Can anyone tell me.....
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
looks like you've got nigh on 100% support on here, LFH. And, let's face it, some of this lot ain't backwards in coming forward. Only Gman is banishing your son to the urine-steeped ex-phone boxes. Texting in class = bad, but having the means to phone home on the way home = fair enough. We've all been stuck in inexplicable jams for what seems like hours and the worry mounts. Particularly in times such as these with that awful facebook murder.
It is NOT an unreasonable request that your son be allowed a phone, on the understanding that it be turned off in school time. Anything is draconian and exhibiting no sympathy towards his situation. No quaking necessary.
It is NOT an unreasonable request that your son be allowed a phone, on the understanding that it be turned off in school time. Anything is draconian and exhibiting no sympathy towards his situation. No quaking necessary.
-
Looking for help
- Posts: 3767
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:12 am
- Location: Berkshire
Funny you should say that, SSM - last Monday we decided to keep the phone at home, and the train was very very delayed in the morning. He hadn't a clue what to do 
, fortunately one of the others had a phone with him, and we were able to offer them advice. Knowing they were going to be late we phoned the school etc. Funnily enough, the lady on reception didn't ask how we knew they were going to be late 
Anyway, the long and the short is if he is going to this school, he is taking his phone. If it is confisctaed, I will go to collect it, and that is when we will have our confrontation, I guess. I will talk all these options over tonight with my husband. I am getting to the point of complete exasperation, good grief at my older children's school there is none of this angst, as long as they are not being silly with the phones.
, fortunately one of the others had a phone with him, and we were able to offer them advice. Knowing they were going to be late we phoned the school etc. Funnily enough, the lady on reception didn't ask how we knew they were going to be late Anyway, the long and the short is if he is going to this school, he is taking his phone. If it is confisctaed, I will go to collect it, and that is when we will have our confrontation, I guess. I will talk all these options over tonight with my husband. I am getting to the point of complete exasperation, good grief at my older children's school there is none of this angst, as long as they are not being silly with the phones. -
Kent99
I agree that refusing to allow children to hand in a phone at reception seems bad practice. I too like to know when my daughter's train is cancelled/ delayed and it is simply not practical to use a public phone at the station because (a) there isn't one and (b) service announcements are so poor on our network that you only know when the train will arrive when it arrives.
As to the argument that we never had mobiles as children and were fine, only the first half of that statement is necessarily true. As a schoolchild in pre-mobile days I remember another girl missing her home stop on the train (it ran fast), panicking, jumping and dying. Perhaps if she could have let her mother know what had happened she would now be a mother herself. Unusual I know, but not something I ever forgot.
The question is what to do now. Does your son have a longer journey than most? Could you suggest a compromise with the school whereby only pupils with a long or complicated journey (e.g. over an hour or changing trains) can hand in a mobile at reception or keep one locked in their locker? Perhaps they would regard this as administratively workable, whilst looking after 1000 phones is not. Perhaps it could also be a requirement that the phones do not have a camera function (if you can still buy them without) if part of the concern is over cyber-bullying or "happy slapping".
Key phrases to mention (if this is a state school) include "safer schools" and "travel plans" (i.e. reducing car travel). Also perhaps "every child matters" (including those living further away..)
As to the argument that we never had mobiles as children and were fine, only the first half of that statement is necessarily true. As a schoolchild in pre-mobile days I remember another girl missing her home stop on the train (it ran fast), panicking, jumping and dying. Perhaps if she could have let her mother know what had happened she would now be a mother herself. Unusual I know, but not something I ever forgot.
The question is what to do now. Does your son have a longer journey than most? Could you suggest a compromise with the school whereby only pupils with a long or complicated journey (e.g. over an hour or changing trains) can hand in a mobile at reception or keep one locked in their locker? Perhaps they would regard this as administratively workable, whilst looking after 1000 phones is not. Perhaps it could also be a requirement that the phones do not have a camera function (if you can still buy them without) if part of the concern is over cyber-bullying or "happy slapping".
Key phrases to mention (if this is a state school) include "safer schools" and "travel plans" (i.e. reducing car travel). Also perhaps "every child matters" (including those living further away..)
-
Notley Mum
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 7:21 pm
- Location: Braintree
Hi LFH
I am so frustrated for you and I work in education!!
I would suggest that when the time comes for a confrontation you mention the Every Child Matters policy from the DCFS (Department for Children, Families and Schools) and also talk to the LEA.
Quotes taken from their web site:
The Every Child Matters (ECM) Green Paper identified the five outcomes that are most important to children and young people:
The Government's aim is for every child, whatever their background or their circumstances, to have the support they need to:
* be healthy
* stay safe
* enjoy and achieve
* make a positive contribution
* achieve economic well-being.
This means that the organisations involved with providing services to children – from hospitals and schools, to police and voluntary groups – will be teaming up in new ways, sharing information and working together, to protect children and young people from harm and help them achieve what they want in life.
The outcomes are mutually reinforcing. For example, children and young people learn and thrive when they are healthy, safe and engaged; and the evidence shows clearly that educational achievement is the most effective route out of poverty.
Over the next few years, every LA will be working with its partners, through children's trusts, to find out what works best for children and young people in its area and act on it. They will need to involve children and young people in this process, and when inspectors assess how local areas are doing, they will listen especially to the views of children and young people themselves.
End quote
Schools (including Catholic ones to my knowledge) have to show they are complying with this and meeting the outcomes. Therefore surely the school is obliged to ensure your DS's safety to and from school otherwise it will be detrimental to his learning and future success? God forbid if something awful happened and he didn't want to go to school. Perhaps this is the question you should put to them.
They are being unreasonable and I would be very interested in their response. Good luck and keep us posted.
I am so frustrated for you and I work in education!!
I would suggest that when the time comes for a confrontation you mention the Every Child Matters policy from the DCFS (Department for Children, Families and Schools) and also talk to the LEA.
Quotes taken from their web site:
The Every Child Matters (ECM) Green Paper identified the five outcomes that are most important to children and young people:
The Government's aim is for every child, whatever their background or their circumstances, to have the support they need to:
* be healthy
* stay safe
* enjoy and achieve
* make a positive contribution
* achieve economic well-being.
This means that the organisations involved with providing services to children – from hospitals and schools, to police and voluntary groups – will be teaming up in new ways, sharing information and working together, to protect children and young people from harm and help them achieve what they want in life.
The outcomes are mutually reinforcing. For example, children and young people learn and thrive when they are healthy, safe and engaged; and the evidence shows clearly that educational achievement is the most effective route out of poverty.
Over the next few years, every LA will be working with its partners, through children's trusts, to find out what works best for children and young people in its area and act on it. They will need to involve children and young people in this process, and when inspectors assess how local areas are doing, they will listen especially to the views of children and young people themselves.
End quote
Schools (including Catholic ones to my knowledge) have to show they are complying with this and meeting the outcomes. Therefore surely the school is obliged to ensure your DS's safety to and from school otherwise it will be detrimental to his learning and future success? God forbid if something awful happened and he didn't want to go to school. Perhaps this is the question you should put to them.
They are being unreasonable and I would be very interested in their response. Good luck and keep us posted.
-
Looking for help
- Posts: 3767
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:12 am
- Location: Berkshire
Oh thank you so much for all the support - I like the every child matters policy - I wrote in my letter that safety was paramount, but it was completely disregarded. Thanks for posting Notley Mum. And Kent99, what a sad story, it must have been awful. He probably does have a longer journey than most, and cannot travel by school bus. And milla, the voice of reason as ever, where's the baby now? I will talk to my husband tonight, and see how we respond, it seems that they really shouldn't get away with this. (I've kind of calmed down now, fortunately )
)-
Looking for help
- Posts: 3767
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:12 am
- Location: Berkshire
-
Kent99
I was taught when going into a negotiation always to try to see things from the other side and work out whether there is anything which benefits THEM without costing YOU too much.
In this case, you should be aware that schools and governing bodies are under huge pressure to be seen to be implementing the ever-changing "every child matters" strategy. They also need evidence of how they are gathering "stakeholder" views on the school (parents are one group of stakeholders) and how they are responding to those views/concerns.
Handled properly, this issue could be a way of documenting action on both fronts. Any chance you could get the headteacher or governors to see that? For your son's sake it would, after all, be better if they thought of you as starting something positive rather than just being a nuisance... And of course they are more likely to play ball if there is something in it for them.
In this case, you should be aware that schools and governing bodies are under huge pressure to be seen to be implementing the ever-changing "every child matters" strategy. They also need evidence of how they are gathering "stakeholder" views on the school (parents are one group of stakeholders) and how they are responding to those views/concerns.
Handled properly, this issue could be a way of documenting action on both fronts. Any chance you could get the headteacher or governors to see that? For your son's sake it would, after all, be better if they thought of you as starting something positive rather than just being a nuisance... And of course they are more likely to play ball if there is something in it for them.
I have made this point before but just want to pick up the bit about looking after 1000 phones. Put like that, of course, it sounds ridiculous, but at DD's school only KS3 have to hand them in - they give them to the form teacher at morning registration and get them back at the end of the day. They get locked in a cupboard - no-one is walking round 'looking after' 1000 or even 30 phones!
KS4 can have them on their person, but they have to be switched off - otherwise they are confiscated for, I think, a week. The children are so attached to their phones that I think it never happens! I think most parents would not want their child texting or taking photos at school so would support the policy. Your school seems to have taken the worst case scenario and is basing their responses to you on it - ie 'we have to look after 1000 phones' or 'kids will be texting all day instead of doing their valuable studies.'
I too am of a (very much) pre-mobile generation and used to get 2 buses to and from school each day. However, in those days, there were usable public callboxes which took cash. I think I could make a call to my Mum for 2p!
KS4 can have them on their person, but they have to be switched off - otherwise they are confiscated for, I think, a week. The children are so attached to their phones that I think it never happens! I think most parents would not want their child texting or taking photos at school so would support the policy. Your school seems to have taken the worst case scenario and is basing their responses to you on it - ie 'we have to look after 1000 phones' or 'kids will be texting all day instead of doing their valuable studies.'
I too am of a (very much) pre-mobile generation and used to get 2 buses to and from school each day. However, in those days, there were usable public callboxes which took cash. I think I could make a call to my Mum for 2p!
I am hopping mad at this silly situation that you are in.
I confess that I really liked the suggestion by (SSM??) to engineer a situation where the school has an understanding of why the boys being contactable might be a sensible option.
I also wondered whether you should tell the school that he will be taking the 'phone in and then make it clear to the school that the phone belongs to you and you will take legal action if they confiscate your phone. I bet there's a law somewhere that covers this...
Like has been suggested already, don't give in. You really aren't asking anything unreasonable. x
I confess that I really liked the suggestion by (SSM??) to engineer a situation where the school has an understanding of why the boys being contactable might be a sensible option.
I also wondered whether you should tell the school that he will be taking the 'phone in and then make it clear to the school that the phone belongs to you and you will take legal action if they confiscate your phone. I bet there's a law somewhere that covers this...
Like has been suggested already, don't give in. You really aren't asking anything unreasonable. x