You know, when I posted my brilliant faraday cage plans I was mostly joking

[conuly]

I mean, they'd absolutely work better* than asking teachers to police this, but I completely get that nobody's going to do it, just like nobody's going to do gun control.

But now I'm invested. It's weird how that works, isn't it? I didn't really care, other than that this was the umpteenth "oh, wow, what can we do about this intractable problem**!" article this month, but now I kinda do!

* Better to stop kids from texting in class. They wouldn't do anything to prevent them from listening to or watching anything they'd previously downloaded. Faraday cages prevent signals from going in or out, but if your cell phone is in your bag and your bag is next to you then the bluetooth signal can get from your phone to your earbud easy-peasy. To stop that you'd need to require kids to put their phones in RFID blocking bags or somesuch. Or you could use a jammer, but all such technology is illegal, has been for nearly 100 years, and comes with a pretty hefty fine and potential jail time. Teachers aren't paid enough for that, and you aren't either.

** Illicit cell phone usage in class. The parental angle was new.

Comments

[frandroid]

Why don't these parents just text their children, tell them that they only expect a response when they're not actively in class??

[gatheringrivers]

That would require common sense.

[conuly]

Even if these people were willing to do that - and I'm guessing that some of them aren't! - the text alert is still an inherent distraction.

[kengr]

Well, a private cell site for the school (much like a stingray, but without the ability to surveil the calls, just redirect them) might be legal but it'd be a fight.

On the other hand, my *other* suggestion might be workable. Telling parents that they are violating the privacy of the teacher and the other students by using audio/video monitoring in class.

And in 2 party consent states it's actually *illegal*. You have to notify folks *and get their consent* to record them and I believe that monitoring the class counts.

In "one party" states you only need permission of *one** party (ie the person recording/monitoring).

It's *definitely* illegal surveillance. The classroom is *not* "in public".

Monitoring software on laptops or tablets may not violate the privacy of anyone but the student using the device. But since it's also possible to use that to cheat, that's sufficient to ban use of such software.

Detecting it on the device is not impossible, but is problematic if you can't plug in a thumb drive with the software to check for it.

Heck come to think of it, just use a antivirus/anti-malware program that has them listed as malware. That be more than reasonable to use on computers that are connecting to the school network.

Router configuration that limits what sort of external to the school connection can be made would be good too.

btw, I'm sure that it's possible to have a detector that will alert you to an active cell phone nearby. Because to be active, they have to *transmit* to the cell network every so often.

If they are off or in airplane mode, they wouldn't trip it.

[conuly]

> On the other hand, my *other* suggestion might be workable. Telling parents that they are violating the privacy of the teacher and the other students by using audio/video monitoring in class.

I doubt schools want to pick fights with asshole parents, but anyway, it'll do nothing to stop them from texting their kids incessantly.

You're right that redirection is dubiously legal for now - but my bet is that once the FCC gets around to banning it they'll ban it all the way. They've already stepped up enforcement on jammers.

[melannen]

I did have college classes in a building that was a Faraday cage! Rumor was it had been built with the expectation that highly classified signals work would be done in it. This was before smartphones were ubiquitous but you couldn't pick up cell phone signal, GPS, or the campus wifi. I think it was built into the walls, although I don't remember anything odd about the windows - either there's a fully translucent way to do it, or the odds you'll pick up signal through a small window are low enough that they didn't care (the research labs themselves were windowless.)

[conuly]

I kinda feel like you could just as easily have wired panic buttons that you're less likely to absent mindedly leave in your other pants, or your car, or whatever.

[conuly]

Oh, but also, this was simply the most egregious article on the issue of "teachers can't keep kids from being on their phones in class" I've seen this month. It's also the only one to mention over-texty parents.

[conuly]

A grille such as used in microwave windows (microwave ovens are also a faraday cage!) will work to prevent any input through the windows, though clearly your building didn't need it!

[conuly]

Teachers carry their panic buttons on lanyards, so that they are always available.

Perhaps a loud, shrill beeping would suffice.

Or... as I said, a faraday cage just keeps signals from coming in or out. It doesn't stop them from moving within the cage. If the panic button goes to an internal receiver then it's still golden so long as only the exterior walls are blocking anything.

[sabotabby]

They really want us to spend all our time policing cell phone use rather than teaching. I won't. I'm just too tired and they'd have to make it so that I don't need to use my phone for 2FA to get into the attendance.

[conuly]

Exactly what was wrong with attendance books? FFS.

[sabotabby]

I liked it more when it was paper but then covid happened.

[conuly]

I can't imagine that attendance books really are a big disease vector. Certainly not bigger than the students themselves.

[sabotabby]

I mean we were locked down and online, so we couldn't get/submit them.

[conuly]

I know, but surely that was then and this is now? Oh, I'm just arguing to argue, I'm sorry.

[sabotabby]

You're absolutely right, which is why they moved to online attendance (necessitating two computers if you intend to both show something on an overhead projector + take attendance of kids coming in late without interrupting your presentation), and then made that attendance such that it signed you out every 10 minutes and when you log in, you need to do 2FA on your phone. Efficiency!

[silveradept]

Faraday bags is a much better option than Faraday buildings, in my professional opinion, and much better for the actual purpose of keeping kids off phones during class.

I also personally don't want spying software on their school-issued computers if those computers ever leave the school, because there's plenty of already-documented privacy abuse going on there, and that the monitoring software on any such computer has no off-network access allowed.

Continuing to move in the direction of making learning engaging for the learner, rather than convenient for standardized tests, is still my long-term solution to the issue of kids on phones.

Well ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

A Faraday cage would mess with some medical devices.

Re: Well ...

[conuly]

Which ones?

Re: Well ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

Probably any "smart" device that sends or receives a signal, can be controlled from a cellphone or computer, or reports its findings to the doctor's office. There's a lot of wearable or implanted monitoring stuff now, as well as things that dispense medication or stimuli on a schedule.

Then you have things that are not technically "smart" in the sense of having in/out signal but are electronic, and sometimes interact with other electronics in unintended ways, or can be glitched by things that effect electronics -- pacemakers being the most notorious.

Also consider that some adults use their child's phone to set necessary reminders (e.g. to visit the office for medication). This is not always easy to distinguish from kids playing on the phone, and leads to adults fighting with each other.

People arguing about phones is a straightforward failure of society to adapt to technological evolution, at the same time society is falling apart enough that it can't backstop the problem with a simple discussion.

Re: Well ...

[conuly]

Probably any "smart" device that sends or receives a signal, can be controlled from a cellphone or computer, or reports its findings to the doctor's office. There's a lot of wearable or implanted monitoring stuff now, as well as things that dispense medication or stimuli on a schedule.

So, what are you talking about? Because the last person to bring this up specifically mentioned afib trackers and insulin pumps.

My mother had an afib tracker. The last I checked, two years ago, those still don't have a phone app and none of them require 24/7 connectivity. Instead, my mother was instructed to have the sending device next to her bed and then once a week we put it next to her chest for a better, more accurate reading. When she needed 24/7 constant monitoring they put her in the hospital and hooked her up to their monitors there.

I have a friend with a diabetic daughter. Her insulin pump does connect to her phone, but it does so via bluetooth. This is not only more reliable (and cheaper) than a cellular or wifi signal, but works inside a faraday cage so long as both the pump and the phone are together inside the cage. It would not, however, work if the phone is inside a signal-blocking bag. (Well, I suppose it would if the pump was in the bag with it, but then it wouldn't be attached to the patient.)

I'm not willing to argue about hypothetical devices. If you have a specific device in mind that needs 24/7 cell or wifi signal then I will talk about that. However, my general impression is that most such devices, if they even exist, would be bad design. Cellular service is still not universal, and many older buildings have terrible signal simply because they're old. Wifi is even less universal. Access to cell service and wifi is still something that costs money for most people.

Then you have things that are not technically "smart" in the sense of having in/out signal but are electronic, and sometimes interact with other electronics in unintended ways, or can be glitched by things that effect electronics -- pacemakers being the most notorious.

A faraday cage does not "affect electronics". It simply stops signals from coming in or going out. Indeed, if you have a pacemaker you're a lot safer inside a faraday cage than outside, because you aren't at the mercy of all errant signals, only those that generate inside the building or room you're in.

Also consider that some adults use their child's phone to set necessary reminders (e.g. to visit the office for medication). This is not always easy to distinguish from kids playing on the phone, and leads to adults fighting with each other.

You do not need any sort of signal for this sort of thing. The calendar is a purely internal feature. This is, in fact, an argument for faraday cages - any noise or vibration coming from the phone would not be from texting or social media or the newest alert from their favorite game or a spam voicemail. It'd have to be from this sort of thing, something unconnected. And if you had a faraday cage you might not have to ask people to turn off their phones.