Marina Yardaeva What will happen if the student does not return it? How will the law banning mobile phones work 08:01

Smartphones are banned in schools. The State Duma adopted the relevant law: flashing of a mobile phone in the classroom is no longer allowed. Teachers and parents rejoice, believing that they have won the crazy war against digital evil and saved children from gadget addiction. I look at this joy and do not understand anything. What exactly has changed? The law is certainly good. But what is the basis for the belief that this will happen?

Law! The word is solid, comprehensive. There is a whole philosophy in it. The logic of victory over primitive chaos. This victory is assumed to be as inevitable as the change of night and day. Any system strives for order. The movement towards order is determined by an indestructible will. And will is law. In general, a very serious thing. But only until they start shaking it for reasons other than business. As long as they don’t try to create something absurd in law.

Imagine, tomorrow they’ll pass a law that forbids everyone from getting the flu. Or be poor. Rainy October could still be cancelled. Or make it a crime to be in a bad mood. So what? Good wishes. Madness? But you know

The law banning cell phones in classrooms, for all its benevolence, seems no less fantastical — at least in the form in which it was passed.

I read it carefully (although there was not much in it), thought seriously and now I tell you: it will not work.

Yes, in fact, the mechanism of operation is not disclosed. Absolutely. It is written: “Do not use mobile radiotelephone communication during training sessions.” But what happens if someone breaks the rule? Seize the prohibited? Or preemptively select all devices at once before classes? This is not possible without consent. Other laws prevent this. After all, it is personal property. After all, consent is also fraught with financial responsibility. Record violations in office notes? Of course you can. What’s next? Nothing.

At the same time, even before any legislation, many schools tried to somehow restore order: the administration agreed with the parent community on a joint fight against gadgets in the classroom and established in the regulations the rule of surrendering phones before lessons.

Teachers bought special boxes for mobile phones with funny and educational inscriptions. The administrators threatened: anyone who did not voluntarily surrender their smartphone and was caught red-handed would be able to return the device only after a personal visit to the school by their parents. All this did not quite comply with real laws. And of course, there were always parents who pointed out the insignificance of these “legal” measures. And among the children, some kind of freedom fighter always presented himself, either by demanding witnesses, or by running away with a mobile phone so energetically to the applause of classmates that the figure of the teacher-parent instantly lost its already rather worn-out authority.

It quickly became clear that it was impossible to agree on everything, and the desire for order at all costs only resulted in greater chaos.

The school is dragged into a showdown between everyone and everyone. One cheater decided to play a prank, got to the valuable box and stole his neighbor’s iPhone on the table. Another found himself unable to contact his family in an emergency. The third left his smartphone at home but was suspected and subjected to a humiliating search procedure. And so mothers are sounding sirens, threatening teachers with the police and prosecutors, teachers are wondering whether they should sue the administration for the additional responsibility that has been illegally imposed on them, and principals are throwing ashes on their heads and hastily rewriting school charters.

Then, as it were, modesty came. Only in the last few years. Boxes began to disappear from the classrooms, and the wording of house rules became more accurate. And they began to look at the problem itself sadly and philosophically. What can we do, they say, because for adults smartphones have long become something without which life is unimaginable, something like a mandatory item of clothing. Forgetting your phone is like going to work without pants. For children born in the digital age, a smartphone is an organically inseparable third hand from them. Yes, unfortunately, they still do not know how to use all the benefits of progress wisely, they are always trying to show figs with their third hand. But this means that these are the conditions of the task.

School children do not want to delve into a new topic, but want to have fun chatting on messenger? They will pay the price for their carelessness in the exam. Of course, they will try to find all the answers on the Internet using the same devices.

This means that the teacher will have to sort out assignments taken from open banks. Yes, it’s all tiring and generally annoying that you have to take into account various unpleasant things. Nobody signed up for this. But that’s life.

Or not? Or is it possible to force rivers to flow backwards by an effort of will? What if… People suddenly perked up again when they heard the word “law.” Even those who had apparently learned to look at the situation with gadgets not as a problem, but as a task. A challenge, if you will. Even they suddenly clapped their hands with joy, anticipating that they would no longer have to worry about how to beat the youngsters in their field.

This means that this new round is also necessary for something. History develops in a spiral. Let’s look at the young people who got away with their mobile phones for a while – they will probably shine their heels more skillfully now. We will also watch the legal debates between parents, teachers and school principals. Only now will we see that those who support the ban on the use of phones in schools will start a fierce fight for their rights.

By the way, this rate is 87% among parents and 90% among teachers. I am also among this majority, both as a mother and a teacher. But there is still some difference between the theoretical support of everything that is good and its practical implementation. At least I do not see this difference yet. And frankly, I do not understand at all how to overcome the existing contradiction between what is desired and what is possible. So far, no one has proposed anything intelligible.

The author expresses his personal opinion, which may not coincide with the editors’ position.