Pupils taking mobile phones to school.

[najaB]

Safer, in part because of mobile devices and the ability to call for help using them.

Yes, I don't deny that a child today with a mobile phone can call for assistance where they wouldn't have been able to do so in the 1980s, but I'm yet to be convinced that a child without a mobile phone is at any greater risk now than the same child would have been back then.

The claim that children need a mobile phone to be safe doesn't hold any water for me. Admittedly, I don't have children.

 

[Drogba11CFC]

Even on the premises seems dubious legally but off the premises too, how about nope.

I'd suggest something stronger, the second word being "off"!

 

[ABB125]

I have mixed opinions on this.

At my high school, the policy was something like "phones are not to be seen", ie: you can bring your phone, but woe betide ye if it's spotted by a member of staff. In practice, there was plenty of phone use during the school day, including during lessons ("look, I've got a new 'smart calculator'"etc), but generally most people respected the rules most of the time. I don't know what's changed as a result of coronavirus. At my middle school (three tier system where I live, covers y6-8), the policy was "hand your phone in to reception at the start of the day, collect at the end", which again had a reasonable degree of respect (though of course there was a medium-sized minority who kept their phone during the day). Both reasonable policies in my opinion, based on the age ranges and school locations (the middle school is on the edge of a village, with a large catchment area up to around 10 miles I think; the high school is in a town, but with a larger catchment area. For both a significant number of pupils live in small villages, very much "rural countryside" (but in no way remote or isolated, such as mid-Wales for example).)
Phones weren't really a thing that children had whilst I be was at first school, I have no idea what the policy there was (probably non-existent!).

I think I acquired a "dumb" phone from an elderly relative in around 2013. I never took this to school, there was no need. I got a smartphone in June 2015, right at the end of year 8. Again, no need to take this to middle school. At high school, I very occasionally took my phone, always for a specific reason, but again there was no need in normal circumstances. Despite me doing several after school activities which meant I needed to get the public bus back home, rather than the contract bus. Punctuality was... variable! And due to the timings of activities, I would have to get the last bus of the day, which could be up to half an hour late. But no need for a phone, because my parents knew what days I'd be home late, and that the bus could be late. Plus most of the days my older brother would also be getting the same bus. And I should point out that my mum was very strict and controlling about what we could and couldn't do.

In the sixth form (part of the high school), I did bring my phone, but I could have fairly easily coped without. The same rules applied to sixth formers, apart from in sixth form only areas.

So in my opinion, "thou shalt not bring thine phone to school lest it be confiscated (and memory wiped?!)" is much too draconian (and unnecessary), but "we don't care if you're using your phone during lessons" is too lax. (Unless, like a small number of schools, pupils are expected to use their phone for things like research during lessons, rather than going to a computer room.)

 

[dakta]

Seems balanced enough, phones are integral to society and function so schools might as well take some role in encouraging or at least been a part of coaching/establishingtheir appropriate use. Always going to be abuse

I'm not a big fan of them as I think it opens up the cyber bullying can but you can't stop technology and progress on the back of it, furthermore they have become more integrated with schools anyway in some sense - being able to ping a message to all students on a morning (adverse weather) might actually be as or even more effective than parents, as you can't guarentee students aren't with their friends or other family

When it comes to actually holding phones out of hours, and even worse, wiping apps and students own data from their own personal devices I'd say thats a legal challenge waiting to happen and any school is IMO asking for it if they tried to enforce.

Probably a seperate argument in its own right but I do feel schools are getting a bit militant in some respects, only foreign holiday I ever had was in term time in junior school and even back then parents got a lot of resistance. Grades didn't suffer (left with 5's which were the max) and I got to see some salt plains, old conflict areas and browsed the markets it was probably worth more than the math it replaced.

 

[D365]

I would say that the chance of losing a plastic card is much more compared to losing a mobile phone.

A phone is heavy that if it falls out from your bag you will notice it immediately, but not the case with a plastic card.

Yes, I’ve experienced this. Sharing a pocket between my phone and plastic cards is not a good idea.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, I’ve experienced this. Sharing a pocket between my phone and plastic cards is not a good idea.

Pre Apple/Google Pay many young people had phone cases that would take a couple of cards. Whoever puts cards in their pocket loose?

 

[Bantamzen]

Yes, I don't deny that a child today with a mobile phone can call for assistance where they wouldn't have been able to do so in the 1980s, but I'm yet to be convinced that a child without a mobile phone is at any greater risk now than the same child would have been back then.

The claim that children need a mobile phone to be safe doesn't hold any water for me. Admittedly, I don't have children.

Well allow me to give you an example why they might need to have mobiles. My teenage niece lives in rural Cheshire, and her high school is 7 miles away from where she lives. Now normally she gets the bus to and from the village where she lives, but they are literally once a day in either direction. So if the bus in the afternoons blobs, and it sometimes does, she is left stranded a long way from home and so needs to be able to call for a pick up. But furthermore, I have also shown her how to track the one bus home on her mobile, so that if it looks like it is going to be late or not running at all she can pre-empt this by calling home for a lift sooner, and also offering a possible lift for other kids that live in the same area and that also rely on the one bus a day.

 

[D365]

Pre Apple/Google Pay many young people had phone cases that would take a couple of cards. Whoever puts cards in their pocket loose?

Me

Well, in my school days (iPhone 3G era), I kept a slim wallet. The smartphones of the time were too thick.

 

[ComUtoR]

Yes, I don't deny that a child today with a mobile phone can call for assistance where they wouldn't have been able to do so in the 1980s, but I'm yet to be convinced that a child without a mobile phone is at any greater risk now than the same child would have been back then.

The risk and safety arguement is partly psychological, partly sociological, and partly technological.

In the 80s I would walk everywhere, play in a local park, chat to the Bobby on the street and pop into my Church. I could walk into a neighbour's house as the door would be unlocked and I could name each of their pets. It was a Very different world back then.

The claim that children need a mobile phone to be safe doesn't hold any water for me. Admittedly, I don't have children.

Mobile phones can be tracked. Some parents geo-fence them and setup alerts. I've used mine to ping my daughter's location when she got lost one evening. WhatsApp is excellent for this. They also have that weird ability to make phone calls. Imagine back in the 80s and needing to call the police.

Think about those comments from lone women who pretend to be on a call because it gives them an element of safety.

'need" is a very strong word and loaded to support an arguement one way or another. However, safety is improved with a mobile phone. They are pretty incredible devices when used properly.

This is all, of course, a small part of why they 'need' their mobiles.

 

[najaB]

Well allow me to give you an example why they might need to have mobiles...

That is a valid example. I'm not sure it expands from the specific case to the general though.

'need" is a very strong word and loaded to support an arguement one way or another. However, safety is improved with a mobile phone. They are pretty incredible devices when used properly.

I don't deny that at all. I'm just questioning the validity of the arguement that "the world has changed" making mobile phones a necessity for safety.

 

[GusB]

The school my little one has a policy that goes way much further…

The school can exercise right to search, delete or retain the phone, ipads, laptops and its data or apps at any time and for any purpose, purely on suspicion at any time on or off the premises.

They went as far to say apps like whatsapp, telegram, instagram, twitter and facebook are banned and would be removed from devices if discovered.

Are pupils and parents required to sign a document agreeing to these Draconian measures? If not, I'm not entirely convinced that the school is on solid ground, legally speaking. Smartphones are essentially general purpose computers and if school staff are taking it upon themselves to delete apps and data without explicit permission, would they not fall foul of the Computer Misuse Act?

 

[ComUtoR]

I don't deny that at all. I'm just questioning the validity of the arguement that "the world has changed" making mobile phones a necessity for safety.

By the same arguement. You don't 'need' an education so why bother sending them to school in the first place........

The existence of the phone can act as a safety device. They are a modern seatbelt for life. Sure you don't need one but your far better off with it.

 

[najaB]

Are pupils and parents required to sign a document agreeing to these Draconian measures? If not, I'm not entirely convinced that the school is on solid ground, legally speaking.

I'd go further than that, they definitely would not be acting within the law.

Unauthorised acts with intent to impair, or with recklessness as to impairing, operation of computer, etc.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a)he does any unauthorised act in relation to a computer;​

(b)at the time when he does the act he knows that it is unauthorised; and​

(c)either subsection (2) or subsection (3) below applies.​

(2)This subsection applies if the person intends by doing the act—

(a)to impair the operation of any computer;​

(b)to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer;​

(c)to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data; or​

(d)to enable any of the things mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (c) above to be done.​

Link: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/section/3?timeline=false

By the same arguement. You don't 'need' an education so why bother sending them to school in the first place........

Because, if for no other reason, it's a legal requirement to do so.

 

[AlterEgo]

Because, if for no other reason, it's a legal requirement to do so.

It’s not a legal requirement to send your child to a school.

 

[najaB]

It’s not a legal requirement to send your child to a school.

No, but it is a legal requirement to provide an "efficient, full-time education". I was responding to the "you don't 'need' an education" part of your post.

 

[ComUtoR]

No, but it is a legal requirement to provide an "efficient, full-time education". I was responding to the "you don't 'need' an education" part of your post.

But that's the problem with the word 'need' you don't 'need' and education. There is a lot of things we don't 'need' in life but are either required to do so (for our own or society's benefit') or is there for sensible or logical reasons. You may find the laws and regulations for home schooling quite interesting. (and shocking)

Also, and sadly. Schools have rather far reaching powers that should be addressed. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/searching-screening-and-confiscation

Guidance explaining the powers schools have to screen and search pupils, and to confiscate items they find.

 

[najaB]

But that's the problem with the word 'need' you don't 'need' and education. There is a lot of things we don't 'need' in life but are either required to do so (for our own or society's benefit') or is there for sensible or logical reasons.

And, going back to my original point, there are sensible and logical reasons why a parent might want their child to have a mobile phone. But that's not the same thing as saying that "the world has changed" and children need to have mobile phones*.

*Edit: For safety reasons, as was the original statement.

 

[ComUtoR]

And, going back to my original point, there are sensible and logical reasons why a parent might want their child to have a mobile phone. But that's not the same thing as saying that "the world has changed" and children need to have mobile phones.

Slightly off topic. There is a general belief that mobile phones are 'essential' I'm, not specifically talking about children. Mobiles are so integrated into our every day life that they are considered to be 'essential' Society is becoming more and more digital. There is the debate about moving away from cash, the debate around e-ticketing, online banking, online shopping, what three words.... etc.

Granted, and I accept, where you are coming from with 'need' but we are evolving to a point where living in a digital world is at that knife edge between essential and required. Society has accepted that mobile phones are important and integral for daily life. Do you accept that mobiles give everyone that link to the digital world and do you accept their importance ? Why should children be excluded from that ? Their phone use is far beyond the safety argument.

 

[najaB]

Do you accept that mobiles give everyone that link to the digital world and do you accept their importance ? Why should children be excluded from that ? Their phone use is far beyond the safety argument.

Yes, that falls into the 'logical and sensible' reasons category.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Some issues here:

1) School governing bodies are, unfortunately, very often not representative of the school. It's very common for them to introduce rules and regulations based on their own feelings about how schools should look, rather than being based on solid scientific evidence. You'll also find that many of them want education as 'it was back in the day', and that the governors are very white, middle class and conservative.

In 13 years of education, I didn't speak to a governor once or had any contact with them. The parent representatives were always the ones who had time, usually because they worked white collar jobs. As a teacher, the governors were regarded as a distant and absent body with zero knowledge of what was actually happening in the school.

There are more issues, but the lack of accountability and responsibility is a major problem. No governor (with the exception of the headteacher) should be appointed without approval from students and parents, but in reality, the governors are often people with high levels of social connections.

2) A blanket ban on mobile phones is mindless. There are many, many good applications where technology can be used, such as WordWall for MFL teachers or Kahoot for general classes. The possibilities are endless, and use of phones is now taught in teacher training courses. For the school to introduce such a ban suggests that the governors have no idea about modern education.

The school my little one has a policy that goes way much further…

The school can exercise right to search, delete or retain the phone, ipads, laptops and its data or apps at any time and for any purpose, purely on suspicion at any time on or off the premises.

They went as far to say apps like whatsapp, telegram, instagram, twitter and facebook are banned and would be removed from devices if discovered.

There's absolutely no way that this is legal. If this was my son's school, I'd be requesting an urgent meeting with the board of governors to explain the legal implications, as well as sending a message to *all* teachers advising them that they could face legal action as a result of interfering with the electronic advice.

Personally, in the case of my child, I would simply instruct them not to unlock the phone and not to hand it over. The school *could* try and use physical force, but it would be a very brave teacher who tried to use force in this situation. I suspect that they would try and suspend the child, but this would also be very questionable in the situation.

Unfortunately, schools frequently break the law because they're simply not challenged by people with the cultural capital to do so.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Oct 2022 ==

Edit: the school has no power to use reasonable force to hand over a phone: https://assets.publishing.service.g...easonable_force_advice_Reviewed_July_2015.pdf

The only exception is if the phone is being used to break the law. Merely having the phone is not breaking the law.

 

[spyinthesky]

I find it amazing what some people class as an emergency.
I certainly think that currently mobile phones should not be permitted during school hours.
As for deleting Apps which seems dodgy, it doesn’t take 30 seconds to reload them.
I am sure many would feel more aggrieved if their child were to be expelled for persistent breaches of school rules.

 

[dakta]

" it doesn’t take 30 seconds to reload them"

Which is moot because it'd be stupidly insane person who created a situation where their pupil had to, no high ground puts a teacher above the law

 

[WizCastro197]

In this current age, Mobile Phones have now become rather essential for most pupils, whether it is just a quick text to telll their parents they are okay and or on their way back from school to using it in an emergency it is useful. My Brothers school as outlined by others has a 'Not Seen, Not Heard' rule, though apparently not very well enforced. Children can take a phone into school but it must be switched off and in a bag.


The deletion of apps and other downloaded content is rather outrageous considering it is the pupil's phone therefore it is up to them what they want to do as long as the parent and or guardian has some sort of awareness about what they do online.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Oct 2022 ==

It’s not a legal requirement to send your child to a school.

Granted but socially it is obviously seen as the worst thing you can do to your child and their future.

 

[Phil56]

When my son started secondary school, they allowed phones to be carried but were VERY strict that they couldn't be turned on during lessons. Teachers were very hot on confiscating the phone if seen or heard being used, to be collected from the office at the end of the day. Multiple confiscations led to the phone only being handed over to a parent or guardian!

Unfortunately, over the 7 years he was there, the school introduced online homework apps, a school VLE, etc., and some teachers started encouraging students to video science experiments or take screen shots of the board, so it became normalised to use phones around the school.

So by the time he left, virtually all pupils would be using their phones during the school day. I don't think the management/governors realised that if they bring in apps etc then the kids had to use phones to access them!

 

[birchesgreen]

Unfortunately, over the 7 years he was there, the school introduced online homework apps, a school VLE, etc., and some teachers started encouraging students to video science experiments or take screen shots of the board, so it became normalised to use phones around the school.

Why unfortunate? Its actually pretty relevant stuff for the world of work

 

[Phil56]

Why unfortunate? Its actually pretty relevant stuff for the world of work

Unfortunate in the fact that on the one hand the rules said they shouldn't be used, but in reality, the teachers/school encouraged their use. That kind of mixed messages doesn't help them enforce the rules so pupils didn't know where they stood, when some teachers allowed/encouraged phone use but others maintained the strict rules of confiscation!

 

[BenS123]

Personally, phones can be great learning tools but they need strict rules to enforce their use when not being used as a learning tool. An approach that I know is phones CANNOT be used inside without the express permission of a staff member, but be can used outside before/after school and at breaktimes and lunchtimes.

When outside the school buildings they cannot be used for photography of other students/staff under ANY circumstances.

Edit: If these rules weren't followed the school would take the phone until the end of the day and send home a letter. Any further incidents would simply lead to "further action such as confiscating the phone for more than 1 day"

 

[Cloud Strife]

About banning phones during breaks: it should be pointed out that the way we communicate in general is changing. It's very artificial to force children into communicating orally when the workplace makes heavy use of messaging apps. I no longer work in teaching, but in general, we have a company rule to keep informal discussions on Slack so that there's a paper trail.

In fact, in recent years, we've started to see that apps are a good way for students to ask questions to teachers. A friend's school has a 'ask the teacher' system using phones in the classroom: students can message the teacher directly with questions about the class, and the teacher can answer them without drawing attention to the individual student. The students can also notify the teacher that they have problems, or that they find the material to be too easy.

It's quite a clever system: the app works on the basis of being active. The teacher can see which users are logged in, so if someone isn't listed as being logged in and yet they're playing with their phone, then it's obvious that they're just messing about.

Unfortunate in the fact that on the one hand the rules said they shouldn't be used, but in reality, the teachers/school encouraged their use. That kind of mixed messages doesn't help them enforce the rules so pupils didn't know where they stood, when some teachers allowed/encouraged phone use but others maintained the strict rules of confiscation!

I find it very unfortunate that schools simply don't understand the value of phones. They seem to focus on a minor amount of wrongdoing, rather than the benefits that they can bring to the school as a whole. A student that doesn't understand something in the lesson can look up additional material on the subject without interrupting the class, for instance.

But it goes back to the issues of school governance. Many rules are not for students, but for the views of the management and governors that implemented them.

 

[AngusH]

Reading this one thought that occurs about mobile phone bans in schools.
I suspect there is assumption (stated or not) that public phone boxes are available and can be used by a student if needed.

In many cases neither is true, there may be no public phone box and the student may not have the cash to use it.

The number of pay phones has declined very substantially over the last few years.

 

[Enthusiast]

Even on the premises seems dubious legally but off the premises too, how about nope.

It’s certainly not dubious on the premises and, although I haven’t looked in any detail, I doubt it is forbidden outside the school either:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1091132/Searching__Screening_and_Confiscation_guidance_July_2022.pdf

“Headteachers and staff they authorise have a statutory power to search a pupil or
their possessions where they have reasonable grounds to suspect that the pupil may
have a prohibited item listed in paragraph 3 or any other item that the school rules
identify as an item which may be searched for”

Whether or not deleting an app is outside the legislation I also have not checked, but it is probably unwise (especially since the sanction is available to confiscate the phone).