Those no phones in school rules would have absolutely killed me since I always listened to music in-between classes in highschool. Especially freshman world history class since I kinda relied on my phone for the digital textbook since I almost lost my physical copy I got loaned from the bookstore.
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
45 points (100.0% liked)
World News
22057 readers
158 users here now
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
For US News, see the US News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
You can get a cheap mp3 player for literally $5. Digital textbooks can be viewed just fine on a laptop, and schools have hundreds of those.
Smart phones are addiction machines. I'm very glad to see schools banning them. Hopefully, parents take note and realize how harmful they are for child development and start buying them dumb phones instead until they're older (16+).
If we want to know whether or not digital devices should be allowed in schools, why don't we ask the folks in the Silicon Valley. They must know it, and have been telling us for years:
In the heart of Silicon Valley is a nine-classroom school where employees of tech giants Google, Apple and Yahoo send their children. But despite its location in America’s digital centre, there is not an iPad, smartphone or screen in sight.
I'm sorry, but this whole "it's unfair to deny kids the use of personal technology in class" is darkly hilarious to me. I did, in fact, try coding on my TI-85 in English class because I was bored, and it was immediately taken. Why is a phone more acceptable?
It wouldn't have been taken if left in my backpack, so any "well, what about an emergency?" arguments are disingenuous. Put your phone on silent; refrain from using it. This is not phone time. In an emergency, parents calling the school was effective with primitive '90s technology. Surely, they can still do that now.
Excuse me; I need to go yell at a cloud.
It's still a pretty young technology, and it took a few years to understand the impacts of it. We've had them long enough now to be able to see how detrimental they have been to the first generation using them.
What were the protests about?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-ban-protests-outside-schools-1.7170029
from the article:
Eby says the province has counted 18 major disruptions at schools across the province since the start of the school year, and several more before September, including demonstrators banging on classroom windows at a school in Burns Lake.
"[It's] concerning, frightening, alarming and it makes school feel like a not safe place," he said.
Eby said all of the incidents the province has counted involved demonstrators against SOGI 123 — the province's optional educational resource for teaching about sexual orientation and gender identity — but said the law is content-neutral and will be applied equally regardless of the cause.
Prohibits protests. Rember when Eby was a civil rights advocate?
Read the article, this is about preventing adults from protesting on school grounds, not outright banning protesting.
You think transphobic protests should be allowed to stand on school grounds making kids and teachers uncomfortable?
I just read the bill, article is wrong.
edit: I read the bill, its here: https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/bills/billscurrent/5th42nd:gov22-1
It specifically focusses on protests on school grounds, or protests that impede access to schools. Thats it. Where does it mention other kinds of protest?
According to the article, quoted.
Access zones are in place at K-12 schools, and police can arrest or issue tickets to anyone found impeding access, disrupting or interfering with educational activities, or attempting to intimidate an individual within 20 metres (66 feet) of school property,” the province said in a release. Unquoted now...
What part of that is bad? Nothing says people can't protest but no one should interfere with kid's education. Doesn't say people can't protest, but they can't disrupt people who go in there is all which seems fair.
Edit: forgot to say I can be a bit dense and not realize things so if I'm missing a glaring fact or angle of this please do inform me.
You realize colleges and universities are schools, right?
this doesnt prevent students or college protests, its to prevent outsiders protesting on school grounds ("think of the children" conservatives, Qnuts, religious or prolife groups etc etc)
You realize it only mentions k-12 in the article and bill right? So while they are schools I can't find mention of them in this act. Can you please show where it says Universites are included? It does not in the article or the link below.
https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/24018
It's vague and doesn't exclude them.
I can’t imagine learning with a phone vibrating in my pocket.
I teach high school, and it’s so hard to get students to pay attention, even with fun engaging projects. The reality is that these social apps are designed to be addictive, and it’s not a fair contest.