My kid just graduated from a NYC high school that had a complete ban on phones in school. The kids checked in their phones at the front desk on the way in and got them back when leaving.
It was by no means watertight -- many (most?) kids had a "burner" phone that was dead or broken or whatever that they turned in (because nobody would believe a highschooler who said they didn't have their phone with them lol) and they kept their real phone. But at least the expectation was set that you can absolutely not ever be seen using a phone in class.
Overall I think it was a good policy. I don't think it's workable at large schools.
In NYC at least you simply can't tell families that kids have to leave phones at home -- they are an essential tool for safety and travel, especially for younger kids. My 12 year old can take the subway to school by himself, but ONLY if he has a phone in case he ends up in some wackadoodle situation where his train has gone express or is on another train line and he needs to call his lifeline (me!) to figure out how to work it out. But they do not need to have them in the classroom.
> My 12 year old can take the subway to school by himself, but ONLY if he has a phone in case he ends up in some wackadoodle situation where his train has gone express or is on another train line and he needs to call his lifeline (me!) to figure out how to work it out.
I was taking the subway to school by myself at 12 in Toronto (maybe a slightly less intense city, to be fair). I'm not sure about NYC but in Toronto it's possible to teach a kid a set of strategies where they'll basically never get dangerously-lost.
Just find the nearest bus, and get on it. Stay on it until it arrives at a subway station. Ask a transit worker at the station if necessary. Get on another bus or subway that gets you a little closer in the right direction. It can take a while but you can follow this algorithm rather blindly and it will get you there. (The system was designed that way, I think.)
I never got lost. And if I had gotten lost, I wouldn't have been in any particular danger. At a certain age they'll have to figure out "oh, there's no bus, what do I do?" on their own. (At the time, I did not like this whole take the subway on my own thing - scared the heck out of me. I had to be coached with multiple trial runs.)
This headline appears to be bullshit. The report does not recommend banning smartphones. This is what it actually says:
"Banning technology from schools can be legitimate if technology integration does not improve learning or if it worsens student well-being. Yet, working with technology in schools, and the accompanying risks, may require something more than banning. First, policies should be clear on what is and is not permitted in schools. Students cannot be punished if there is no clarity or transparency on their required behaviour. Decisions in these areas need conversations supported by sound evidence and involve all those with a stake in students’ learning. Second, there should be clarity on the role these new technologies play in learning and on their responsible use by and within schools. Third, students need to learn the risks and opportunities that come with technology, develop critical skills, and understand to live with and without technology. Shielding students from new and innovative technology can put them at a disadvantage. It is important to look at these issues with an eye on the future and be ready to adjust and adapt as the world changes."
Going against HN's usual anti-smartphone thing, I think this is incredibly dumb. Luckily no one really cares much about what UNESCO calls for.
Outright bans on smartphones in schools are no different from the video game, TV screen time, "kids will only play games on computers" and other related superstitions that were in vogue back in the early 2000s. All they did was make parents feel validated (without having to put in the work to understand their child) and make life difficult for most kids while building resentment.
As with most things, the decision of smartphone access for kids should come down to having parents actually understand their child, his/her needs and ability to handle the associated responsibility.
Especially as a teenager, pursuing my interests in computers was nothing but constant arguing with my parents because they were constantly being supported by outsiders (who had never seen what I was doing) on their anti-computer superstitions of the time (due to which they wholesale refused to understand that I wasn't gaming the vast majority of the time).
We've come full circle. When I was in high school (2013), smartphones had just started to become the default (i had a galaxy s2) and cell phones had been banned in-class since they became common for every teenager to have one (as early as 2007 for me, probably earlier than that for older millennials)
I guess at some point teachers gave up trying to enforce the rules. Or the idea of being away from your phone for hours at a time became strange to everyone. Or maybe teachers thought they could incorporate phones into lesson plans.
Anyway, I think we were better off not being allowed to use our phones in class.
I wish education went the other way, focusing on integrating educational tools to adapt to a world where everyone has access to the world's full repertoire of knowledge at all times. Teach kids to integrate these powerful tools as part of their learning and problem solving skills. By the time a kid is out of high school they should have a powerful index of knowledge accessible from all devices to help them tackle complex problems.
I was always resentful in high school when teachers said you wouldn't have access to informational charts or calculators in the real world. At that time I considered my integration with some electronic devices an extension of myself and an external index, it was like having a bunch of additional limbs for problem solving. Not having access to my tech devices was equivalent to being artificially lobotomized. And kids growing up will have access to even more powerful tools thanks to LLMs.
Societies that adapt and integrate tech devices as part of the educational experience will have a competitive advantage in the long run.
If your goal is for your kids to not have access to smartphone apps, dangers and distractions, I fear it'll fail spectacularly.
If your goal is to build self reliance and problem solving skills, you may succeed in unintended ways.
I was born in 1979. I touched my first computer probably at age 6. I programmed in GWbasic when I was 10 or so, started turbo Pascal and oracle db lessons when I was 11. War started when I was 12, my dad got wounded when walking to work, and I was basically a fully fledged prepubescent adult partially responsible for family survival. And I am not special. (This is lateral to the meticulous way I built a flame thrower at 12 as well:)
Point is, 12 and 13 year olds are smart and resourceful and have a lot of time and motivation to outwit you. We somehow forget our 12 year old selves when we become adults. I reread enders game when I need to remind myself (my initial reaction to the book was "what a horribly unrealistic way to portray kids, they think like adults", followed by the realization I did think like that as a kid! We just start telling ourselves weird tales of superiority as we get old).
You are not repeat not going to successfully keep your kids from this stuff until they're 14. My 12 year old niece who is like the most innocent person I know taught me more about dark Web than I knew. You don't raise your child in isolation. They'll learn from you but also hundred other kids. You can hope to be involved and maybe, maybe guide. I fear that by not giving them access yourself in a guided fashion, all you'll be doing is ensuring they have it in unguided fashion.
(Fwiw I have a 2 and 4 year old and struggle with exact same questions coming up)
As someone who didn't have a phone until 12 or 13, please do, BUT make sure you do it right. I use my phone for maybe 5 minutes a day excluding essential stuff, have 0 social media, and have no interest in increasing either number.
If you just hold it over their head, they'll go find some other kid whose parents' entire parenting philosophy is "give iPad". You should make sure to explain to them why you're restricting the tech (and be open if you think the kids are mature enough to understand). "You could download bad things that spy on you or get exposed to bad content - it even happens to a lot of adults" is a much better explanation than "ooo spooky bad stuff on internet".
My final suggestion, and what I wish my parents had done, is allowed me to use the internet freely, with supervision (and an adblocker). Instead of letting them go on YouTube or Reddit to watch random streamers, let (and encourage) them to try learning Spanish, Python, electronic music, whatever. It would have been extremely fun for me as a kid to learn about "advanced" stuff like coding actual websites or messing with the terminal instead of playing with the sanitized block-code websites. They'll also pick up useful skills in the process, and be entertained in a productive way. Much better than restricting or allowing everything imo.
Also, the fact that you're considering this makes you a better parent than half the population nowadays. Keep your kids from consuming garbage and they will thank you later!
I have had coworkers who wanted to stick with a dumb phone. It sounds great to give junior a dumb phone until they're "old enough", but not much communication happens via sms. It's all done in other apps.
Your kids will be excluded from a lot of conversations and events. They will feel ostricized socially and will inevitably be frustrated at you because of it.
Having no phone versus a dumb phone would make the resentment worse. No idea what the best answer is beyond all of society collectively realizing it's a bad idea to give smartphones to young kids.
It's completely feasible. I've been told by a lot of younger people that their parents gave them a "practice phone" (iPod Touch was a popular choice) as a kid, and if they took care of it and hadn't done anything with it they shouldn't have by certain age, they were allowed a smartphone.
I'm not sure what the modern equivalent is, and there are certainly plenty of other ways to gauge responsibility and honesty, but there are phones that can't be used for much except calling and texting specific people.
In general, if someone is old enough to seek something out, banning them from it isn't going to work, anyway. I don't support the iPad/YouTube model of parenting, but I also don't think kids who grow up with things are as/more susceptible to them because of when they were introduced.
It's like prohibition, the forbidden fruit. Denial will only increase the want. It's better to teach moderation early than it is to try to curb the want for 7+ years.
My kid has had an iPad from age 1 or so, with kiosk mode enabled and a baby game that made funny noises when they slapped the screen.
They got a phone at age 7, just before starting first grade. No Youtube, no TikTok and screen time enforced per category and per program. The only one I "cheated" the age with was WhatsApp, because it's the default communication tool over here.
It's about 5 years later and I've still managed to keep them off Youtube by giving more screen time in Netflix/Disney+/our PBS equivalent etc, where the content is actually produced and not some youtube elsagate horror show or a screaming influencer hawking off whatever a sponsor is telling them to sell this week.
At this point asking for screen time with good grounds is a habit for the kid: "Homework is done and I read The Trials of Morrigan Crow for 30 minutes, can I get screen time?" It's also used mostly for background noise, iPad is on a stand somewhere with a random show running and they're drawing or doing some crafts while it's playing.
The rule we follow is that every 15 minute slot spent reading (comics or books) is given out double as screen time.
The parental controls on Google devices are pretty darned good. I can't see their raw browser history, but I can see what apps are installed and how much they're used, control screen-time, bed-time, ban/grant app permissions on a per-app basis, etc. Blanket banning smartphones from kids is overkill when there are tools available to enforce responsible use.
There is an ugly trend here. We want to protect children from exploitation, so we make artificial learning environments where kids interact with each other instead of adults and perform often silly exercises instead of actually participating in the creation of value. Now we want to protect kids by removing their capacity to communicate and organize socially. Protecting children is a noble goal, but it may be possible that the best protection for children is to interact with adults to create value and communicate and organize socially. Building cocoons for kids hoping that will help them pupate into successful adults seems misguided.
Adults have been fine with the Lord of the Flies tendencies of adolescent education. But now smartphones are ruining everything?
I don’t have children let alone teenage ones so maybe I shouldn’t have an opinion on this, but it seems that we adults complain way too much about teenagers and almost never consider that maybe we have structured their lives in a way that isn’t great for them.
Singling out smartphones or binge drinking won’t fix anything at the root.
This is totally unprecedented. It is likely that the addictive quality of smartphones and social media are the cause. They are replacing physical contacts with virtual ones. There is a serious argument to be made to outright ban teenagers from owning smartphones until the age of 16, similar to laws on smoking and alcohol.
I would support this purely on the basis of reducing the privacy invasion of those children by those devices. The confusion is any other devices they use will similarly be phoning home so I would advocate for their removal too.
The future seems to involve some sort of macro Tesla aesthetic where more than you thought reasonable has been removed, what is there may not be executed well, and what displays etc there are in one physical region all go through one single point of control/truth attestation with other devices banned. In the case of a school that will be the school IT which they may outsource.
A family friend is a teacher and she talks about how the kids just play with their phones the whole time. They don't pay attention and she's not allowed to do anything about it. I don't understand how we got to the point where teachers have zero authority.
I don't understand why phones can't be put in lockers. If you really need to use the phone for an emergency, you could get a pass. And in the past isn't that what the office was for?
I don't know how we've managed to so severely nerf teachers' authority to conduct their class and deal with troublemakers. I've got a daughter now, and the classroom is like Lord Of The Flies now vs. how it was when I was her age in the '80s. My kid reports that one or two kids act out basically all day (maybe trauma from growing up in a broken home?) and the rest of the class barely gets through classwork. So they all get tons of homework to make up for basically chaos during school hours.
From what I understand it’s a confluence of multiple different factors resulting in this situation. The problem is this (inability to enforce classroom etiquette) is really only an issue in “Gen Pop” public schools, which is starting a kind of doom spiral out of them, concentrating the problem there even more so.
I don't see a more elegant solution than this, but it's a bummer. Smartphones are so useful; the world's information AND a computer in your pocket! The ideal would be to give students and parents an avenue to remove/combat the addictive elements of their smartphones, but most students (and parents) don't see those elements as a problem, but a feature.
On one dimension they are a tool (like a Sheika Slate in Zelda).
On the other dimension they are a toy.
The problem for schools is that the tool and the toy are packaged together.
A further problem is that smartphones are consumer electronic devices, so businesses will strive to make them as addictive as possible and are unlikely to support creating some kind of separation between toy and tool.
So I agree that a ban is probably the best solution at this point. A ban with legal backing so schools can focus on education and not combating distraction.
In the workplace you have BYOD, bring your own device. But in order to access the services needed at your workplace, you need to install MS Intune and similar, which basically give your workplace limited admin access, they can remotely wipe your device, set stronger pin requirements etc. Perhaps something similar should be made available for schools. So the school can limit use of the phone without putting the phone in a drawer
[+] [-] bgribble|2 years ago|reply
It was by no means watertight -- many (most?) kids had a "burner" phone that was dead or broken or whatever that they turned in (because nobody would believe a highschooler who said they didn't have their phone with them lol) and they kept their real phone. But at least the expectation was set that you can absolutely not ever be seen using a phone in class.
Overall I think it was a good policy. I don't think it's workable at large schools.
In NYC at least you simply can't tell families that kids have to leave phones at home -- they are an essential tool for safety and travel, especially for younger kids. My 12 year old can take the subway to school by himself, but ONLY if he has a phone in case he ends up in some wackadoodle situation where his train has gone express or is on another train line and he needs to call his lifeline (me!) to figure out how to work it out. But they do not need to have them in the classroom.
[+] [-] retrac|2 years ago|reply
I was taking the subway to school by myself at 12 in Toronto (maybe a slightly less intense city, to be fair). I'm not sure about NYC but in Toronto it's possible to teach a kid a set of strategies where they'll basically never get dangerously-lost.
Just find the nearest bus, and get on it. Stay on it until it arrives at a subway station. Ask a transit worker at the station if necessary. Get on another bus or subway that gets you a little closer in the right direction. It can take a while but you can follow this algorithm rather blindly and it will get you there. (The system was designed that way, I think.)
I never got lost. And if I had gotten lost, I wouldn't have been in any particular danger. At a certain age they'll have to figure out "oh, there's no bus, what do I do?" on their own. (At the time, I did not like this whole take the subway on my own thing - scared the heck out of me. I had to be coached with multiple trial runs.)
[+] [-] adhesive_wombat|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] verve_rat|2 years ago|reply
(Genuinely asking, never lived in a place with a subway, but took the bus all the time at that age.)
[+] [-] tomjen3|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] halhod|2 years ago|reply
"Banning technology from schools can be legitimate if technology integration does not improve learning or if it worsens student well-being. Yet, working with technology in schools, and the accompanying risks, may require something more than banning. First, policies should be clear on what is and is not permitted in schools. Students cannot be punished if there is no clarity or transparency on their required behaviour. Decisions in these areas need conversations supported by sound evidence and involve all those with a stake in students’ learning. Second, there should be clarity on the role these new technologies play in learning and on their responsible use by and within schools. Third, students need to learn the risks and opportunities that come with technology, develop critical skills, and understand to live with and without technology. Shielding students from new and innovative technology can put them at a disadvantage. It is important to look at these issues with an eye on the future and be ready to adjust and adapt as the world changes."
[+] [-] dotnet00|2 years ago|reply
Outright bans on smartphones in schools are no different from the video game, TV screen time, "kids will only play games on computers" and other related superstitions that were in vogue back in the early 2000s. All they did was make parents feel validated (without having to put in the work to understand their child) and make life difficult for most kids while building resentment.
As with most things, the decision of smartphone access for kids should come down to having parents actually understand their child, his/her needs and ability to handle the associated responsibility.
Especially as a teenager, pursuing my interests in computers was nothing but constant arguing with my parents because they were constantly being supported by outsiders (who had never seen what I was doing) on their anti-computer superstitions of the time (due to which they wholesale refused to understand that I wasn't gaming the vast majority of the time).
[+] [-] shortrounddev2|2 years ago|reply
I guess at some point teachers gave up trying to enforce the rules. Or the idea of being away from your phone for hours at a time became strange to everyone. Or maybe teachers thought they could incorporate phones into lesson plans.
Anyway, I think we were better off not being allowed to use our phones in class.
[+] [-] TheAceOfHearts|2 years ago|reply
I was always resentful in high school when teachers said you wouldn't have access to informational charts or calculators in the real world. At that time I considered my integration with some electronic devices an extension of myself and an external index, it was like having a bunch of additional limbs for problem solving. Not having access to my tech devices was equivalent to being artificially lobotomized. And kids growing up will have access to even more powerful tools thanks to LLMs.
Societies that adapt and integrate tech devices as part of the educational experience will have a competitive advantage in the long run.
[+] [-] Beldur|2 years ago|reply
Is this realistic? Any experiences?
[+] [-] NikolaNovak|2 years ago|reply
If your goal is for your kids to not have access to smartphone apps, dangers and distractions, I fear it'll fail spectacularly.
If your goal is to build self reliance and problem solving skills, you may succeed in unintended ways.
I was born in 1979. I touched my first computer probably at age 6. I programmed in GWbasic when I was 10 or so, started turbo Pascal and oracle db lessons when I was 11. War started when I was 12, my dad got wounded when walking to work, and I was basically a fully fledged prepubescent adult partially responsible for family survival. And I am not special. (This is lateral to the meticulous way I built a flame thrower at 12 as well:)
Point is, 12 and 13 year olds are smart and resourceful and have a lot of time and motivation to outwit you. We somehow forget our 12 year old selves when we become adults. I reread enders game when I need to remind myself (my initial reaction to the book was "what a horribly unrealistic way to portray kids, they think like adults", followed by the realization I did think like that as a kid! We just start telling ourselves weird tales of superiority as we get old).
You are not repeat not going to successfully keep your kids from this stuff until they're 14. My 12 year old niece who is like the most innocent person I know taught me more about dark Web than I knew. You don't raise your child in isolation. They'll learn from you but also hundred other kids. You can hope to be involved and maybe, maybe guide. I fear that by not giving them access yourself in a guided fashion, all you'll be doing is ensuring they have it in unguided fashion.
(Fwiw I have a 2 and 4 year old and struggle with exact same questions coming up)
[+] [-] MarioCircuit|2 years ago|reply
If you just hold it over their head, they'll go find some other kid whose parents' entire parenting philosophy is "give iPad". You should make sure to explain to them why you're restricting the tech (and be open if you think the kids are mature enough to understand). "You could download bad things that spy on you or get exposed to bad content - it even happens to a lot of adults" is a much better explanation than "ooo spooky bad stuff on internet".
My final suggestion, and what I wish my parents had done, is allowed me to use the internet freely, with supervision (and an adblocker). Instead of letting them go on YouTube or Reddit to watch random streamers, let (and encourage) them to try learning Spanish, Python, electronic music, whatever. It would have been extremely fun for me as a kid to learn about "advanced" stuff like coding actual websites or messing with the terminal instead of playing with the sanitized block-code websites. They'll also pick up useful skills in the process, and be entertained in a productive way. Much better than restricting or allowing everything imo.
Also, the fact that you're considering this makes you a better parent than half the population nowadays. Keep your kids from consuming garbage and they will thank you later!
[+] [-] DavidPeiffer|2 years ago|reply
Your kids will be excluded from a lot of conversations and events. They will feel ostricized socially and will inevitably be frustrated at you because of it.
Having no phone versus a dumb phone would make the resentment worse. No idea what the best answer is beyond all of society collectively realizing it's a bad idea to give smartphones to young kids.
[+] [-] washadjeffmad|2 years ago|reply
I'm not sure what the modern equivalent is, and there are certainly plenty of other ways to gauge responsibility and honesty, but there are phones that can't be used for much except calling and texting specific people.
In general, if someone is old enough to seek something out, banning them from it isn't going to work, anyway. I don't support the iPad/YouTube model of parenting, but I also don't think kids who grow up with things are as/more susceptible to them because of when they were introduced.
[+] [-] theshrike79|2 years ago|reply
My kid has had an iPad from age 1 or so, with kiosk mode enabled and a baby game that made funny noises when they slapped the screen.
They got a phone at age 7, just before starting first grade. No Youtube, no TikTok and screen time enforced per category and per program. The only one I "cheated" the age with was WhatsApp, because it's the default communication tool over here.
It's about 5 years later and I've still managed to keep them off Youtube by giving more screen time in Netflix/Disney+/our PBS equivalent etc, where the content is actually produced and not some youtube elsagate horror show or a screaming influencer hawking off whatever a sponsor is telling them to sell this week.
At this point asking for screen time with good grounds is a habit for the kid: "Homework is done and I read The Trials of Morrigan Crow for 30 minutes, can I get screen time?" It's also used mostly for background noise, iPad is on a stand somewhere with a random show running and they're drawing or doing some crafts while it's playing.
The rule we follow is that every 15 minute slot spent reading (comics or books) is given out double as screen time.
[+] [-] soligern|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Pxtl|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jweir|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] m0llusk|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] avgcorrection|2 years ago|reply
I don’t have children let alone teenage ones so maybe I shouldn’t have an opinion on this, but it seems that we adults complain way too much about teenagers and almost never consider that maybe we have structured their lives in a way that isn’t great for them.
Singling out smartphones or binge drinking won’t fix anything at the root.
[+] [-] cubefox|2 years ago|reply
https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/06/teen-d...
This is totally unprecedented. It is likely that the addictive quality of smartphones and social media are the cause. They are replacing physical contacts with virtual ones. There is a serious argument to be made to outright ban teenagers from owning smartphones until the age of 16, similar to laws on smoking and alcohol.
[+] [-] fidotron|2 years ago|reply
The future seems to involve some sort of macro Tesla aesthetic where more than you thought reasonable has been removed, what is there may not be executed well, and what displays etc there are in one physical region all go through one single point of control/truth attestation with other devices banned. In the case of a school that will be the school IT which they may outsource.
[+] [-] nsxwolf|2 years ago|reply
I don't understand why phones can't be put in lockers. If you really need to use the phone for an emergency, you could get a pass. And in the past isn't that what the office was for?
[+] [-] ryandrake|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] opportune|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mapierce2|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] horeszko|2 years ago|reply
On one dimension they are a tool (like a Sheika Slate in Zelda).
On the other dimension they are a toy.
The problem for schools is that the tool and the toy are packaged together.
A further problem is that smartphones are consumer electronic devices, so businesses will strive to make them as addictive as possible and are unlikely to support creating some kind of separation between toy and tool.
So I agree that a ban is probably the best solution at this point. A ban with legal backing so schools can focus on education and not combating distraction.
[+] [-] xwdv|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mongol|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Simulacra|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nottorp|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] benguild|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ChatGTP|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fnord77|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aaron695|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] JohnClark1337|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]