school confiscates cell phone, lawyer dad is mad?

[Meech]

[ QUOTE ]
We have to have these "blanket" policies to give ourselves a chance to defend ourselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is more along the lines of what I was thinking.

Covering your ass >>>> individual rights

Too many chiefs, not enough indians.

[ggbman]

I'm saying if you can accomplish the same thing by NOT confiscating property and creating a situation where people can gripe about how the are getting [censored] out of their hard earned money, that is more optimal.

[almostbusto]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Confiscating valuable proprty for extended periods of time should always be a last resort.

[/ QUOTE ]
So maybe after a third offense for the exact same thing? If not then, when's the "last resort?" The fourth offense? I can't imagine telling anything other than a dog the same thing three times without escalating to serious consequences. If I tell you, as a parent, that, "The third time I have to take the cell phone away from your child, I'm keeping it," and then you agree in a signed statement, and then it happens, you better believe I'm going to take that cell phone away.

[/ QUOTE ]

in the cellphone case there is virtually no number of times being caught where it becomes correct to sieze property. this is fundamentally obvious to me because the student isn't threatening other students with physical harm as a result of his use of the phone. if the student gets caught multiple times BEING DISRUPTIVE (ie, simply possessing is in no way worthy of punishment), the administration has a horrible understanding of incentive structures.


as others have said, suspension, makes a lot more sense (for some who is a repear OFFENDER, ie someone who actually disrupts classes on multiple occasions and isn't responsive to requests to stop the behavior). it doesn't amount to trampling on people's rights.

[bowens]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We have to have these "blanket" policies to give ourselves a chance to defend ourselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is more along the lines of what I was thinking.

Covering your ass >>>> individual rights

Too many chiefs, not enough indians.

[/ QUOTE ]

'splain this to a poor public school teacher. What gives students the "right" to carry and use cellphones,mp3 players, etc...? Do schools (and other institutions) not have the responsiblity to set forth rules of conduct? Again, perhaps the argument has become lost in this thread. I am not saying that I agree with the total seziure of property. As I have stated before, if a parent comes to our school, the property is returned. My arugument is that the distraction (phone,mp3 player) does not need to be used during school hours.

Forgive me, but I do not understand your last statement, and what it has to do with the discussion.

[runner4life7]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We have to have these "blanket" policies to give ourselves a chance to defend ourselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is more along the lines of what I was thinking.

Covering your ass >>>> individual rights

Too many chiefs, not enough indians.

[/ QUOTE ]

'splain this to a poor public school teacher. What gives students the "right" to carry and use cellphones,mp3 players, etc...? Do schools (and other institutions) not have the responsiblity to set forth rules of conduct? Again, perhaps the argument has become lost in this thread. I am not saying that I agree with the total seziure of property. As I have stated before, if a parent comes to our school, the property is returned. My arugument is that the distraction (phone,mp3 player) does not need to be used during school hours.

Forgive me, but I do not understand your last statement, and what it has to do with the discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

the right is to carry your cell phone for 30 days OUTSIDE of school.

[daryn]

[ QUOTE ]
Painful thread to read. Sooo much dumbness. It is not difficult to come up with appropriate punishments via detentions, suspensions, and other things that will show up on records that will discourage cell phone use. Confiscating valuable proprty for extended periods of time should always be a last resort. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

i basically agree with you. the only issue here is that the 30 day thing is for the 3rd offense!

i'm curious, what kind of punishment do you guys suggest that will actually curb the use of cellphones in a classroom? i would be all for just throwing the kid out of class at the sight of a cell phone. can we all agree on that one?

[dknightx]

why do people think suspension is better than getting a phone taken away? Yes, let's take the kid OUT of school so he can't learn instead of taking away the distraction! makes perfect sense.

and for a regular, decently smart, high schooler, getting suspended is probably a REWARD compared to losing your cell phone for a month.

[bowens]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We have to have these "blanket" policies to give ourselves a chance to defend ourselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is more along the lines of what I was thinking.

Covering your ass >>>> individual rights

Too many chiefs, not enough indians.

[/ QUOTE ]

'splain this to a poor public school teacher. What gives students the "right" to carry and use cellphones,mp3 players, etc...? Do schools (and other institutions) not have the responsiblity to set forth rules of conduct? Again, perhaps the argument has become lost in this thread. I am not saying that I agree with the total seziure of property. As I have stated before, if a parent comes to our school, the property is returned. My arugument is that the distraction (phone,mp3 player) does not need to be used during school hours.

Forgive me, but I do not understand your last statement, and what it has to do with the discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

the right is to carry your cell phone for 30 days OUTSIDE of school.

[/ QUOTE ]

Try reading the post.

[almostbusto]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We have to have these "blanket" policies to give ourselves a chance to defend ourselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is more along the lines of what I was thinking.

Covering your ass >>>> individual rights

Too many chiefs, not enough indians.

[/ QUOTE ]

'splain this to a poor public school teacher. What gives students the "right" to carry and use cellphones,mp3 players, etc...? Do schools (and other institutions) not have the responsiblity to set forth rules of conduct? Again, perhaps the argument has become lost in this thread. I am not saying that I agree with the total seziure of property. As I have stated before, if a parent comes to our school, the property is returned. My arugument is that the distraction (phone,mp3 player) does not need to be used during school hours.

Forgive me, but I do not understand your last statement, and what it has to do with the discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]
things you need to recognize/think about/respond to so the discussion can be worthwhile.


human beings have a fundamental right to life, liberty, and property. these rights are (arguably) fundamental. making a blanket policy regarding what you can bring to school is incredibly stupid, inefficient, and narrow-minded, as i have explained previously. regardless you could have such policies, however that does not make it right to seize property as a result of breaking those rules, as has been explained before.

seizure of property for a limited amount of time is still seizure of property.

whether or not something is needed is completely irrelevant.


being a teacher is voluntary. your emotional plees are misguided. personally, i have absolutely no sympathy for "poor" teachers.

[almostbusto]

[ QUOTE ]
why do people think suspension is better than getting a phone taken away? Yes, let's take the kid OUT of school so he can't learn instead of taking away the distraction! makes perfect sense.

and for a regular, decently smart, high schooler, getting suspended is probably a REWARD compared to losing your cell phone for a month.

[/ QUOTE ]

you contradict yourself. first you act like its bad to take the kid out of school, yet if you take the kid out of school its a net gain FOR ALL INVOLVED (other than perhaps the parents?).


a net gain by all parties is called a pareto improvement. and is always a favorable movement.