Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 252 posts

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#231

Post by oska »

throwaway50603 wrote: post #167
jb200 wrote: post #62

Former US public HS Math teacher here. The summer before I started teaching I obtained a cell phone signal jammer (from the EU, where they're legally available) and quietly kept it in my desk. I didn't have to confiscate a single phone over the three years before I walked away from the job. Lots of internal chuckles from me brought on by complaints about the signal quality in my room. Granted, this only worked becaus…

The device might be legally obtainable but using it in a way that affects the public (which includes the students) is a serious crime anywhere in EU. I'd guess it's the same in the US.

I'm prompted to remind you of this part of the site's guidelines :

> Throwaway accounts are ok for sensitive information, but please don't create accounts routinely. HN is a community—users should have an identity that others can relate to.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

What's prompted me to remind you is that I've observed this 'throwaway' account commenting quite combatively throughout this thread, which makes me think you've created the account to 'give you the freedom' do just that. Which is against the culture here.

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#232

Post by Ccecil »

A local tech school I work with the teacher does attendance by the phones.

They are to be put in a cabinet in a small bin. If they are not there...the kids do not get listed as being in class. Yes...There are a couple kids with no phone...but sadly only a couple.

I personally think this is the way to handle this. In this class's case it is a machining/manufacturing program it is especially important to have the kids paying attention due to safety issues. They are quite literally running machines that can kill people.

When I was young we were told to not bring anything that was a potential distraction from learning...for me or others. If we did, it was taken away.

This also applied to hair and dress code...not that I am against free expression or anything like that...but the point was that anything that took away from the educational process (again...of you or others) was not allowed. I remember kids being sent home for wearing inappropriate Tshirts or haircuts (dyed mohawk). This was not the 50s...this was the 80s-90s.

Not sure what changed...but in my case it is time as a parent to make an effort. There is no reason for my kids to have phones at school...They don't answer when I need them to anyways.

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#233

Post by [deleted] »

oska wrote: post #231
throwaway50603 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The device might be legally obtainable but using it in a way that affects the public (which includes the students) is a serious crime anywhere in EU. I'd guess it's the same in the US.

I'm prompted to remind you of this part of the site's guidelines : > Throwaway accounts are ok for sensitive information, but please don't create accounts routinely. HN is a community—users should have an identity that others can relate to. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html What's prompted me to remind you is that I've observed this 'throwaway' account commenting quite combatively throughout this threa…

[deleted]

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#234

Post by throwaway50603 »

than3 wrote: post #223
throwaway50603 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm right in the middle of Europe. Why not bring it in? I don't understand why they should behave as if they lived in 19th century. They're people living in 21st century, making full use of new technology - nothing wrong about that. It's bullshit to demand they have to go home to get their phone before they go on with their day after school - not to mention they use the phones before school too. My siblings buy break…

Honestly, this sounds more and more like an association trigger and addiction seeking behavior. You may want to: https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/how-an-addicted-brain-work... Additionally, each one of those apps has nearly full access to all your private information. Accurint goes out of their way to get most data about people. That entire ecosystem lacks adversarial review. Additionally, coercively forcing you to…

Honestly, it sounds like you're just fishing for reasons to ban phones because you personally don't like them and are unable to respect students as people.

Not sure what you mean about the reliability - the apps are more reliable than the previous methods like paper tickets. I don't really want to go back to standing in endless queues.

And no, these apps don't have nearly unlimited access to my private information, not sure where you got that idea. They have access to some of my personal information that I gave them, but they always had that access - the public transport app has the same information that I had to fill out in a paper form when buying a yearly pass, for example. And of course, my email provider has access to my email - news at 11.

Here in EU we have GDPR and DSA, that's enough adversarial review for me.

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#235

Post by throwaway50603 »

r00fus wrote: post #219
throwaway50603 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A phone contains private photos, conversations, has authorized access to email, chat and social media accounts, it's a second authentication factor, it has payment cards, saved passwords, browser history, potentially health data (for example, period tracker and medication notification app) and other data that they might not want anybody else to access, or could even cause them problems if the wrong person saw some of…

Honestly the sovereign student BS needs to stop. If it's disrupting the class the student needs to answer for that. The student isn't being asked to open the phone, just to put it away. If I were a teacher I'd ask the student to power the phone down and put it on my desk face up. Of course, teachers have to do tons that have nothing to do with pure instruction - they're essentially running an org of 20-30+ kids all d…

That's what I said - ask them to put it away, pull them out of the class, but don't touch the phone.

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#236

Post by [deleted] »

oska wrote: post #231
throwaway50603 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The device might be legally obtainable but using it in a way that affects the public (which includes the students) is a serious crime anywhere in EU. I'd guess it's the same in the US.

I'm prompted to remind you of this part of the site's guidelines : > Throwaway accounts are ok for sensitive information, but please don't create accounts routinely. HN is a community—users should have an identity that others can relate to. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html What's prompted me to remind you is that I've observed this 'throwaway' account commenting quite combatively throughout this threa…

[deleted]

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#237

Post by abenga »

Brusco_RF wrote: post #147
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>active shooter situation I feel like active shooters shouldn't be a situation in a school in the first place.

And I feel like cars should never crash and there should be no wars famines or tsunamis. We live in the real world, plan accordingly. Your feelings about it don't matter.

Seeing as it is an ongoing phenomenon in only the one country, the fatalism represented by saying it is "the real world" is disappointing.

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#238

Post by abenga »

vuln wrote: post #143
rtkwe wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it shouldn't be but it's the America we have and it's constitutionally difficult to do anything about it with the current interpretation of our second amendment in the Supreme Court.

> constitutionally difficult to do anything about it with the current interpretation of our second amendment in the Supreme Court. Could you explain what’s “difficult” about “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?” It appears to be pretty clear cut to me. I’m not sure how anyone can conclude the opposite.

The constitution was written by flawed humans, flawed humans who came after them and learnt better should be able to change it.

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#239

Post by albert_e »

Ccecil wrote: post #232

A local tech school I work with the teacher does attendance by the phones. They are to be put in a cabinet in a small bin. If they are not there...the kids do not get listed as being in class. Yes...There are a couple kids with no phone...but sadly only a couple. I personally think this is the way to handle this. In this class's case it is a machining/manufacturing program it is especially important to have the kids…

I have a junk drawer with easily 12-15 old unused phones that I just ignore.

I am sure today's kids can easily get their hands on a junk throwaway phone to use as an "attendance" marker if that is really the rule (while still keeping their actual functional phone with themselves).

Re: Students can’t get off their phones. Schools have had enough

#240

Post by codersfocus »

greedo wrote: post #216
vuln wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SCOTUS held quite a different view of the 2nd Amendment for many many years Which years specifically before the NRA lobbied for the last 30 years? Anything before 1990? Please be specific.

I'm assuming both that you're arguing in good faith, and that your ability to use search engines must be seriously impaired. So here goes: 1875 - US v Cruikshank. Held that states have the ability to regulate firearms independent of the Federal government. 1939 - US v Miller. Held that the "obvious purpose" of the 2nd Amendment was insuring effective state militias. Specifically insisting that only those guns usable…

Reagan was the one who banned guns in California, and the 2 cases you mention seem irrelevant
Post reply on HN