I’m glad to see this trend as it’s been a long time coming. I am seeing another trend, where students pushed back and found loopholes and implementation will vary per school. I Was speaking to another parent in VA last week and they mentioned that their school board just allowed phone use during lunch break based on the motion proposed by students, which they believe is still within the interpretation of bell to bell.
100% - students aren't likely to take this lying down, especially when previous student protests have gotten attention. While I personally think no phones during all school hours is the way to go, I think giving local districts some choice in how to enforce provides some needed flexibility that will prevent a large-scale backlash.
I am very sympathetic to all the arguments here, and support phone bans. But it's worth noting that the evidence for positive effects from phone bans is surprisingly weak. I wrote about it a couple months ago (https://open.substack.com/pub/topkomment/p/should-schools-ban-phones). There's overwhelming evidence that screens themselves are damaging, but it does seem like unregulated usage outside of schools tends to be enough to trigger the bad effects.
Again, I support the bans anyway, since I have a pretty strong prior that bans have to be useful, and because it's a hard topic to study. And there have been SOME studies with positive results. But I'm also nervous about motivated reasoning driving policy, so I try to keep an open mind.
Hey Charles, great points, per usual. I was thinking of your piece while writing this!
Those findings suggest to me that smartphones have the capability to do significant damage even with a relatively limited amount of exposure. So, while removing phones from schools might not instantly make things better, it sets the stage for additional improvement at home, where it's much more within the power of parents to do something about, as they see fit. In that lens, I view it as giving parents more of an opportunity to make positive changes vs. if the phones are readily available in schools, they never really stood a chance.
For anyone reading this, Charles routinely has great takes like this - strongly recommend you check out his page.
It’s great news that states are beginning to adopt these new measures. I’m of the age where I grew up with these smart phones, and I don’t think it’s taken seriously enough how addictive they are. The specific culprit I would say is social media. The social world no longer exists in real life, it exists entirely digitally. Rates of anxiety have increased in the young because it is no longer necessary for them to interact physically to socialize, so when they do it is much less familiar territory. Hopefully with time people recognize the true problem and we find ways to deal with it better.
I’m glad to see this trend as it’s been a long time coming. I am seeing another trend, where students pushed back and found loopholes and implementation will vary per school. I Was speaking to another parent in VA last week and they mentioned that their school board just allowed phone use during lunch break based on the motion proposed by students, which they believe is still within the interpretation of bell to bell.
100% - students aren't likely to take this lying down, especially when previous student protests have gotten attention. While I personally think no phones during all school hours is the way to go, I think giving local districts some choice in how to enforce provides some needed flexibility that will prevent a large-scale backlash.
I am very sympathetic to all the arguments here, and support phone bans. But it's worth noting that the evidence for positive effects from phone bans is surprisingly weak. I wrote about it a couple months ago (https://open.substack.com/pub/topkomment/p/should-schools-ban-phones). There's overwhelming evidence that screens themselves are damaging, but it does seem like unregulated usage outside of schools tends to be enough to trigger the bad effects.
Again, I support the bans anyway, since I have a pretty strong prior that bans have to be useful, and because it's a hard topic to study. And there have been SOME studies with positive results. But I'm also nervous about motivated reasoning driving policy, so I try to keep an open mind.
Hey Charles, great points, per usual. I was thinking of your piece while writing this!
Those findings suggest to me that smartphones have the capability to do significant damage even with a relatively limited amount of exposure. So, while removing phones from schools might not instantly make things better, it sets the stage for additional improvement at home, where it's much more within the power of parents to do something about, as they see fit. In that lens, I view it as giving parents more of an opportunity to make positive changes vs. if the phones are readily available in schools, they never really stood a chance.
For anyone reading this, Charles routinely has great takes like this - strongly recommend you check out his page.
It’s great news that states are beginning to adopt these new measures. I’m of the age where I grew up with these smart phones, and I don’t think it’s taken seriously enough how addictive they are. The specific culprit I would say is social media. The social world no longer exists in real life, it exists entirely digitally. Rates of anxiety have increased in the young because it is no longer necessary for them to interact physically to socialize, so when they do it is much less familiar territory. Hopefully with time people recognize the true problem and we find ways to deal with it better.