5 hours ago, rjs4470 said:

It also ignores the fact that phones have become a virtual necessity just to be able to get around in life. It’s a tool that makes many things beyond just simple communication easier. And as such, it can and does play a role in education. And I completely understand that this was not true a generation ago, but things have changed and to just ignore that and say “phones don’t belong in school” is a shortsighted and antiquated take on the issue.

Then should schools provide phones for all students?

Believe it or not there are students that don't have and can't afford phones. There are kids that carry inoperable/broken phones in their pockets just to make it look like they too have one. I hope no teacher is relying on every student to have a phone as part of their lesson plan or teaching method.

2 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

Then should schools provide phones for all students?

Believe it or not there are students that don't have and can't afford phones. There are kids that carry inoperable/broken phones in their pockets just to make it look like they too have one. I hope no teacher is relying on every student to have a phone as part of their lesson plan or teaching method.

Obviously, not every student has a phone, and schools should not provide one. Some schools/areas will have nearly 100% with phones, some will be much less, and many will be in between. Statistically, over 80% of high school students have phones. Thus, to ignore the impact and effect that phones can have on learning is shortsighted. And as adults we've all encountered things that are becoming more difficult to do without a smart phone. Which is one of the reasons why I don't think a blanket policy like this is necessary or even good. 

4 minutes ago, rjs4470 said:

Obviously, not every student has a phone, and schools should not provide one. Some schools/areas will have nearly 100% with phones, some will be much less, and many will be in between. Statistically, over 80% of high school students have phones. Thus, to ignore the impact and effect that phones can have on learning is shortsighted. And as adults we've all encountered things that are becoming more difficult to do without a smart phone. Which is one of the reasons why I don't think a blanket policy like this is necessary or even good. 

I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm  just wondering how the 20% without phones will compensate in class, when the other 80% are using their phones to look up information for class.

 

1 hour ago, rjs4470 said:

Obviously, not every student has a phone, and schools should not provide one. Some schools/areas will have nearly 100% with phones, some will be much less, and many will be in between. Statistically, over 80% of high school students have phones. Thus, to ignore the impact and effect that phones can have on learning is shortsighted. And as adults we've all encountered things that are becoming more difficult to do without a smart phone. Which is one of the reasons why I don't think a blanket policy like this is necessary or even good. 

I wonder how many of theses kids running around with phones are on free lunches?

2 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm  just wondering how the 20% without phones will compensate in class, when the other 80% are using their phones to look up information for class.

 

There have always been students who have access to tech, and students who do not. Those disadvantages/advantages have always existed, whether you're talking about encyclopedias, computers or phones. There are students who don't have access to the internet outside of school.

1 hour ago, 4 Quarters said:

I wonder how many of theses kids running around with phones are on free lunches?

Does it matter or are we just looking for ways to demonize the poor? A family of four can earn almost $55k and get reduced lunch. Families in poverty situations figure out ways to afford and access things they need. I would say phone/internet access is pretty important to everyday life these days. So while they may figure out a way to afford a phone for their kids, there may be many other things they have to give up. 

22 minutes ago, rjs4470 said:

There have always been students who have access to tech, and students who do not. Those disadvantages/advantages have always existed, whether you're talking about encyclopedias, computers or phones. There are students who don't have access to the internet outside of school.

Not in the classroom, there should be no advantages In-The-Classroom. No haves and have-nots in the classroom. Away from school there will always be differences.

I agree that there are students that aren't as fortunate at home with latest tech or even internet. That's why great teachers don't rely on tech and on-line research to teach. Tech not only makes students lazy, it can also make teachers lazy if their teaching becomes tech dependent. 

Phones can go in a clear plastic "shoe holder" like you'd hang on the back of your closet door. They're visible the entire time, no one can mess with them, and it becomes a great way to take attendance. We used this method to limit their interaction with them in my practice area for years. Now we have a culture where the athletes come in and they're not bothered with them because they're focused on the task at hand. In the right culture/environment, you can actually trust a teenager to make some fairly good decisions, but you have the create the culture first. I see nothing wrong with a little forced cultural shift. 

My daughter in 8th grade has a cloth with pockets on it in the front of the classroom that they have to put their phones in when the day starts and pick them back up as they leave for the day.   My daughter in 9th grade has to keep her phone turned off and in her back pack for the entire school day.