Group of 17 London secondary schools join up to go smartphone-free

Post by vel0city » Wed, Jun 19, 2024, 9:09 PM UTC

logtempo wrote: post #190

vel0city wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming children (on average) have the same capacity to make reasoned decisions as adults so long as you just "teach" them. There's a reason why we don't let 8-year-olds drive, and its not just that nobody bothered to take the time to teach them. And no, no matter how many times I tell my three-year-old the stove is hot, I'm not going to put them in charge of cooking dinner on the stove. Instead, I'll ban the…

We're talking about childrens that have between 11-18 years old. I'm also not saying that teachers could ask nicely and then do nothing if the rule is broken. Actually, one could ask students to either put their phones in their bag or in a "safe phone-box", and still seize the phone if it's used. Bringing awarness is important, when it comes to fighting addiction.

UK Secondary education is 11-15. UK driving age is 17. My argument about not letting them drive still stands. We're not letting 11-year-olds drive.

> I'm also not saying that teachers could ask nicely and then do nothing if the rule is broken.

But what rule? Clearly not some rule banning them, since your argument is there shouldn't be a rule banning their use. If the rule isn't a ban, then what cause does the teacher have to forcibly remove the phone? Is the student allowed to have the phone or not? It would seem like the idea a teacher is able to make the judgement call of policing the phone usage in the classroom and deciding when it becomes a distraction isn't working. And having it hidden behind a vague "causing a distraction" often can't easily be proven other than the teacher's judgement.

The teacher shouldn't have to deal with supporting their decisions of removing the phone they should be focused on teaching the lesson. Having a clear-cut rule that phones are not to be out in the classroom makes it obvious where the line is. If it is just at the teacher's discretion of what is a distraction, students (who are children and already often have a hard time with decision making abilities) would probably have a harder time understanding the edges of the judgement decision.

Sure seems like the simpler solution is to just have a blanket "phones aren't allowed" rule instead of the mess it is currently. No judgement call, no forcing the teacher to defend their position, the standards are clear from the start. Back when I was in school, about the time the iPhone came out, cellphones were common for highschoolers (age 13-18) but having them out in a classroom was strictly banned. If a teacher caught any student using a phone without previously having the teacher's permission, it would immediately be taken up and brought to the office and only released at the end of school. This seems entirely in-line with the program being implemented here.

> The schools have agreed that if any phone is used by a pupil during the school day, it will be confiscated.

Post by rstuart4133 » Wed, Jun 19, 2024, 9:41 PM UTC

Angostura wrote: post #46

Listening to something on the BBC the other day that I found thought provoking. The speaker suggested that the question’at what age do you give your child access to the internet’ could better be framed ‘at what age do you want to give internet companies access to your child’

> The speaker suggested that the question’at what age do you give your child access to the internet’

Australia has also banned smart phones from schools. Here the ban had nothing do to with access to the internet or the effects of social media.

To paraphrase your question: at what age does constantly accessing the internet not interfere with work or schooling?

The answer is never, of course. All workplaces have policies limiting it. Schools have the same problem: there were always kids using phones hidden under desks to send message to each other. Workplaces enforcing their internet policies using monitoring software is rare thankfully, but expecting kids to exercise the same self discipline as a adult can is futile and so they moved to a ban. They ran studies on the outcome: https://theconversation.com/banning-mobile-phones-in-schools... TL;DR: Banning phones improved scholastic results.

I'd lay long odds the article is little more than click bait. My guess is a very well known result and the schools are actually banning phones so they can do their main job, which is teach kids. But rather than report that, the journo speculated in the most inflammatory way possible.

Re: Group of 17 London secondary schools join up to go smartphone-free

Re: Group of 17 London secondary schools join up to go smartphone-free