The problem is, Louis, that the leading method of cheating on exams is the use of the cell phone!
Students use their phones to photograph the relevant pages of the text book then recall them during the exam. Unless you teach in a very small classroom, it's almost impossible to catch them referring to the cell phone during the test--it's just "lying there" on the desk or in their laps. All it takes is one such cheat in a class to encourage others to emulate the behavior--and as most of us are aware, cheating has become even more common in recent years than it ever was in the past! Prime Time Live did a special on the subject that showed students using precisely those cell phone methods to cheat in major Universities throughout the US--and the students themselves felt there was no alternative, since others were doing the same and they needed an "edge" to compete in the class!!! As far as disruptive behavior goes--I _do_ feel that a standard can be established. I've had more than one student tell me that he or she appreciated the "no cell phone" rule in my classroom, because it allowed him or her to follow the lecture without other students getting calls, or getting up and leaving the room when their cell phone vibrated in their pocket. I don't use a subjective "everything including the kitchen sink" approach to disruptive behavior. I outline very clearly what is--and is not--acceptable in the classroom. For the most part what is NOT acceptable is behavior that interferes with the rights of the other students to participate in the class, including their ability to follow the flow of a lecture or discussion without unnecessary interruptions. I have no problem with students injecting questions into my lectures--that helps everyone to learn. But just as I wouldn't tolerate a student starting a conversation with someone else on a totally unrelated subject in my classroom during lecture or discussion, I don't tolerate such actions as talking on a cell phone, playing video games on a gameboy, or listening to CDs or MP3s during class. Our students will go from our classrooms to the work place. Those behaviors wouldn't be tolerated there and there's no reason they should be in our classes either. The simple fact that a telephone CAN be carried with you doesn't immediately justify using it in inappropriate settings. As far as sanctions go, given the potential for cheating inherent in a cell phone, those involving testing are very fair (if a student LEGITIMATELY needs access to a cell phone--for example, if his or her child is ill or another unusual circumstance exists--all that student needs to do is inform me in advance and keep the phone in his or her pocket or purse during the test instead of on the desk or in his or her lap). And, given the obvious fact that a telephone conversation is rather disruptive--and totally inappropriate--during a lecture or class discussion, the ones applying to participation grades seem fair as well. Students have most of the day for their telephone conversations--including the time they spend on homework or research. I don't feel it's particularly unreasonable to ban those activities for the short time they are in our classrooms. Perhaps that doesn't "leave much love behind." But it DOES contribute to an environment where learning can take place--and for some reason I tend to think THAT, not leaving love behind, is the primary objective of a classroom teacher. Again, I prefer to teach in the online environment. In that environment, there ARE no closed book exams (which I wouldn't use if my institution didn't require them); discussions aren't interrupted by one or more learners talking on the phone; and lectures are available for review as often as necessary. In that environment a cell phone is a tool of communications--I have one beside me all the time I'm teaching online in case a learner needs to contact me directly and email won't do the job as well as a personal discussion. But different spaces have different rules and what works online can spell utter chaos in a classroom setting. Rick -- Rick Adams Capella University, Graduate School of Technology Grand Canyon University, School of Social Sciences. Jackson Community College, Department of Social Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love you leave behind when you're gone." -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" -----Original Message----- From: louis schmier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 4:53 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: RE: reducing cell phone disruptions in the classroom Rick, somehow I don't you think you can equate cheating on an exam with the ringing of a cell phone. The former certainly dramatically impacts academic performance. That latter doesn't. im And I'll take the bait. No. I don't think such a subjective, everything including the kitchen sink, "oh you know what I mean" term as "disruptive behavior" is grounds for a grade reduction. I have better ways and are far more effective than "off with your head" threats and sentencing. Personally, I like Rod's approach. I've used it on occasions. And, I like mine with the donuts. The student learns there are consequences while the grade retains it's supposed academic achievement purity. Of course, unless you take off point for lack of attendance. I don't think such threats or actions leaves much love behind. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
