Who the heck are these kids talking to at lunch anyway?

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , bizby40 says...


There have been a couple of threads recently that involved cell phones.
If
you've read the first one, you know that I am not a fan of cell phones.
My
kids may very well be the only high schoolers in town that don't have
them -- though with my oldest being only 9, I do have quite a while to
reconsider.

But in the "Kid gets 10-day suspension for talking to Mom in Iraq at
lunch"
thread, several people have vigorously defended the kids' right to talk in
the phone at lunch. Without agreeing or disagreeing with that, I have a
sincere question -- who the heck are these kids talking to at lunch
anyway?

My bet - talking to others across the cafeteria, flashing pictures, and
pointing
out people to each other. Just like they IM their neighbors when they're
home.

lol -- this is my bet too. At least in most cases. Which is why,
regardless of what the rules are in my school, my kids might not
have the phones. Or at least not until they are able to buy their
own.

Bizby

"Dayge" wrote in message
...
The question is are all these calls necessary?

I think that's the wrong question, actually. Regardless of whether you
are a fan of cell phones or not, you should be asking: "Is anyone being
harmed by these calls?"

And the answer, of course, is no.

Why is the answer, of course, no?

I think cell phones can decrease independence of kids. In addition, because
they can be distracting, this hurts school work, which hurts the kids who
are distracted and his/her classmates. Finally, they can be used to cheat in
school, which hurts everyone. And the extra time and effort that teachers
have to spend policing cell phone use is better spent teaching.

Jeff

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , bizby40 says...


There have been a couple of threads recently that involved cell phones.
If
you've read the first one, you know that I am not a fan of cell phones.
My
kids may very well be the only high schoolers in town that don't have
them -- though with my oldest being only 9, I do have quite a while to
reconsider.

But in the "Kid gets 10-day suspension for talking to Mom in Iraq at
lunch"
thread, several people have vigorously defended the kids' right to talk in
the phone at lunch. Without agreeing or disagreeing with that, I have a
sincere question -- who the heck are these kids talking to at lunch
anyway?

My bet - talking to others across the cafeteria, flashing pictures, and
pointing
out people to each other. Just like they IM their neighbors when they're
home.

And many parents limit the use IM and other electronic communications so
that they can read and do homework.

Gee, it seems like a good idea for schools to do this as well.

Jeff

Banty

In article . net, Jeff says...


"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , bizby40 says...


There have been a couple of threads recently that involved cell phones.
If
you've read the first one, you know that I am not a fan of cell phones.
My
kids may very well be the only high schoolers in town that don't have
them -- though with my oldest being only 9, I do have quite a while to
reconsider.

But in the "Kid gets 10-day suspension for talking to Mom in Iraq at
lunch"
thread, several people have vigorously defended the kids' right to talk in
the phone at lunch. Without agreeing or disagreeing with that, I have a
sincere question -- who the heck are these kids talking to at lunch
anyway?

My bet - talking to others across the cafeteria, flashing pictures, and
pointing
out people to each other. Just like they IM their neighbors when they're
home.

And many parents limit the use IM and other electronic communications so
that they can read and do homework.

Gee, it seems like a good idea for schools to do this as well.

Possibly, depending on the school and circumstances.

But, c'mon - we're talking 13 to 18 year olds. What percentage of calls do
folks here think is about arranging for pizza with big sister at college? Some,
to be sure.

But overwhelimingly most of the cell phone stuff at this age is fluff. Just
like most of the telephone stuff was fluff when I was a teen in the early '70s.
And when my mom was a teen in the '40s.

Banty

"Jeanne" wrote in message
...

"bizby40" wrote in message
news

There have been a couple of threads recently that involved cell phones.
If you've read the first one, you know that I am not a fan of cell
phones. My kids may very well be the only high schoolers in town that
don't have them -- though with my oldest being only 9, I do have quite a
while to reconsider.

But in the "Kid gets 10-day suspension for talking to Mom in Iraq at
lunch" thread, several people have vigorously defended the kids' right to
talk in the phone at lunch. Without agreeing or disagreeing with that, I
have a sincere question -- who the heck are these kids talking to at
lunch anyway?

They can't be talking to their friends that are in class, since that is
not allowed. They *could* be talking to their parents, but I have a hard
time believing that there are that many kids that really *need* to talk
to their parents during the school day on a daily basis. That only
leaves other kids who are also at lunch. And if they are all at lunch,
why don't they just eat together? And if they have so many friends that
they can't eat with them all every day, then do they really need to chat
with them all every day?

Sure, lunch is a time to socialize and get a break from the day -- that's
why you go to eat and socialize with your friends. I just don't see a
cell phone as useful in this picture. In fact, I can see the poor
lunchmate left to eat essentially alone as her friend takes call after
call.


Well, I've seen two *adult* women /men both taking cell calls during their
lunch together.

I agree. And it's wrong, wrong, wrong. I have one friend that I almost
quit going to see because her land line would ring contstantly and she'd
take every call. Most of them were some kind of business related to
the volunteer work she does, but many of them just had to let her know
something, and the answering machine could have sufficed. Actually,
none of them were *urgent*, the machine could have handled them all.
But if she was going to insist on answering them, it upset me that she
ended up in friendly, non-related chit-chat that greatly expanded the
time I spent just sitting there waiting.

How she finally picked up on how rude she was being, I don't know,
but thankfully she did finally stop answering the phone when I was
there.

I'm still not taking a stance on whether or not the phones should
actually be banned during lunch, though my anti-cell bias is showing
through. But I really am curious about who they're all talking to.

Bizby


I'm definitely not a cellphone fan. From what I know, the kids call/text
friends who do not go to that school or they call parents or parents call
them. The question is are all these calls necessary? Just because two
friends are friends doesn't mean they need immediate access to each other
24/7. Presumably they can talk to each other *after* school. Parents can
call the school office if there is a (non-emergency) need to communicate
with the child.

I think after a certain age and in certain areas, cell phones help the
parent keep in contact with the child but I'm not sure that instant
contact during an ordinary school/work day is needed (although I know some
parents think it's their right to have instant access to their child).

To me, cell phones provide a means to contact people when needed. But
then the question is how do you define "needed"? I can be comfortably out
of reach to most people (even DH, DD and DS!) if I know there is a way to
reach me through traditional means (e.g., land line phones). Occasionally
I've felt frustrated that I couldn't reach DH at his workplace (he doesn't
have his own line) but it's never been a crisis or even a problem.

For example, DS goes to daycare close to DH's workplace (and about an hour
from mine). DS hurt his hand and the daycare called both of us but only
reached me. I also tried calling DH but he was out of the office. So, I
went to get DS (who turned out to be fine - grrrr). It was inconvenient
to me but hardly catastrophic.

Jeanne

I agree with you completely. People tend to create their own "need" for
cell phones.

Bizby

I think that's the wrong question, actually. Regardless of whether you
are a fan of cell phones or not, you should be asking: "Is anyone being
harmed by these calls?"

And the answer, of course, is no.

Why is the answer, of course, no?


Because so far I haven't heard of a cell phone attacking anyone.

I think cell phones can decrease independence of kids. In addition,
because they can be distracting, this hurts school work, which hurts the
kids who are distracted and his/her classmates. Finally, they can be used
to cheat in school, which hurts everyone.

Just because they "can," doesn't mean they will.

And I think a cell phone gives a kid more independence, not less.

Lots of things are distracting in schools, regardless of cell phones and if
a student is that easily distracted from their lesson either the teacher
isn't doing his/her job very well in keeping them interested OR the student
just isn't interested in that particular lesson, period.

Finally, I don't see how they can be used to cheat. When you take a test
you aren't supposed to have *anything* except the exam, a pencil/pen, and
possibly a calculator or some other tool/book (if the teacher wants), on the
desk. So I think a teacher would notice a cell phone on the desk. Besides
that, I agree with you in that during class, cell phone should be limited or
even prohibited. But the original discussion was about a kid using it at
lunch. Lunch is different than class.

And the extra time and effort that teachers have to spend policing cell
phone use is better spent teaching.


I *completely* agree...so maybe they should stop trying to "police cell
phone use" and focus on their job (teaching) instead.

It's unfortunate that we live in a society where rules are enforced merely
for the sake of enforcement instead of for a legitimate purpose (which
seems
to be the case with the school in Georgia). My husband was in the
military
for almost twenty years and he also served over in the Middle East for
long
periods. Unless something has changed drastically since he was in, I can
tell you all for a fact that it is not easy to make a phone call from over
there and when you have the opportunity to do it, you take it. You don't
worry about whether the person is sleeping or at lunch or anything else
for
that matter. There are specific times when phone calls are allowed and
only
a certain number of phones to use. Every phone call had to be coordinated
to make sure I was near a land line when he was able to call so he would
reach me.

That's what I did when my father was deployed, that's what my cousins did
when
their son was deployed, and, since this is apparently the ONLY such case
in a
school near a large military base, this is what all the rest of the
students do.

No it's not. It's the only *reported* case. And as I stated in the rest of
my post, just because something worked for you, or for me, or for anyone
else for that matter during "their decade" doesn't necessarily mean it
should be done the same way in the future. Necessity is subjective and
while it isn't necessary for any human being to communicate with another
human being at all, it does make life easier and better and people happy.
Once you determine that communication is "necessary" (if it is, under your
own definition), then that begs the questions, what forms of communication
are "necessary?" I tends towards the school of thinking that if a
particular action isn't hurting yourself or anyone else, you should be
allowed to decide for yourself whether you want to do it or not. While I
respect rules and the "necessity" of them, I also think they should be bent
according to circumstance. We don't live in a black & white world.

The thing that cell phones have introduced, that our society is still
struggling
to get a set of workable rules around, is this possibility that phone
conversations can happen anywhere, anytime. That a conversation CAN
happen
anywhere, anytime, does NOT therefore mean it SHOULD happen anywhere,
anytime.

Right. But you don't know the particulars (nor does anyone), for why that
phone call took place or the "necessity" of it taking place at that
particular time. Maybe there was a reason for it, maybe there wasn't. But
that's my point. Who are any of us to judge whether it's right or wrong.
Rules are great but they should be the be-all-end-all of the way in which we
live.

Even though there are some people who would put that convenience over all
other
concerns. They should not be surprised at objections from those who value
those
other concerns - that's how social conventions evolve.

You're right. I apologize for my earlier comment and I don't begrudge you
or anyone else their opinion. But speaking of social conventions, today's
social conventions include technological items such as cell phones, email,
video games and television. Kids should know how to use each of these and
the appropriateness of using them. The only way they learn is through
experience.


That does not mean the technology is being ignored, or denied, or anything
like
that. It means that new rules evolve around it to allow the needs of all
to be
accommodated.


"Needs of all"? "All" would include that boy then, right? Necessity is
individually determined. The needs of all or even the needs of the majority
will never, ever be met because every person has their own needs and they
will conflict.


So I return to my original question: Did this child harm anyone by taking
a
cell phone call from his mother during his free time? Was the phone call
disruptive to his classmates or to the "learning environment?" On both
counts, I would say it's highly doubtful. That being said, I wonder at
those who support this school's decision.

By the school's informed policy, the answer is yes. At least in that it
undermines a rule they have deemed necessary for the smooth running of the
school. And one that, apparently, *every* *other* *student* is able to
work
with.

Just because the media picked up on one particular happenstance and
broadcast it, doesn't mean others don't exist. I'd be willing to bet there
are others. This is just the only one we are hearing about. Besides that,
I hardly think one phone call at lunch is going to disrupt its "smooth
running"...if that's the case, I'd argue the school has a lot bigger
problems they need to address.

"bizby40" wrote in message
...

"Dayge" wrote in message
...
So I return to my original question: Did this child harm anyone by taking
a cell phone call from his mother during his free time?

I respectfully ask that the discussion of the rightness or
wrongness of allowing a child to take a call from an
overseas parent remain in the thread in which it was
introduced.

But that's not what I asked. My question was pretty general but if you want
to make it even more general you can: Does any child do harm by taking a
cell phone call during his/her free time?

And I think my question does have a tie to your original question...

Does it really matter who they are talking to? Is it anyone else's business
other than possibly the parents?

I would hazard an educated guess that most phone calls are to people the
students knows since (IME at least), people don't tend to talk to random
strangers. Those people could include family members or friends. Why does
it matter who they are talking to?

Dayge wrote:

Have you all thought about how communication betwee parents and
children has
gotten worse over the years? How many children have we seen in the
news or
even at our own schools who have so much repressed anger due to
neglect
because their parents are working all the time or trying to have
lives of
their own or just generally leave them to their own devices instead
of
caring enough to talk to them on a regular basis to find out what's
going on
in their lives? Communication between children and their parents
(and
others: family, friends, etc.), should be encouraged, not punished.
Those
that are, or become, anti-social are the ones you need to worry
about. The
fact that this parent cares enough about her 17-year-old son to call
him and
interrupt his short lunchtime to talk to him and the fact that this
near-adulthood boy cares enough about his mom, despite her choosing
to go
serve overseas, to take the phone call, knowing it would probably get
him
into trouble and/or he could've been hanging out with his friends
instead,
should be enough.


Here's a different perspective:

http://news-info.wustl.edu/tips/page/normal/338.html

Cell phones on college campuses make 'letting go' a challenge

By Neil Schoenherr


Sept. 2, 2003 - Ahh ... the cell phone. A great tool for keeping in
touch, getting help in an emergency or calling home to see what
groceries to pick up.

It's also one of the most visible additions on the college campus scene
in the last several years, says Karen Levin Coburn, assistant vice
chancellor for students and associate dean for the freshman transition
at Washington University in St. Louis.


Photo by David Kilper / WUSTL Photo
According to the new edition of Letting Go, the "arrival of the
ubiquitous cell phone has created not only convenience and ease of
communication, but also a challenge to the process of letting go" by
providing a way for students and parents to always be able to reach
each other.
Download
Coburn is co-author of Letting Go: A Parents' Guide to Understanding
the College Years, which provides a comprehensive, down-to-earth guide
for parents experiencing the varying emotions of parenting a college
student. The book, now in its newly released fourth edition, has sold
more than 300,000 copies since first being released in 1988.

"When we wrote our 1997 edition, very few people used cell phones. They
just weren't an issue," Coburn says. "Now the majority of students have
a cell phone and they've made a huge difference, pro and con, in the
communication patterns between parents and students."

According to the new edition of Letting Go, the "arrival of the
ubiquitous cell phone has created not only convenience and ease of
communication, but also a challenge to the process of letting go" by
providing a way for students and parents to always be able to reach
each other.

Coburn said one student even described the cell phone as an electronic
leash. "It can be great to keep in touch, but it can be overdone. The
cell phone really changes the dynamic and expectation of communication
between parents and students," Coburn says.

More than half of college students now own a cell phone, the authors
report in Letting Go. That means "for many of today's students there is
an ever-present possibility of an available parent at the end of a
'cordless tether' - a fact that alarms many experts in adolescent
development," the authors write.

"I see it all the time," Coburn says. "Students are walking around
campus talking to their parents. 'Hey, mom. Just got out of class. I'm
bored. I just called to say hi.' That can be positive, but it can also
be a detriment to fostering independence."

At the same time, parents are able to call anytime day or night. The
cell phone can be an irresistible invitation to parental intrusions
into a student's day.

Quality, content of calls count

"In this edition of the book, we've really moved into another
generation of parents," Coburn says. "They've been more involved with
their children all along and they expect to stay involved. College
students still need their parents, and this generation of millennial
kids are more likely to turn to their parents for advice than
generations of the recent past."

Coburn's advice? There is no right or wrong way to communicate. She
says some families prefer e-mail as a primary contact, reserving phone
calls for weekends or special occasions. That also allows students to
communicate at their own pace and to not be interrupted during class or
time with friends. Others find that touching base everyday by phone,
even for a minute or two, is comfortable and casual.

"Even more important than the frequency of the phone calls," she adds,
"is the quality and content of the conversation. The challenge is for
parents to refrain from trying to orchestrate their children's lives
from afar, to support their growing independence and to encourage them
to take action to solve their own problems."

When it comes to keeping in touch," Coburn says, each family will need
to find its own way, "straddling that fine line between intrusion and
desertion and remaining sensitive to the issues of control and
independence, connection and separation, that are at the heart of all
the logistics."

Coburn co-wrote Letting Go with Madge Lawrence Treeger, a longtime
member of Washington University's Counseling Service, who is now a
psychotherapist in private practice in St. Louis. The book is published
by HarperCollins and is available at Amazon.com and most bookstores.

Dayge wrote:
I would hazard an educated guess that most phone calls are to people
the
students knows since (IME at least), people don't tend to talk to
random
strangers. Those people could include family members or friends.
Why does
it matter who they are talking to?

With IM, that may not be true anymore. IM on a phone is akin to IM on
the internet. The kid could be chatting with some complete stranger
who's on the internet, not a phone. There are a lot of adults who IM
all day long from their workplace with strangers, much of them married
and flirting.

The other day i was in the police station (my friend's car got stolen
and we had to report it). A 45 year old man was in there asking for
help because a 14 year old girl kept calling his cell phone and leaving
IM messages on it. He had saved the logs. The girl thought she knew
him, and didn't believe when he said he was not her ex-boyfriend but
rather a 45 year old married man. You'd be surprised at the messages
she IM'd this man - very harrassing and sexually precocious. The man,
of course, was quite concerned that somehow he'd get implicated in the
whole mess and accused of stalking *her.* He had a 14 year old daughter
himself, and was apalled at the thought his DD would do something like
this. The police put an end to the ordeal by calling her cell phone,
talking with her, and then asking to talk to her mom. Her mom had no
idea her daughter was IM'ing a 45 year old stranger.

jen