Phone Taken in School

Lotsafish

Funnily enough my biggest problem with that one is the below:

Any loss of the above is borne by the owner of the property and not by college authorities

So essentially: 'If we confiscate your phone and loose it, its not our fault but yours'.

???????

robinph

Well it wouldn't run the risk of them loosing it if they are not given cause to confiscate it.

amdublin

LB6 wrote: »

From the consent form my daughter just signed to register for secondary school in september.

"Mobile Phones. Walkmans, Discmans,Mpeg Players or such like, are prohibited in classrooms, study halls and during formal college activities. Where a mobile phone etc. is discovered during a class period, the instrument will be confiscated immediately. Mobile phones etc. are only allowed to be accessed at the end of the school day. Otherwise they are to be locked into a student's locker and powered off. Non-compliance willr esult in confiscation and a fine of €26 will be imposed to ensure return before the end of the Half Term/full Term, whichever is sooner. Furthermore, if Mobile Phones are used in a negative manner to intimidate or bully students or others, the management of the college reserves the right to impose a serious sanction. Any loss of the above is borne by the owner of the property and not by college authorities".

What ye think of that one?

Seems 100% clear to me: You use it, you lose it

I am still laughing to myself thinking about the OP "storming" the school over a mobile phone being confiscated - which would not be confiscated if the child did not use it during school hours.

amdublin

Lotsafish wrote: »

So essentially: 'If we confiscate your phone and loose it, its not our fault but yours'.

Essentially yes.

So essentially, don't break the rules by using it and there is no risk of anything happening to it.

BostonB

The bigger risk is from someone mis-using their phone. So yeah, get rid of them all. No one needed them in the past.

tomhappens

Some replies in this discussion are border line unbelievable.

Schools have rules and they should be obeyed by the pupils and parents. It is that simple.

IMO the punishment should not suit the "crime" but should be a deterrent from the "crime". Obviously I don't think of this as a "crime" but I am sure people know what I mean. I think that should be the way in general though

Perhaps the choice of losing the phone or a weeks suspension with use of the phone would be a better scenario.

Del2005

tomhappens wrote: »

Perhaps the choice of losing the phone or a weeks suspension with use of the phone would be a better scenario.

Free holidays, a lot more phones will be discovered if you could get the week off.

yuloni

This post has been deleted.

gagiteebo

Condi wrote: »

I can't see myself settling into a teaching job...to monotonous. I think I would try to do things differently anyways if I did.

Teaching is too monotonous? I've never had a dull day teaching in my entire career (still in the early years ) One of the reasons I got into it actually.

No it's not for everyone so maybe you aren't suited to the role and that's cool, you're meant to do something else with your life but don't tar all teachers with the same brush just because you've had bad experiences with a few. There are a lot of teachers who work hard and genuinely care about the students and love their jobs so don't disrespect those of us who fit that.

Best of luck.

BostonB

Condi wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Theres usually a different pin you can set for the phone itself independent of sims.

Then some phones have a remote lock where you can send them a SMS to lock them. Some also can encrypt themselves and any memory card in them.

Seperate to that, I think you could request the head master that as policy all phones confiscated be turned off in the presence of the pupil, (thus endabling the phone lock) so that data can't be read. As they have no rights to read your data without your permission.

hamlet1

Khannie wrote: »

Fair enough.



Agree 100%. If I have a problem with a rule I'd go to the school in advance of it being broken though and suggest that they implement a different punishment; Detention for example.

If I had a *really* big problem with a rule, I'd seriously consider moving my child to a different school.

no wonder the world is full of arrogant brats.let them take their punishment for breaking rules.are you going to bail out your "child" if they get into trouble when they get a job?will you all cop on.

paddyandy

Needing to resume classes after lunch imagine trying to get kids to be good and hand back their phones.I dont even like to think about it.

gagiteebo

hamlet1 wrote: »

no wonder the world is full of arrogant brats.let them take their punishment for breaking rules.are you going to bail out your "child" if they get into trouble when they get a job?will you all cop on.

Completely agree

I teach in a fee paying school and most of the kids are great but a good few are the most arrogant morons you'll ever meet. Yes, I said morons. I have seen things happen that completely turn my stomach. Kids who are so rude and badly behaved etc but get away with everything because Mammy and Daddy ring in saying they'll pull them out of school if 'little Johnny' isn't taken off detention for telling his teacher to fcuk off.....the 'management' bow to the parents, they're afraid of them and the kids know this so they get away with everything! I hate to imagine what they'll be like in college :cool:

I've usually taught in VEC schools, went to a comprehensive myself, and give me the kids there anyday. No sense of entitlement or self-importance. At a parent teacher meeting one parent said that they weren't sending their child to a fee paying school just so they would become a teacher :rolleyes: Says it all really.

Funny thing is the results here are worse than in a lot of places because money doesn't buy brains. They always get on great though 'cos the parents have contacts. :rolleyes:

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Oryx wrote: »

Mobile phones are only commonplace in the last 15 years. We all survived school without them. If a child needs you, you will be contacted. God be with the days when we didnt even have a house phone, and I still survived, uncontactable, at school.

Kids do not need mobile phones, at all. They have them as a toy, a convenience, and reassurance to parents. But kids can safely last a day in school without one, and I would back any school with rules as outlined above, where phones are banned and confiscated if the rule is broken.

The arguement that "back then" it was differant, holds absolutely no weight at all. As the times change, so do attitudes and behaviours. You may have survived perfectly fine 15 years ago without todays technology, but this isn't 15 years ago, this is now. Comparing with how you dealt with a problem 15 years ago to how you would do it now is not the best of ideas.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

LB6 wrote: »

From the consent form my daughter just signed to register for secondary school in september.

"Mobile Phones. Walkmans, Discmans,Mpeg Players or such like, are prohibited in classrooms, study halls and during formal college activities. Where a mobile phone etc. is discovered during a class period, the instrument will be confiscated immediately. Mobile phones etc. are only allowed to be accessed at the end of the school day. Otherwise they are to be locked into a student's locker and powered off. Non-compliance willr esult in confiscation and a fine of €26 will be imposed to ensure return before the end of the Half Term/full Term, whichever is sooner. Furthermore, if Mobile Phones are used in a negative manner to intimidate or bully students or others, the management of the college reserves the right to impose a serious sanction. Any loss of the above is borne by the owner of the property and not by college authorities".

What ye think of that one?

It's fine. The rule is set out in writing before she goes to that school. Just take it in and if she wants to go to that school then she should take note of the school rules. Where does the €26 come from? Such an odd number.

I can't see the problem with audio devices or phones once they are not used during class, but then again, I am not a principle and I don't own a school

LB6

No idea where the €26 came from - but my other two kids that went there also had the same rule applied to them. Tough luck if they got caught with their phone - only happened once. I wasn't forking over whatever it cost at the time for a phone, they did without until they earned the cost of retrieving the phone back. Lesson learned.

Ludo

Kennedi Important Khaki wrote: »

The arguement that "back then" it was differant, holds absolutely no weight at all. As the times change, so do attitudes and behaviours. You may have survived perfectly fine 15 years ago without todays technology, but this isn't 15 years ago, this is now. Comparing with how you dealt with a problem 15 years ago to how you would do it now is not the best of ideas.

Couldn't agree more. I don't agree with phones during school hours BUT saying we all survived without them in school and therefore so should todays kids is silly.

I survived sleeping on my belly as a baby...does that mean it is still ideal in this day and age when we know better? No...times change.

Who knows how many lives/emergencies could have been avoided years ago if we all had phones then. Extreme examples I know, but using them just to show how futile the point is that some posters are making.

I see no problem with any kid having a phone as long as it is used properly and they are taught where and when it is appropriate to use it.

gaeilgegrinds1

No phone policy means that. I used not completely agree as a sibling of someone who had phones been the norm when we were kids would have needed one for medical reasons. However, now as a teacher I see why. Privacy reasons. Phones are used for terrible things. Also, stunts their social skills if used during lunch and will still often go off. The idea behind such policies are often to discourage them being brought to the school at all, they can't get stolen then afterall. However, student must have access to a phone in emergency situations. So for the diabetes issue the child is safe and parent can leave a message with the school which will be delivered to the student then. Hope that helps, thanks

robinph

gaeilgegrinds1 wrote: »

So for the diabetes issue the child is safe and parent can leave a message with the school which will be delivered to the student then. Hope that helps, thanks

When I've an "emergency" with my diabetes, being able to operate a phone is incredibly unlikely. Basic motor functions of being able to stand up, or open a chocolate bar are a big issue, and trying to convince people that I'm not drunk is actually harder than when I really am drunk.

gaeilgegrinds1

We have a buddy system, kids are paired up. Also half the teachers are up to date in first aid, not all parents are so I'd say they're as safe with us as at home oftentimes. Only my opinion of course. I really don't see why a phone is necessary. And yes I know a lot about diabetes, a phone is not going to make a major difference whether it's the one in the classroom or in their pocket they use. By the time the one in their pocket is switched on they would have used the one in the classroom in my opinion.

TheColl

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Most schools have a policy that parents and students sign up to when they enter the school. They also have sanctions in that policy if rules are broken. If you sign the policy you are agreeing to those rules and sanctions.

This is true, well said. Parents/children shouldn't be surprised when a rule is enforced if they have taken the time to read all school policies before enrolment.

themysteriouson

Thread is so long took me ages to read it!!

Anyway I agree that children should not be able to use mobile phones in school but there are special circumstances where a child will need to have one with them for emergencies for example my younger brother is in secondary school and has epilepsy.

If for example he was to have a bad seizure and they couldnt contact my mother or father (they both work full time and might not always have a phone on hand) my brothers mobile would be essential for them to get an alternative contact such as myself or another family member. Luckily his school are quite understanding and allow him to bring it to school as long as he doesnt use it in class etc. Personally I think that is a reasonable allowance on the schools behalf.

Sorry just on the post before this one. Schools also need a certain amount of flexibility as when my mother sent him to that school she agreed to the no phone policy but at the time she didnt know he had that particular illness so if the school was to turn around and say to her now " well you agreed to the no phone rule" I would think that would be a bit unreasonable on their behalf.

robinph

Would it not be simpler to just have a third, or fourth, contact number given to the school instead of expecting someone to read through the contacts in a phone and decode who might be the next most appropriate person to call?

ocokev

School is also about learning life skills.
Should we expect that when sitting at a traffic light that we can use our mobile phones cos we are not driving.
If the schools has a policy then it should be respected by both the parent and the child.

Jo King

Schools are, supposedly, there to educate children. Where does confiscating property and extortion of money from children appear in into the syllabus?
Schools which are funded by the dept of education should follow the rules set out by the dept. Where do they authorise confiscation of property and extortion of money? It is the same with schools insisting on uniforms. It is outrageous that schools insist on a uniform despite there being no official reason for one.

robinph

Not sure how your thinking that the fining of students who break the schools rules is the same as extortion.

Would you not consider learning how to follow rules and behave in civil society as a worth while lesson to be taught at schools?

gagiteebo

Jo King wrote: »

Schools are, supposedly, there to educate children. Where does confiscating property and extortion of money from children appear in into the syllabus?
Schools which are funded by the dept of education should follow the rules set out by the dept. Where do they authorise confiscation of property and extortion of money? It is the same with schools insisting on uniforms. It is outrageous that schools insist on a uniform despite there being no official reason for one.

Are you for real? Extortion of money? Bit of an overreaction there imo. Most students have no problem wearing a uniform either in my experience. When they all wear a uniform they all wear the same clothes, there's none of the usual 'who's wearing the best labels' etc. Everyone is equal which is a good thing.

hitlersson666

We lose ours for a month??? Consider yourselves lucky

Del2005

Jo King wrote: »

Schools are, supposedly, there to educate children. Where does confiscating property and extortion of money from children appear in into the syllabus?
Schools which are funded by the dept of education should follow the rules set out by the dept. Where do they authorise confiscation of property and extortion of money? It is the same with schools insisting on uniforms. It is outrageous that schools insist on a uniform despite there being no official reason for one.

If you break the rules in life you get fined or worst. Much better to learn at school that rules are there for a reason. The vast majority I disagree with, but I know I can't do anything about them as they are the law. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. You read and signed the school's rule book so you've no excuse.

dolliemix

Jo King wrote: »

Schools are, supposedly, there to educate children. Where does confiscating property and extortion of money from children appear in into the syllabus?
Schools which are funded by the dept of education should follow the rules set out by the dept. Where do they authorise confiscation of property and extortion of money? It is the same with schools insisting on uniforms. It is outrageous that schools insist on a uniform despite there being no official reason for one.

Lol! So, if it's not on the syllabus it shouldn't be taught or dealt with. I can't imagine what schools would become if that was the case.....I'd be surprised if this simplistic view was posted by somebody who has any idea what it's like to manage a school from day to day.

There has to be some regard for others around you. It would be impossible to cover the 'syllabus' in the first place, if Johhny and Mary were running out taking phone calls or texting whoever during class time.

Not to mention, the high incidence of bullying using mobile phones in schools. I've already referred to a case I came across in this post.

dolliemix wrote: »

:rolleyes: .....I can see where this is going.....as with almost everything else in this society nowadays people won't take responsibility for their own actions and want to blame everyone else if something goes wrong for them.

If your phone gets confiscated you've obviously breached school rules that you and your parents have signed up to in the first place. So, if you don't have your phone it's YOUR fault!

If you get mugged or whatever it's bad luck but it's by no means the school's fault!!!

If your phone gets confiscated you could ask the principal could you ring your mother to let her know that you disobeyed school rules and you've no phone as a result . If there is a chance of you being mugged on the way home mummy could come and collect you.

However - this would be in an ideal world. A lot of parents these days fail to see the whole picture and do end up 'storming' down to the school threatening teachers and management with the possible awful HYPOTHETICAL scenarios that their children could be in, without assuming responsibility themselves for THEIR children's behaviour!

I' m a teacher and I've seen every side of the mobile phone argument. I've seen the parents come in and getting overly emotional and abusive about it. I've seen the kids whose phones have gone off by accident because they genuinely forgot to put them in their lockers. (I feel awful for them!) I've seen the kids quickly take the sim cards out of their phones before handing them over! I've seen the parents buying a second phone for their children when the original has been confiscated.

But the most upsetting incident of all that I witnessed was a group of students in my school videoing a disabled student when she was unaware that this was happening. It turned out that the intention was to put the video up on Bebo for a laugh.

After I saw that incident, my instinct will always be to protect that child or those children from that sort of bullying, whatever it takes.

And it was by chance that I discovered these children doing that, so God knows what else goes on.

For that reason I have no problem confiscating phones. We allowed phones at lunch time up until that incident. It's important that the message about bullying and particularly such an invasive form of bullying, is heard and prevented as much as possible.

We obviously can't stop bullying. But even little measures might make some of our students feel more comfortable and safe coming into school each day.

Schools don't work within the boundries of the 'syllabus'. Who do you think supervises the school plays, debating, matches, fundraising etc? These are not included on syllabus, yet what would the experience of school be like without them on offer.

I, for one, would hate my child to go to a school, that was concerned only with the 'syllabus'. Schools aren't run this way. It's naive to suggest this as a reason as to why phones shouldn't be conviscated.