However, text messaging has been a major problem with students texting in class interfering with the disruption of their learning. Most teachers express how they feel about cell phones being a distraction to others, however very few students have complaints about the use of cell phones in class. Text messaging in class should be allowed by choice of the students, it can easily be discreet and the possibility of an emergency. Text messaging in class should be allowed by the choice of students. In the argument “Tapping into Text Messaging” by Janet Kornblum, says teens, techies and other early adopters leading the charge to text say it is a great way to communicate when they are too busy to talk or when making a call would be rude or impractical.
Students need structure. Structure in the classroom will cause self motivation in students. Also, students don't like being held accountable for their actions. Having to talk to students about why they didn't finish their assignments will motivate them to do their work. Most students try to avoid being lectured or get in trouble for something they can avoid.
Some people deserve a second chance, but it shouldn’t be given to someone that doesn’t show effort towards school. If someone is failing a class you can’t always blame the student. You have to put in perspective that the teacher could be bad at teaching,or perhaps the student missed a lot of class due to being sick,or maybe the class is just too hard. So however, handing out extra credit could be tolerable to the students that show effort, and not to the students who mess around in class. One reason a student should receive extra credit to pass, is that they have trouble with that one specific subject.
These rules are sometimes written in a way that they can be like targets for the children e.g. ‘I will walk quietly around school’ instead of ‘Do not run in school’. As rules like this could be difficult for younger pupils to understand, some schools have separate rules for Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2. For example, one KS1 rule could be to be honest to others while a KS2 rule could be to ‘try your hardest in everything you do’. In some cases, if the children do not understand a rule (this could be down to the way the rule is worded) then staff must discuss them regularly during class and assembly time so that the pupils can remember them.
Today, children view school as a “place of danger”, and their main focus is to avoid danger as much as possible (Holt 360). This danger comes in the form of mistakes on tests, quizzes, and homework assignments in which the children earn grades based on what they are able to remember at that time, instead of making a long-term connection between the educational content and the children’s own distinct method of learning. Teachers, despite their best intentions, diminish the children’s will to read when they conform to these “conventional” methods of teaching. These methods have made a game, between the teachers and students, out of learning to read; a game in which the students are to guess what the teachers want to hear and to agree with the conclusions the teachers draw. This gives children the impression that reading is dangerous, because they don’t want to make mistakes and lose the game.
“A Minnesota teacher of seventh and ninth grades says that she has to spend extra time in class editing papers and must 'explicitly' remind her students that is is not acceptable to use text slang and abbreviations in writing” (Cullington 89). Also, “many complain that because texting does not stress the importance of punctuation, students are neglecting it in their formal writing” (Cullington 89). These points are valid, but the evidence is limited because it is based on a few personal experiences, rather then a large study with much more research.
By applying this method, teachers will no longer have to deter from their lesson plans to force students to pay attention. Students will also benefit from the program, as they will no longer miss notes or assignments due to sleeping in class. This method can also provide use for students who do not follow directions, use a cell phone or other unauthorized electronic device, and those select students who fail to abide by the rules of the classroom. A dear friend of mine, of whom I hold in the highest regard, showed a less than enthusiastic reply to my “modest proposal.” He referred to my method as “unreasonable” and “overly exaggerated.” His main concern was that this method would cause more distractions in the classroom. He reasoned that the students would overreact to the shock and cause a disturbance.
This does not mean that parents have no rights to what happens to their child while they are at school but this allows school to guide student behaviors though discipline. This idea is called in loco parentis (pg. 378). This concept was once more important in schools than it is now but it has brought forth it idea that no matter the student, disabled or not, there needs to be a certain level of responsibility put on all students for their behaviors when they are at school. This would be a great chapter of the book for parents to read because it would help them to understand why the school is doing what it is doing.
“The institutions traditionally procure, provide and control the technology for learning but now students are acquiring their own personal technologies for learning and institutions are challenged to keep pace” (Research in Technology Learning, 2010). Computers and other technical devices that are being used to enhance student learning helps to make teaching more creative and effective; however, it has also caused a lot of confusion and chaos in regards to ethics. Once teachers only had to be concerned about the basic rules of classroom etiquette and they could govern their classroom visually. Now teachers have to implement rules and guidelines to ensure that technology in the classroom is being used for its intended purpose to protect students from lurking dangers that might not always be detected by human
A child could go to school and be taught to be nice to the other students and not steal their things; while after school this same child’s older siblings could be teaching him that he needs to earn respect from people through fear, and that stealing is a way to earn acceptance with friends. When thinking about this, one cannot help but ask the question: are there moral absolutes or is right and wrong relative? Many people have dedicated a lot of time and energy trying to answer this question in modern days and there is not one commonly agreed upon answer. Although it may be difficult or even impossible to prove whether truth is relative or absolute, I seek to show how the argument for moral truth is weak at best. Moral relativity not only makes less logical sense, but the rapid shift of the popular world view into relativism is unprecedented and immoral.