this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
16 points (94.4% liked)

Indiana

490 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Indiana just passed legislation to require schools to ban phones.

They permit them for health reasons, emergencies, when part of lesson, and when part of a formal plan.

I personally don't like the idea of schools requiring locking them up. What would you do in that emergency they mentioned?

Why should kids not be able to use them at lunch?

If you want to control your kid's phone time, there's already apps for that.

Edit: additional comment from a teacher: she said the phone restrictions aren't going to be as effective as one would think with all the kids having watches with data plans. Dude...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (5 children)

I have relatives in Texas this statement applies to, and it's outrageous. You can certainly email your legislative representatives and tell them how uneducated people have a harder time contributing to society...

But don’t you see? When these kinds of people make the most ideal Republican electorate possible, this outcome is their objective!!

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Un-schoolers typically have better outcomes than public-school kids, and you are confusing them for the products of religious schools. No one who thinks as you are inferring is going to give their kids any intellectual freedom.

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Homeschooled children are consistently the least educated and least prepared for the modern world, including our capitalist-slavery system of indentured (be profitable to someone else or die) employment. The vast majority of them will either slide into extreme poverty or will never be able to extricate themselves from it.

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 years ago

"Consistently" ... show your homework. Everything I'm seeing shows the opposite.

load more comments (2 replies)