Pubdate: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 Source: Terrace Standard (CN BC) Copyright: 2005 Terrace Standard Contact: http://www.terracestandard.com Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1329 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/youth.htm (Youth) CELLBUSTERS SCHOOL DISTRICT 82's proposed policy banning camera-cellphones from locker rooms, washrooms and other places where they might be used to invade the privacy of students caused a stir with reactions from "how dare they" to "go for it." And "go for it" is what school trustees should do. It's hard to imagine any use a student might have for a camera-cellphone in a classroom or anywhere else in an institution of learning. This is not to suggest that every student will use a cellphone in an unsavoury fashion. But generations of people received their education and got along quite well thank you in the schools of their day without requiring a phone. Schools are places of learning, not a downtown cafe or mall or even movie theatre where incessant ringing or beeping followed by loud talking has become the unfortunate norm. The real question is how the proposed policy, if adopted, will be enforced. If teachers continue to be hard-pressed in doing their regular duties and support workers have been cut back, then having the people needed to put the muscle behind the policy might be a problem. The proposed policy regulating cellphone use in schools is one of three the school district is considering. Also good to see is the proposed policy on smoking. Right now there's that ages-old tradition of the smoke pit. But no more if school trustees have their way in imposing a no-puff zone of anywhere from 50 metres to several blocks away from school property. The policy suggests there would be a series of disciplinary measures up to and including a $40 fine for those found in contravention of this policy. But while this sounds tough and uncompromising, the proof in the pudding will again be how the policy, if adopted, is enforced. After all, it's been four years since the so-called "drug free zones" were set up around schools and we're not aware of one charge, let alone a conviction, that stemmed from narcotics-related activity within these zones. The third policy under consideration is to conduct locker searches at random for narcotics and to bring in drug-sniffing dogs as required. Locker searches aren't new and drug dogs have been used before. But the current policy says searches can only be justified on reasonable grounds. There may be something a little disquieting about the idea of random searches. But drug use on school grounds or using schools as a safe haven for drug stashes cannot be condoned. Copies of the proposals are at the school district office and the board meetings March 11. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth