How will the ban on using mobile phones in class be enforced?

On Wednesday, the State Duma banned schoolchildren from using mobile phones in class, even for educational purposes. However, the law does not specify exactly how the ban should be enforced and what punishment is provided for minors for refusing to put away a smartphone. Kommersant found out from teachers how they plan to deal with phones in the classroom and whether the new law makes sense.

On Wednesday, the State Duma adopted the sensational “telephone” amendments to the law “On Education” in the second and third readings. In Art. 41 “Duties and Responsibilities of Students” in the section “Students are obliged” the following wording appeared: “… not to use mobile radiotelephone communications during training sessions when mastering educational programs of primary general, basic general and secondary general education.” However, exceptions are provided – “cases of a threat to the life or health of students or workers” and “other emergency cases.” It should be noted that at first the bill allowed the use of mobile phones “with the permission” of the teacher. This version was adopted in the first reading, but then the deputies considered it necessary to tighten the bill.

At the same time, during the first reading, many deputies were interested in who and how would monitor compliance with the ban. “What sanctions will follow for a violation?” — asked Alexey Kurinny (KPRF). And Biysultan Khamzaev (ER) asked if they would come up with “special boxes” where students would have to put their mobile phones before the start of the lesson. Tatyana Butska (ER) reminded that children sometimes need a phone for interactive tasks. “Educational gadgets should not be mentioned here at all as an exception to the ban; they have their own laws,” State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin said then.

All these details were never spelled out in the law. The head of the education committee, Olga Kazakova, explained that “the implementation of the bill in each school will be monitored independently.” And the head of the “family” committee, Nina Ostanina (Communist Party of the Russian Federation), said that the implementation of the ban is a matter for the Ministry of Education. “Kommersant” forwarded the deputies’ questions to the ministry and received the following answer: “Restrictions on the use of electronic devices will support the quality of the educational process. Those students who are often distracted by entertainment will be able to show interest in other more rational and useful things. And there is no revolution in this; we continue to have Sanitary Regulations that protect against excessive use of gadgets during study. At the same time, we traditionally and without fail discuss the implementation of all innovations in schools with experts, teachers, regional authorities, education managers, and parents, so that all changes will benefit participants in the educational process. The same will apply to the implementation of the provisions of the federal law adopted today by the State Duma.”

Director of the Nizhny Novgorod ANOO “School 800” Mark Sartan notes that the State Duma made a decision binding on everyone, but each educational organization could independently establish similar prohibitions. “Fortunately, the language of the law leaves room for schools to make their own policies. And at the same time, it is absolutely not necessary to physically confiscate phones from children,” says the director. “Our school, like many others, resolved the issue on its own, without the help of deputies.” At School 800, phones are not confiscated except for repeated violations, but mobile devices must be kept in bags and briefcases during lessons and school events. It is also prohibited to use telephones on the stairs and in the dining room during meals. “We believe that we should not prohibit or restrict by order, but that all participants in educational relations should agree among themselves. The school should help reach such an agreement and fix it,” says Mr. Sartan.

“In every classroom we have boxes for phones, where children hand them in before the start of the lesson. But not in an order format – we try to explain what the benefit is,” says Olga Perchenko, a class teacher from Rostov-on-Don. “The children are all adequate and accept the request without problems, so they don’t have to deal with sanctions for violating the ban.”

In the Moscow region gymnasium named after E.M. Primakov there is already a ban at the level of internal school regulations, director Maya Maisuradze told Kommersant. Moreover, students are not allowed to use phones not only during lessons, but generally during their entire stay at the gymnasium. According to her, this requirement was supported by teachers, parents and the council of high school students: “We see only advantages in this – children communicate with teachers and with each other during breaks.”

The ban is implemented as follows: upon entering the school, each student places the gadget in an individual box and locks it with a key. You can pick up equipment only after school, when the student goes home. “If you need to urgently call your parents, we have a landline phone. And in an emergency situation, the class teacher can do this,” says Mrs. Maisuradze. The director clarifies that their school “has no problems with technical support” and it is possible, if necessary, to provide children with school laptops or tablets if the educational process requires it. “At meetings with school directors in the Moscow region, I heard concerns that problems might arise with the technical implementation of the bill, since the scheme has not been established,” she says. “Especially since the use of phones was not prohibited during breaks.”

This is exactly the opinion of Tatyana Rassolova, a teacher from Velikiye Luki, a participant in the Forum of Class Teachers. She believes most schools are not technically prepared to store hundreds of phones. “Maybe they’ll offer to put this on the class teachers so that we can run around the school with a box of phones after the students. But we already have to carry textbooks and notebooks from class to class,” says the teacher. “And if the phone breaks or disappears, our parents will immediately file a claim against us. So, as now, we will ask students to put the gadget in their briefcase. Unless now we can appeal to federal law.” Ms. Rassolova also notices that children sometimes use personal phones during lessons for educational purposes: “We look, for example, at dictionaries on Gramota.Ru, because often there is no necessary paper edition in the classroom. Not to mention a school laptop for every student.”

“If a child’s phone goes missing after he puts it in the box before the start of class, that’s fine. At least he can wait until his next birthday without him, he’ll have a rest,” ironically notes the first deputy chairman of the commission on demography, protection of family, children and traditional family values ​​of the RF OP, father of eight children Pavel Pozhigailo. He suggests that there should be no problems with “phone confiscation” in schools, and fully supports the ban, since he is sure that gadgets interfere with the correct assimilation of information. Nevertheless, Mr. Pozhigailo admits that phones are built into the educational process: children look at their homework on them and use electronic diaries. “I believe that it is necessary to create a methodology for assessing the effectiveness of such laws: how children acquire knowledge now and how they will acquire it in a year or two after the ban,” suggests Pavel Pozhigailo. “I think then everyone will notice the benefits of such a measure. And if, based on the results of such assessment activities, telephones still turn out to be needed in the educational process – which I doubt – then the law can be adjusted.”

Polina Yachmennikova