291
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
291 points (95.0% liked)
News
23684 readers
3356 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The issue with local policy like that is that school boards or individual teachers are hugely susceptible to parental rage. Countless teachers will talk about how every parent has some reason why little Timmy just absolutely must have his TikTok machine on him at all times, just in case his mom needs to text him and can't be bothered to call the school office.
Having some state-level precedent makes this much easier for local officials, who can just say that they're following state guidelines.
And that's a problem why exactly? Why is every comment here pretending that there is either being glued to the screen of your phone or having it locked away, no inbetween?
Schools can somehow enforce completely rediculous clothign regulations but "the phone stays in your bag unless it's an emergency" is somehow impossible because it's some kind of law of nature that you must stare at the screen 24/7.
Do you want to have to watch your 25+ students every minute to enforce your rule, or would you like to teach your lesson?
Actually yes. I want the students watched because that's part of teaching. Ignoring them to the point it's extra work to even look at them once a minute while while reproducing some book verbally or in writing is not.
That's a fair point. But what's worse for a student, not paying attention in class or getting a cop sent into the classroom to arrest/assault them?
If it's a law, and the school has a cop on premises it's just a question of when will a teacher ask a cop to deal with it.
I am not sure if a law enforced by the government and courtrooms without much room for exception is the best idea. What if a student genuinely needs a phone in class?
Why couldn't the precedent be a school policy similar to how some schools might have a uniform policy? Why would it be easier to enforce a uniform policy than a no phone policy?
Also, what is the difference between a highschool and a college interms of phone use during class?
To be very clear, I was not suggesting that a cop arrest a student for opening Instagram.
My point is that schools will be significantly more able to resist parental pressure when the school boards quite literally do not have the authority to make the decision. Perhaps there is some room for exceptions with legitimate need, but I'd argue that the bar needs to be pretty high for that, because again, it was in fact possible for students to attend school without phones for essentially all of human history. If a parent really needs to get a message to a student, they can call the office.
Just saying.... after dealing with schools for my entire career, theres a reason why parents dont want to have to rely on the office to deliver anything.
You are assuming that the only reason for a student to have a smartphone in class is to make a call.
Besides special needs students that may require their own set of regulations if laws are to be drafted. We are only considering what smartphones are currently capable of. What if in the future they are capable of things that are considered essential learning tools? If a law was passed to blanket ban specific devices or sweep up even more technology then it will be hard to revoke when required.
The school system already has all the tools it needs to deal with distractions in the classroom. The issue at hand seems to be more a systemic one than a technological one.
I'm not against some system of qualified exceptions, though they'd need to be very tight or you'll suddenly find every parent discovering their kid's own special need.
From conversations I've had with teachers, this is not at all remotely consistent with what they report.
I am not a teacher and not part of the school system right now. Are schools no longer allowed to send kids to the principal's office? Or send a letter to their parents? Or issue detention? Or is it that none of those methods help? Is a teacher's only course of action to remind students to not look at their phones during class?
When I read the article and the teacher realized that as long as the students looking at their phones were quiet it was fine it really just seemed to me like that teacher failed. If a parent said that, I would also think they failed.
There have always been distractions in the classroom and unless we are talking about a diagnosis of addiction, smartphone uses shouldn't be treated differently.
"There have always been distractions in the classroom and unless we are talking about a diagnosis of addiction, smartphone uses shouldn't be treated differently."
If that's what it comes down to then, fine. Maybe some serious research should be done in the subject.
But, until then why allow something in classrooms that isn't just a simple distraction. It's a tool with lots of uses that should never be allowed in school (and I'm not just talking about cheating).
It's also an easy method of bullying that can be very difficult to stay ahead of.