i do have some sympathy for teachers taking phones away because I had one class in school where a kid would play that noise outside the frequency adults can hear really loudly the whole time on his phone.
Also memes and texting friends are always going to win out over algebra and english class if they are an option right there
Mostly because the world disregards their concerns. “I was able to go through school with lead paint and leaded gasoline” says the fucking boomer.
“I was able to go to school withoit a cellphone.”
Good job, you survived a time when life was much simpler, and I’m glad you’ll use your experience to shit on the next generation. It’s the same argument against LLMs. They aren’t going away and saying. “No, don’t” isn’t going to change the world.
It’s the same stupid worldview that thinks playing a “gambling is dangerous” warning after a Draft King ad is an effective deterrent.
I don’t think OP is thinking that far into their future. I don’t think OP has any plans for higher education either. It’s been a few decades for me, but when I was an undergrad, if your pager went off in class --cell phones weren’t really a thing yet-- most professors would ask you to leave, which was not a good thing in the small upper division classes as they were very difficult and you had to pass with a B or better to move on in my major.
I actually doubt that phones are the major reason for a post like this. There are many reasons that you could fill in that only happen to some schools but phones happen to be the only one that applies to nearly every school. For example, at my school, our lunches have been cut down to shit 15 minutes at most, and if you buy lunch, it’s much less. We usually have them call 5 minutes left. Sometimes they will say the kitchen is closed, sometimes they can’t because people are still ordering.
Not only kids struggle with this, adults too. I’ve seen restaurant visits where everyone puts their phone on a pile on the table, first one to ring pays the bill. Otherwise Billy couldn’t stop texting his controlling partner all night.
I was rather referring to having nobody who would text/call me, besides my carrier, of course. But also that means I won’t end up in restaurant with someone.
Yeah, the second one will directly affect the first one positively. Essentially, school work needs to be the most interesting thing you can do in school, otherwise you will have low motivation. It’s not the job of the the school staff to make the material extremely interesting, it’s their job to remove every more interesting thing from the reach of students.
Read up on dopamine if you didn’t understand that.
While you’re on that, you could research how things don’t become more interesting by the absence of more interesting things and how dopamine is required for attention and information retention.
Doing nothing to motivate except removing potential distractions from unengaging school work doesn’t work and can even hurt students’ mental health as they experience issues of guilt and inadequacy from being unable to do what’s required of them.
I ask because schools do a lot to motivate but kids often dismiss it as lame or complain about the efforts. It’s very easy to say “motivate kids” but actual ideas aren’t common.
Let me give you an example, everyone has heard “when will we use this in real life?” in math class. The same people asking those questions are the same that groan at word problems. So you have kids complaining that won’t be able to use something in real life, and upset when they have to solve a real life problem. What’s the real complaint the student has? They have to try.
I agree that so much more can be done to make school fun, but it’s not all on the teachers. Students have to be present, participate and willing to leave their comfort zone in order to have better results.
Great question. And a hard one. But knowing a proposed solution will worsen the situation is an important step in it.
It’s like every time a person says “see, this is what happens when you don’t hit children” at every behavior issue. Even though we know that hitting children objectively worsens behavior over doing nothing, but they insist that doing the only thing they know, even if harmful, is better.
Let me give you an example, everyone has heard “when will we use this in real life?” in math class. The same people asking those questions are the same that groan at word problems
I had a math teacher that helped us see which math we would use in real life, and which math we wouldn’t, and helped us understand why the latter was still important for us to know. Everyone paid attention to her.
What’s the real complaint the student has? They have to try.
When you have a room of 30 students and 29 of them are complaining about something, we need to remind people that one of the real life uses of math (stats & probability to be precise) is to point out how unlikely it is that those 29 students are the causal variable.
I agree that so much more can be done to make school fun, but it’s not all on the teachers. Students have to be present, participate and willing to leave their comfort zone in order to have better results.
“Personal Responsibility” attitudes just doesn’t work for crowd dynamics, especially with regards to children. The way a group behaves is nearly 100% predictable from the balance of outside human factors. In this case, the outside factors are parents and teachers. That’s it. Either there is something that all the parents are doing wrong, or the teachers.
Since there are some teachers who have far more success than others (common “favorite subjects” based on school), that means the most likely cause, and mechanism for improvements, are the teachers.
It’s like every time a person says “see, this is what happens when you don’t hit children” at every behavior issue. Even though we know that hitting children objectively worsens behavior over doing nothing, but they insist that doing the only thing they know, even if harmful, is better.
When you have a room of 30 students and 29 of them are complaining about something … point out how unlikely it is that those 29 students are the causal variable.
You are saying 29 out of 30 people can’t be right, which is very wrong. But what you miss is that it’s really 3-4 kids disrupting and the rest going along because it’s easier.
It’s the path of least resistance, and people will jump onto the easy path.
“Personal Responsibility” attitudes just doesn’t work for crowd dynamics,
Except they do. Look at all the examples of Japanese fans cleaning stadiums.
In a crowd most people will follow the norm. If the norm is playing on your phone and not listening, the you have a bad time. It’s not punishing kids because teachers are bad at their jobs, it’s setting a behavioral norm.
Next time you dislike your teacher think about when you got stuck in a group with people who wouldn’t do anything. Now imagine a class full of them. If just one or two more people put in a little effort good things would happen.
I disagree. For two reasons. First, there is only a couple studies in your link, and its “difference-in-difference” strategy does not seem (at least prima facie) to shown effective isolation to only a single variable. Second, it seems to be making the same mistake previously made by Psychologists in the “hitting children” debate, making unsubstantiated (or “common sense”) conclusions about the gulf in the middle after only doing a quick analysis of the two extremes. Further, your link also calls question your claim by pointing out Switzerland did not find any effectiveness in banning phones.
And the “hitting” reference was intended to point out the concern against positive advancement. There was a time where psychologists thought hitting was better than nothing even when they knew it was net harmful and so did not strongly discourage it when parents could not or would not embrace more modern parenting strategies. The same is true of phones in school (and, per your link, laptops in college). Looking at the laptop studies I could find, they have the same methodological problems the phone studies have. They’re looking presumptively at distraction, and setting up an experiment where distraction is more pronounced.
Yet laptops have a lot more research than phones. Studies mentioned above compare ubiquitous laptop use and scores, while failing to address that each individual that uses a laptop averages higher scores than individuals who do not. What studies I could find with phones could be moving in the direction of that same dynamic that shows missing understanding of how to be use technology in learning.
Let’s look at the other side of things. Another study (again, possibly flawed…I don’t trust either side’s phone studies much yet) found that removing a phone ban in NY caused an increase in overall student obedience and educational productivity, at the cost of “school culture”. As someone who grew up as a victim of “school culture” in a world where teachers supported bullying (and in many places they still do), I have no problem with that trade-off. Of course, this study does directly contradict your educatoronline article.
“If educators do not find ways to leverage mobile technology in all learning environments, for all students, then we are failing our kids by not adequately preparing them to make the connection between their world outside of school and their world inside school”
…which is more important than test scores.
You are saying 29 out of 30 people can’t be right, which is very wrong. But what you miss is that it’s really 3-4 kids disrupting and the rest going along because it’s easier. It’s the path of least resistance, and people will jump onto the easy path.
Is that something you can cite, or just your own personal “pick em up by their bootstraps” opinion? Do you have any experience with crowd simulation? Can you show any evidence that your explanation is likely, or even reasonably possible?
Except they do. Look at all the examples of Japanese fans cleaning stadiums.
That’s… not an effective or topical rebuttal at all. Did you misunderstand what I meant by “Personal Responsibility” attitudes? I referred to blaming the individuals in a large group for their failure instead of blaming the causal elements of the group. I have to deal with that type of problem regularly, where a manager tries to blame a majority of his reports (all capable and talented) of being the problem when something goes wrong. Guess who I ultimately find responsible?
Next time you dislike your teacher think about when you got stuck in a group with people who wouldn’t do anything.
Thankfully, I’m decades out on that. From the kinds of things I see and read about education, I’m grateful I don’t have to go back. But then, my education started after school anyway.
It’s concerning that you think the absence of a device is comparable to the presence of a action, in this case hitting.
I’m genuinely lost on how you think the only variable here is whether something is being banned or being encouraged. Or should I say, it’s “concerning”. Did you have a smartphone in school?
Hmm. I’m curious about this. I repeated the words you used because I thought it was appropriate to do so. Were you resorting to trying to mock me in the first place?
If so, then “glass houses” and all that. If not, then please don’t take my reply as mocking. I genuinely mean it. And I am genuinely curious if you had smartphones in school. We didn’t have them when I grew up.
Great! But you have no evidence to support your argument. Your apples to oranges comparison of laptops isn’t compelling. Nor am I compelled by your methodology argument, which seems to take issue with testing a hypothesis that phones are a distraction.
thought hitting was better than nothing even when they knew it was net harmful
Once again, we know cellphones are detrimental to learning. This is not a matter of schools failing to adapt to new technology. Tablets, computers, interactive software and more are used. It is about unrestricted cell phone use, which studies have shown hinders learning.
a phone ban in NY caused an increase in overall student obedience and educational productivity, … Of course, this study does directly contradict your educatoronline article.
No it doesn’t. It says that no phones mean better learning. You are missing the forest for the trees.
Crowd dynamics
Lots of research has been done on this, and a small number of people can influence a large group. Look at “wave” studies for more info.
Calling minimum acceptable classroom behavior “picking yourself up by your bootstraps” is absurd. It’s like saying that you can’t expect people to not talk at the theater because that’s just asking too much of people.
Great! But you have no evidence to support your argument
I cited two pieces of fairly substantive evidence in reply to someone who cited a single article. If you don’t think that is reasonable escalation of evidence, we can stop now.
Once again, we know cellphones are detrimental to learning. This is not a matter of schools failing to adapt to new technology
My cited references contradict that. More importantly, your article contradicts the “we know” part. Let me quote your reference: "Research from Sweden, however, suggests little effect of banning mobile phones in high school on student performance. "
My references made clear argument that this is indeed a case of schools failing to adapt to new technology. I even quoted a relevant quote to you.
No it doesn’t. It says that no phones mean better learning. You are missing the forest for the trees.
“My findings suggest an improvement in educational productivity due to the NYCDOE’s ban removal”. I understand there’s a double-negative in that reference, but the cited study’s findings suggest that “yes phones mean better learning”. You might disagree with it, but please reread it so that you do not misrepresent it.
Lots of research has been done on this, and a small number of people can influence a large group. Look at “wave” studies for more info.
Sure. Please demonstrate that your claims are correct. Until then, and especially because you seem to have failed to comprehend the involved references, I will wish you luck.
Calling minimum acceptable classroom behavior “picking yourself up by your bootstraps” is absurd. It’s like saying that you can’t expect people to not talk at the theater because that’s just asking too much of people.
I’ve lived an entire life of watching people blame the bulk of individuals for failures by authorities. I have become reasonably skeptical of any claims that “it’s everyone but…” the decision-maker.
One of the problems with arguing with people online is I tend to assume people are arguing in good faith.
After getting about 50 studies showing that cell phones are bad for learning, I switched to duckduckgo. Not until page 3 did I find your sources. You have waded through data that says you are wrong. I’m not interested in copying them for you.
One of the problems with arguing with people online is I tend to assume people are arguing in good faith.
One of the things that stop me from arguing with people online is when they accuse me of arguing in bad faith because I have facts they don’t like. From such no-name sites as Harvard.
EDIT: For future reference (and 2 points):
Front page is a popularity contest, and does not bear any weight to the truth of a matter, or even expert consensus of that matter.
Front page can differ between people in search engines, and these results came from the front page on mine.
So in summary, the only reply that would not have been “bad faith” in your eyes would be to concede the argument. So you got it. Congrats, you were right about every opinion you’ve ever had in your life.
The best way to motivate is to build relationship and demonstrate a sense of excitement or at least show real-world connection to content. Relationship is the key, though. Students will care more about anything you say if they trust that you care about them.
It’s not the job of the the school staff to make the material extremely interesting, it’s their job to remove every more interesting thing from the reach of students.
And this is how we reached the point where sleep is more common in a classroom than anything else. They should make the material interesting enough that people won’t have to resort to other stuff
Read up on dopamine if you didn’t understand that.
I know what dopamine (the joy hormone which the body uses as a “reward”) is. Since the body uses it as a “reward” if school gives students that, then students will like school
They should make the material interesting enough that people won’t have to resort to other stuff
Nope. It’s all relative. Compared to what’s available via the phone and internet, 90% of school material is fundamentally more boring, because important things are often boring – and there’s almost nothing you can do about it. I mean sure, an incompetent/unmotivated teacher can make the material even less interesting, but that’s also why we need competent teachers. That’s a separate problem.
So the quest to make school material more interesting than the Internet is a dead end – it’s just impossible. So they need to make everything else less interesting. Which means that phones and computers can fuck right off. If there are kids for whom this is a difficult situation and they’re unable to cope, such kids will need intervention. I.e. restrictions in free time as well.
important things are often boring – and there’s almost nothing you can do about it.
That’s downright ridiculous. The most important skill for a teacher is an ability to effectively impart knowledge and in order to make students listen and remember, you need to make them interested.
So they need to make everything else less interesting.
No, they ABSOLUTELY don’t. If I’m watching a fascinating TED Talk at home, I don’t need anyone to make my favourite tv show boring in order for me to pay attention. That’s not how attention works. For someone who seems at least dimly aware of the existence of dopamine, you seem remarkably confused about the effects of a lack of it.
If there are kids for whom this is a difficult situation and they’re unable to cope, such kids will need intervention. I.e. restrictions in free time as well.
So restrictions are your only tools? I really hope you’re not a teacher or a parent, because your ideas seem not just ineffective but actually borderline abusive.
If I’m watching a fascinating TED Talk at home, I don’t need anyone to make my favourite tv show boring in order for me to pay attention.
You’re comparing a TED Talk that you chose to watch to school curriculum.
I really hope you’re not a teacher or a parent, because your ideas seem not just ineffective but actually borderline abusive.
I’m a parent who has witnessed the effects of smart devices on children, and I have made serious mistakes in this area. Those mistakes are from being not restrictive enough. I believe the society has made similar mistakes, but is slowly turning to facing and understanding those mistakes. A generation has been lost, though, and some people (like yourself it seems) are still fighting against countering these problems. I hope you’re not in any role where you can decide these things, because I think your opinions around this seem very harmful to both individuals and society.
It was supposed to be an easy to understand example of information being imparted in a more efficient way because it’s made interesting, not a one to one comparison. I felt that “listening to the teacher explain passionately and engagedly about the industrial revolution” was a bit clunky and on the nose.
I guess I underestimated how literal I have to be when dealing with someone who can’t even imagine that pedagogy other than deprivation works.
I’m a parent who has witnessed the effects of smart devices on children, and I have made serious mistakes in this area. Those mistakes are from being not restrictive enough.
No, those mistakes have likely been mostly from increasing the temptation to goof off on their phones by boring them.
I apologize, but your comments started stuoid and the devolved into ignorant nonsense, and thus poor other fella keeps engaging you like you’re capable of honest debate.
Education has never been about being more interesting than games or entertainment, and you sound like a nitwit for even suggesting it. Teachers are tasked with educating, and the #1 preventable reason for kids falling behind isn’t “entertain me more!” . . . it’s shit parenting and upbringing.
Kids lack impulse control worse than anyone – taking away cell phones is an absolute no-brainer.
I hope you’re not in any role where you can decide these things, because I think your opinions around this seem very harmful to both individuals and society.
Ignoring what we’re fighting about, just think of what you said there. You are saying (correct me if I’m wrong) that we should just not allow people with opinions that contradict you to not have any power
Sorry if I came off rude or I’m putting words in your mouth but stuff like that is not ideas I take lightly. I think it’s a threat to democracy
EDIT: I also hate stuff like this that directly attacks the person with the ideas. I have noticed that the replies to you became a lot ruder after you said that (probably it rubbed off.) I thing it is important to be calm in a discussion
Back to the topic
You’re comparing a TED Talk that you chose to watch to school curriculum.
Teachers regularly put informational videos (including TED talks) on in the classroom. It never becomes less interesting because it’s forced upon me - if anything their a nice change of pace
Those mistakes are from being not restrictive enough
Can you please elaborate. What “mistakes” did you make and what do you do now (also please elaborate on the “mistakes” society made)
Ignoring what we’re fighting about, just think of what you said there. You are saying (correct me if I’m wrong) that we should just not allow people with opinions that contradict you to not have any power
That was a reaction to them saying that they hope I’m not a parent. Which I am. Obviously not a good reaction, but it happened.
EDIT: I also hate stuff like this that directly attacks the person with the ideas. I have noticed that the replies to you became a lot ruder after you said that (probably it rubbed off.) I thing it is important to be calm in a discussion
I feel that I was attacked first and replied with similar energy, but oh well. That’s how everyone feels in these things, right?
Ignoring what we’re fighting about, just think of what you said there. You are saying (correct me if I’m wrong) that we should just not allow people with opinions that contradict you to not have any power
No one should be basing policy decisions on opinions anyway. Those should be based off facts and data.
Did you hear what I said about dopamine being the “joy hormone” and used as a “reward”. Your body gives out happy hormones like this after an exercise and other good stuff for you (including school work if it is interesting)
And don’t you tell me that knowledge isn’t interesting. For something to be interesting (by my definition) it must give you knowledge.
Girls twerking on TikTok is not interesting - the way Hitler died is
Memes are not interesting (unless they contain important info)
These may produce dopamine in other ways but they are not interesting
Which means that phones and computers can fuck right off.
I could be considered “tech savvy”, I know a bit of C/PHP and a lot of shell script. Explain ro me how I could learn that without a computer (I’m also self-taught)
So they need to make everything else less interesting.
As I said, sleep is something that pupils prefer to schoolwork. Get schoolwork above a bar that low and then we can talk. Amyway, it just needs to be interesting enough that students won’t feel a need to check social media
I could be considered “tech savvy”, I know a bit of C/PHP and a lot of shell script. Explain ro me how I could learn that without a computer (I’m also self-taught)
By using the computer or phone at home. Roughly half of the programmer workforce currently alive went through childhood without a mobile phone, because they didn’t exist for regular consumers. And personal laptops for children would’ve been perhaps an option for the top 1%, but probably not even them. Since you just didn’t have electronics in school.
You used Tiktok as an example for something that is more interesting than learning. (Of course it’s more interesting than learning, it’s digital crack cocaine.)
And this is how we reached the point where sleep is more common in a classroom than anything else.
I think this has more to do with sleep deprivation. I can probably count the number of days I got a full night’s rest while in high school and college on one hand. Rather than making classes more interesting (though they could do this as well I guess), they should focus on not completely overwhelming the students with homework, although I’ll admit that was more of a college thing.
Hey at least they give you some books to read if you’re bored. They’re heavy as hell, but you might learn something and get a well needed break from the phone.
to answer your question, there is no reason other than america’s fetishization of the protestant work ethic.
schools don’t need to be a joyless labor camp. you already have to wake up far too early and be there all day, can’t you at least be on your phone? maybe give kids a break? everyone has stress in their lives, my anxiety started in 5th grade, maybe i don’t have the mental capacity for 7 fucking classes today and i check out after 5. just like no honest person pays full rapt attention every minute of their jobs.
in college you can basically be on your phone during class and i remember just as much from college as i do grade school. either way, you have to study for the exams. if you aren’t gonna pay attention, there are plenty of ways to do so. being forced to listen doesn’t necessarily increase absorption.
Ah yes, americas protestant work ethic is why phones are not allowed in schools. Silly me I thought it was because it lowers motivation and promotes cheating
I thought it was because its distracting to the student and their peers? Cant focus on the lesson when youre playing games on your phone, and converselye when another student is playing games on their phone.
Unless you have ADHD and have a really hard time focusing on work with the chorus of shuffling and sniffles around you and would rather put in earbuds and study.
Plenty, yes. If someone revealed they’re a girl aged 13-16, they’d get flooded with DMs asking for nudes. And dick pics. Always many of such screenshots around.
Lmao it pains me every time I think of my prior behavior as a kid on the net. Becoming an adult, I was not prepared to face the shame of my behavior simply due to my lack of understanding. I genuinely thought I knew. ugh.
My district’s got tablets for pretty much everything and the kids don’t really know how to troubleshoot any problems with them and there’s no time to teach them to troubleshoot those problems and it’s all proprietary bullshit anyway. doomer
How could they motivate you to actually pay attention in class instead of playing with your phone? Honestly ask yourself if this “addressing motivation” would make geometry more interesting than tiktok.
not treat students like indentured servants? productively encourage them to pay attention instead of imposing austere zero tolerance policies? do you really think that people in ancient greece paid attention to every second of lecture because there weren’t any phones?
could you, yes you, in your day to day life, handle being forced to go through school again? to learn something new every hour of every weekday and being given obligatory deadlines, not even being paid for the work, having to be there at like 7:30am, having even less control over your personhood and freedom just a few years after being born?
could you, yes you, in your day to day life, handle being forced to learn something new every hour of every weekday and being given deadlines, not even being paid for the work, having to be there at like 7:30am, having even less control over your personhood or freedom just a few years from being born?
The fuck you think everyone has to go through in their lives prior to being an adult.
This opinion is wild bud. Firstly, I disagree with the every hour of every weekday; once you take into account breaks, lunches, the much shorter working day, sports, and the way classes should usually be front-loaded with information then flipped for engagement, you’re maybe spending 10-15 hours a week “learning” and the rest practicing/applying. In my career I’ve generally had to spend much more than that each week learning.
Secondly you aren’t slaves, you have the option to down tools and just remain poorly educated without ramifications that endanger you immediate life/safety. That you don’t is as much to do with knowing it’s a shit idea, as it is societal pressure.
Thirdly, the people of Ancient Greece didn’t pay attention every second, but when their mind wandered they were at least able to move back to the topic at hand, tbh, if you miss enough context scrolling reels, you won’t be able to catch back up, and so many will just give up and stay on their phones.
Lastly, society around you pays for your education, it’s part of the social contract we live in. The resourcing of schools is already woefully low, please define how stretching those resources to accommodate completely preventable delinquency, is at all worthwhile. By draining time you aren’t only robbing the school, you’re taking from the students next to you who don’t want to spend their time acting like entitled children.
In my career I’ve generally had to spend much more than that each week learning.
Important point. If you’re in a career that’s at all demanding, you are going to be learning for the rest of your life. School prepares you for that. The specifics aren’t important, what you should be learning in school is approaches to research, study, and problem solving. Schools could probably do more to make that clear.
Your statement would sound a lot less dramatic if not for the fact that literally everyone goes to school.
“Not being paid for your work” 🤣🤣🤣
My man, your book report is contributing nothing to society. Future scholars will not look upon it with awe. It is purely an exercise to help students as a whole develop as individuals.
Here’s my question - how do you expect teachers, who are actually providing society with a much-needed service, who are already well understood to be overworked and underpaid, to productively encourage students to pay attention?
could you, yes you, in your day to day life, handle being forced to learn something new every hour of every weekday and being given obligatory deadlines, not even being paid for the work, having to be there at like 7:30am, having even less control over your personhood and freedom just a few years after being born?
Bruh, you’re arguing with people who have already gone through school.
Yeah it sucks sometimes, we all know. We did it. The exact thing you’re bitching about and acting like no one else knows how bad you have it? We did it.
When adults tell teenagers that they understand, they aren’t just saying that because they want the teenagers to listen. They’re saying it because they remember when everything seemed so profoundly unfair. We really do understand…but you’re still wrong.
School sometimes sucks, but what you gain from it is remarkable. Take advantage of it, because work load only increases from here. You are at a time of your life where your major duty is to learn stuff and then prove you learned it. You may very well someday look back on this and go, “Damn, wish I’d appreciated it more.”
Telling a kid, “Yeah, it sucks and it isn’t going to get any better,” is the last thing you should tell a kid in these modern times. That’s half the reason so many people are suffering mentally. The lack of an ability to affect change because stubborn goons with more power than them assume they know how things should be done.
I will admit that I could’ve added a more of, “but life does get a lot better when you’re the one making choices.” But honestly I think, in the near-dystopian society we labor through, that the boredom of school can be a helpful preparation for the monotony of entry-level work.
I’m trying to commiserate on some level. Life can be hard, I’m not going to lie about that. I dealt with my share of crushing depression in my 20s. But for many it is worth it, and education can help it be less difficult in the long run.
I guess the point I should be trying to make is that finding ways to actively engage with things that aren’t your preferred activity is a vital skill for enjoying life. School becomes less monotonous when you make an effort to enjoy it, not when you rely on your teachers for that and spend your time pining for your dopamine source. The same is true for shitty work. Embracing it and finding ways to keep your mind engaged can make terrible work far better. It’s how I survived years of working fast food, retail, and call centers until I finally got a job I truly enjoy in software.
And of course this carries throughout personal lives as well. Being able to put down the keyboard/controller/phone and clean the house is a necessity, one I still struggle with.
The lack of an ability to affect change because stubborn goons with more power than them assume they know how things should be done.
Yeah but this is, maddeningly, pretty much the way life is.
By the way, the point here isn’t that it would be bad if teachers could make school more engaging than YouTube and TikTok, but rather that it’s impossible for the average teacher to make school more engaging than a student’s phone. So get used to it. Required activities will never consistently outperform entertainment, at any point in your life.
This isn’t meant to be doom and gloom. It’s meant to be honest. Learn to love life, because life won’t always make loving it easy. But it will be worth it, at least in my experience.
You can quit work and starve. You can quit school and get in a little bit of trouble. I don’t really see the equivalence here.
Children have lots of rights in this analogy, in fact in a great many places, they also have a right to be cared for by the state that adults don’t. Statutory service provision routinely is written in protection of children.
Weirdly, most people don’t have a right to take out and use their phone when working, and given that’s the thread topic it’s a decent sized hole in your argument. I worked a high-wage and technical role, white collar as it gets, and you know where my phone was when I was meant to be concentrating on my work, in my pocket. Know what would happen if I was fucking about on it when I had something important to do? Disciplinary, HR, threatened loss of livelihood. If you’re arguing you’re not being treated like adults, I have bad news for you.
Look, you’re not some oppressed underclass of unperson and your myopic determination to cast yourself as such is a genuine insult to people living under actual hardship.
First, school kids need rules, and school is good.
I also don’t think 1 short comment deserves:
Look, you’re not some oppressed underclass of unperson and your myopic determination to cast yourself as such is a genuine insult to people living under actual hardship.
Most jobs don’t really care if you’re on your phone if you are on break. Some jobs don’t care so long as work gets done. It seems your job or career is less forgiving than most.
I don’t know why you’re acting like a blanket ban is a good thing, and I don’t know why you assume thinking that we should treat children and teenagers with a level of respect means I think that children are being treated like cattle.
Maybe you get off on enforcing broad policies, but I’m not a chud.
Yknow they could fix a lot getting rid of textbooks…so uh yea. Hands on shiz for the classes that need them and less teaching people to regurgitate and still missing half the facts they ought to know from history. Esp in a effort to make us history look good…when no we were awful lmao
That was the point. Bc I have AuDHD and have always struggled with textbooks but no one has offered a accommodation(which most accommodations have been lackluster in how much help they provide) that worked for me. I wanted to be done with college by now, but so many things on top of the lack of hands-on stuff means I feel like I’ve learned absolutely nothing.
Well there’s a bunch of content some of my teachers have pulled from that’s just as good. Hell with history it’s a good idea not to have a state textbook anyway. Shiz omits so much it’s unreal. Or it tries to paint times before the Civil war as the best of times despite us yknow owning people o_O
I dissagree information written in a book is a perfectly valid way of conveying it. Obviously lies about history shouldn’t be taught but that’s not a problem with the medium
just doing tests as a memory exercise is also not good
Problem is there needs to be a alternative for audhd people like me. I can’t do textbooks and I’m tired of being forced to learn things exclusively through them without much practice.
That would’ve helped tremendously in my “logic and algorithms” class that it felt like never got any practical practice to see in code. So much of my computer classes based in the theory of it all without allowing me to attempt it in practical applications. It’s either that or not being based in reality on languages and technologies we need to learn. Like heck I want to get into tinkering too and there’s not much for that in schools where I wouldn’t have to have a better paying job to afford the materials myself.
Plus with things like history it’s bonkers how much stuff I’ve found out after the fact bc of living in the south. Esp since I know they tried to push states rights bs on us, and definitely make columbus seem like the Saint he’s not. Among other stuff bc people who shouldn’t be involved in education are dictating things like this.
Which they all ask me now that I’m trying to get through things what ones would be helpful and the usual suspects never were helpful. I’ve done research on other possible ones and always tell them I’ve got no clue what would be helpful bc searches don’t seem to line up but all these schools have no lists of ideas for that either…
Something I’ve found to have worked well in the past is phone breaks. It helps regulate phone usage and makes students far more likely to pay attention, myself included. The teachers that had the most success gave us phone breaks. Regulation and breaks > punishments.
That’s actually a pretty elegant solution. A teacher being against something that motivates the kids is a losing battle to begin with. Extending that olive branch stops that bridge from being burned, and there’s been all those studies that show prudent use of breaks increase productivity, including outside of that environment
Something like 15 minutes break between 45 minutes of each lecture/period would be probably the most logical solution (which many countries implement) so there is at least some chill time instead of just having to hurry class to class. What if you need to 9/11 the school toilet, grab the heavy-arse books from the locker, make death threats to NAFOs on Twitter, or get some xp in Runescape? Maybe kids will be less likely to goof off in class?
It’s always rude to not listen. So phones should not be allowed during class.
However, It’s rude not to allow breaks, growth, emergencies, and the fact that they are in fact, kids. They should be allowed to socialize, enjoy youth, and understand hierarchy/respect. So to earn respect, you must respect first.
Let the kids have their phones/computers as that is the modern world we live in. They will have technology. Don’t discourage it just because some people learned “you won’t always have a calculator in your pocket”. Well, now you do, so rather than ban it, teach them to USE IT!!! Just… properly.
Even when in school, phone helped me quite a bit with education. Having a way to do a quick fact-check is invaluable.
Now as I’m finishing getting my degree such devices became an inseparable part of the process.
Yes, you may not always listen to what’s being said whilst using them, but lets be frank, you wouldn’t be listening to those parts either way.
School education in a lot of places is fundamentally flawed. It’s extremely difficult to learn when you’re expected to absorb information just by listening and writing.
I’d agree with OPs sentiment here, off-topic smartphone usage isn’t the cause for worse education, but instead is a result of poor engagement in the first place. Should people be more engaged in the topic then suddenly smartphones start being used as a studying tool and not for entertainment. There are many ways of achieving that, but that’s a whole different story.
I think the biggest issue isn’t letting kids use a tool, it’s getting kids to do the work.
I recently worked with a bunch of kids in college, all stem majors, who couldn’t Google effectively or do basic math in their heads. It’s not a matter of “don’t let them use a resource” it’s that many people won’t try.
Limiting technology isn’t cruelty, it’s vital for learning many skills. Number sense can’t be taught by a taking a picture and writing an answer.
I agree whole-heartedly. As someone who needed to learn the hard way that knowing the shortcut doesn’t always help with the work, I’m very much in favor of teaching kids the proper way first.
Also, if kids need to be “fact-checking” their class, that’s indicative of a whole different issue.
Because I don’t think most kids have learnt even the smallest bit about proper research methodology to be able to fact-check things. If that little bit they know is enough to disprove something in class, that teacher needs a stern talking to about the bs they peddle.
“fact-checking” was a bit of a crude way of putting it on my part. I’m not native, so there could’ve misused it.
(Went a bit overboard with a wall of text again, but of well)
Although it wasn’t without the fact-checking in it’s normal sense. Take “English as a foreign language”, for example. One teacher will say the word is pronounced one way, the other will say its different. Who’s right? Let’s check Cambridge dictionary. Although it isn’t always teacher’s fault as a professional. Sometimes you just forget things no matter how well you know them.
The other part that I may have failed to convey is looking information up, be it a math formulae, a word, some sort of rule, name or a date.
It’s way quicker than going through your books and is actually not a bad way to remember something. You either have a tab left off or you’re seeing it when using the search, which makes you remember that you did look that up a while back. It’s very minor, but because you’re still being reminded about it from time to time, the information sticks. Essentially you’re doing unintentional passive memorisation.
That’s why I think that maybe not in primary, but definetly in secondary and high school banning technology is not the way to go about it. If the student uses it for entertainment during class, they won’t suddenly start studying if you prohibit them from usining it. You’re essentially solving a non-issue, because the majority of students aren’t even using phones during classes (Well, maybe to cheat on tests, but that’s hurting the quality of assessment and not education itself).
Banning phones is easy, but it’s also the least impactful thing you could to to “improve” educational system. It would be of more sognificance you were to reduce classes to 8 pupils, lessen teacher’s paperwork, introduce new active teaching practices, reward students for persuing their endevours and so on. But that’s difficult, banning phones is easy and brings you more polical approval.
Are there schools that don’t teach calculator usage? Even 10-15 years ago German schools (at least in the states I looked at) had the option to teach math with either basic calculators, scientific calculators, or computer algebra systems in grades 9-13 (I think) with most schools picking scientific calculators even back then. I would expect that to have moved into earlier grades and more advanced devices nowadays.
I meam, i remember even in 5th grade nearly 20 years ago them telling us “you wont always have a calculator in your pocket” and this was happening when vell phones were becoming mainstream enough that some of us did have flip phones
Neither one really has anything to do with the other.
In fact, I’d say getting rid of phones could help improve motivation because when students are more focused on school, they’re more motivated and perform better.
This meme was made by a middle schooler who doesn’t understand the higher-level decisions being made by educators.
Add comment