French schoolchildren will have to leave their smartphones switched off or at home as the new academic year begins in September, after lawmakers voted for a ban on Monday.
The ban on smartphones, tablets and other connected devices, which will apply to pupils up to the age of 14-15, fulfils[sic] a campaign promise by centrist President Emmanuel Macron, while being derided as "cosmetic" by the opposition.
MPs of Macron's centrist LREM party and its allies gave final approval to the bill, while lawmakers on the left and right abstained from the vote, calling the law a "publicity stunt" that would change nothing.
Under the new law, schools may make exceptions for "pedagogical use", extra-curricular activities, or for disabled pupils.
Secondary schools for their part can decide individually whether to impose a partial or total ban on connected devices.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by jmorris on Wednesday August 01 2018, @11:44PM (12 children)
All the 'smart' people, the ones who ruined the world, are laughing. In a couple of years we will see whether results improve or not. There probably isn't even a theory where education is impaired by a lack of access to Instagram and worse. So what is the downside to running this experiment? Kids having phones in school is less than twenty years old as a thing, smartphones less than a decade yet to listen to morons kids won't be able to live a meaningful existence without regular hits from the LoJack in their pocket. It will be just fine.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:47AM (11 children)
I'm not sure it will "be just fine." I mean, it will be something. I don't think the human race is headed for extinction or civilization is going to end because of smartphones.
But I look at behavior of ADULTS now, and it's weird. Yes, things like telegraphs and telephones and radio and television and whatever changed socialization patterns, but smartphones have fundamentally changed human social dynamics on a much more continuous and basic level.
I've been out to dinner with people in their 40s who mostly just sit around and play on Facebook and whatever random stuff for mostly of their dinner. Why bother "having dinner WITH" someone else if you're not going to bother communicating with the people you're with?
I'm not saying it's necessarily all bad. This isn't a doom and gloom post. But smartphones are that addictive and disruptive even during time when you're actively supposed to be engaging socially with others for pleasure. It has a huge effect on a learning environment.
I've been teaching at both the secondary and tertiary levels for the past couple decades, and I've really noticed changes. Not just "I'm old, get off my lawn!" kind of opinions (from me and my colleagues at a number of institutions) -- technology in classrooms can be used for good, but random disruptions all the time are... well, disruptive. Surprise! Multitasking by humans has basically shown to be a myth in multiple studies. You get distracted and you lose focus on the task at hand. You do that enough, and learning suffers.
Now, I haven't looked into the details of this policy or its implications, so I don't know whether it's a good idea. But the idea that unguided smartphone use in a learning environment can't have negative consequences... Sorry, but my anecdotal evidence (and that from lots of colleagues who actually spend time in classrooms) says they have already been showing effects.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 02 2018, @02:15AM (4 children)
So - if a young woman attempts to lose her virginity, but fails to tweet about it - is she still a virgin?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @02:29AM
You are the most Amurrican zen philosopher.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:52PM (2 children)
Was the attempt successful? The answer to that question would seem to correlate with your question.
What doesn't kill me makes me weaker for next time.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 02 2018, @02:19PM (1 child)
You might think so, but I have this theory. Some other woman is impregnated the night before she departs on a flight into destiny. The plane crash lands on some desert island, and she is the sole survivor of the crash. She is stranded there for years - maybe even decades. Yes - OF COURSE she got pregnant the night before the flight. But, with no other women to talk to, the pregnancy cannot advance. She's just stuck with this fertilized egg, waiting for the opportunity to talk it into existence as an embryo, and then a baby. Finally, she is rescued, and she is given the opportunity to phone home to Mama, Big Sister, Little Sister, Cousin Mae, etc. Then, it's like WHAM!!! That little egg finally develops in the space of several seconds, she delivers the baby, and that baby grows right before her eyes into a teenaged kid. Just, WHAM!!
I strongly suspect that a human female who is unable to communicate her first sexual encounter to another human female may still be a virgin. At least until the communication takes place.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @02:32PM
I just can't help myself... I tried but am compelled to advance the notion that you just described the theory of Schrodinger's Cat. Only use a different term for the feline.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:46PM (4 children)
Do they really permit kids to sit there and play on their phones?
Yeah I know it was decades ago but we were not allowed to play DnD during class lectures, or pass notes, pr even play tic tac toe, for example. Have teachers simply given up on classroom discipline entirely or just WRT phone use?
I would theorize if they've given up on discipline, the phone thing is a mere symptom and not much will improve by playing games banning phones.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Thursday August 02 2018, @04:04PM (1 child)
Please note, a lot of educators are liberals. As such, it's all about how little Johnny or little Suzie is Feeling. Not about how letting a child go undisciplined will end up making them an entitled little brat. Who may or may not learn their lesson in the long run. Yes, behavior modification works with ignoring the bad deeds and rewarding them for their good deeds. That doesn't help raise someone who cares about others. The kind of "discipline" that is popular now, will help raise someone who is selfish. Someone who cares about others won't steal, murder, abuse, or be intentionally harmful to others. Someone who is selfish, may or may not be predisposed to stealing, murdering, abusing, or harming others to get what they want. Product of current discipline methods Exhibit A: Martin Shkreli.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @04:55PM
My my you really don't know your opposition. By your logic all you conservative types only teach creationism and your spiritual leaders keep sodomizing kids. I'll take your liberal straw man over those dummies any day.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Thursday August 02 2018, @08:58PM (1 child)
Well, I did say that I've taught in both secondary and tertiary (i.e., college/university) environments. I've sometimes taught in lecture halls with well over a hundred students. It's not really possible to police them for all electronic device usage unless you outright ban them and have an army of teaching assistants to enforce it.
(Sidenote: The culture around these devices in college environments seems to have changed radically just in the past 2-4 years. I've heard this from multiple people at multiple institutions, who have had to introduce clauses in their syllabuses banning use of electronic devices in class, when before it simply wasn't usually a problem. Laptops have obviously been around and often used by students in classes for a couple decades now, but the distraction factor of smartphones seems to be getting worse over time.)
As for secondary school, it's often a problem of constant vigilance. Kids often have phones in their pockets and sneak looks at them. Sure, they did the same with notes or tic-tac-toe, but the difference is that the phone is constantly updating and showing new content on its screen -- unlike the notes and tic-tac-toe which only show something new if another student interacts with a piece of paper... which tends to be more noticeable in class. Sneaking a look at a phone periodically isn't often as noticeable.
I'm not saying it's an entirely different problem, but given the ubiquity of electronic devices, it's an issue.
Again, I haven't looked into the details of this policy or how it will be implemented. But it may also be done for simple consistency's sake. I've taught at schools where even before smartphones existed, school policy said cell phones were never to be outside of bags (e.g., backpacks) when in a classroom or could risk confiscation. But if you don't have a policy like that across the board, what you tend to see are teachers who are more or less lenient, and student's behavior then shifts as they try to get away with things even in classes where the teacher maintains more discipline.
I personally don't think this is the sort of thing that should have a national government action policy, but is it potentially useful to have a consistent policy on where and when smartphones are allowed and how they are (or are not) allowed to be used? I'd say yes.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Thursday August 02 2018, @09:00PM
(To clarify the last sentence, I meant consistent across a school or something... rather than dictated by government.)
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Thursday August 02 2018, @09:34PM
Likely because they are too busy on their "smart" phones to be bothered preparing a meal themselves.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by bob_super on Wednesday August 01 2018, @11:56PM (9 children)
- I need a phone
- You're in Middle school, you don't need a phone
- My friends have phones
- Good for them. You're still not getting one
- What if I need to call you?
- Ask your friends for their phone
- What if it's an emergency?
- Ask an adult in the school, then ask your friends for a phone
- What about $after_school activity ?
- Ask the adult in the room
- How about when I'm going there, or coming back?
- With your mom, or your friend and her mom or dad, the bus driver, or the shop next to the bus stop ?
- But I want a phone!
- Let's go over the concept of "no", once again
- ...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @12:57AM (3 children)
They're so desperate to have those proprietary, spying shiny goodies. Good little slaves.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:12AM (2 children)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:16AM
And miss a learning opportunity ?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:20AM
Then they should create phones which aren't loaded with proprietary software and spying. I refuse to support such things with my money.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:49PM (3 children)
Ugh its like arguing with management... just tell them what it'll cost and let them decide.
OK that phone will cost you mowing the lawn seventy times because phones have exploded in price in recent years, and then shoveling the driveway approximately twice a week to pay the monthly bill, every single month, or it gets disconnected. Not interested anymore? OK whatevs now go do your homework.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @04:58PM
We have found the topic where VLM has useful advice! Huzzah, come celebrate and be merry!
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday August 02 2018, @05:30PM (1 child)
How does doing mandatory chores translate into a real-life cost ? 70 times zero is ...
(not even going into the fact I haven't mowed my lawn 70 times over the last 5 years)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 05 2018, @11:05PM
When there is, as here, a choice. If you choose a path which has mandatory chores that aren't on other paths, then those chores are a cost of the path. If one looks at this particular scenario, it is educational in so many ways. First, it illustrates the exclusive power of the parent. No one else can legally buy the phone for the kid. Thus the parent can demand unusually high costs (such as mucho mandatory chores).
Second, the costs aren't particularly extreme in this case. For example, I spend almost $50 a month on cell phone service. Here, we're probably speaking of no more than 10 hours a month (usually much less) unless VLM has a mighty lawn or rainforest climate.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Thursday August 02 2018, @04:28PM
Please note, the kid doesn't need a smartphone, but some form of contact would be a good idea.
A quick look on the internet provided different options. "Just a Phone" kind of devices marketed for kids or seniors. (Some have tiny games, but not anywhere near a "smartphone" kind of thing.)
Example of a phone that would seem appropriate for school kids:
https://www.amazon.com/Firefly-96-0001-039-Mobile-glowPhone-Pink/dp/B000W9R7CS [amazon.com]
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by archfeld on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:34AM (1 child)
I use a 'dumb phone' just one step above a flip phone, in that I can text but I don't connect to the net or have apps on it. Does that mean I could leave it on ? I can totally understand the point of not having google or the net to cheat from during class but I still like the idea of having the phone available for emergency use. Having a smart phone during a test is like having the test be open book.
For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
(Score: 2, Disagree) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday August 02 2018, @06:56AM
Not in class, no. You don't need the distraction, your classmates don't need the distraction and the teacher doesn't need the distraction. If you NEED to make or receive phone calls in class you probably shouldn't be attending school today.
Texting can be as compromising as the net. Test time? Surrender your phone first or you don't sit.
The school is well enough organised to relay any emergency messages to you. If the emergency is in class the phone can wait until after you've been evacuated.
It is. It's not a problem if the test has been designed as an open book exam. It is a problem if it distracts anybody (including you) in the class.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @02:36AM (2 children)
Law at 10am.
Surrender at 2pm
News at 6pm
Someone takes perverse pleasure deploying "[sic]" in an article likely written by a 2nd language English person. How many 1st language English speakers can spell "fulfill" correctly, first time? Fulfil, fullfill, fullfil fulfill... aaargh!
Maybe we should "[sic]" it every time a USAian F's up using 'effect' / 'affect', 'insure' / 'ensure', 'their' / 'there' / 'they're' and 'brake' / 'brake'.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @07:32AM
Why? The purpose of [sic] is for people not to send letters to the editors of newspaper complaining. Here people can just follow the hyperlink to the source. Moreover, comments are welcomed here regardless of quality since it lets bored regulars have something to make fun off. So, complain away.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @10:36AM
None so far.
(1st language American speakers are fine.)
(Score: 2) by corey on Thursday August 02 2018, @03:16AM (20 children)
Now hopefully more nations (particularly Australia) will follow suit.
I'm not entirely sure why I think this is a great idea, but I don't see how smartphones in school can be any good for children. Maybe less cyber-bullying? Either way, less screen time is good for their eyes and brains.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 02 2018, @04:51AM (13 children)
In the first case, the administrators discipline them, say by taking away their parking privileges with trespassing and towing next, if the student insists on continuing to break the rules. But in the second case, how does one punish such rule breaking? Either there is no punishment (and it reverts to the schools doing what they were going to do anyway - I gather the French law is just an example of that) and the law is merely theater, or there is a punishment and we have the spectacle of students receiving heavy handed punishments for illegal parking. The State doesn't make a good school principal and it is foolish to use its power to enforce minor school rules and such.
Finally, consider this quote [telegraph.co.uk]:
Why are students going to respect a bunch of legislative busy bodies and their laws when they do stupid stuff like this? At least, it's educational. But what is the lesson!?
(Score: 3, Informative) by bob_super on Thursday August 02 2018, @06:06AM (10 children)
The lesson is "you can't argue with me, because I have the law on my side, so shut the fuck up you little immature prick, and you'll get your phone back when your parents go ask the principal for it. If they're more polite than you, maybe there won't be a fine"
You would not believe the abuse some teachers and principals get, from students and/or their parents, when they dare confiscate the sacrosanct digital pacifier. Especially women niddle-school teachers in shitty neighbourhoods.
(Score: 2) by Dr Spin on Thursday August 02 2018, @08:21AM
The lesson not here is "Paris, 1968".
those that are condemned by history ...
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 02 2018, @11:54AM (8 children)
Harassment, threats, etc are already illegal. And we already can see how this power could be abused in your very first line.
Think about it.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday August 02 2018, @04:30PM (7 children)
> > you can't argue with me, because I have the law on my side
> Think about it.
Don't see your point. You can't argue with a cop that you should get away with $crime, just because That's Not Fair and Just This Time and Who Said That I Can't and ...
(Most) French teachers and headmasters are not gonna go file paperwork every five minutes because they can, and all but a few kids already keep their phones hidden during class. The law is there to help with extreme cases (because all 14 yr-olds are stupid), and for political grandstanding reasons. It's not a slippery slope to Fascist Oppression.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 03 2018, @03:04AM (6 children)
But maybe it's a mistake on my part to argue with people who don't get that a matter, which is simply settled by the teacher taking the phone away, doesn't require the French government to get involved.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday August 03 2018, @06:30AM (5 children)
My kids, in the US, are in school with a few kids who go to the principal's office multiple times a week, and still don't give a shit and talk back. That's in a pretty nice area.
Expelling doesn't mean anything to someone who knows you have to take them back, so it's vacation until it's time to disturb class again.
Having the ability to scare (or try to) a kid who doesn't care about the principal, by putting him in front of a police officer who is grumpy since he'd rather be the kind of things he became a cop for, is an extra tool that few, maybe none, will ever resort to (neither the principal nor the cop would want to fill the paperwork). But it's an extra tool, giving solid legal ground to the "no phones" school rule.
It's mostly politicians parading. It's most likely barely gonna get used. But there must have been enough cases reported to make them wake up from their naps and pass something that they believe will not be totally turned into a mockery.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 03 2018, @12:20PM (4 children)
I'm sure a few years in jail will cure them of that tendency and the spectacle of the kid being hauled off by police will put fear in the rest. We can't have our citizens questioning authority. OR we could fire this principal and/or teacher and find someone who can figure out how to deal with back-talking kids.
Which can be next school year. The solutions don't have to be permanent. And I have no problem rewarding such students with as much expulsion as they can get until they're old enough to drop out.
Only the petty tyrants would do that. Fortunately, there are plenty of them in US school systems to jail students for equally petty discipline problems.
No, it doesn't have to be. Your faith in politicians is touching.
I'll note here that I'm not speaking in a vacuum. In the US, there are a lot of areas that have made "sexting", the distribution of sexually explicit images of oneself by cell phone text, illegal. Thus, when a school catches students distributing images of boobs, penises, etc, they can throw those students to the mercy of the police and court system. For example [reason.com]:
In other words, a bunch of students took naughty pictures of themselves and now, the force of the law will be selectively applied to the students that the authorities don't like. This French law is just more of that nonsense.
What I find particularly remarkable about this thread is how the people defending the practice of making cell phones illegal in the classroom have done nothing to justify their opinion - neither to explain why the force of law is acceptable for basic discipline issues in the classroom nor how such laws would improve the situation. They just keep insisting that we oughta have a law.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday August 03 2018, @04:19PM (3 children)
Would you rather have mutually agreed contracts ?
(grin)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday August 04 2018, @03:08AM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Saturday August 04 2018, @05:51AM (1 child)
The dumb new law applies to 6-16 yr-olds.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 05 2018, @10:44PM
Does this particular age bracket need more oppressing? Seems to me the world (and France in particular) is already amply oppressing them. I'm stuck on the original premise. Why exactly do we need a law to do a teacher's job?
(Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:51PM (1 child)
Yeah... I'll wait and see when that attitude is used to encourage the enforcement of immigration and weed laws. Till then, not much pity for nearly 100% leftist teachers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @05:03PM
Hey dummy, FRANCE!
Weed laws are enforced, try driving around in Arizona with a big bag of weed and make sure some is being burned and the smoke is going out the window!
Ooooh, you mean federal law?? I guess on THIS point you're 100% a federalist then? Fuck state's rights because... hippies?
Immigration law? Last I checked it is being enforced quite frequently, what exactly do you think is going on?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday August 02 2018, @07:08AM (5 children)
Yes, please.
It's a good idea because younger kids find them too much of a distraction. It's also a good idea because too many children and older students use them as status symbols.
And I think it's a good idea because phone/tablet operating systems are too geared towards consuming instead of creating. They have as little place in a school as closed source software.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 02 2018, @12:25PM (4 children)
One of the many points of education is to help people think for themselves. Bringing in the power of the state to handle mundane educational issues is ripe for disruption of the educational environment, abuse, and one of the notorious slippery slopes of governance. On that last point, today, it might be cell phones in the classroom, tomorrow it might be legitimate disagreement with the teacher, and the day after, insufficient enthusiasm for the Dear Leader.
OTOH, I can see the utility of such laws in my profession [accounting]. "You can't crumple those reports you send me or put too many staples in it, because I have the law on my side". No longer am I an impotent schmuck just doing my job, but I have a taste of real power! Maybe a $50 fine per extra staple with a visit by local law enforcement to deliver the ticket? That sounds giddily reasonable, don't you think? What could possibly go wrong?
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday August 02 2018, @12:58PM (3 children)
Actually "the power of the teacher and school" is, all too often, insufficient with too many parents.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 03 2018, @03:06AM (2 children)
Even in cases where that is true, the French law will do nothing to change the situation for the better. And why should we do stupid things just because some school systems are incompetently run?
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Friday August 03 2018, @03:48AM (1 child)
The law probably will change things for the better because the worst offenders know the limits of what schools can do but fear what the police can do.
Not "incompetently run" but unable to police existing laws against assault.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 03 2018, @11:46AM
Ridiculous. I think instead it will change it for the worse for precisely that reason. The police have no reason to be involved here. Involving them creates various opportunities for mischief, such as school authorities using the power of the law to bully students and parents they don't like.
First, that is completely irrelevant. Assault is already illegal and schools don't police laws in the first place. The police police. The schools educate. Second, such problems come about because the school in question is poorly run. Sorry, I don't buy that there are huge collections of mean parents out there that force France to pass laws regulating behavior of students (who let us note aren't the parents). Use these occasions of students ignoring rules as signs to replace the school employees enabling the behavior.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:54PM
If the kids don't have smartphones in schools then how will they be able to call 911 or their parents each and every time that a school shooter bursts into the school with automatic weapons?
What doesn't kill me makes me weaker for next time.