London Oratory complete mobile phone ban even on long commutes

That should be 'kind of' SEN not 'kind SEN'. It was a typo (because I'm not AI) Just thought I"d better say so before someone starts a whole thread about not being kind....

It is in their policy now. I pasted a relevant excerpt and link earlier today. I believe a number of the new pupils and parents first heard about the travel ban during Y6/7 transition. Even so, there appears to be some confusion amongst teachers about the policy, at least when verbally relaying it to parents and pupils, inferring that the in school and out of school policies are identical i.e. phone can be confiscated out of school.

Mill Hill County High also support the Smartphone Free Childhood Barnet initiative. The letter to parents, includes a list of schools supporting the initiative and states that brick phones can be used (Feb 2025), link below.

Excerpt
“If you need to contact your child while they travel to and from school, a simple 'brick' phone is enough. 'Brick' phones do not have internet connectivity, and they are inexpensive”

https://www.qegschool.org.uk/attachments/download.asp?file=5951&type=pdf

BBC article with SFC’s comments:
Excerpt
“The SFC also signposts parents to other types of phones such as "brick" phones, which only allow calls and texts, or other models that can access podcasts and music, but offer no internet access.
Ms Eden said: "We are not saying no phones, just one without the dangers of the internet in the child's pocket.”

Link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78wpy45ex3o

"By the book" is putting in the SEN support that the children with SEN need. Any similar size comprehensive school should be able to offer an appropriate range of SEN support. Other than accessibility issues (e.g. needing to install lifts, possibly in buildings that aren't suited), SEN support is an an ongoing, evolving provision to meet the needs of the pupils. It isn't an ethos that schools can opt in and out of.

As for mobile phones, that is very clearly a simple case for reasonable adjustments. Great that LOS has acknowledged that. Other schools need to follow suit.

No one is discriminating based on SEN but why would you pick any school that says they will do everything by the book but they are not really set up to offer the kind SEN support that actually makes a difference?

This is exactly what Labour are trying to push though - so it clearly doesn't exist at a local level yet.

All state schools will have some SEN children, but forcing your child into a school that isn't the right fit isn't a good thing, is it?

Would you prefer all schools to smile and say 'please send X here' or would you prefer them to be honest about the experience X will most likely get at their school (the by the book experience) and suggest you look elsewhere?

If you are still arguing about mobile phones then you have been told that LOS does make medical/sen exceptions and you have also been told that other schools actually want to adopt a no phone policy. So it appears phones create more problems for schools than they solve. It is a fine balancing act and ultimately if parents aren't happy they can send their children to a school that aligns with their views. Plenty of parents don't want their children to have phones and now they have a choice of schools that align with their views too... isn't that great?

I am very anti phone but I think there should be an exception for brick phones for commutes.

Yes, it's not quite the stand-alone RC power house it once was. It was the CV schola that was chosen for David Attenborough's 100th celebration at RAH last year, not LOS!

A pupil almost burning it down can't have helped. It's been a building site for a couple of years now and that level of disruption will have had an impact. Think that's coming to a end, so they may level up in the next few years.

I don't think it is legal to discriminate based on send. Maybe take a look at the send code of practice which is statutory guidance.

This is a section from it:
Every school is required to identify and address the SEN of the pupils that they
support. Mainstream schools, which in this chapter includes maintained schools and academies that are not special schools, maintained nursery schools, 16 to19 academies, alternative provision academies and Pupil Referral Units (PRUs), must:
• use their best endeavours to make sure that a child with SEN gets the support they need – this means doing everything they can to meet children and young people’s SEN
• ensure that children and young people with SEN engage in the activities of
the school alongside pupils who do not have SEN
• designate a teacher to be responsible for co-ordinating SEN provision – the
SEN co-ordinator, or SENCO (this does not apply to 16 to 19 academies)
• inform parents when they are making special educational provision for a
child
• prepare an SEN information report (see ‘Publishing information: SEN
information report’, paragraph 6.78 onwards) and their arrangements for
the admission of disabled children, the steps being taken to prevent
disabled children from being treated less favourably than others, the
facilities provided to enable access to the school for disabled children and
their accessibility plan showing how they plan to improve access progressively over time

There are also sections that talk about reasonable adjustments.

There's nothing in it that says "but it's ok to tell parents that you can't be arsed to do this if they send a child to your school, so they might be better off looking elsewhere".

I think it's also worth noting that plenty of send children perform highly, academically.

Obviously academically selective schools can select based on tests of academic aptitude. But non-selective schools can't, other than things like banding to ensure a comprehensive intake.

Why not? If a school can say it is set up to help all types of SEN kids and so you should send your kid there, why can't a school point out that it is really not set up for SEN kids? It's not stopping your from sending your child there but it is saying you might find other schools a better fit for your child and your expectations might not be met if you send your child to a high performing academic school.

and would that be the spirit of the Old Testament or the New Testament you are referring to there? I don't recall hearing the parable of the schoolchild without a mobile phone as the second reading on any Sunday ever, or recall thou must always carry thy mobile phone as of the 10 commandments.😂

But state funded schools should be accessible to any child that qualifies for a place, they shouldn't be making policies (and not flexing on them) for children who have send, when the flex would be pretty trivial (a turned off brick phone in the bottom of a bag). That's exactly the point of a "reasonable adjustment ". If LOS flexes, fine but clearly some schools don't and that isn't really ok.

My DD's only school option isn't 45 mins away, that's the one we thought was most suitable for her. She doesn't have "issues traveling" she just has had a couple of unfortunate incidents at the beginning of year 7. For my older DD, we've had plenty of disruption in her 4 years on a similar journey. Sometimes public transport just doesn't work and they end up stranded.

But schools have to allow reasonable adjustments for kids with sen to level the playing field. It seems from what someone has said up thread that they do make exceptions on medical grounds which is great. You can’t just say that a specific school “isn’t for sen kids”. That’s discrimination. They have as much right as any other child to attend.

@Araminta1004
I’m afraid “thanks for the admission” is doing rather a lot of work there. There is a blanket ban on phones, with specific authorised exemptions for medical or SEN reasons. An exemption does not disprove a rule; it is the exception that sits within it. So no, you haven’t caught anyone out — you’ve just discovered what the word “exemption” means.
And yes, “from a teacher”. I spend a great deal of time patiently correcting young people when they say something foolish or misunderstand something straightforward — they’re children, so that comes with the territory. Professionally, I’m paid to show them patience. You, however, are presumably an adult, you’re not one of my pupils, and I’m perfectly entitled to respond to nonsense with considerably less patience.

But a school that doesn't allow phones isn't suitable for her. That's the point. They have their policies for the benefit of the whole school. Your child should go to a school that is suitable for her and if that is one that allows phones then that is the one you send her too.

It sounds like LOS do make some concessions. Why is your autistic daughter not eligible for transport if her only school option is 45 minutes away and she has issues travelling?

@Bigmove25 - yes because she said her DS was anxious and a stickler for rules etc. So why should anyone with a more anxious child or a child with SEND where reasonable adjustments have to be made by law, be put off by some batshit policy on the website proudly proclaimed by a head, which is basically discriminating against such kids even applying! Not in the spirit of the Roman Catholic faith.

DD’s school was very strict on smartphones but allowed brick phones for years 7-11. That seemed a very sensible compromise to me. I had a phone card always with me when I was at school, but a fat lot of good that would be nowadays.

really not 'all' you've ever said... You were telling the OP to mount a legal case earlier on 😂

Maybe not if they don't personally agree with it. But when it comes to sen, that's into reasonable adjustments territory. My autistic DD has a 45 min journey to school and we've had a couple of incidents already, just a few weeks into year 7, where having a phone on the journey has been really valuable. Should she really have to go to a local school that isn't as suited to her, because she needs occasional help from us on the journey? I'd have no issue with her having to lock her phone away at school, but she is more vulnerable than the average and I would hope any school could accept that.

Because she was being rude. And all I ever said is that some of these school policies aren’t actually legal!

Publicly admitting? They literally said if you'd done your research you would have discovered this yourself. Why the legalese?

Oh and what's with the faux outrage? Are teachers not allowed to say what they think like anyone else?

I’m not in the UK but grew up in London, very familiar with this world. (My DCs’ private school collects all devices upon arrival and returns at dismissal; school issued laptops are fully locked down bar Google Classroom ages 10-14, and fully unlocked off the premises thereafter (but all social media blocked on the premises)). Anyway, I’d love to know whether and if so how a school like LOS incorporates AI into its curriculum, both teaching what it is/how to use it, and using it for school work. And of course, how they might run this alongside a complete ban on smart devices during the week except when at home. Do the students work on laptops? Are the internet-enabled? Do they use Google Classroom or equivalent?

No, it is not about entitlement, it is about legal rights and overstepping. A diabetic kid who needs a smart phone linked to their pump and their parents phone at all times, will get one in any state school (it would be illegal not to allow it)! That is a fact, same for kids with SEND and anxiety or epilepsy etc. And school policies and fads change all the time anyway and they have to adjust to need, including travel sickness and anxiety anyway.
Plenty of people chose the Oratory because they are practising Roman Catholics and above all else that is what drives them there, not the outstanding this that or the other. And part of the RC faith is tolerance.
Yes my kid is not at the Oratory but as practising RC we did look at it closely, have friends with kids there etc, mostly it is a very good school and has a high parental satisfaction rate.
The tough it out bit of RC faith and RC schools I am more than familiar with. But there is a line that has to be respected. So in the event the OP is actually concerned because of her child’s needs at least that point was clarified.

MHCHS states no exceptions.

Excerpt and link below.

21. MOBILE PHONES / SMART WATCHES / ELECTRONIC DEVICE
In school
Mobile phones /smart watches / electronic devices are not permitted on the school site due to the negative
impact and they can have within the school community.
Students who are seen with a phone / smart watch / electronic device or students in possession of a phone /
smart watch or electronic device which goes off will have the item confiscated.
The item will be passed to the school reception and stored in the school safe.
Students will be able to collect the item from the school reception at 15:25 on the following Friday (the week
after the item is confiscated).
Sixth Form students will be able to collect their phone at 3:25pm on the day of confiscation.
Failure to cooperate with the request to hand the phone over will lead to a Red Card consequence.
Sixth form students are permitted to use mobile phones and smart watches in the immediate vicinity of the
Sixth Form block. Any use of their mobile phone / smart watch outside of this are will result in the process
above being followed.
Out of school
Any student seen using their mobile phone / smart watch or electronic device outside of the school grounds
while in uniform will be asked to put it away.
The teacher will log a C2 use of mobile phone on Class Charts.
The Head of Year will conduct a search the following day and confiscate the phone placing it in the school
safe.
Students will be able to collect the item from the school reception at 15:25 on the following Friday (the week
after the item is confiscated).
There are no exceptions to this policy.

https://millhill.reactfiles.co.uk/uploads/key_information/MHCHS-Behaviour-Policy-2026.pdf?t=1788779897 link

In my experience, capitalism and entrepreneurship solve this problem quite efficiently.

A local newsagent near the school usually runs a discreet sideline keeping phones during the day for a small sum of money.

It’s called ‘entitlement’.