NationStates Jolt Archive

This sucks.

http://www.parentdish.com/2008/04/16/dad-calls-from-iraq-son-gets-suspended/

Comments section: "This school needs to be suspended. What's the matter with them?"

Epic response :D

isn't it still a no-no to make such calls after people started getting harassing phone calls? or was that just the British army having a row with mobile phone companies?

though this:
we support our soldiers, we support our troops.

now I hope the boy gets expelled, its just sad and slightly annoying that I see this in England now

yeah, that's what happens when you break the rules.

Whether Soldier and Iraq or what else. If they let the school know that there is a very good reason to call during school time, then there shouldn't be a problem. Really.
Sticks and asses and such...

This sucks.

http://www.parentdish.com/2008/04/16/dad-calls-from-iraq-son-gets-suspended/

I quite agree. Students shouldn't be allowed to have mobiles in class. And the father should know better than to call during lesson. It's what breaks are for.

I quite agree. Students shouldn't be allowed to have mobiles in class. And the father should know better than to call during lesson. It's what breaks are for.

Hehehehehe.

Best tongue in cheek I've heard in a while.

I don't really want to play the devils advocate here but:
- There is a reason phones are not allowed in school: They are disruptive to not only the pupil, but every other student. Plus the many other reasons
- If you make one exception to the rule, you will have to make a hundred: "Oh, but my third cousins dog is sick, they only found out what is happening during maths"


I do feel for their situation, and feel that they may need to manage it better: i.e. see if the father can call during lunch so the kid can go into the school office to take the call.

If there was an agreement reached however, the school should retract the suspension.

Do not blame me for pointing out these facts... Don't shoot the messenger...

The key to this seems to be that the dad made arrangements with the school administrators.

The key to this seems to be that the dad made arrangements with the school administrators.

Apparently he didn't make them very clear, though.

- If you make one exception to the rule, you will have to make a hundred: "Oh, but my third cousins dog is sick, they only found out what is happening during maths"No, what you're referring to is a law. Rules are meant to be bent and broken under circumstances that are appropriate. That's why they're called rules and not laws.

No, what you're referring to is a law. Rules are meant to be bent and broken under circumstances that are appropriate. That's why they're called rules and not laws.

So, what is appropriate and what is inappropriate? Who is the judge of that?

So, what is appropriate and what is inappropriate? Who is the judge of that?

The person who gets to lay down the rules, usually.

So, what is appropriate and what is inappropriate? Who is the judge of that?Whoever is charged with creating and/or enforcing the rules.

The person who gets to lay down the rules, usually.

So, where is the line drawn? If you are allowed calls from parents, why not uncles? 2nd uncles? 3rd uncles?

The problem is that it would start out as just parents, but would bit by bit progress up to something of less urgency. Until we get to the point "Oh, but my third cousins dog is sick"

So, where is the line drawn? If you are allowed calls from parents, why not uncles? 2nd uncles? 3rd uncles?

The problem is that it would start out as just parents, but would bit by bit progress up to something of less urgency. Until we get to the point "Oh, but my third cousins dog is sick"Slippery slope fallacy.

So, where is the line drawn? If you are allowed calls from parents, why not uncles? 2nd uncles? 3rd uncles?

The problem is that it would start out as just parents, but would bit by bit progress up to something of less urgency. Until we get to the point "Oh, but my third cousins dog is sick"

Personally, I wouldn't allow any calls during class. If the parents have arranged a certain time for calls, and have agreed with the school on that, I think the kid should have stayed out of this particular class altogether to take the phone call.
It appears however, that the parents did not make clear arrangements, plus the kid took a phone call during class. And he's being punished according to school regulations. Sounds fair to me.

I was a teacher, and I would do exactly the same thing as the administrators of the school

1.- Having your mobile on during class is a punishable offense. To receive the call, you had it turned on, so be a big boy and get your suspension.

2.- Taking a call from a turned on phone is a double offense. Your suspension is going to be worse. If the call seems to be that urgent, the kid would had to really ask for permission to take the call, outside and after receiving such permission from the teacher.

3.- So, "my dad is calling me from Irak". Yeah, well, I guess there are people with faimly in Mexico too, and they have their cell phones turned off. Soldier, medics, policemen, whatever. If they need to talk with their family, tell them to call to the school principal if it is important. If it isn't, just ignore it.

4.- Those are rules, do you respect your soldier daddy with all that discipline?, well, honor him by being a big boy and having discipline yourself.

5.- Again, "my daddy is calling from Irak", for what I know, it could be your girlfriend.

If I were in his situation, I would have politely and quickly explained why I needed to take the call and walk outside into the hallways to answer that. And if they were still going to suspend me after that, then whatever, I still made the right choice.

Slippery slope fallacy.

ah slippery slope, thats the word I was after... There is no method to prove whether it is a fallacy or not however...

So, on a different tack:
There are two options:
1. Disallow all phone calls during school time
2. Set a rule that says that people are allowed to recieve calls provided the caller fits into category A (Let's say serving in Iraq)

The key thing however with any rules and laws, is that for them to be followed, they should be fair to everyone. Option 2 does not fit this.

ah slippery slope, thats the word I was after... There is no method to prove whether it is a fallacy or not however...I don't doubt that people will ask to accept calls from other people than their fathers. What I do doubt is that there's any obligation whatsoever to comply with these demands. Whether to allow for an exception lies in the estimation of the person entitled to do so, and I'm sure they can see why waiting for a phone call from a parent that is serving in a warzone is a more legitimate reason for bending a rule than someone receiving a phone call from grandma on their birthday.
What you were saying was that allowing this meant you had set a precedent which allows for more frivolous demands to have a sound basis for being met. It simply doesn't.
So, on a different tack:
There are two options:
1. Disallow all phone calls during school time
2. Set a rule that says that people are allowed to recieve calls provided the caller fits into category A (Let's say serving in Iraq)Again, you're confusing rule with law. Rules provide for exceptions by the people who make/enforce them. Making a whole new rule is not necessary.
The key thing however with any rules and laws, is that for them to be followed, they should be fair to everyone. Option 2 does not fit this.Actually, considering that everyone else will likely be able to talk to their fathers pretty much whenever they want to, bending the rule that no one is allowed to use their cell phones would be fair to the people who's fathers are unable to do so.

An exception to a rule is always judged on a case by case basis.

Frick, when I was in high school, if your phone rang in class, all that was done was the teacher would take the phone, and stow it in their desk until the end of the day, at which point you could pick it up. A suspension for having a phone turned on? That's ridiculous. That's the sort of punishment you give for getting into a fight in the lunchroom, not for having a frickin' phone turned on, and not for answering the phone either.

Frick, when I was in high school, if your phone rang in class, all that was done was the teacher would take the phone, and stow it in their desk until the end of the day, at which point you could pick it up. A suspension for having a phone turned on? That's ridiculous. That's the sort of punishment you give for getting into a fight in the lunchroom, not for having a frickin' phone turned on, and not for answering the phone either.

I suspect the article isn't giving all of the information leading up to a suspension

I don't doubt that people will ask to accept calls from other people than their fathers. What I do doubt is that there's any obligation whatsoever to comply with these demands.Is there an obligation to to comply with the original demand? Is it not up to the school administrator regarding whether any student receives any phone call? The administrator made a decision, and now people are criticizing them because they did not get their way.

What you were saying was that allowing this meant you had set a precedent which allows for more frivolous demands to have a sound basis for being met. It simply doesn't.A good arguer/debater could easily use it as a basis for further privileges. "Johnny got to skip class to talk to his father he hadn't seen in 3 months. I haven't seen my Grandmother in 6 months, so why can't I speak to her?"
However... due to my bed time been as soon as this post has been posted, I am in no position to do so

.
Actually, considering that everyone else will likely be able to talk to their fathers pretty much whenever they want to, bending the rule that no one is allowed to use their cell phones would be fair to the people who's fathers are unable to do so.
Is it fair on the other students though that their classes get interrupted by this kids phone ringing? He is also the only kid allowed a phone on them at school. Even teachers usually aren't allowed mobiles on them. (atleast not turned on)

An exception to a rule is always judged on a case by case basis.
Which is where basic inequality comes from...

===

I just want to restate a point from my initial post, just before I end up looking like the uber evil guy...
I do feel for the family, but at the same time I believe they should have organised a method of communicating which did not involve the interruption of study. They were in contact with the school beforehand, so they surely could have organised for the student to make use of a vacant room to take the call in. Therefore not disturbing the class.

The punishment is harsh for what was done. A suspension is a big punishment for something reasonably frivolous. This does however suggest to me from my own experiences that the kid had been warned previously (however I have no proof or evidence).

Is it fair on the other students though that their classes get interrupted by this kids phone ringing? He is also the only kid allowed a phone on them at school. Even teachers usually aren't allowed mobiles on them. (atleast not turned on)

Happened to me once, my cell phone rang in the middle of the class, and the pupils just kept staring at me because that was breaking the rules, I had forgotten to turn it off before entering the class. I turned it off without opening it, and gave it to one of the girls, saying that my cell phone was impounded until the end of the class, the punishment stated in the rules of the class. They just laughed and everything was solved quite fine. You need to establish standards and apply equality to everyone.

If in that school the punishment for that fault is suspension, then go with it. You are indeed interrumpting the class, although a suspension is a bit harsh. My bet is that the teacher told the pupil to turn the phone off, and he just took the call nevertheless.

I got a detention for using my cellphone after school one time in high school. Apparently, school isn't over until 15 minutes after the the last bell rings. I was calling my mom after my last class and got a detention because I was technically still in school?

I fail to understand how this is news worthy.


Me thinks this is a case of someone (the author not the OP) picking up on a minor incident and turning it into a "ZOMG this school hatez our troopz!!!!"

Is there an obligation to to comply with the original demand? Is it not up to the school administrator regarding whether any student receives any phone call? The administrator made a decision, and now people are criticizing them because they did not get their way.Talking to someone in charge of raising them is not unreasonable. If said person has extremely limited means to meet their parental obligations (in this case because they work in a warzone), that would be grounds for an exception. A close relative being terminally ill and the student needing to be available would be another.
A good arguer/debater could easily use it as a basis for further privileges. "Johnny got to skip class to talk to his father he hadn't seen in 3 months. I haven't seen my Grandmother in 6 months, so why can't I speak to her?"
However... due to my bed time been as soon as this post has been posted, I am in no position to do soTo which an even better debater could retort: "No."
Is it fair on the other students though that their classes get interrupted by this kids phone ringing? He is also the only kid allowed a phone on them at school. Even teachers usually aren't allowed mobiles on them. (atleast not turned on)Considering that the dad has little time, the inconvience appears to be rather minor.

This sucks.

http://www.parentdish.com/2008/04/16/dad-calls-from-iraq-son-gets-suspended/

And apparently, the father had a deal with the Assistant Principal in regards to this.

Fuck the school. Let the kid back in without penalty.

This is retarded. honestly.
Of course taking phone calls in class is ulterior impolite. They should teach the kids that, making them understand, not enforcing it with petty rules which require such a strict interpretation not to make people whine about equality.

But it should be the kids decision whether a phone call is really important enough to warrant an impoliteness (though as far as I understood the kid DID leave the classroom after apologizing).
And Phones don't have to ring! Mobiles can vibrate without annoying anyone. It's not that a even the worst ring tune is so terrible that it will disrupt all the students ability to learn for hours. A loud fart steers more distraction.

Have a mobile phone is common part of daily live today. We should teach our kids a appropriate behavior and understanding of the responsibility coming with it. I don't see how banning phones from schools will archive that.

I quite agree. Students shouldn't be allowed to have mobiles in class. And the father should know better than to call during lesson. It's what breaks are for.

What breaks?

Two day suspension seems a bit harsh for taking a phone call during class.

yeah, that's what happens when you break the rules.

points \/
The odd part is that the father had apparently made an arrangement in advance with the assistant principal to allow his sons to receive calls from him. "He had spoken with Mr. Fletcher," said Pat Hill, the boys' mother. "He thought there was an agreement understood that if he called either Joshua or Brandon at school, that everything was fine."

This sucks.

http://www.parentdish.com/2008/04/16/dad-calls-from-iraq-son-gets-suspended/

This sounds like a 'zero tolerance' policy which is shite. Yes, cellphones are a problem in schools. But apparently the parents attempted to make arrangments with the school and were under the impression that said arrangements had been accepted. I'd be flipping my lid as a parent to have my kid be suspended after that.

Then again, fighting with schools is (unfortunately) often the only way you can make sure your kid doesn't get fucked around. And I'm saying that as a teacher. I don't mean screaming at teachers or administration...but I do mean not just letting them do what they want without having to answer for it.

I'd take this to the school board.

I was a teacher, and I would do exactly the same thing as the administrators of the school

1.- Having your mobile on during class is a punishable offense. You were a teacher....and you talk about 'punishable offenses' in an education context?


Must be a cultural thing.

And this, children, is why public schools seriously need overhauling. Is it any suprise that students hate school when the administration is more concerned about it's own power trip than it is about educating students or running things rationally.

Now... I don't support cell phones in schools for the use of socializing with peers, however, I believe that parents should be able to contact their children whenever they feel like, whether they are here or oversees. In the days before children had cell phones, this would take the parent calling the office and the office paging the student which is equally disruptive to the class.

This story just made me sick. The administration should be ashamed of itself.

Considering that the dad has little time, the inconvience appears to be rather minor.

Which would suggest to me that there is more to the story here...

Everyone here I believe is agreed that the punishment is very harsh for such a minor rule-breaking.
Educators are not morons, and despite what people will say are generally not unfair. Even if the principal is on a powertrip, teachers would object to the harsh punishment. So, the fact that both the administrators and the teachers agreed on the punishment would lead be to believe that there is a larger story behind it.

There was obviously not an agreement made between the parents and the school, or the incident was outside of the agreement.

Teachers and people who work in a school setting: Agree?

Which would suggest to me that there is more to the story here...

Everyone here I believe is agreed that the punishment is very harsh for such a minor rule-breaking.
Educators are not morons, and despite what people will say are generally not unfair. Even if the principal is on a powertrip, teachers would object to the harsh punishment. So, the fact that both the administrators and the teachers agreed on the punishment would lead be to believe that there is a larger story behind it.

There was obviously not an agreement made between the parents and the school, or the incident was outside of the agreement.

Teachers and people who work in a school setting: Agree?

given all the disasterous examples of "zero-tolerance" we've seen in the past you still have complete faith that this isn't just another example of a school going too far with its sweeping punishments?

EDIT: Double post... Damn server

see 2 posts down

So, where is the line drawn? If you are allowed calls from parents, why not uncles? 2nd uncles? 3rd uncles?

The problem is that it would start out as just parents, but would bit by bit progress up to something of less urgency. Until we get to the point "Oh, but my third cousins dog is sick"

Because parents are your parents, I think that any legal guardian should be able to contact you. And I see no reason why it would have to get less urgent as long as the administration didn't want it to.


- If you make one exception to the rule, you will have to make a hundred: "Oh, but my third cousins dog is sick, they only found out what is happening during maths"


No, you won't. My dog is sick =/= I haven't seen my dad, who is in a dangerous situation in ____ months and this is my sole chance to contact him.

This best thing for this situation would be for staff to think rationally. This would prevent stupid punishment like this and prevent it from becoming too frequent.

given all the disasterous examples of "zero-tolerance" we've seen in the past you still have complete faith that this isn't just another example of a school going too far with its sweeping punishments?

I have had no experience with schools from the US.

However, I have faith because I know that the media will say anything to sell a paper and envillianate (yes, I think I just made up a word...) someone.

Because parents are your parents, I think that any legal guardian should be able to contact you. And I see no reason why it would have to get less urgent as long as the administration didn't want it to.
You claim that the administrators have the right to draw the line, but when they do it everyone gets into an uproar over it....




No, you won't. My dog is sick =/= I haven't seen my dad, who is in a dangerous situation in ____ months and this is my sole chance to contact him.
Slippery slope thingamajig. It starts as "my father in iraq", then it is "My uncle in China" and before you know it is "My cousins dog at the vet".


This best thing for this situation would be for staff to think rationally. This would prevent stupid punishment like this and prevent it from becoming too frequent.
Like I said, I believe there is alot we do not know on the issue

Why didn't the kid play the patriot card?
"My daddy is fighting for our freedoms in Iraq, and if you won't let me take the call, you hate liberty!"

You claim that the administrators have the right to draw the line, but when they do it everyone gets into an uproar over it....
They should use common sense to draw the line instead of asshatery like they did here. They went to far with this but I highly doubt we would be having conversation if it was "with third cousins dog is sick".

Slippery slope thingamajig. It starts as "my father in iraq", then it is "My uncle in China" and before you know it is "My cousins dog at the vet".
the "Slippery slope thingamajig?" Oh, you must mean the fallacy http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html As long as the staff use common sense to justify their choice there shouldn't be a problem. Here, however, they didn't.

Like I said, I believe there is alot we do not know on the issue

Indeed.

I think there is more to this story then is being reported.

We had a incident like this in the US at the start of the Iraq war with the kid getting suspended. It was a school near a military base so naturally a lot of the locals go up and arms about this. turns out he wasn't suspended for the phone call but how he explained it the the teacher ( several swear words were used). Id wait until I hear the schools side of the story before i pass judgment.

Wow, that school sucks...my phone has rang a bunch of times in class and the teachers just kinda ignored it. I'm not a moron though, I didn't answer the phone call in the middle of class.

When I went to high school, not even the teachers had cell phones. I THINK the principal MIGHT have had one in his car (the old, multi piece one that needed to be hard wired into the car's electrical system).

Why didn't the kid play the patriot card?
"My daddy is fighting for our freedoms in Iraq, and if you won't let me take the call, you hate liberty!"

It stopped working at around Iraq body bag # 2,500.

When I went to high school, not even the teachers had cell phones. I THINK the principal MIGHT have had one in his car (the old, multi piece one that needed to be hard wired into the car's electrical system).

When I was in Middle School, every teacher had a cell phone.

*attempts to make Gun Manufacturers feel old*

When I was in Middle School, every teacher had a cell phone.

*attempts to make Gun Manufacturers feel old*

If cell phones are outlawed, only outlaws will have cell phones.

I was a teacher, and I would do exactly the same thing as the administrators of the school

Usually one ends a sentence with the appropriate punctuation mark, such as a period.

3.- So, "my dad is calling me from Irak".

Iraq, actually.


Yeah, well, I guess there are people with faimly

That's spelled family.


Having been a teacher, I'm sure you can appreciate these corrections. Though, honestly, I doubt you ever were a teacher.

That being said, there are extenuating circumstances here. They are the same extenuating circumstances which should apply to any student whose parents or other immediate family members are in a life threatening situation (whether it be in Iraq, in the critical care unit of the local hospital, or wherever). This should especially have been true if the parents had notified the school about the extenuating circumstances, as has apparently happened here.

I know schools these days like to pretend the parents don't matter and shouldn't have a say in things, but that's simply not the case in most families. I imagine the poor kid would have gotten in as much trouble by simply staying home to receive the call, or skipping the class. And the mother would probably have gotten in trouble as well, for promoting truancy. It's a no-win situation.

You realize that Aelosia is not an American and I believe English is not her first language.


Having been a teacher, I'm sure you can appreciate these corrections. Though, honestly, I doubt you ever were a teacher.

1) Aelosia is not an American

2) English is not her first language unless I am mistaken

1) Aelosia is not an American

2) English is not her first language unless I am mistaken

Spanish. She's from Venezuela.

And not knowing English wouldn't prevent her from being a teacher of any subject.

Well, except for, y'know, English.

They should use common sense to draw the line instead of asshatery like they did here. They went to far with this but I highly doubt we would be having conversation if it was "with third cousins dog is sick".


the "Slippery slope thingamajig?" Oh, you must mean the fallacy http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html As long as the staff use common sense to justify their choice there shouldn't be a problem. Here, however, they didn't.


Please explain how it is 'asshatery'
As I see it, they did use common sense:
The rules state no students are allowed phones at school, therefore because he not only had a phone at school, but took a call during class, he has broken the rules.


We had a incident like this in the US at the start of the Iraq war with the kid getting suspended. It was a school near a military base so naturally a lot of the locals go up and arms about this. turns out he wasn't suspended for the phone call but how he explained it the the teacher ( several swear words were used). Id wait until I hear the schools side of the story before i pass judgment.
You could be right there. From this article regarding the current incident:
http://www.temple-telegram.com/story/local/2008/04/15/48659
According to the cell phone use policy for the Copperas Cove Independent School District, students are prohibited from displaying, activating or using cell phones during school hours, unless it is an emergency.

The policy further states that the student may receive a $15 fine and face detention, or even suspension, should the student become insubordinate.
They only get suspended if they are insubordinate (Giving sass)


====

And from this article: http://www.kdhnews.com/news/story.aspx?s=24674
On April 3, he received a two-day, out-of school suspension after he received a call on his cell phone from his father, a soldier serving in Iraq. But Brandon had already received a three-day, in-school suspension earlier that day after replying to a text message sent by a friend, his mother said.
It reveals more details about the incident that are not apparent in the other reports... It seems to me that the mother went to the media without giving them the full story. now we have a layer of media crap to sort through...

Spanish. She's from Venezuela.

And not knowing English wouldn't prevent her from being a teacher of any subject.

Well, except for, y'know, English.

Yes I know. I was making a point that English was not her first language and that she wasn't an American.

(I wonder why the title wasn't: "youngster breaks schools rules and gets suspended". If he was waiting for his dad's call from Iraq, he should have said that to the teacher before, since using cell phones is forbidden in class.)

from further reading the article in the OP, I must change my mind: since the student had a permission for receiving calls on his cell phone during school, he was ok. The problem is with the school - bad management, I'd say.

1) Aelosia is not an American


She's from Venezuela. Ergo, she's American. The USA aren't the only country on those two continents. ;)

She's from Venezuela. Ergo, she's American. The USA aren't the only country on those two continents. ;)

Will we REALLY discuss semantics now? :p

Will we REALLY discuss semantics now? :pALWAYS! :D:D:D

Anyway, about the OP: after further reading, looks like the student asked permission to use his cell in class and wait for his dad to call, and got it from the school management; I must change my mind, and call this case an example of poor school management.

*snip*

5.- Again, "my daddy is calling from Irak", for what I know, it could be your girlfriend.

And that's the rub, right there. You can wave the flag of patriotism and military service all you want, but in the end, without checking, nobody knows who's on the other end of that phone.

The "arrangements" that should have been made were this: Dad wants to call, he calls -- wait for it -- THE SCHOOL'S OFFICE and gets the kid paged to the office to take the call. Takes about a minute or two and is much less disruptive than a cell phone going off in class, a kid answering it, and a teacher having to verify that the caller is legitimate.

Calling the office is what we had to do before cell phones were ubiquitous. I'm all for allowing Dad to talk to Junior, but a few seconds of thinking would have solved the problem. People are WAY to eager to trot out the emotional pleas when it comes to issues like this. It's a similar knee-jerk to the lawsuit reflex.

ALWAYS! :D:D:D

Anyway, about the OP: after further reading, looks like the student asked permission to use his cell in class and wait for his dad to call, and got it from the school management; I must change my mind, and call this case an example of poor school management.

Agreed, but still that's a cumbersome and most disruptive way to go about it.

It stopped working at around Iraq body bag # 2,500.

If it had, Ann Coulter would be broke.

What breaks?

Lunch break, for example.

Lunch break, for example.

You're not allowed to use your cellphone during lunch, you're not even allowed to leave for lunch. I'm sure the war wouldn't just stop when the kid had lunch, anyway.

You're not allowed to use your cellphone during lunch, you're not even allowed to leave for lunch. I'm sure the war wouldn't just stop when the kid had lunch, anyway.

You're not allowed to leave your classroom for lunch? And you're not allowed to use your mobile outside the school building?

You're not allowed to leave your classroom for lunch? And you're not allowed to use your mobile outside the school building?

You're not allowed to leave the building until the end of the school day.

You're not allowed to leave the building until the end of the school day.

You mean none of your schools have schoolyards, or that students aren't allowed in them?

You mean none of your schools have schoolyards, or that students aren't allowed in them?

My school doesn't let us out of the building until the day is over. You can't just leave as you please, and that includes even going out for some air.

From 7:55am to 2:30pm, no cellphones.

You mean none of your schools have schoolyards, or that students aren't allowed in them?

My school doesn't let us out of the building until the day is over. You can't just leave as you please, and that includes even going out for some air.

From 7:55am to 2:30pm, no cellphones.

The problem that I have with this whole thing is this:

The odd part is that the father had apparently made an arrangement in advance with the assistant principal to allow his sons to receive calls from him. "He had spoken with Mr. Fletcher," said Pat Hill, the boys' mother. "He thought there was an agreement understood that if he called either Joshua or Brandon at school, that everything was fine."

Did he have permission and the school reneged?

Was the mother mistaken? It doesn't matter. The boy obviously couldn't have known his mother was mistaken. Is the school punishing the boy, or the parents?

Cell phones should be banned from classrooms, and if one does go off, it should be an automatic detention. I am 100% for this rule. There is nothing more rude than a phone going off in the middle of a lecture-- Calls from parents included.

Oh, and the fact that the kid received a suspension earlier that day for text messaging, makes me much less prone to feeling sorry for him. The phone should have just been confiscated until the end of the day though.

One thing that bothers me though:
The wording sounds to me like the class was being let out, and the kid was leaving the classroom. So this sorta destroys the "it was disruptive" complaint. Is there any proof that it was during class that his phone went off?

aye, that's pretty fucked up.

If it had, Ann Coulter would be broke.

When I said "stopped working", I meant on people, not on the animals that read Coulter.

When I said "stopped working", I meant on people, not on the animals that read Coulter.

:D

Why didn't the kid play the patriot card?
"My daddy is fighting for our freedoms in Iraq, and if you won't let me take the call, you hate liberty!"

Or the common sense card, or no card at all. Really, what does the administration have to be thinking when they try to get in between this kid and their dad? What idiots.

Or the common sense card, or no card at all. Really, what does the administration have to be thinking when they try to get in between this kid and their dad? What idiots.

They are thinking that they a) have a rule against cell phones in school, which is wise considering the lack of cell phone etiquette present in our society, b) the kid was caught texting a friend earlier that day. Doesn't sound like Jr. was saving his cell phone "priviledge" just for Dad.

I agree that the kid should get to talk to his dad whenever he got the chance; but he should have forewarned his teachers that he might be getting this call, and his parents needed to better communicate with the school administration.

Usually one ends a sentence with the appropriate punctuation mark, such as a period.

Fast writing, actually. Sorry about that, but happens from time to time, when I don't have time to review the post before sending it. I tend to write fast in these forums.

Iraq, actually.

Not in my country. You did understand the word, although, right?

That's spelled family.

Indeed. A shameful typo. Sorry about that.

Having been a teacher, I'm sure you can appreciate these corrections. Though, honestly, I doubt you ever were a teacher.

I always appreciate corrections when they are aimed at improving my flawed english, but not about small typing mistakes in one post trying to lead to bigotry. However, thank you for pointing that, I will try to tighten my precautions as to avoid further offense with a lack of a period or a wrong written syllabe. Furthermore, if you are basing your last statement on the current state of my english grammar, I would suggest you to rethink about it. I was a teacher of music, in Venezuela. In Venezuela, it is still "Irak", and you hardly refer to that nation when you explain what music is. And furthermore, I wonder how is your spanish going.

You were a teacher....and you talk about 'punishable offenses' in an education context?

Must be a cultural thing.

More like a translation thing. Let's try with "an action that breaks a rule stated previously, and that carries a preinstated sanction".

"Punishable offenses" is a legal term or idiom, right?

1) Aelosia is not an American

2) English is not her first language unless I am mistaken

Spanish. She's from Venezuela.

And not knowing English wouldn't prevent her from being a teacher of any subject.

Well, except for, y'know, English.

Thanks to you two for remembering things so well.

To be honest, some time ago someone approached me and offered me to give basic english classes. I refused by stating that my english was rusted, (as it still is), and an overloaded agenda, (plus, the earnings weren't good enough). Of course, I would check thrice whatever I would write in front of a class giving an english class, something I rarely do with NSG posts.

She's from Venezuela. Ergo, she's American. The USA aren't the only country on those two continents. ;)

The point is about cultural differences, right? Well, how about THAT?

Go, my favourite NSG eurocommie :p

Will we REALLY discuss semantics now? :p

Irak/Iraq, periods, typos, one America/two Americas, isn't all that about semantics? :p

And that's the rub, right there. You can wave the flag of patriotism and military service all you want, but in the end, without checking, nobody knows who's on the other end of that phone.

Yeah, there is a bit of a political agenda in the article. I bet hundreds of children in the US were punished by similar situations in the same week. Too bad they didn't have a patriot father.

The "arrangements" that should have been made were this: Dad wants to call, he calls -- wait for it -- THE SCHOOL'S OFFICE and gets the kid paged to the office to take the call. Takes about a minute or two and is much less disruptive than a cell phone going off in class, a kid answering it, and a teacher having to verify that the caller is legitimate.

Exactly, this would have been the perfect way to handle the situation. It's the way it is done here, if you need to talk with your kid, you can try the school's phone all the time.

Having been a teacher, I'm sure you can appreciate these corrections. Though, honestly, I doubt you ever were a teacher.Based on what, exactly?