Cellphones in Class! ARGHH!

[gingin6789]

I think this is the main issue for me--cell phones and other devices are distracting to other students. So as much as I'd like to take a "screw 'em, it's their responsibility to know the material!" attitude, I have to think about the class as a whole.

 

I actually don't allow laptops in my classes unless we have some special task that requires a laptop. When there are no electronic distractions around, I find that the class discussion is much better and that students actually perform better.

 

TBH, I don't really understand why it's so much to ask to have people put their personal phones or devices away when they're in class. It's really very little to expect of people. There are a variety of rude things that I could do when I'm in a seminar or job talk, but I don't do them.

 

And I attended college before the cell phone craze hit, but professors back then were not tolerant of other distracting behaviors--reading the newspaper or a magazine in class, or sleeping all over your desk. Doing any of those things would get you kicked out of class. I didn't think my professors were insecure for enforcing those rules.

 

I completely agree.  I did have a professor who limited laptops and other devices to the back row of the classroom so as to cut down on distractions.  If someone did have a laptop, they would go right to the back, and everyone knew to avoid the back row.

 

And you're right about the last part, too!!! I wasn't in college pre-cell phone era, but I was in middle school and high school, and I know passing notes was forbidden in class (but, yes, folks did it anyway).

[overworkedta]

I'm not a law expert but I have had some training in workplace harassment and sexual harassment in general (required for all public service employees in some parts of Canada, which includes graduate TAs). Although I have had a bit of similar training in the US during orientation and other workshops, the laws of US and Canada are similar enough that it's entirely possible that I will confuse one for the other in cases with subtle differences!

 

So, my interpretation of what is happening here would be that it is sexual harassment because (at least in Canada, but I think this was covered in my US grad orientation too) for someone to show sexually explicit materials to another person without their consent. A workplace (e.g. the school/the classroom) should be free of harassment so I am confused why this is "academic freedom". Obviously, every person, student or otherwise, should be free to watch whatever they want (as long as it's not illegal) in privacy but I don't think it is reasonable to infringe on others' rights to a harassment-free workplace/classroom in order to uphold an individual's first amendment rights.

 

I don't know if there is a US equivalent, but the very first article of the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms is 

And in Canada, there are laws that prescribe that workplaces/classrooms should be harassment free. So, to me, it completely makes sense for a student to not be able to watch pornography (and thus make other people see it without their consent) in public places such as classrooms and libraries. But that was in Canada -- is there not some similar restrictions to the US Bill of Rights?

 

Like I said above, I am not a law expert! But my previous harassment training would definitely tell me to talk to someone / escalate it if I saw something like that happening at my school!

 

I study Canada (also not  a law expert but I've taught Canadian Politics and the Charter to u-grads) and I can say that there is a HUGE difference regarding such things like this.  The burden falls on you to "prove" that there is apparently some sort of huge abuse of your rights going on.  Now, I would argue in a classroom where you can't move, this may be different, but in a library, there are actually huge problems with limiting access to pornography among patrons.  Even in public libraries, there are issues:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-11-11/news/ct-met-orland-park-library-pornography-changes-20131111_1_library-board-chicago-public-library-library-computers

 

Also, take protests like Westboro Baptist "Church" which just came to my campus and we counter-protested.  That wouldn't be allowed in Canada because of "hate groups" and the Charter/Criminal Code but they have repeatedly had their rights affirmed here.  It's crazy.

 

Are freedoms more "free" South of the border?  I would argue generally yes but I am really not sure if that's a good thing.

[TakeruK]

I study Canada (also not  a law expert but I've taught Canadian Politics and the Charter to u-grads) and I can say that there is a HUGE difference regarding such things like this.  The burden falls on you to "prove" that there is apparently some sort of huge abuse of your rights going on.  Now, I would argue in a classroom where you can't move, this may be different, but in a library, there are actually huge problems with limiting access to pornography among patrons.  Even in public libraries, there are issues:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-11-11/news/ct-met-orland-park-library-pornography-changes-20131111_1_library-board-chicago-public-library-library-computers

 

Also, take protests like Westboro Baptist "Church" which just came to my campus and we counter-protested.  That wouldn't be allowed in Canada because of "hate groups" and the Charter/Criminal Code but they have repeatedly had their rights affirmed here.  It's crazy.

 

Are freedoms more "free" South of the border?  I would argue generally yes but I am really not sure if that's a good thing.

 

Wow, thanks for the enlightenment! 

[overworkedta]

No problem.  I just spent a week on civil rights and liberties in my American class last week and they have Supreme Court presentations coming up, so I love to remind them about how much freedom we actually have in comparison.  I love Canada to death and actually would prefer limits if it could slow the spread of hate but I know a lot of people disagree with me.