APS Current cell phones reality

[Anonymous]

With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

This isn’t accurate. The parents who don’t want to limit their kids’ use ALSO don’t want them banned. The people most in favor of it seem to be the parents of kids who genuinely want ALL kids to have rich learning experiences and the ability to not spend their educational years on screens. The parents fighting this hardest are the ones who also have phone issues and can’t fathom what their kids could possibly do all day if not on a phone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

This isn’t accurate. The parents who don’t want to limit their kids’ use ALSO don’t want them banned. The people most in favor of it seem to be the parents of kids who genuinely want ALL kids to have rich learning experiences and the ability to not spend their educational years on screens. The parents fighting this hardest are the ones who also have phone issues and can’t fathom what their kids could possibly do all day if not on a phone.

I'd also include parents whose own anxiety is not well managed. They have anxiety about needing to reach their child, and likewise, their child has anxiety about needing to reach them. The most stark example of this is the poster on AEM who alluded to their child needing an emergency appt with their pscyh re: the possibility of not having their phone. When probing of the situation unfolded, the parent suggested that the child A. has anxiety, and B. would have no problem storing their phone during the day, but, feels very strongly about having it in case of an emergency.

Well, let's employ common sense. Who wouldn't feel strongly about having a phone in case of an emergency? Everyone would like to have a phone available to contact their families in case of an emergency. Now, what we are talking about most likely here is a scenario of a active shooter at a school. The reality is that having a phone or not having a phone will not save a child in a situation like this. Further, actively using a phone during this type of situation could create greater danger to a child as it could draw attention to them inadvertently. Also, can we imagine what type of scenario would unfold if a singular child in a classroom had a phone and no other children had them--what kind of clamoring and desperation would occur as everyone bartered to use the sole phone? My last point on this goes back to control and anxiety, which I highlighted further upstream, there is this magical thinking that if someone just has a phone it will save or protect them in this situation--it is not likely to.

We like to think that we can control or predict safety and life for our loved ones, but, anyone could have a stroke, get in a car accident, etc etc. We most often don't know when someone's last day will be. Magical thinking should not be the prevailing force that influences this cell phone discussion, and I hope people can embrace reality, manage their anxieties, and understand that tolerating discomfort and uncertainty is part of life, and allow those notions to enter into the overall discussion and planning as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

Except even if I don't send my kid to school with a phone, another kid could still take an embarrassing photo of my kid and forward it around during lunch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

Except even if I don't send my kid to school with a phone, another kid could still take an embarrassing photo of my kid and forward it around during lunch.

Theres also the issue of socialization -- its hard to socialize even if you are well adjusted and put the phone away, when 95% of the student body is phone zombies. Rather than looking like some werido standing around trying to make eye contact, they of course pull out their own phone. Obviously this is a spectrum, but once a phone is pull out, others will follow.

Phubbing is contagious!
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ITP-03-2020-0150/full/html#:~:text=In%20daily%20life%2C%20we%20often,possibility%20that%20phubbing%20is%20contagious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

This isn’t accurate. The parents who don’t want to limit their kids’ use ALSO don’t want them banned. The people most in favor of it seem to be the parents of kids who genuinely want ALL kids to have rich learning experiences and the ability to not spend their educational years on screens. The parents fighting this hardest are the ones who also have phone issues and can’t fathom what their kids could possibly do all day if not on a phone.

Or while these parents don't give their phones until developmentally appropriate (hey- that's me! Kid is in 8th grade and we're one of those late-implementation families), I also don't judge others who do give their kids phones. As long as these kids can learn in class without distracting others, I give not a flip about phones. I just want some reasonableness in this debate. But the away for the day crowd wants to impose their will on everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

This isn’t accurate. The parents who don’t want to limit their kids’ use ALSO don’t want them banned. The people most in favor of it seem to be the parents of kids who genuinely want ALL kids to have rich learning experiences and the ability to not spend their educational years on screens. The parents fighting this hardest are the ones who also have phone issues and can’t fathom what their kids could possibly do all day if not on a phone.

Or while these parents don't give their phones until developmentally appropriate (hey- that's me! Kid is in 8th grade and we're one of those late-implementation families), I also don't judge others who do give their kids phones. As long as these kids can learn in class without distracting others, I give not a flip about phones. I just want some reasonableness in this debate. But the away for the day crowd wants to impose their will on everyone else.

Honey, the away for the day crowd is imposing their will on students all over the country as well as all over the DMV and ROVA.

This really has nothing to do with you or with Arlington. This has to do with what's best for all children, for every child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m surprised there are 10 pages of postings on this. Other than kids who need apps to control their medical equipment, what exactly is the need for a child to have a phone accessible at all times? Put it away, and keep it away.

Right. I assume almost every parent posting on here went to high school when few, if any, kids had cell phones. And everything was fine. We interacted with each other and didn't die of boredom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m surprised there are 10 pages of postings on this. Other than kids who need apps to control their medical equipment, what exactly is the need for a child to have a phone accessible at all times? Put it away, and keep it away.

+1. It’s shocking to me that this is controversial. Unless there is a medical need, your kid doesn’t need a phone during school hours.

Plus, the new policy doesn’t actually change the rule but rather just helps teachers to enforce the rule that already exists. Students have never been allowed to have phones out during class time. Now teachers don’t have to waste time trying to police this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m surprised there are 10 pages of postings on this. Other than kids who need apps to control their medical equipment, what exactly is the need for a child to have a phone accessible at all times? Put it away, and keep it away.

+1. It’s shocking to me that this is controversial. Unless there is a medical need, your kid doesn’t need a phone during school hours.

Plus, the new policy doesn’t actually change the rule but rather just helps teachers to enforce the rule that already exists. Students have never been allowed to have phones out during class time. Now teachers don’t have to waste time trying to police this.

+1 I do see how the lock-bags could be challenging in HS since teachers have learned to integrate phones into some classes. But away in some kind of docking station every time you come into class is 100% reasonable for HS. I will be interested to see how the Wakefield pilot goes with removing them completely.

And the lock-bags should be used throughout the middle schools. The data shows the phones are most detrimental in the early teen years. And you don't have the varied arrival/departure times/off campus lunch issues in MS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

I agree. I'm solving the issue with absolutely no effort: by letting my kid follow the rules of their school, whatever they are, and suffering the consequences if they don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

I agree. I'm solving the issue with absolutely no effort: by letting my kid follow the rules of their school, whatever they are, and suffering the consequences if they don't.

Presumably, there will be some type of consequences for breaking the rules, and if my kids do break the rules they'll have to live with those consequences.

There really isn't anything parents needs to do here.

[Anonymous]

I gave my son a phone last year in 6th grade to be able to call me after school ended (no land line) because he was walking home to an empty house. Stipulation--it must stay in his backpack in his locker all day. I thought THAT was the rule for APS middle school but apparently many kids carried their phones around all day and some even left classes to text or watch YouTube in the restrooms.

Yesterday, son told me that his friend was listening to music with airpods during class period while working on exercises and the teacher allowed it! And son's friend gave him an airpod to listen as well. WTF? (I told him never again.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

This isn’t accurate. The parents who don’t want to limit their kids’ use ALSO don’t want them banned. The people most in favor of it seem to be the parents of kids who genuinely want ALL kids to have rich learning experiences and the ability to not spend their educational years on screens. The parents fighting this hardest are the ones who also have phone issues and can’t fathom what their kids could possibly do all day if not on a phone.

I'd also include parents whose own anxiety is not well managed. They have anxiety about needing to reach their child, and likewise, their child has anxiety about needing to reach them. The most stark example of this is the poster on AEM who alluded to their child needing an emergency appt with their pscyh re: the possibility of not having their phone. When probing of the situation unfolded, the parent suggested that the child A. has anxiety, and B. would have no problem storing their phone during the day, but, feels very strongly about having it in case of an emergency.

Well, let's employ common sense. Who wouldn't feel strongly about having a phone in case of an emergency? Everyone would like to have a phone available to contact their families in case of an emergency. Now, what we are talking about most likely here is a scenario of a active shooter at a school. The reality is that having a phone or not having a phone will not save a child in a situation like this. Further, actively using a phone during this type of situation could create greater danger to a child as it could draw attention to them inadvertently. Also, can we imagine what type of scenario would unfold if a singular child in a classroom had a phone and no other children had them--what kind of clamoring and desperation would occur as everyone bartered to use the sole phone? My last point on this goes back to control and anxiety, which I highlighted further upstream, there is this magical thinking that if someone just has a phone it will save or protect them in this situation--it is not likely to.

We like to think that we can control or predict safety and life for our loved ones, but, anyone could have a stroke, get in a car accident, etc etc. We most often don't know when someone's last day will be. Magical thinking should not be the prevailing force that influences this cell phone discussion, and I hope people can embrace reality, manage their anxieties, and understand that tolerating discomfort and uncertainty is part of life, and allow those notions to enter into the overall discussion and planning as well.

Agreed.
Re the comment on AEM about being able to say goodbye to family during a shooter situation - maybe try parting each morning as though it might be your last chance to talk to them. I really believe this is more about parents' anxieties and wishes than students'. And this poor child who is so anxiety-addled by the thought of not being able to get in touch with her family during an emergency needs to learn to deal with that anxiety, not be enabled to lean on the crutch of her phone. What if her phone battery died? Or she dropped it and it broke? Or she couldn't get through to her parents for whatever reason?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With a little effort -you know parenting- parents could solve this problem for themselves. Even with no effort they could decide not to give their kid a smartphone. But the parents who won’t want to ban phones for everyone else. I still don’t get this.

Except even if I don't send my kid to school with a phone, another kid could still take an embarrassing photo of my kid and forward it around during lunch.

Is this really what stresses you out about having phones in schools?