Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Maybe require children to put their phones in their lockers during the school day.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Maybe require children to put their phones in their lockers during the school day.

They already were not supposed to be using them in class, and yet still did. Mandating they go into lockers would very likely be ignored as well. Enforcement/consequences for existing rules/violations is what needs to be addressed.

Plus, if that whole 911 save lives stuff is a valid reason to allow the kids to have them, when the active shooter is roaming the halls capping kiddies phones in lockers are not much good.

 CptJake wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Maybe require children to put their phones in their lockers during the school day.

They already were not supposed to be using them in class, and yet still did. Mandating they go into lockers would very likely be ignored as well. Enforcement/consequences for existing rules/violations is what needs to be addressed.

Plus, if that whole 911 save lives stuff is a valid reason to allow the kids to have them, when the active shooter is roaming the halls capping kiddies phones in lockers are not much good.

I agree with you that Enforcement of school rules, and consequences need to be enforced, but at the same time... we know schools aren't putting phone violators in detention because it would mess with their "numbers" and they'd somehow receive less money because they were suddenly viewed as a "bad" school.


Even if we go with the whole 911 thing, if we stick with the most common places a school shooting happens: middle school and high school... some of the biggest high schools in the country are 2-4,000+ students. Does 911 really need that many calls? (obviously, some are just going to be huddling in a corner pissing themselves, including some teachers, but the point is, "worst case" scenario for that 911 dispatcher is that they get a flood of calls from everyone in that school who has a phone from the principal on down to the janitor and the tiniest freshman.


IMO, one of the better solutions I"ve seen, is to "force" students to put their phone on the chalk tray of the board at the front of the class

I often wonder if we wouldn't be better off embracing these phones and teaching the kids how to get the best use out of them. I dunno. My experiences are that some functions are extremely useful in a classroom (snapping a picture of an experimental set up or using the timer for experiments, for example) but there's always going to be 1 or 2 kids that are messing around with them. The thing is, those kids will mess around no matter what, give them a pencil they'll draw penises on their books or the tables, give them a piece of paper and they'll have spit balls ready to go ASAP. So managing phone behaviour is not TOO much different from other forms of behaviour management. Keep your eyes open, be firm, fair and consistent.

All of that said, sometimes phones can be surprisingly disruptive. I'm at the end of the year, and was supervising a revision period on Friday. A kid asked if they could use their phones to listen to music on their headphones. Normally, I say no, but I thought "What the hell, why not" because they'd been improving for a while, behaviour wise. Which seemed fine for literally five minutes until the same kid was loudly accusing one of the girls of taking a picture of him on her phone, kicking up a huge fuss.

Suddenly I had a big pain in my arse trying to sort it out as the guy kept trying to grab the phone from her, she's yelling at him to go away, I'm attempting to get the phone from her. Got it sorted in the end, but it took a good 15 minutes out of the study period of sheer stupidity. So at the end I said "This, this right here is why I normally never let you use your phones to listen to music guys. Well done."
(Turned out she hadn't taken a photo btw, the guy just didn't feel like working and wanted some drama.)

 jhe90 wrote:
It may have workers but also jams any nonm land line 911 calls, and puts lives at potential risk.

It may also jam a teachers mobile that's linked to a school shooting aleart system or mass messaging system in case of lockdowns etc.

I can see why it's illegal, phonesa are a problem but that's however ruined there career chances if they get a offence that serious on record, its hardly minor.

Got to be ways to solve the problem though, maybe filtered advanced systems that don't,t block 911 or set emergency numbers during classroom time and allow free use at breaks and lunch.

I wasn't saying that he should be allowed to utilize the jammer. I was just pointing out that the children don't need cell phones in class rooms.

Also, unfortunately a jammer can't be programmed to block all signals except 911 calls, unless they have 911 utilizing different frequencies then regular mobile devices, and even then, depending on the level of power going into the jammer, a fair amount of interference would still exist.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Maybe require children to put their phones in their lockers during the school day.

No no a more motivational method.
If someone's on the phone then clearly they have mastered the assignment. Time for a pop quiz - hurray! The teacher can then invite everyone to personally thank the truant after class.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
So he went a step to far and bought and used a jammer in class. While I think that is wrong because a much easier solution exists, confiscating the phones of anyone using them in class, I do not think that he should be under fire for endangering students. ........... Anyone else have thoughts on this?

This:

teacher took way a students mobile phone, ended up with knife in gut.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/11/bradford-school-stabbing-boy-14-suspicion-attempted-murder
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-33121601
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bradford-school-stabbing-vincent-uzomah-5867501

"Sickened pupils watched in horror as teacher Vincent Uzomah was stabbed at their school before desperately trying to stem the blood pouring from his stomach."

"The witness was in the neighbouring classroom when Vincent, 50, was stabbed – apparently during a row over a confiscated phone."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:

In my previous school, I confiscated a phone and the kid (a pretty big 16 year old, taller than me) jumped on me and tried to wrestle me for the phone.
Luckily, teenagers are not as strong as they look and I was able to hold him at arms length until he got embarassed at not being able to overpower his nerdy science teacher and gave up.

So you have come to expect violence too even if not a knife.

I can see the value in a jammer. Yes I prevents us of mobile phones in an 'emergency', but in an 'emergency' the jammer can be switched off, the pupil should rely on the authority of the school for their safety. Also we had 'emergencies' in the 80's and managed without mobile phones.

That is a possibility, always, when dealing with scumbag youth, but it's extremely rare that anything like that happens.

If I have the back up of school administrators and management, I will always confiscate after a warning. If I don't have that back up, I won't toe the line just because they wrote a policy they have no intention of enforcing.

 Da Boss wrote:
That is a possibility, always, when dealing with scumbag youth, but it's extremely rare that anything like that happens.

If I have the back up of school administrators and management, I will always confiscate after a warning. If I don't have that back up, I won't toe the line just because they wrote a policy they have no intention of enforcing.

Yes its rare, but not unknown. The above story is not a one off.
One supply teacher i know working in north London wore a stab vest to school. Paranoid? possibly, but like the seat belt it doesn't have to safe you life every day to be of value.
teachers are getting stabbed with fair frequency that it don-t always hit the mainstream press, and mobile phones are one of the things to kill for in the mentality of chavs; and these sorts of scum don't acknowledge the concept of discipline, and especially not the concept of confiscation and some will react the only way they know how. Not many will go as far as stabbing but they might swing a punch or try to intimidate. Jamming phones so they don't work re-establishes the no phones rule without placing the teacher in danger.

Not only do I refuse to condemn use of phone jammers in schools, I would go as far as to encourage them.

I tihnk by law these things should be installed in every movie theater.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
That is a possibility, always, when dealing with scumbag youth, but it's extremely rare that anything like that happens.

If I have the back up of school administrators and management, I will always confiscate after a warning. If I don't have that back up, I won't toe the line just because they wrote a policy they have no intention of enforcing.

Yes its rare, but not unknown. The above story is not a one off.
One supply teacher i know working in north London wore a stab vest to school. Paranoid? possibly, but like the seat belt it doesn't have to safe you life every day to be of value.
teachers are getting stabbed with fair frequency that it don-t always hit the mainstream press, and mobile phones are one of the things to kill for in the mentality of chavs; and these sorts of scum don't acknowledge the concept of discipline, and especially not the concept of confiscation and some will react the only way they know how. Not many will go as far as stabbing but they might swing a punch or try to intimidate. Jamming phones so they don't work re-establishes the no phones rule without placing the teacher in danger.

Not only do I refuse to condemn use of phone jammers in schools, I would go as far as to encourage them.

I'm wondering how long it would be before your keister was sued in the US with this policy. I doubt long.
There are many warnings-including weather (aka tornadoes) that go over the phone now. Cutting the faculty off from that would be...bad.

I know, how on earth did people survive without a phone only ten years ago?

 Frazzled wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
That is a possibility, always, when dealing with scumbag youth, but it's extremely rare that anything like that happens.

If I have the back up of school administrators and management, I will always confiscate after a warning. If I don't have that back up, I won't toe the line just because they wrote a policy they have no intention of enforcing.

Yes its rare, but not unknown. The above story is not a one off.
One supply teacher i know working in north London wore a stab vest to school. Paranoid? possibly, but like the seat belt it doesn't have to safe you life every day to be of value.
teachers are getting stabbed with fair frequency that it don-t always hit the mainstream press, and mobile phones are one of the things to kill for in the mentality of chavs; and these sorts of scum don't acknowledge the concept of discipline, and especially not the concept of confiscation and some will react the only way they know how. Not many will go as far as stabbing but they might swing a punch or try to intimidate. Jamming phones so they don't work re-establishes the no phones rule without placing the teacher in danger.

Not only do I refuse to condemn use of phone jammers in schools, I would go as far as to encourage them.

I'm wondering how long it would be before your keister was sued in the US with this policy. I doubt long.
There are many warnings-including weather (aka tornadoes) that go over the phone now. Cutting the faculty off from that would be...bad.

So long as the school can receive the tornado warning the individual need not. They had tornados in the 80's too.
Mobile phones are fashionable, they are not mandatory for on campus survival.
Kids with mobile phones makes sense, they can call for help, they can arrange safe transport, but they arent needed in a school. There is nothing that cant be dealt with my talking to someone in school, or waiting until after school hours.

Also due to technological overdependence having a negative effect on human development having jammers on central campus ad not only in classroom has some advantages.
Just in the same way kids cant use calculators on most maths tests, a central campus ban on phones could mitigate the damage overuse of phones has. Too many kids cant communicate without them, and literacy is dropping due to txt.

In the UK there are a TV public safety campaigns run telling people to walk and txt safely because the idiots don't pay attention to where they are and what they are doing. Having school as a time out from txting makes sense, after all you can bring an toy to class, so why bring a mobile phone.

As for tornados, I wonder if kids would notice them more if thy weren't walking around heads down punching a phone keypad. After all tornado alerts are just more boring messages to ignore while you continue a 'conversation' with the kid on the next desk.

I wouldn't mind a jammer like that (my lab has such poor signal it may as well have one anyway!) but I think it's also important to point out that while phone overuse and dependency is an issue, it's generally only in extreme cases that it's harmful. Kids used to pass notes, now they send texts. The problem, them not paying attention, is the same, and the solutions are the same as they have always been too.

Firm, consistent rules, support from parents and management and interesting lessons will do more to help than a phone jammer. Without the phones some other behaviour becomes the problem.

As I keep saying (just because it is definitely my experience) the real problems start when school management makes rules but don't back up teachers on enforcement.

I'm all for it. Kids can do without for 6 hours a day. Maybe it will increase their attention span.
Honestly it's too bad they're illegal. I've had a fantasy of having one in my car because of all the people driving too slow or not paying attention because they're more interested in the latest gossip from their BFF.

 Wraithlordmechanic wrote:

Honestly it's too bad they're illegal. I've had a fantasy of having one in my car because of all the people driving too slow or not paying attention because they're more interested in the latest gossip from their BFF.

From that perspective a jammer is the wrong tool. A loss of signal/connectivity as your vehicle's motion puts them into your jammer's range will cause further distraction as they try to figure out why they can't send or receive. That further distraction as you are in closer proximity to them is potentially harmful to you and your vehicle.

 Necros wrote:
I tihnk by law these things should be installed in every movie theater.

Should every movie theater also be equipped with an electronic gun jammer??

I was teaching back in the day when mobiles were just becoming a 'thing'.

One smart alec rich show offy kid turned up with a mobile and was very busy being annoying and disruptive with it.

I went to confiscate it. He said I couldn't confiscate it because the school had no rules against mobile phones - and he was right, no one had ever had one in school before.

I was more right.

We did have rules against "electronic equipment", a catch all to keep out walkmans, radio cassettes etc, which in my opnion also covered his phone.

Teacher 1 . Kid. 0.

 Wraithlordmechanic wrote:
I'm all for it. Kids can do without for 6 hours a day. Maybe it will increase their attention span.
Honestly it's too bad they're illegal. I've had a fantasy of having one in my car because of all the people driving too slow or not paying attention because they're more interested in the latest gossip from their BFF.

Lol reminds me that this actually happened

The guy had the feds pull up at his home once they found out as it was disrupting near by police while driving

 CptJake wrote:

 Wraithlordmechanic wrote:

Honestly it's too bad they're illegal. I've had a fantasy of having one in my car because of all the people driving too slow or not paying attention because they're more interested in the latest gossip from their BFF.

From that perspective a jammer is the wrong tool. A loss of signal/connectivity as your vehicle's motion puts them into your jammer's range will cause further distraction as they try to figure out why they can't send or receive. That further distraction as you are in closer proximity to them is potentially harmful to you and your vehicle.

Nah you'd just flip it on when you're stopped at a light and watch everyone look at their phone trying to figure out why the call was dropped. Meanwhile you laugh maniacally and twirl your mustache like Snidely Whiplash

What? I did say it was a fantasy...

FacebookJunkie wrote:
I was teaching back in the day when mobiles were just becoming a 'thing'.

One smart alec rich show offy kid turned up with a mobile and was very busy being annoying and disruptive with it.

I went to confiscate it. He said I couldn't confiscate it because the school had no rules against mobile phones - and he was right, no one had ever had one in school before.

I was more right.

We did have rules against "electronic equipment", a catch all to keep out walkmans, radio cassettes etc, which in my opnion also covered his phone.

Teacher 1 . Kid. 0.

Surely there is a completely fundamental rule that children should pay attention and not disrupt lessons. That covers any particular item a pupil might bring into class and use to make a nuisance of himself.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

FacebookJunkie wrote:
I was teaching back in the day when mobiles were just becoming a 'thing'.

One smart alec rich show offy kid turned up with a mobile and was very busy being annoying and disruptive with it.

I went to confiscate it. He said I couldn't confiscate it because the school had no rules against mobile phones - and he was right, no one had ever had one in school before.

I was more right.

We did have rules against "electronic equipment", a catch all to keep out walkmans, radio cassettes etc, which in my opnion also covered his phone.

Teacher 1 . Kid. 0.

Surely there is a completely fundamental rule that children should pay attention and not disrupt lessons. That covers any particular item a pupil might bring into class and use to make a nuisance of himself.

The moment you try that line a smartalek student will be disruptive with an item required for study.
Confiscate that.

Yep, that is what you do. And then you allow them to suffer the consequences of their poor choices.

I always give a warning of the consequence first, of course. But if someone is twatting other students with a textbook or writing on the table with a pencil, I have no problem confiscating either item.

Phones are no different to anything else in that regard.