Non-Educational Electronic Devices in Schools (Essay Sample)

Policy to Ban Use of Cell Phones and other Non-Educational Electronic Devices in School
Name
Institution
Policy to Ban Use of Cell Phones and other Non-Educational Electronic Devices in School
With the advent of information technology, there have been major developments in several spheres of human life. Education is one area that has witnessed positive changes as a result of easy and quick access to information. For instance, online libraries and academic databases provide convenient and reliable access to learning material. In addition, online platforms, some of which can be integrated to mobile phones, allow learners to share information, discuss educational issues, as well as seek assistance from instructors. However, there is one aspect of the application of information technology in education that has raised concerns for its interference with student engagement. Mobile phones, which are widely considered basic gadgets for communication, are being used by students in ways that interfere with classroom learning and threaten the integrity of learner assessment. Regarding classroom learning, ringing mobile phones cause distractions, while texting and playing games consumes learners’ time. With respect to the integrity of learner assessment, students can use mobile phones to cheat by texting each other answers or using mobile Internet to search for answers. In this regard, there is need to formulate and implement relevant policies aimed at restricting the use of mobile phones at school. This move will ensure that learners do not waste time playing games and texting each other, reduce disturbances during learning hours, as well as minimize cheating incidences during exams.
The first step in using policies to effect institutional change is identifying a problem that needs to be addressed. The issue of mobile phones in schools is controversial because it has both merits and demerits. If put into good use, mobile phones, iPods, cameras, and other non-educational gadgets can facilitate learning by enabling students and teachers to communicate, access, and store information related to syllabus material. Research is a key function in learning, and mobile phones with Internet capabilities can greatly promote learners’ engagement in research by allowing them to access online academic sources. In addition, learners can record lectures that they can listen to at their own pace, which can greatly increase their understanding of the course material and classroom learning activities. Moreover, students may use their phones to take pictures related to what they are learning, such as illustrations of the digestive system for a biology class, or maps for a geography class. In this consideration, banning the use of mobile phones and other non-educational electronic devices, but which may be used for educational purposes, seems to be retrogressive to learning and a hindrance to faster dissemination of knowledge.
However, the problem in allowing these devices in school is the difficulty in controlling their use. Assuming that each child comes to school with a non-educational electronic device, it will be impossible for teachers to monitor how each students uses his or her gadget. This is especially the case in Canada, where children as young as 10 years old own mobile phones. According to a survey carried out early 2014 by the non-profit organization MediaSmarts, 40 percent of children in grades four through six own mobile phones, while the rate was over 90 percent for older students (grade 11) (Oliveira, 2014). The astounding finding, however, is the use into which the students put their phones. Of the 5, 436 students who were interviewed, 59 percent reported that they used their phones to play games, 52 percent said they used them to keep updated on social media, while 51 percent used their phones to download music and movies. These statistics indicate that students use mobile phones and the Internet in activities unrelated to learning more than they use them for educational purposes. In the MediaStart survey, Wikipedia was the least visited site. Accordingly, there is sufficient justification for the banning of mobile phones and non-educational electronic devices in schools because they encourage students to engage in non-academic activities. Other studies have shown that when used for academic purposes, phones, such as those equipped with cameras, are used for cheating by allowing students to take pictures of exam questions and sending them to other students or persons outside the school to get the answers. According to a research in the U.S. by Common Sense Media, an education company based in San Francisco, more than a third of school-going teenagers use mobile phones to cheat in exams (Miners, 2009). In addition, phones and other electronic devices can be a source of conflicts and fights at schools as a result of thefts. In this regard, these devices are detrimental to the learning environment because they create disciplinary problems and consume valuable time that could otherwise be used for learning activities.
Policies are effective tools for prohibiting, sanctioning, and rewarding behavior, as well as providing inducements for desired behaviors (Osher & Quinn, 2010). An effective policy that will discourage students against coming to school with non-educational electronic devices should, as a matter if necessity, include undesirable consequences for offenders. Accordingly, the relevant policies should incorporate the following provisions.
The use of non-educational electronic devices with the capability to store, retrieve, send or receive information during exams shall be treated as cheating, and the offender shall be subject to appropriate disciplinary measures.
Non-educational electronic devices, including photographic equipment, personal music players, cell phones, and other gadgets with the capability to capture, store, retrieve, send and receive data shall be banned in classrooms during class hours unless their presence is directly related to a learning activity and are permitted by the teachers.
Violation of these regulations shall result in the following steps being taken against offenders.
Firs offence: Immediate confiscation of the devices to be returned to the owner at the end of the school day or the following day, as the concerned authorities may deem appropriate.
Second offence:Confiscation of the device to be returned to the student by the Administration in consultation with a parent or guardian;
Third offence: Confiscation of the device to be returned to a parent or guardian. In addition, the student shall be banned for the remainder of the school year from bringing and possessing any non-educational electronic device. Consequence for further offences will result in suspension from school.
Effective policy implementation is very critical in achieving organizational and institutional change, since it determines the success or failure of the program being implemented. An understanding of the nature of the policy helps in determining the implementation strategies and the level of implementation (whether at national or local levels). Decentralization of the management of schools to provinces, districts, and other grassroots-level institutions has become a popular reform strategy in the education system in recent years (Walker, 2002). This approach is informed by the assumption that there will be improvements in education when policy makers are near the place where the policy will have an impact. This is because being within the context of implementation gives policy makers the opportunity to monitor and facilitate progress. Theoretically, decentralized approaches like school-based management (SBM) aims to bring teachers, parents, policy makers, and other stakeholders in the education sector together for the purpose of promoting unity and avoiding conflicting interests. In this light, effective implementation of a policy banning mobile phones and other electronic gadgets in schools should be an all-inclusive process by involving all the stakeholders. To win the support of all stakeholders and ensure that the program runs smoothly, the implementation process should also include consultative forums where parents and students will be involved in the decision-making process, as well as be informed of the objective with regards to classroom learning.
Implementing a policy banning mobile phones in schools must involve overcoming a number of challenges. The first and foremost challenge is the existence of religious schools, whose management is not subject to the regulations that govern public institutions. Such schools have a separate and distinct governance system, which are often determined by the funding authorities (Goddard, 2000). In this regard, policy implementers should consult with the management of private schools if the policy is to be applied to the whole school system. The second challenge is the absence of a national governing body in the Canadian education sector (Goddard, 2000). This situation presents a problem with respect to the coordination and reinforcement of the policies. To address this challenge, the mandate for implementing the policies should be decentralized to the district level for easy enforcement ...