.
Feedback

Parents Beware-Allowing your child to bring their cell phone to school in District 68 can be an expensive lesson.

Who should be responsible for damage to your child's phone when it is in the care, custody and control of Woodridge School District 68?

My daughter attends Jefferson Jr. High in Woodridge. Recently, one of her friends was communicating by text with her Dad in the hallway between classes when a teacher took her Apple iPhone from her. The teacher turned it over to the school office but sometime before doing that she dropped it breaking both the case and fracturing the screen. This is the second incident with the same teacher breaking a students phone I am told. The office returned the phone to her friend simply saying "We're Sorry". 

The District 68 information handbook states:

ELECTRONIC DEVICES The possession and use of cell phones and other electronic devices, other than paging devices and two-way radios, are subject to the following rules:They must  be kept out of sight and in an inconspicuous location, such as a backpack, purse, or locker.  They must be turned off during the regular school day. They may not be used in any manner that will cause disruption to the educational environment or will otherwise violate student conduct rules.

There is nothing in their handbook that indicates a phone will be removed from the students. Most of our children have smart phones now. My daughters phone cost $799 without a contract and it is only the base model iPhone5 16GB. District 68 may have the right to restrict the use of electronic devices but they should not be taking phones away from students if they are not assuming liability while it is in their care, custody and control. If my daughter damages a textbook, she is responsible for the cost. To quote the handbook again: "Pupils are responsible for the care of all textbooks. Fines are assessed by the principals for those books which are damaged". Why is District 68 not responsible for damage when the situtation is reversed? 

When my daughter was attending Meadowview, her Firefly phone was taken from her when it fell out of her pocket one day. She was not using it. To get it back I had to go into the school office and ask for it. I happened to be running late that day and was unable to communicate with my daughter so she stood outside the school wondering what to do. In today's world where an individual attempted to abduct a child just last week around Edgewood School, this further cements that a phone should never be taken away from a child. Find another way of dealing with any abuse. 

Russ Foster February 8, 2013 at 12:05 pm
I think the lesson is, don't send anything expensive or valuable to school with your kids.
Doubly true if they are going to break the rules with it (since you quote the rule book which says "phones must be off during the day" and need to be in an "inconspicuous" location -- neither of which, it sounds, were followed).
Joann Walker February 8, 2013 at 12:41 pm
It is always easier to place blame on someone else. There are rules that must be followed and when they are broken there are consequenses. I've worked at Jefferson and every student knows the rule about cell phones. They also know that their phone will be taken away. It is unfortunate that something happened to the phone but you should be talking to you daughter about breaking the rules at school. . She knew she shouldn't be using her phone in school. Period
Suzanna Klein February 8, 2013 at 02:16 pm
Why did she stand outside of Meadowview wondering what to do? Has she never been without a cell phone in her life? That's a disturbing reflection on the reliance of a cell phone instead of common sense and upbringing.
Margaret Q February 8, 2013 at 04:32 pm
Why does a child need a $799 phone?
Leo Kowal February 8, 2013 at 06:21 pm
Don't you get it! Parents are raising drones now-a-days.
Donna Ruyter February 8, 2013 at 07:07 pm
I am 55 yrs old, I have 3 adult sons and NONE of us have a $799 cell phone. Ridiculous....
Bill Thompson February 8, 2013 at 08:37 pm
It's a safety issue. My daughter does not get bus service thus making her a walker and we are 0.9 miles from school. There were (3) attempted abductions of girls on Jan 29th and Jan 31st within six miles of Jefferson, so my daughter will always have a phone with her. There were (2) attempted abductions around Meadowview while my daughter went there. One involved the crossing guards while still standing on school property on the east side by Foxtree Ave. Thus, I always want to be able to communicate with my daughter especially when she is walking home. The Woodridge Police does a fantastic job investigating/communicating with the school district about every attempted abduction. But with respect to the Jan 31st incident around Edgewood School about 7 am according to the WPD press release, no communication was received from the school district until after students had already been allowed to go home from the elementary schools that day. I'm sure the school district did the best they could to communicate as soon as possible so I am not placing any blame on them just to clarify.
My whole point is it doesn't matter if it is a $25 flip phone or a $799 smartphone. If students are caught using a phone when not allowed, send them to the principals office, give them a detention slip, etc. but never take the phone away from students for the safety reasons noted above. And the school district should assume liability for any damage while the phone is in their care, custody and control.
Bill Thompson February 8, 2013 at 08:51 pm
It's not a matter of placing blame but stating the facts. The same teacher has had (2) incidents of removing phones from students and then breaking them. If she has some physical problem like arthritis which causes her to drop phones, why is she taking them from pupils?
It also appears you did not read the entire blog. It was not my daughter but instead her friend Lastly, if you worked at Jefferson this year you would know students were allowed to use their phones during lunch if they did not make any noise prior to the winter break And some teachers allow students to use phones for during class as a learning tool.
Bill Thompson February 8, 2013 at 09:26 pm
This incident had nothing to do with common sense or upbringing so I take umbrage to your remarks. Either you do not have children or you have forgotten how a child's mind works at an early age. My daughter was in 1st or 2nd grade when this happened. Children have not reached the age of reasoning at such a young age. My daughter was smart enough not to leave the school grounds. This was the 1st time I was ever late, albeit only a few minutes. The whole purpose of giving my daughter a phone at such a young age was to be able to communicate with her for any reason. I did/do rely on a phone to communicate. It should be noted that the 1st and 2nd graders are let out of school on the far south side of school. This location is completely out of view and at least 100 yards away from the main school entrance.
I bet you still rely on a stamp to pay your bills when you could use a computer.
Marie February 8, 2013 at 09:45 pm
First of all, if the child was using a Firefly, that sounds like she is in Kindergarten or First grade. So yes, if her Dad was late one day, I can see where a small child would be confused on what to do, especially if the daily routine is Daddy picks her up ... and this does not sound like a "disturbing reflection".... When my daughter was young, I also got her a Firefly ... press a button and call Mommy. Her after school daycare once forgot a child on a bus. I took her out of that daycare and bought her a Firefly, so she could always call me.
Bill Thompson February 8, 2013 at 09:46 pm
Hi Janet,
Thanks for responding. I was starting to get frustrated until I saw your comments. You appear to be the only one who gets the safety issue. I don't know why your comments were only received by me as an email instead of posting to the Patch website so I copied them and re-posted them above so I could at least show one person out there agrees with me as far as a phone being a tool for safety purposes. I couldn't agree with you more strongly about how it is more important for a child to have a phone for communicating regardless of school rules.
Marie February 8, 2013 at 09:51 pm
They are not only phones, they are computers. The iPhones do so much more than place a phone call. Most people I know have them. I don't I'm still carrying a BlackBerry, but teased that I am behind in technology.
Bill Thompson February 8, 2013 at 10:29 pm
And for anyone naive enough to think it can't happen in my neighborhood, there are (11) registered sex offenders in Woodridge alone. Many are within one mile of Jefferson, One is only (2) blocks from JJH on Ravinia Lane who is listed as AGGRAVATED CRIMINAL SEXUAL ABUSE/VICTIM <13.
Vickie February 9, 2013 at 12:50 am
My daughter goes to JJH, and as Bill stated above, they are actually allowed to have them out during lunch, just not during class time. And actually, even during class some of my daughter's teachers let them use them to play music or take pictures. It all depends on the teacher. I agree with Bill. I don't the school should be allowed to take away their phones. They should be giving warnings, detention, even go so far as a suspension if it's an ongoing issue. Or call the parent, send them an email, etc. There are plenty of ways to handle the issue without taking away their phones. My daughter's a latch key kid, and with all the stories lately about attempted abductions you better believe that phone is God sent.
Lynn February 9, 2013 at 08:45 pm
A junior high child doesn't need a fancy iPhone - particularly the newest model. Kids today are so "entitled" - and part of that is due to parents giving them anything they want. Our daughter had a basic phone until she was old enough to buy her own iPhone.
Woodridge Resident February 10, 2013 at 05:12 am
A few concerns, how easy would it be for a student to blame a teacher for something that never actually happened? Suzie drops her phone, it cracks, and then purposely knows a teacher will take the phone, since clearly the rules state they should be turned off, and locked in their locker during the school day. Now let's blame the teacher. Secondly, and I know it's not the actual point of the original letter, but someone got very ripped off with the cost of the cell phone. I think it's absolutely ridiculous for any junior high student carries such an expensive phone for their "safety." Give them a cheap phone if safety is the real issue. But, have your child learn to follow the rules. How hard is it to keep it turned off and in their locker during the school day?
Woodridge Resident February 10, 2013 at 12:36 pm
Donna, I couldn't agree with you more. I think any parent that claims the phone is for their safety when they purchase them a phone that costs that much money, and has a data plan has either been taken in by their child, or the cell phone salesperson, A phone for a child's safety is one used to make and receive phone calls and nothing more.
Woodridge Resident February 10, 2013 at 01:24 pm
Bill, I know it was a long time ago, but why didn't you just call the school and let them know before she was dismissed? They would have kept her in the office, as it is the standard procedure from my knowledge of all of the schools. I'm only mentioning this because there might be others reading this that are unaware the schools would be more than willing to work with families that may be running late when picking up their child.
Bill Thompson February 10, 2013 at 01:48 pm
You raise an excellent point. i didn't just write this blog post without attempting to get input from Jefferson Jr High. So when I called the school to "Discuss Cell Phone Policy" I was directed to Principal Dr. Schmidt. I did not ask for him. I left a message in his voice-mail. Just over two days later I received a call after school hours when I was driving in rush hour from an unknown cell phone. Since it wasn't my family I did not answer. I know my driving skills degrade when I am talking on a cell phone even if I use a Bluetooth device so I let it go to voice-mail. I try not talk on a cell phone when I am driving. I returned the call and again did not receive a call back for 3+ school days until once again while I was driving in rush hour traffic. Those of us in the private sector used to be able to return a call in 24 hours. The standard was then moved up to within 4 hours, then 2 hours, then ASAP. If the principal is so busy he cannot return a call sooner, why did he not delegate to someone else. I wanted to discuss this privately but after not hearing anything for 2 1/2 days after my second call, I chose to write this blog post during lunch the day of posting. I don't feel very important to the district given the slow response in returning calls here. 50% of my property tax goes to District 68. I would expect a little more timely response and during normal school hours for a call to be returned even if I didn't have a student in the district at the time. Continued>>
Woodridge Resident February 10, 2013 at 01:51 pm
Bill, I think you should send an email to the Principal, and let him know a better time when you can be contacted, or start the discussion via email.
Bill Thompson February 10, 2013 at 03:03 pm
I would also like to point out I had a two points when I wrote the initial blog. Responsibility for damage and the SAFETY issue. But when I tried to post it told me I was restricted to 1500 characters and the safety aspect was minimized. The safety aspect is not minimized in my belief in giving my daughter a phone and she has had one since 1st grade for that reason. Now I will address all of you who reproved me in thinking it is "ridiculous", "ripped off" for a Jr High student to own a cell phone costing so much. I did not pay $799 when I purchased the phone. With committing to a two year plan, My cost was $199. I didn't just give the phone to my daughter, it was based on grade incentives. When she met those, I gave her the phone but not for four months after her report card since I wanted her to have the newest iPhone. ALL my daughters friends have a smartphone. I also thought it was crazy to own a smartphone until I was able to use one before purchasing. Once you go smartphone, you will never go back. It's a mini-computer with a minimum cost $500. It's a GPS/Mapping device, min cost $100. Stuck in traffic, GPS will get you home via another route, priceless. Camera, min cost $150 for same capabilities. It's a learning tool which is priceless. My daughter uses hers all the time doing homework. The Apps you can get for free open up another spectrum which rewards you. GasBuddy has saved me countless dollars in finding the cheapest gas based on my location at the time.
Woodridge Resident February 10, 2013 at 03:10 pm
Bill, maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me you haven't addressed the main issue of the fact your daughter wasn't responsible enough to follow the rules. I think it's great you had incentives built in before she was able to get the expensive phone, but if she were my daughter the phone would have been taken away the first time I received a text from her during the day, and replaced with a basic phone with the instructions the phone was to remain off during the school hours when she was either at school, or at a school function like a field trip. I find it hard to believe a teacher took two phones away and both broke. I find it easier to believe the teacher was set up to be blamed for a broken phone.
Bill Thompson February 10, 2013 at 03:39 pm
There is also the inequity of enforcing the rules. If deviations exist on a student by student or class by class basis, there is a problem. One person/teacher alone should not act as a policeman. I already pointed out the disparity between classrooms and use of cell phones. If one teacher allows them for learning tools, how can another deviate and remove cell phones from a student? The first day my daughter attended school at JJH, I was called by the school because her jeans did not meet the dress policy based on one individuals opinion. This individual spotted my daughter in the hallway, she was not one of my daughters teachers. This was last year when all the girls wore jeans with manufactured holes in them. I went to Penney's and bought a pair without holes and brought them to school. My daughter was forced to change during the school day before returning to class. But when I picked her up after school I saw over a hundred girls wearing jeans with holes who were not removed from their classroom and told to change and whose parents obviously not called like me. One individual playing policeman again. My daughter wore those same jeans again and never had a problem. All the girls wore jeans with holes throughout the entire year. I went so far as to call JJH in the summer prior to the school year to discuss dress policy and avoid any problem in the first place. I was told jeans with holes were not a problem unless excessive and flesh was exposed in problem areas.Explain that!
Woodridge Resident February 10, 2013 at 03:44 pm
Bill, I understand there's lack of consistency, but that's even in the real world too, not just JJH. Again, you seem to be making excuses for your child not following the rules, rather than teaching her to take ownership in the first place. That's concerning to me.
Bill Thompson February 10, 2013 at 05:41 pm
He was allowed adequate time to call me back in my opinion. My input is obviously not important to him and I see no reason why I should be forced to write him now. Part of his job as an administrator is providing 'customer service' to parents. But let's talk about email communications. This is a paragraph in a letter dated Jan 25th, 2013 sent by Dr. Schmidt by email with instructions on how to schedule a conference. "Our hope is that scheduling conferences online will offer Jefferson parents more options, eliminate communication errors, and provide an instant confirmation of the day and time scheduled for a conference". This letter and accompanying instructions failed to address one flaw with the Skyward online system. You had to delete the Fall Parent Teacher Conference to schedule one now. When I attempted to schedule on the first day allowed, Jan 29th, I could not. I called JJH and then told of the problem. Time wasted=1/2 hour. 3 more emails were sent by the school district on Jan 29th, and Feb 1st but none of them addressed the issue. Why was the problem not addressed in those emails after it was discovered? It's a saved word document and changes could have been easily applied in the subsequent emails. The teachers in my conference indicated they had heard from many parents of the scheduling issue. And why is one document at 45% scale, the next 94% and the next 160% scale. What is wrong with 100%? Unless you know how to use Microsoft Word, the 45% one is not legible.
Bill Thompson February 10, 2013 at 05:43 pm
It was not my child but my daughters friend. But it could have been my daughter and that was why I contacted the school to discuss their electronic device policy. We all have choices and I chose to give my daughter a smartphone. I also understand why you feel this is excessive. But part of my reasoning was she always wanted to use my phone or our home computer which I also use for work, to help her with homework, when I still needed them. Now I don't have to stop working and then resume late at night. It works for us.
Finally, I suspect you are either an employee of the school district, have been one in the past or have friends or family employed by them because you have continually defended their rules here. Maybe you are the teacher who broke the phones. This is not a set up by anyone. Yes the school district needs rules. But today's world is not the same as it was twenty years ago, ten or even five years ago. Parents expect to be able to communicate with their children even during the school day. The rules should allow us at least a five minute window when we can do just that if needed. I often travel for work and can be sometimes over 120 miles away. If I encounter an accident/inclement weather, I may not make it back in time to pick up my child. I may need to tell my daughter to go home with someone else's parent or that my Dad is coming that day. I could call the office to convey this but do not feel as confident compared to communicating directly with my daughter.
Woodridge Resident February 10, 2013 at 05:51 pm
Twenty-years ago is no different than today with parents that need to communicate, but the way one goes about it has changed. What did parents do twenty-years ago to convey the same types of communication? They called the office. You seem to have a lot of excuses for lack of rule-following. The fact I taught my own children to follow rules, or suffer the consequences, and accept them if they didn't doesn't mean I am the teacher that allegedly broke the phones, work in the district etc. Lastly, I don't feel parents NEED to communicate with their children during the school day, but if they had an emergency there are plans in place for that.
Bill Thompson February 10, 2013 at 05:58 pm
Twenty years ago is no different? I respectfully disagree.
Jeff February 10, 2013 at 07:26 pm
Bill,
I too have a daughter at Jefferson, who was given a phone based upon her continued academic excellence in the 750 level courses. I am not a district employee, or school employee anywhere. She uses her phone to text me between classes, asking for a ride or alerting me to after school events, e.g. Student Council, Scholastic Bowl, Volleyball, etc. However, I told her that if she is caught using it and it is confiscated she will bear the burden of replacing if it is broken while in school custody. She is using it knowing it is not quite within the rules, knowing there is risk involved and knowing she will be responsible if anything happens to it. I do not think the district is responsible if a confiscated item is broken. It was confiscated being used when and/or where it shouldn't have been. Risks are involved, responsibility must be taken by the perpetrator.
Bill Thompson February 11, 2013 at 02:57 pm
Thanks for your response Jeff. Before this incident, I did not realize the district would not assume liability for students possessions while in their care, custody and control. Therefore, they should not be taking anything from students, especially phones. And I feel there should be sometime during the day when a student is allowed to communicate with their parents without the fear of breaking the rules.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Woodridge Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something