, there will be consequences and penalties.

You can choose not to come.

If there are age restrictions (i.e. must attend until 16), you can still choose to not attend, but you will be breaking the law. There are consequences for that, too.

Further, if I am the teacher and I violate my own school's policy and allow you to take calls during class, I can be fired.

Cell phones are an unnecessary interruption to the learning process, and as such are not tolerated in class. Even the teachers must obey this rule, did you think of that? I can't leave my cell phone on, either.
(except I don't have one, and plan never to have one.)

 

[toddjh]

Cell phones are an unnecessary interruption to the learning process, and as such are not tolerated in class. Even the teachers must obey this rule, did you think of that? I can't leave my cell phone on, either.
(except I don't have one, and plan never to have one.)

If a teacher's cell phone rings, is it confiscated until the teacher's parents come to get it back?

 

[luchog]

I don't believe that in car conversations have shown any statistical impact on driving safety and in fact can improve safety because of the extra set of eyes. I know from personal experience that a passenger has helped me avoid a situation.

I don't have it handy, but a study was done 2 or 3 years ago that showed that in-car conversations do have a negative impact on driving safety. It is classed as a "distraction factor", with an impact similar to, for example, eating or drinking.

 

[slingblade]

If a teacher's cell phone rings, is it confiscated until the teacher's parents come to get it back?

Gee, then I'd be SOL for sure!!

Nah, we just get our widdle hands slapped, and the students usually laugh at us for being such great big grown-ups, but unable to remember the rules.....

 

[toddjh]

I don't have it handy, but a study was done 2 or 3 years ago that showed that in-car conversations do have a negative impact on driving safety. It is classed as a "distraction factor", with an impact similar to, for example, eating or drinking.

Just to add an anecdote to the pile, my one and only accident occurred because I was distracted by a conversation with a passenger. I try not to talk too much in the car anymore.

 

[Tony]

Correct.

Then it's not a contract.

For an adult, AFAIK. Kids are under guardianship of their parents. If their parents tell them to sign, they have to, and it's binding.

No it's not. A parent cannot compel a minor to sign a contract. If they do, the contract is invalid.

The state mandates that they attend school up through a certain age.

Did you think I wouldn't notice that you switched the terms? I said "class", not "school". Your dishonesty is blatant.

So the phone has to ring and disturb the class in order for the student to press "ignore". Can't it be on "silent" to begin with? And if "silent", then it may as well be off.

Yes, it can be on silent.

 

[Tony]

No. Their choices are limited. And in this case, the choice to take a call and leave the classroom interrupts my teaching, disturbs the other students, and encourages students to waste everyone's time by calling each other to get each other out of class. They aren't just making a choice regarding their own learning--they are making choices about the learning of others as well, and that choice is not their right.

This prison camp mentality for schools is what is wrong with them and why they're such crappy places for learning. Can you provide evidence for any of these claims?

 

[slingblade]

I don't think anyone told me that. But someone mentioned that they shouldn't be allowed in school.

One person's opinion doesn't equate to policy, and don't weasel--aren't you already having a hard enough time with Art's doing that in the other thread?

I understand that, but what I'm saying is that that method has been rendered obsolete because of cell phones (well, and that I think kids of a certain age should be treated like mature human beings).

Then at the very least, you'll have to explain why a 47-year-old woman was given the same rule to follow in her college classes as these underage students are expected to follow in theirs.

The question is not so much maturity, but propriety. Cells interrupt class, therefore cells are not allowed on in class. Period.

By the way, here's another bandwagon to climb on: boys aren't allowed to wear hats in class, either, though they can wear them in the halls. They might write homework or test answers on the underside of the bill. Poor things have lost their freedom of expression, boo hoo.