Phone Confiscated in Primary School

[truthseeker]

if the schools policy is for children not to have mobile phones in school and possession of one results in confiscation then getting guards involved is just sending a message to your child that some rules are OK to break - which is totally wrong!!!

What kind of an adult will this child grow into?

I fully back the school for standing by its rules, if the parents dont like the rules they can change schools.

 

[zag]

This is interesting . . .

If the school has a policy that says that mobile phones may not be used during school time and someone breaches that policy then it is reasonable to confiscate the phone so that policy cannot be breached further.

In this circumstance it does not follow that the school can then check content on the phone.

However, for this particular issue (as far as I can determine from the posts) it looks like ths school had reason to believe that that phone was being used to distribute unwanted content. In this circumstance it does follow in my view that the school should investigate the content on the phone, however by not having any witness it effectively tainted any evidence that could have been used if there was to be a disciplinary action.


I wouldn't regard content on a mobile phone as being inherently private data. It's not public, but neither is it purely private and confidential. This doesn't mean that the school can just breeze into a classroom and check everyones phone, but where there is reason to believe that a specific phone is being used to breach policy (distributing unwanted content) I think the school is within its rights to confiscate the phone and examine the content.

Removing the technology element - if somone was distributing hand written sheets containing anti-semitic, racist, sexist or bullying content would the school not be entitled to confiscate someones bag and check the content ? Indeed would we not expect the school to act in this way ? Why would a phone be regarded as different ?

If the school expected this to be a 'minor' issue then they acted correctly in my view. If they expected this to be a serious issue (which it wasn't by the sounds of things) then they should have called a parent as a witness and explained what they were doing and why before examining the content.

z

 

[dtlyn]

If it were my child I'd go up and commend the Principal. No child should have any need for a Mobile phone in the confines of a shool property. If the child cannot keep his phone off and in his/her school bag for fear of it being stolen then I'd find a new school. Teachers have enough work cut out teaching in today's society without the distraction of mobile phones. Merely having it in his hand is good enough for me to warrant a breach of the rules. If you feel so strongly why not just get another for €29 rather than resorting to the Guards, Laywers etc. The message you send out to challenge the School Authority is infinitely more damaging than forking out another €29. Why dont the Parents take responsiblity for not informing their child about the nuscience and distraction mobile phones cause to teaching staff. Next thing we'll hear is a claim for compo for psychological damage suffered by little Johnny from being without his phone for a month. There's absolutely no sympathy from this corner.

Let off enough steam there?

Approach the principal discreetly, discuss your concerns openly, negotiate a compromise that's win/win for both parties e.g. kid gets taught a lesson, a phone becomes available for use.

Surely two mature adults can engage in such an exercise of compromise without threats of Gardaí involvement, legal action, or sweeping righteousness (see above)?

What's with the "assume the worst, hit the jugluar" attiude goin on here?

 

[stir crazy]

It is common for happy-slapping incidents to be recorded using a mobile and then the incident replayed to friends or even unfortunately put online. Sad but true.

Isn't this just the proof we need to hang the bully and have the bully expelled ? Provided we can obtain the evidence, against such evidence there is no possible defense whatsoever.

Sorry Stircrazy but you don't seem to be getting the point. Mobile Phones in a school can be used for a number of othr reasons than the main reason they were intended. Bullying on its own is bad - with a Mobile the Bully can simply assemble all their friends to cause further problems to the party been affected. The Principal and teaches operate the school - they set the rules and if the rules state No Phones, it should mean No phones. I am unable to understand your reasons on this one. Maybe we should have the lunatics running the asylum.

I am not disagreeing with teachers and the principal having authority over what happens inside a school. I understand what you are saying but I completely disagree with the effectiveness of banning phones as a method to deal with bullying. I think it is an overreaction which only makes moderate and well behaved kids distrust, resent and not see the point of authority. Kids wont easily speak truth to power when power is used heavy handedly but thats how they will view it.
The whole phones issue is a distraction from the real issues which are identifying and dealing with bullying itself. Bullies are clever. Kids are clever . They will just hide their tiny phones and use them when teacher isnt looking. Especially if up to no good, which does not apply to most kids.

The most serious bullying will occur outside of school on the walk or way home far away from the supervision of the school yard. Isnt' this the time when the bully is free to use a phone outside of the limitations of school rules ? I dont see how banning phones within school grounds will make a blind bit of difference in these situations . As for using phones to gather friends around for a bulying incident, the school yard is such a small place where everyone usually knows everyone else that I doubt long distance communication is necessary at all. If bullies have partners in crime they will do evil and hang around with each other whether they have phones or not.

 

[so-crates]

Stircrazy, Luddites not only rejected technology they actively attacked it, dismantling and sabotaging machines and burning factories. In this case we are discussing the control of mobile phones in a primary school environment, slightly less drastic I think!

I agree mobile phones do not cause bullying and removing them doesn't stop it but what they do is provide a forum within the school to which people not party to the "conversation", say for example the adults, have NO access and can exercise control only by limiting access to that forum. Limiting the usage of phones in schools is probably never a policy in isolation but is part of a set of policies relating to norms of behaviour, each of them have arisen in response to a problem or an identified need and the use of phones is no different. It presented an opportunity for troublemakers and for messing and for distraction (and not matter how good children are, it takes a very unlikely child to not test the rules and not engage in horseplay to some degree). As I said, blocking signals is not an option so the phones cannot be reasonably disabled within the school property at the behest of the school. It is true that it is possible to sneak in a phone but it is easier to define the transgression as the evidence is far more solid that a phone was present than that a phone was on. What I am saying is that I understand what you mean, the phone isn't the issue, the behaviour is. But what I am getting at is that the transgression is better defined and easier to police and the solution is more effective if the rule is "No mobile phones are allowed in School". A rule that cannot be enforced is useless or worse.

To address your other points. The child can be bullied out of school on the phone yes but at that point it is the duty of the parent to monitor what is happening on the child's phone, same as if they are being bullied on their Bebo page or similar forum. Sorry if it seems a cop-out but it is nonetheless true.

As for the child being bullied on the way home from school and being "rescued" by being able to use their mobile phone to call someone. How quickly do you think they could call for aid and more importantly how quickly that aid will come? How quickly would the phone be taken from the child? The school ban won't stop bullying but it may help ameliorate the problem, every opportunity for bullying thwarted is one less incident.

The ban on phones is no more onerous than one on swearing, wearing too much jewellery, wearing a uniform or any one of several dictats we have all been faced with in school. We all have stories of "heavy-handed" application of the rules, and while we all moaned about them, laughed about them, rebelled against them, argued with adults over them, made representations to adults about them; I would disagree with you, they didn't make us distrustful or resentful. Today's rules won't make today's moderate and well-behaved schoolchildren distrustful or resentful either. Application of a rule is not being heavy-handed. Like I said, phones aren't a special exception, nor are rules against them.

One last thing... evidence means one thing for certain, the incident has occurred. Prevention is always better. Trite but true.