Parent advocates who lobbied for Away All Day phone policy feel blindsided, ignored by new MCPS phone policy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, I'm the parent of a MS and HS student and this this policy is sane and sensical.

My HS-aged kid having access to their phone at lunch is fine, actually. They can (and do) use it to help with homework, to read sports scores and share with friends, or to facilitate discussion at the meeting of a club.

I think the testimony above assumes the kids are using their phones to SnapChat or something and never look up, but they are actually using them to facilitate socialization, not to shut it down.

Your kid doesn't need a phone at lunch. If it's a true urgent issue, they can go back to their locker and send a message. It puts such a burden on school staff to police phones that are distracting kids from their education. Just make it simple and let the kids go through their school day without additional phone time.

High school kids have jobs, and doctor appointments and family responsibilities. Young adults must be empowered to be…adults.

No, HS kids don’t have jobs and doctor’s appointments and family responsibilities that require them to be on the phone during school hours when they’re supposed to be learning.

Plan better and your kid won’t need to be calling the doctor while at school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a nightmare for high school teachers to try to police/enforce the cellphone policy while teaching and managing a class of 30+ students each period.
I wish we could have “away all day” but I don’t see it being logistically possible in mcps due to parents needing their kids to have cell phones for “safety reasons.”

Lots of teachers tell the kids to put it away and deduct points or have a points system for the phones. Teachers need to get better management skills and have consequences. Stop blaming everyone else. If it's not the phones, it’s the chromebooks, daydreaming or many other things.

And people wonder why there’s a teacher shortage…

How about parents refuse to parent and expect MCPS to do it for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want my kid to have a phone for safety reasons and the rest of you need to parent better.

Who cares what you want? Home school your own kid and let them plant themselves on screens all day if you’re so worried about the safety and are convinced a cell phone will somehow allow your kid to defend themselves.

The rest of us want to follow the advice of experts and keep phones out of classrooms so they can learn.

Many of us have restrictions on the phones. Do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want my kid to have a phone for safety reasons and the rest of you need to parent better.

Who cares what you want? Home school your own kid and let them plant themselves on screens all day if you’re so worried about the safety and are convinced a cell phone will somehow allow your kid to defend themselves.

The rest of us want to follow the advice of experts and keep phones out of classrooms so they can learn.

Many of us have restrictions on the phones. Do you?

Yes. I tell my kid to keep it away all day while at school. You should do that too.

[Anonymous]

Policies mean absolutely nothing unless there are consequences. This new "policy" is a non-story because there are no mentions of what happens when cell phones are in use during classes - which is nothing.

Currently, there is no attendance policy, no consequences for tardiness, insubordination, chronic absenteeism, cell phone use, profanity, or many other behaviors disruptive to learning.

Anyone who isn't in schools these days would be SHOCKED by what they see if they were to spend a day there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Policies mean absolutely nothing unless there are consequences. This new "policy" is a non-story because there are no mentions of what happens when cell phones are in use during classes - which is nothing.

Currently, there is no attendance policy, no consequences for tardiness, insubordination, chronic absenteeism, cell phone use, profanity, or many other behaviors disruptive to learning.

Anyone who isn't in schools these days would be SHOCKED by what they see if they were to spend a day there.

There are consequences in my kid’s school for kids using phones during class time. For you to make the blanket assertion that there should be no rules, because no one follows or enforces the rules (in your opinion) lacks any sort of logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Policies mean absolutely nothing unless there are consequences. This new "policy" is a non-story because there are no mentions of what happens when cell phones are in use during classes - which is nothing.

Currently, there is no attendance policy, no consequences for tardiness, insubordination, chronic absenteeism, cell phone use, profanity, or many other behaviors disruptive to learning.

Anyone who isn't in schools these days would be SHOCKED by what they see if they were to spend a day there.

Yup. The policies might as well be written on toilet paper with the lack of enforcement we're seeing in MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SOURCE: https://wjla.com/news/local/montgomery-county-new-guidelines-away-all-day-students-use-cell-phones-school-changes-personal-mobile-device-mcps-cellphone-update-elementary-middle-high-instructional-time-lunch-between-classes-maryland-education-crisis-focus-parents-concerns#

MCPS parent Jeremy Joseph sent the following statement to 7News about the new cell phone update:

“Overall, this is a positive step forward at the ES and MS level and a huge step backward for HS.

Explicitly allowing HS students to have phones during lunch and passing periods is totally and completely out of step with how Superintendent Taylor handled this issue last year in Stafford County or what LA County did in February and Baltimore County does and how countries around the world (including Brazil and Denmark) are tackling this issue.

This policy is only going to put MCPS high school students further behind compared to their peers in more forward-thinking municipalities, and only further harm Montgomery County's economic growth as the kids will come out of HS less prepared.

What's most upsetting is that in late March the County promised a robust comment process and engagement in finalizing the updated policy, which did not occur.

Why did they make the decision to allow highschoolers to keep their phones during lunch and passing periods?

We don't know?

How will the phone policy be enforced differently from the prior policy?

We don't know - there is no detail provided.

And they released this policy on a Friday afternoon, which in DC is when you drop something you want to bury.

The new policy would appear to reduce principal discretion to keep phones out of schools during lunch and passing periods, which is the only proven way to reduce the distraction of the phones to improve learning outcomes, reduce fights and bullying, and promote critical face to face interactions and allow kids to make new friends unbound by their online contacts.

At a minimum, the policy should be updated to allow HS principals the discretion to adopt the proven Away All Day policies.

Forcing this lowest common denominator is deeply troubling and counterproductive.

Some principals will have the chutzpah and moral conviction to do what's right, and the policy should not limit their initiative.

But really, the county should simply do what the Superintendent did last year in Stafford County or what LA County did in February and Baltimore County and around the world (including Brazil and Denmark) - keep the phones out of the kids hands from first bell to last bell.

That's what the data shows is the right choice across all relevant metrics: security, academic learning, socio-emotional success and an inclusive school environment, for teacher retention and satisfaction and for budget reasons (20% of each HS class is taken up by policing the phones). There's no data provided that makes this policy the right long-term choice for HS students!

As you know, a group of parents submitted a petition with more than 2,000 signatures supporting Away All Day policies, including in HS.

We have not received any response from MCPS in response to our petition. We are happy to continue engaging with MCPS on these important topics.”

Good effing Lord, when are parents going to understand they're not important stakeholders in public education? They need to stop complaining about every little thing and stay in their lane. This guy sounds like a clown.

I mean, my dude has enough money to live in-bounds for Walt Whitman. He could pay for Washington Waldorf if that's what he wanted. But expecting every kid in school to follow his family's rules around screen use is ludicrous. My kids don't cover their hair or keep kosher just because some of their classmates do, nor would I expect them to follow the rules of my family.

Sorry but this logic sucks. If something is a problem in public schools, the answer isn’t “wealthy people just flee to private.” It’s “fix what’s wrong”

We do not agree that "uses phone for 15 minutes during lunch" is an actual problem in public schools. In fact, many of us think it is not. This is not something like drug use or fighting that there is widespread societal consensus on. This is "I want kids to take a horse and buggy to school instead of a bus" levels of disagreement.

Then feel free to share credible reasons instead of just telling people to “go to private school,” which does not make sense.

The credible reason is that using a phone for a few minutes during lunch is fine, actually, and if someone has different rules for their own children they can either enforce those rules or choose an environment in which those rules will be enforced for them (Waldorf school for folks who want screen-free lives). What they should not be able to do is impose their own rules on other families.

Basically, the analogy to keeping kosher holds. A school has the responsibility to make reasonable accommodations for dietary restrictions, but they do not need to make the entire school community keep to those restrictions because one family follows them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, I'm the parent of a MS and HS student and this this policy is sane and sensical.

My HS-aged kid having access to their phone at lunch is fine, actually. They can (and do) use it to help with homework, to read sports scores and share with friends, or to facilitate discussion at the meeting of a club.

I think the testimony above assumes the kids are using their phones to SnapChat or something and never look up, but they are actually using them to facilitate socialization, not to shut it down.

Your kid doesn't need a phone at lunch. If it's a true urgent issue, they can go back to their locker and send a message. It puts such a burden on school staff to police phones that are distracting kids from their education. Just make it simple and let the kids go through their school day without additional phone time.

What locker?

I've been seeing in Teacher forums that a lot of kids don't use their lockers because they can't figure out how to use combination locks, not that the lockers are "inconveniently located." Another life skill fail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SOURCE: https://wjla.com/news/local/montgomery-county-new-guidelines-away-all-day-students-use-cell-phones-school-changes-personal-mobile-device-mcps-cellphone-update-elementary-middle-high-instructional-time-lunch-between-classes-maryland-education-crisis-focus-parents-concerns#

MCPS parent Jeremy Joseph sent the following statement to 7News about the new cell phone update:

“Overall, this is a positive step forward at the ES and MS level and a huge step backward for HS.

Explicitly allowing HS students to have phones during lunch and passing periods is totally and completely out of step with how Superintendent Taylor handled this issue last year in Stafford County or what LA County did in February and Baltimore County does and how countries around the world (including Brazil and Denmark) are tackling this issue.

This policy is only going to put MCPS high school students further behind compared to their peers in more forward-thinking municipalities, and only further harm Montgomery County's economic growth as the kids will come out of HS less prepared.

What's most upsetting is that in late March the County promised a robust comment process and engagement in finalizing the updated policy, which did not occur.

Why did they make the decision to allow highschoolers to keep their phones during lunch and passing periods?

We don't know?

How will the phone policy be enforced differently from the prior policy?

We don't know - there is no detail provided.

And they released this policy on a Friday afternoon, which in DC is when you drop something you want to bury.

The new policy would appear to reduce principal discretion to keep phones out of schools during lunch and passing periods, which is the only proven way to reduce the distraction of the phones to improve learning outcomes, reduce fights and bullying, and promote critical face to face interactions and allow kids to make new friends unbound by their online contacts.

At a minimum, the policy should be updated to allow HS principals the discretion to adopt the proven Away All Day policies.

Forcing this lowest common denominator is deeply troubling and counterproductive.

Some principals will have the chutzpah and moral conviction to do what's right, and the policy should not limit their initiative.

But really, the county should simply do what the Superintendent did last year in Stafford County or what LA County did in February and Baltimore County and around the world (including Brazil and Denmark) - keep the phones out of the kids hands from first bell to last bell.

That's what the data shows is the right choice across all relevant metrics: security, academic learning, socio-emotional success and an inclusive school environment, for teacher retention and satisfaction and for budget reasons (20% of each HS class is taken up by policing the phones). There's no data provided that makes this policy the right long-term choice for HS students!

As you know, a group of parents submitted a petition with more than 2,000 signatures supporting Away All Day policies, including in HS.

We have not received any response from MCPS in response to our petition. We are happy to continue engaging with MCPS on these important topics.”

Good effing Lord, when are parents going to understand they're not important stakeholders in public education? They need to stop complaining about every little thing and stay in their lane. This guy sounds like a clown.

I mean, my dude has enough money to live in-bounds for Walt Whitman. He could pay for Washington Waldorf if that's what he wanted. But expecting every kid in school to follow his family's rules around screen use is ludicrous. My kids don't cover their hair or keep kosher just because some of their classmates do, nor would I expect them to follow the rules of my family.

Sorry but this logic sucks. If something is a problem in public schools, the answer isn’t “wealthy people just flee to private.” It’s “fix what’s wrong”

We do not agree that "uses phone for 15 minutes during lunch" is an actual problem in public schools. In fact, many of us think it is not. This is not something like drug use or fighting that there is widespread societal consensus on. This is "I want kids to take a horse and buggy to school instead of a bus" levels of disagreement.

Then feel free to share credible reasons instead of just telling people to “go to private school,” which does not make sense.

The credible reason is that using a phone for a few minutes during lunch is fine, actually, and if someone has different rules for their own children they can either enforce those rules or choose an environment in which those rules will be enforced for them (Waldorf school for folks who want screen-free lives). What they should not be able to do is impose their own rules on other families.

Basically, the analogy to keeping kosher holds. A school has the responsibility to make reasonable accommodations for dietary restrictions, but they do not need to make the entire school community keep to those restrictions because one family follows them.

What about when teachers stop reading books to kids and instead show videos? Is that something I should just accept about public education these days or am I allowed to advocate against that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, I'm the parent of a MS and HS student and this this policy is sane and sensical.

My HS-aged kid having access to their phone at lunch is fine, actually. They can (and do) use it to help with homework, to read sports scores and share with friends, or to facilitate discussion at the meeting of a club.

I think the testimony above assumes the kids are using their phones to SnapChat or something and never look up, but they are actually using them to facilitate socialization, not to shut it down.

Your kid doesn't need a phone at lunch. If it's a true urgent issue, they can go back to their locker and send a message. It puts such a burden on school staff to police phones that are distracting kids from their education. Just make it simple and let the kids go through their school day without additional phone time.

What locker?

I've been seeing in Teacher forums that a lot of kids don't use their lockers because they can't figure out how to use combination locks, not that the lockers are "inconveniently located." Another life skill fail.

My kid's school doesn't allow backpacks in class. Kids use the lockers. My kid keeps their phone in their when they arrive, and picks it up when they leave (so I'm told). Phones get confiscated in class if they're caught.

Teachers have enough to deal with--they don't need to be policing a kid who is addicted to their device and posting on snapchat during class hours because their parent thinks they're a special snowflake who must have their phone with them at all times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, I'm the parent of a MS and HS student and this this policy is sane and sensical.

My HS-aged kid having access to their phone at lunch is fine, actually. They can (and do) use it to help with homework, to read sports scores and share with friends, or to facilitate discussion at the meeting of a club.

I think the testimony above assumes the kids are using their phones to SnapChat or something and never look up, but they are actually using them to facilitate socialization, not to shut it down.

Your kid doesn't need a phone at lunch. If it's a true urgent issue, they can go back to their locker and send a message. It puts such a burden on school staff to police phones that are distracting kids from their education. Just make it simple and let the kids go through their school day without additional phone time.

What locker?

I've been seeing in Teacher forums that a lot of kids don't use their lockers because they can't figure out how to use combination locks, not that the lockers are "inconveniently located." Another life skill fail.

My kid's school doesn't allow backpacks in class. Kids use the lockers. My kid keeps their phone in their when they arrive, and picks it up when they leave (so I'm told). Phones get confiscated in class if they're caught.

Teachers have enough to deal with--they don't need to be policing a kid who is addicted to their device and posting on snapchat during class hours because their parent thinks they're a special snowflake who must have their phone with them at all times.

Middle or high school. Is that mcps. That does not sound like hs here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, I'm the parent of a MS and HS student and this this policy is sane and sensical.

My HS-aged kid having access to their phone at lunch is fine, actually. They can (and do) use it to help with homework, to read sports scores and share with friends, or to facilitate discussion at the meeting of a club.

I think the testimony above assumes the kids are using their phones to SnapChat or something and never look up, but they are actually using them to facilitate socialization, not to shut it down.

Your kid doesn't need a phone at lunch. If it's a true urgent issue, they can go back to their locker and send a message. It puts such a burden on school staff to police phones that are distracting kids from their education. Just make it simple and let the kids go through their school day without additional phone time.

What locker?

I've been seeing in Teacher forums that a lot of kids don't use their lockers because they can't figure out how to use combination locks, not that the lockers are "inconveniently located." Another life skill fail.

Oh wow--so you read it on social media so it must be true of all kids. What an example you're setting to your students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, I'm the parent of a MS and HS student and this this policy is sane and sensical.

My HS-aged kid having access to their phone at lunch is fine, actually. They can (and do) use it to help with homework, to read sports scores and share with friends, or to facilitate discussion at the meeting of a club.

I think the testimony above assumes the kids are using their phones to SnapChat or something and never look up, but they are actually using them to facilitate socialization, not to shut it down.

Your kid doesn't need a phone at lunch. If it's a true urgent issue, they can go back to their locker and send a message. It puts such a burden on school staff to police phones that are distracting kids from their education. Just make it simple and let the kids go through their school day without additional phone time.

What locker?

I've been seeing in Teacher forums that a lot of kids don't use their lockers because they can't figure out how to use combination locks, not that the lockers are "inconveniently located." Another life skill fail.

This is not true. Most MS kids use lockers, but at the HS level there are not enough lockers for every kid and the schools are large enough that it doesn't make sense. But kids learn to use combination locks in 5th grade, and then use lockers for 6th - 8th.

[Anonymous]

Do these advocates even have HSers?

I’ve had one graduate HS and now at an Ivy and another in HS currently. They absolutely need their phones. First, they don’t have lockers. Second, there is no room in the cafeteria and food is inedible so they use their phones to order food for pickup at lunch as they walk over to the restaurant to get their sandwich/salas/burrito. Third, they do have doctors appointments that they get themselves too. Fourth, they need the phone to drive (and again, no lockers). Fifth, they need the phones to check studentvue and canvass to stay on top of deadlines (no, it’s not reasonable to expect someone to handle 7 AP classes without electronic calendaring). Sixth, the phone is very useful for things like the note app to keep track of things to do. Seventh, the phone doesn’t create any moral hazard not already present with the school chrome books which have zero parental controls and on which they can also watch dumb or obscene videos.

My kids school piloted the “no phone during class time” rule this past year and it worked fine. Some of the teachers had boxes in the desks for the phones, others just required tj in the bag. It was fine.

What I’d actually like is for some enterprising student to program an app that allows the kids to know which bathrooms are open on any given day. That would be a real time saver, to avoid walking a mile plus around the school searching for someplace to pee.

These people saying no phones at lunch in HE seem like they are coming from some la la land world where there is room for the HS to eat lunch in school, and kids are turning in assignments on paper and actually have time to have conversations with their teachers, kids are having nice little conversations at lunch, etc. There are much bigger problems in McPS than phones at lunchtime for HS kids.