> In crafting its policy, Estacada incorporated feedback from parents. That led to some key decisions around the cell phone ban. Rather than use pouches or lockers, students are allowed to keep their phones safely stored in their backpacks. That was for two reasons — it allows students to contact loved ones during emergencies, and many parents use phone trackers to keep tabs on their kids.
I'm glad to hear this. They're currently trying to shill the magnetically sealed pouches in the UK, but the flaws are obvious: massive bottleneck at the pouch station would delay entry and exit from the building, phones would be unavailable during emergencies or to record incidents of crime or staff malpractice, and financial burden on schools.
Students can be trusted to obey a simple "no phones in class" rule.
A friend's kid needs an exemption from their doctor because their phone is also their glucose monitor and diagnostic tracker, and the exception only allows them to unlock the pouch under supervision when necessary.
There can be moral (or other) panics to real dangers. That doesn't mean cool heads don't lead to better solutions.
People panic in fires, trampling one another trying to get out. The danger is real, but so is the damage caused by the panic.
Here people are responding to real harms but we're often jumping to conclusions. Trying to act too fast. Thinking it is better to do something rather than nothing. But that's not always true. We see this happen with all sorts of complex problems we face these days. People care more about having an answer than they do a solution. This one is no different. We get bad answers like the above because people are rushing and not thinking about the consequences. But if things were as easy to solve as were wish they were then they'd already have been solved. The "easy" part only comes after a lot of hard work and really only from a high level
I'd argue you don't need a study, just reasoning. I mean, a study would be good, but we also have brains on our shoulders.
Learning to read or to do mathematics is like anything else, it takes practice. We know, intuitively from our own lives and observes virtually all humans, that humans perform better with less distractions. It would be hard to learn how to play the Tuba with me screaming behind you. It would be hard to learn chess with a movie playing in front of you.
Phones are distractions. Less phones = less distractions = better performance, smarter kids, more likelihood to graduate, higher average income.
More meaningless words that can be defined as needed by you to support your rather bizarre agenda.
Numerous peer reviewed articles published in reputable journals have reported that there are advantages to banning cell phones in the classroom, yet you as the sole arbiter of "actual science" declare otherwise.
We don't actually need "actual science" to conclude that phones in classrooms are likely causing problems. We can observe them in action causing problems and take actions even if the peer reviewed double blind study hasn't been done
Kids are smart. My school district has sealed pouches.. Its amazing how many kids throw an old phone in there, and put their actual one away hidden on silent.
Which I guess gets looked the other way, since they aren't using it in class.
It's definitely a mix of the actual phone pouches and the bans giving teachers actual authority and permission to confiscate phones when they're out and disruptive. IMO there's likely a shift that happens with pouches where there are enough kids following the rules and only having one phone in the pouch that it tips the social balance over. That would be harder with just teacher enforced bans I think.
It's definitely a hard problem over all balancing their completely disruptive nature if there's no bounds to the issues around safety and parental worry from not being able to contact their kid all the time which phones have made the norm.
This is how it works in my kids' school. Not Estacada, but not that far away, and not in Portland. No pouches or lockers, just an understanding that phones which are seen will be confiscated. First time they get sent to the office and returned as the student leaves school. Second time they have to be picked up by a parent.
You'd think it would be a huge deal with rebellious teens, but my daughter says it has basically been a non-issue.
>Students can be trusted to obey a simple "no phones in class" rule.
I'm honestly not educated on the topic right now since I haven't been in school for 15 years and have some time left before my daughter starts, but is this rule really not in place in most schools? How could any school justify not having this rule at the very least, regardless of how well-enforced it is?
I always assumed it was a lack of enforcement due to understaffing that was the problem
I tend to avoid placing the blame on individuals (parents in this case) when the problem being described is so widespread. People act as rationally as they can, so if it's that common, it's a systemic failure. Scolding the masses is a fool's errand.
We’re talking about underdeveloped minds in the face of excruciating social and physiological pressure.
I’m pretty sure the systemic failure is, in part, that parents are, en masse, abdicating their responsibilities of guiding their children through the minefield of modern technology, from iPad kids on up.
The reasons why vary - and include being addicted themselves.
I’d love to hear any anecdotal evidence to the contrary - not just a dismissal, or being called a fool.
The society that supports phoneless children no longer exists. It stopped sometime in the 2010s. Taking away phones doesn't bring that infrastructure back, it culminates in something new and worse.
One example is the tension between childrens' independence and roaming and the now lack of payphones. Taking away a cell phone doesn't bring back payphones. It either reduces a child's independence or puts them in more dangerous situations. What it doesn't do is return them back to a time when a couple of quarters could call mom or dad.
you’re saying the complaint is that in that era it was also thought of as a new phenomenon.
That makes some sense - it’s been a declining slope, with a huge drop-off point.
But was there also evidence of less-competent people coming out of the end of the machine that’s supposed to produce people to keep the civilization functional?
Probably happened at one time or another - but it was probably also considered a problem……
My original “as a default” verbiage is doing a lot of heavy lifting, but is there for a reason.
The sealed pouches are a bit of theatre. My son's school has a policy that pupil's can take their phones to school but if one is seen or heard on the school grounds it'll be confiscated and the owner's parents called to come pick it up on their behalf. From what I hear they're not shy about applying that policy either.
Offsetting part of the punishment to the parents (having to get them to come in to the school to collect the phone) is going to help get the policy reinforced from home in most cases.
My kid’s school had a similar policy. I didn't mind having to go out of my way to collect the phone and didn’t pass any of that on to my kid, they were annoyed enough about having it confiscated that it only took a few times before they modified their behaviour accordingly.
At first a lot of parents get inconvenienced coming to get confiscated phones and if that doesn't inspire them to discipline their kid at home the school can move to the more draconian pouch systems.
I don't understand. We had a "no phones in class" rule when I was in school over a decade ago. It was the obvious default. How did it go away, and how is this new policy different from the obvious? Are they saying that until now their policy was that phones are openly allowed in class? Why??
> Parents have no business tracking their kids when they're at school
The tracker sends a notification when they're not at school, that's the point. Plus, I can lock down social media apps only during school hours. Blanket statements like this are plain ignorant. Also, I'm glad Utah finally passed a similar ban. Phones in use in class are a tremendous distraction 99% of the time.
If you kid is not at school, you will know. Kids weren't able to get away with hooky 20 years ago, let alone now. If they do it enough you'll have a court date!
I think this mostly boils down to our ever-connected society producing unreasonable expectations of communications. It is a very, very recent phenomena that you can instantly contact whoever whenever you want. Previously, it was common place to be unreachable for most of the day.
Realistically, your kid will survive, and even thrive, if you are not able to contact them for 8 hours a day. There is a downside to this kind of tether. It's a new type of ever-present anxiety, like someone breathing down your neck. Half of raising kids is teaching them what to do. The other half is leaving them alone, so they can learn to be competent adults.
This is ridiculous. The school will notify you if the student is not at school, or the teachers will eventually (or their grades/missing assignments).
Also you don't need to track your kids to enable school time mode, if you want to lock down their phone during school.
What are you going to do when they go to college? Track them? Monitor them? Make sure they go to classes?
At some point, you just have to trust your kids to do the right thing. It's a part of them learning how to grow up and be independent. It's better to make mistakes the younger you are so you can learn from them when there is less on the line.
This is even more ridiculous, how about that?? My particular school will send a message at 5pm daily with any attendance issues, but I can be notified instantly through the app. Why would I ever choose to be less informed? Also, I appreciate your points about college, but have you noticed a large number of students disproportionately boys are disenchanted with the whole education system at large and opting out of college. I'm clinging on to a hope that mine will see the value, but there are lots of different developmental speeds and some students need more guidance than others. You do realize some high school students just become burnouts, right? Your one size fits all, hands off and trust mentality is naïve and if you happen to be a parent, hopefully you'll be able to avoid the situation of parenting a student in crisis. Cell phones are a major problem in schools and I'm glad to see efforts being made to address it
I don't agree with tracking kids but you're being silly. I ditched in high school and my parents didn't find out. This is true for plenty of people. Sure, it was 20 years ago but we had cellphones too. It's not like we were in the dark ages and schools couldn't call
Usually no. If you missed multiple yeah, but mostly they didn't care.
Though they started to my senior year. You'd get detention or even suspension if you did it too much. It was especially problematic with us in the AP/IB programs. My older sibling's class (AP/IB) ditched so much it was messing with the state attendance records.
But maybe they didn't call because we were in the advanced programs. The people ditching the most were the ones getting good grades. The school still has a pretty good ranking in California (top 20%).
And frankly, if they called... just delete it off the answering machine before your parents got home.
Or the other thing, get your elder sibling to call you out. Or call in pretending to be the parent or elder sibling. People did that all the time. It's not like the school knows your parents' voice. And well, now that's easy to fake, right?
My son, who recently graduated high school, went to a school that banned phones but insisted on laptops (providing them for the kids who couldn't afford one). He said it was ridiculous, as none of the kids had any problem using their laptop for anything they would have used the phone, which was mostly texting, scrolling social media, watching videos, and playing games. Even when the school tried to lock down services, as soon as one kid found a way around it, they all did.
The whole "browser game" industry is built on this phenomenon. It's about getting kids on school laptops mindlessly looping on something while shoving ads in their face.
Honestly, get the tech out of classrooms. A few 8 bit machines that can run LOGO are far more genuinely educational than all the gunk they have today.
I grew up in the 2000s and I remember almost everyone in the computer lab would be playing Flash games, until someone came in and yelled at us because it wasn't "educational" enough.
They almost let us play RuneScape (something something medieval history?) until they saw me firebolt a rat and declared it unacceptably violent.
I visited my old school once, a few years after graduating, and was startled to see many people on their laptops in the hallways. I guess they had become required. I had graduated right around the time smartphones came out, and we didn't have laptops either. (You'd see a laptop at school occasionally but it was a rare sight.)
I'm glad the fanciest thing I had was a TI-84, because it got me to spend most of my time socializing, which I think was pretty good for my development.
Gotta get schools back to using paper homework. There's so many of those awful online classroom portals for homework. Absolutely trash software, technically speaking.
TurnItIn.com was starting to be a thing when I was in high school. I found out it didn’t sanitize the papers you upload and had no CSRF protection, so I could upload a doc with inline JavaScript to hit the change-password and logout APIs.
Was pretty impactful for my education, just not in the intended way
Way back when I was in school (2004 or so) I set up a proxy on my personal website to get around them blocking email, because I don’t want to have to save things to a damned floppy drive.
I then let a teacher use it because he was frustrated half of his search results would get blocked. From there, it spread like wildfire. Eventually they blocked it and from then on the IT guy would give me a side eye whenever we crossed paths.
Anyways, I can only imagine the clever ways kids get around things now. If it’s not per device, all a kid would need is a mobile hotspot to be king.
Back in the day when every hotel that was charging for WiFi was stupidly leaving port 53 wide open, I wrote an IP over DNS tunnel to get free WiFi. Worked great until I went to a hotel in Tokyo and turned it on. Suddenly my network connection was completely dead. They were clearly watching for shenanigans. Took me a few minutes to figure out they had redirected my MAC address to the bit bucket. I spoofed my MAC to a different one, and then behaved, as well as admired those IT guys.
Yeah, back when I was in school it was a cat and mouse game of finding a new proxy every week when the last one got blocked. The minute someone found a new one, it was everywhere.
I decided to sidestep the whole game and run my own proxy at home. I didn't have enough bandwidth for multiple users, so it was just me. I don't think IT ever caught on.
My son is in middle school and it's the same thing. They can't have devices in the classroom, except for the school mandated device that does everything the phone does and more.
Yeah it probably took about 15 seconds for the first kid to figure out that you could just share a google doc with your friends and use it for texting.
It’s hard to imagine a slow, overworked, somewhat inept, bureaucratic school board, with a thousand other things it wants to care about, managing to stay ahead of thousands of crafty and highly motivated teens.
they brought laptops to cafeteria? outside? the core issue is usage of phones outside of the class, no? if he used it during the class, cool (we all gad boring teachers). if he was able to use it after the bell rang that is not having a ban
I remember reading somewhere else that there was a psychological benefit for kids as well. Not having the constant pressure to check the device. Just seems like a big win all around.
In our district phones are banned during the day. Most students don't care about their phones, what they care about is FOMO. And so the ban does great to not only reduce distractions but also the cognitive load of constantly wondering what they're missing.
I surprisingly found this with my Apple Watch. was so concerned it would make me even more plugged in. But in reality now 90% of the time I get a junk email I just say “huh” instead of needing to open the phone to see what it is (and the other 15 notifications). Can’t have fomo if you know you’re not missing out, amirite?
I think this more about it coming from a higher authority than the school itself.
Many schools have similar bans but they don’t get support from many of the pupils or their parents as both groups have members that just believe it is the school choosing to overstep their authority.
Now it is a diktat from above it makes the school’s job in enforcing it much easier. They can just point to the relevant legislation/diktat and say that their hands are tied, if you disagree here are the places you can go to voice your opinion. Meanwhile we (as a school) have no choice but to apply the rules, etc.
It's tough to imagine how different it must be for kids now than when I went to school.
I know there's a billion other reasons, but I've heard parents say they want their kid to have a phone so they can keep in touch if they need to.
When I was a kid, cell phones weren't a thing (at least for kids) so the once or twice a year I needed to call a parent I went down to the office and asked to use their phone.
Then I got to have whatever, usually embarrassing, conversation with my mom while everyone in the school office stared at me. Good times.
I agree with the cell phone bans (I would extend it to all electronic devices, schools should be pen and paper). But we just got our phones taken away in highschool.
Do graphing calculators actually help people learn? We used them in high school, but when i needed to take calculus in university we didn't use them. I'm doubtful they are good for learning especially when trying to teach the foundations.
I distinctly remember writing a minesweeper game, using the built-in programming language. Not the fast compiled one you needed a cable to transfer! Just button presses.
Personally, playing with the graphing and algebra functions on the calculator were hugely informative. Rapidly trying out different things, seeing how they looked how tweaking things would cause adjustment, all added educational value.
I feel like graphing calculators enable exploration in a way that doing it manually with pen and paper cannot. Obviously, pen and paper is super valuable as well, but I feel that they are complimentary.
Back in the day the feature I liked most about my TI-82 was the amount of information that could fit on the display, the formatting options available, the ease of entering and editing what you entered, and the amount of past entered formulas that would be saved and how easy they were to retrieve. It made doing large blocks of basic BEDMAS math very quick and less suspectable to errors caused by accidentally hitting the wrong key entering in large formulas, and very easy to go back and find out where I messed up and quickly retabulate everything.
All of that mostly comes up in physics and chemistry were its about knowing what long formulas you need to plug the numbers you have available to you to find out what you need to know. Oddly enough their seems to be very little benefit to using a graphing calculator in a actual math class.
It really depends on the level of the class and the goals. Usually by the time you're getting to calculus you're moving away from simply calculating a numerical answer anyways and the problems where you do need to find one just to test that final step can be finessed so they're simple to calculate by hand and eliminate the problem of full computer algebra system calculators that can handle the symbolic manipulation too.
In my case it did. I took "advanced math" (trig, mostly) in high school from an abysmal teacher. Ignoring her and developing an intuition through graphing was the best thing ever. I had the best final grade in the class.
I don't see the need for it. The only time I ever needed to graph a function was to answer a homework problem that specifically asked me to. Having your calculator do it misses the point.
"Need" might be strong, but I am okay with music players. My ADHD self is able to focus many times better if I have certain kinds of music playing to block out nearly talking and other distracting sounds.
I gave my 16yo ADHD kid an mp3 player with hours of “ADHD focus” music on it.
It’s proven very useful a few times where a few ND-unaware teachers have confiscated phones that the ND kids use to help them focus.
They don’t get it to use it whenever they want but there are some situations where they are allowed to use it and where having a phone is tricky given the lack of trust some teachers have.
Old school technology fallbacks are sometimes useful. Who knew.
Having all been in high school, I think we can all agree that lack of trust is warranted. Not for every kid, but for enough of them that blanket rules make sense. We also don’t allow students to use the calculator app on their phone for tests, and instead make them buy the “old school technology fallback” version.
An MP3 player seems like a good compromise, and far cheaper than the phone they’re replacing.
For ~$60 you get a device that can play every type of audio file and has better sound quality than your cellphone + streamer combo.
I've been reading more about Chinese hardware and if you've been sleeping on it there are a lot of great Chinese consumer products that are both extremely high quality + very cheap.
Turns out when you have tens of millions of engineers they pump out banger after banger. Also always hilarious, in an enduring way, finding the factory engineers engaging with consumers on random forums that take their feedback seriously.
Note that in this case, you are getting what you pay for: I had a FIIO DAC that sounded amazing but was really bad about full-scale turn-on, sync and desync pops to the extent that it damaged my speakers. Yes, perfect power sequence hygiene would have prevented the problem, but one can't always be ready with the amplifier volume knob when their playback system crashes.
ah good to know. Outside of having a very basic dac for my cans on my desktop, I wouldn't think of any serious equipment failures could happen. Probably wrong to assume that these things are engineered to be safe/redundant.
This is going to be my first DAP in like 15 years, zune being the last one I had. Pretty excited to rock it out for a bit.
There's a current fad out there to move to more single-service type of devices rather than using a phone for everything. Want to try it out myself to be more intentional with my digital actions and ween myself away from corporate social media.
If they're allowed and help where phones wouldn't or don't there are still lots of options for stand alone MP3 players with minimal or no connectivity. They still exist as a market because they're dirt cheap to make.
not all classes are 100% lectures. many of my kids classes have 15-30 minutes of "work time". sometimes entire periods are "work periods" when they have a big project or whatever.
I mostly just listened during homeroom and lunch period. But once I was sent to in-schoool-suspension in high school in the early 2000s for listening to my mp3 player (Diamond Rio PMP300) after I finished taking the yearly standardized tests the state used to judge schools.
This has absolutely been the standard in every school around where I live for years. Anecdotally, however, I wouldn't go so far and say it lead to "engaged students" and "joyful teachers" :)
UK here. My kid's school is insane. They think they are so progressive because they banned personal phones entirely, which is fair enough. But they forced us to buy marked up Yondr pouches, which is not fair.
However this isn't the only problem. They also force us to pay monthly for iPads with wonky ass Logitech cases to be issued on which they do everything on Google classroom.
Google Classroom is an abhorrently bad bit of software on an iPad. It's just horrible in every possible way. Clunky, interface sucks, slow, unreliable.
Then they give detentions when children can't submit work, some auth issue means the entire device goes down the toilet for two days, documents won't open because the staff use Office instead, they keyboard case craps out and you can't type with anything but the screen, the staff forget to submit the work until an hour before it's due, the entire school wifi network is down for a week and they have no backup.
They should ban that too. Technology MUST be fit for purpose in a classroom and most of it isn't.
Go back to paper for everything. Work, journals, timetables, the lot. And the teachers can use whatever to drive projectors in the classroom.
When I was in uni I would repeatedly get told that such issues with their software were fine because the lowest N quizzes/homeworks/etc wouldn't get counted. So instead of spending that leeway on a bad day I had to use it on their servers being down or whatever.
I teach CS in the US and I have gone back to pencil-on-paper quizzes for my classes. I allow one page of hand-written notes and given them a quiz review beforehand where I essentially tell them what's going to be on the quiz.
My intent isn't to trick anybody with hard questions, but rather to force the knowledge through their head out through their hand, then back through their eyes and through their hand again.
Next semester I'm doing in-person paper readings, where the first 20 minutes of the class are reading a paper I print out and hand to them, we discuss the paper in class, then they submit their annotated papers to me for a participation grade.
Probably a similar problem to AI. Using AI for the sake of AI in an engineering workflow probably wastes time right now. Using technology in the classroom for the sake of using technology is probably similar. Is it really creating access, opportunity, saving time. All that? I am skeptical. I have had similar experiences with my children over time. There was a layer of technology that made sense for education. Probably peaked when I was in school in the 90s.
My daughter got a 0/20 for a test that she sat and did. Now she's not a complete idiot so this was suspicious. I asked about it and they said that it was likely that she didn't get any questions right. I asked for them to provide me with a copy of the exam paper so I could independently verify that.
Magically she got a 17/20 grade updated but no paper appeared. I pushed it further and was told it was resolved. I raised a formal complaint immediately and they did a full investigation. The conclusion was there was a defect in the system used for tracking progress and it was losing information imported from the exam system. They had to manually enter over 200 student papers again due to this.
No one had noticed or actioned it or saw it was a serious issue until I raised a formal complaint.
When technology is in the loop it's very difficult for anyone to take personal accountability as demonstrated.
My partner is currently in an online college program for computer science. The platform and way they have structured it feels like actual computing hell. There is so much friction compared to what I know a more seamless learning experience online should be like.
I have worked in Edtech for the last 15 years, and I stand by it when I say most of it is just added noise.
1:1 programs are a waste of money and time. Students don't need continuous access to a computer. Shared computer labs with a set goal for the time will always have better outcomes.
Kids frankly aren't learning more today with all this tech in the classroom than they were twenty years ago with paper and whiteboards, and the metrics prove it.
> They should ban that too. Technology MUST be fit for purpose in a classroom and most of it isn't.
Absolutely agree.
It’s just bad luck that your kid is in a school that can’t get it right.
My 16yo kid’s (state) school is far from perfect but the school provided laptop works well, is reasonably locked down and policed, and is fixed or swapped out quickly if there is a problem. Sure we have to contribute towards it but we can (and we pay extra to help cover the cost for someone who isn’t able to pay for it). There are no similar tales of broken WiFi, unavailable servers or whatnot.
They went through some problems where there were multiple systems in use and the kids regularly got confused about where they had to check for homework, with different teachers for the same subject using different systems, but that was resolved eventually.
Phones are officially banned but enforcement is sometimes sporadic. If they do take the piss with it then it gets confiscated and a parent has to come in to get it released (the school has some generic Nokias to hand out at the end of the day if the kid has to have some way of being in contact). That deals with the majority of it.
They seem to have got the balance mostly right in terms of doing enough to keep the lessons mostly distraction free, and also reducing access to keep FOMO down (if hardly anyone has access to their phone during the school day then they, as a group, don’t think they are missing out on much).
Not a fan of them going back to paper for everything, but 100% on screens isn’t good either, especially as the exams are pretty much all paper based.
Used to work in edtech. It's because like most software purchasers, the schools literally only care about a feature matrix. Fixing bugs or performance was considered a waste of feature time and thus of potential contracts.
My children's secondary school (England) also banned use of phones, but the rule was that the phone had to be switched off and kept in the school bag, which was all very sensible.
State schools cannot charge for essential equipment needed for the curriculum. Some schools are taking the p. If all parents told them to do one they would have no leg to stand on, and it is rather scandalous that nothing is done to stop this at Council and government level (they probably prefer to turn a blind eye rather than footing the bill).
This reminds me of university. Thankfully I did it long enough ago that a lot of stuff was still pen and paper, but some obvious stuff used computers (I did finance and econ, so some programming, lots of spreadsheets and statistics, etc...).
We had some student portal thing online for submitting assignments, MS Office was "required", but the portal was weird and it was right after the .doc/.docx fiasco so everything related to office was a shitshow. Some of our profs simply gave up on the blessed tech stack, issues assignments as Google Docs files, and had us submit assignments through Google Docs. So much easier. I know Google gets a bad rep because of weird perceptions about surveillance, but no one does cloud syncing better. And because most of their software is browser based, it does basically "just work".
Not having distraction devices in a classroom is such a basic concept. I'm surprised it required government intervention. Every half decent school principal should've banned them in their school, and if the principal didn't, the individual teachers should have banned them from their classrooms. The first time a kid had to have a question repeated to them because they were looking at their phone should've been the last time phones were permitted in that class.
Part of the problem is with each step down the ladder there's less authority and support and more chances for blowback from angry parents going higher up the chain. Teachers fear not getting support from principals if they're DIYing a device ban, principals fear blowback from complaints to the board or superintendent etc.
There's also the normalization problem at the teacher level where kids are used to using them in other classes so it's a bigger lift to get different behavior in one specific class.
For what it's worth — my last workplace did not allow cell phones in the building and I learned to love it. When people attended meetings, we all made eye contact and talked about the task at hand. Nobody ever got distracted by notifications or tuned out with boredom. And since we all had traditional telephones at our desks, someone would come get you if your family was calling with for an urgent crisis. I miss it.
My kids' school banned phones during the school day. The principal promised that the office would relay any messages if parents call, and they do. I would be interested to see if there are already statistics showing academic success. That is, are grades and test scores affected by phone bans? The article talks about graduation rates, but doesn't directly address grades and scores.
> I would be interested to see if there are already statistics showing academic success.
It's fair to expect that data, though honestly at this point, it might also be reasonable to expect data that increased screens IMPROVE the outcomes before allowing or issuing them.
Here in Amsterdam, most of the schools have a complete ban(!) for pupils below age 15 or 16. It has been a great decision so far. My daughters are essentially phone (and internet) free until they come hone from school. I love it
It’s the right idea but it also puts the burden of enforcement on teachers that are already over extended, especially in schools where behavioral challenges are more prevalent. Great in a scenario where students are compliant, and a nightmare in environments where they’re not.
I don’t have a solution to that problem, but I also think it’s important to acknowledge it’s not all sunshine and roses.
I’m saying this as a person with close friends in Oregon school systems, based on the experiences they’ve shared with me.
> It’s the right idea but it also puts the burden of enforcement on teachers
As opposed to what? Enforcing rules of the classroom is part of the teacher's job.
I don't understand this objection. What's the alternative? Just let the classroom be a free for all because we don't want to burden teachers enforcing rules? Put a separate security officer in the classroom?
Enforcement becomes easier, not harder, when the rules are uniformly applied everywhere and without exception. There's no gray area and less temptation to bring the phone out because they know they'll lose it wherever they use it, even if it's in the hallways.
Mostly I think that's because it's pretty obvious smart phones, and the applications that inhabit them, have been a net negative for adults and children.
Given the free market nature of cellphones, where vendors and companies have unfettered access to monetize users, having cellphones in school is akin to making school children line up and listen to sales pitches from companies around the world for several hours a day, instead of focusing on education.
I think this is likely a good concept for schools, but I want to see the data and not opinions. Lack of evidence based policy is what got us here, we should at some point start using evidence based policy to get us out of it.
There are many sources for data on before and after school cell phone bans. Oregon is far from the first to implement this. 35 US states have some form of school cell phone ban, and I believe the UK is doing a nation-wide ban. There is a good amount of supporting data measuring results on this topic.
My understanding is that these are already banned in most schools and the practical difference between enforcing this at a state or national basis is basically nonexistent vs simple local enforcement.
"Banned" is only meaningful if there are consequences for defying the ban. My experience as a high school English teacher in a handful of schools across several states was that admin is, generally, unwilling to implement a hard ban on smartphones because a significant portion of parents would vocally object (to put it mildly).
Pushing the ban to the state level acknowledges the broad inability of district level leadership to self-police these problems.
If anything I suspect it helps reduce the adversarial relationship between local schools and their parents. "State law, not our policy, sorry." Sounds childish, but hey, if parenting has taught me anything it is that plenty of people never outgrow childish behavior.
I would love it if my laptop had a "study mode" for when I am trying to debug something or learn something new using my laptop. Some of us have less than stellar self-control, so a study mode which requires a multi-step rigamarole to shut off might prevent me from casually checking my email or a news website when I am supposed to be learning a new data structure or figuring out a data corruption bug. I have no idea how it would work in real life: I need access to the internet to lookup API documentation, download libraries, and read online books, but I imagine something could be worked out.
(This article mentions that not only are cell phones banned at the featured school, but these kids have hobbled laptops that supposedly help them focus on school work, although the imperfect nature of the hobbling has unintended consequences).
I managed to build myself exactly this with Claude's help. There are 3 levels of protection.
1. I use an app called SelfControl, which blocks websites temporarily.
2. I have a script which watches `/etc/hosts` with launchd and reverts it to a version pulled from a server if the file changes. This blocks websites I never want to go to.
3. I setup a 'focus mode' with hammerspoon prevents me from launching certain apps, and makes me wait 30 seconds and type a string of text when I want to switch it off.
Yes, all of these things can be disabled when I want to, but the point is that they all add some fiction and give me a chance the reconsider the distracting action I was about to take.
I've been doing it for about 2 weeks, so far it's working pretty well!
Create a separate Mac / Windows non-admin account just for coding? I’m sure there are parental control measures for either platform. As time goes you can update the deny list of web sites.
Another thing that helps is recording your screen for the whole day. Once you start doing review in the evening it will create back-pressure on the monkey brain that jumps to distractions.
Yet another thing is to setup a separate computer. You can browse crapnet as long as you want, but you have to walk to another desk. The back pressure is subtle but has long-term effect and requires very kittke will power.
>Create a separate Mac / Windows non-admin account just for coding?
Yes, I got as far as creating a separate account on my MBP a few years ago and I do programming and open source stuff with that account. And it has helped quite a bit! Although it's not perfect (case in point, I am here on HN right now).
Granted it won’t work for 100% of people but I’m sure it would work for lots of people.
Something as simple as a button you have to press to disable it is often enough of a barrier to prevent people from doing that as it makes the context switch from work to non-work more obvious than simply alt-tabbing to a different browser window.
Slowing down the dopamine feedback loop works. Many impulses that lead to distraction are automatic, not conscious. Ever closed a Hacker News tab just for your fingers to immediately re-type the URL into the bar and hit enter? There are browser extensions that delay loading pages on a given site for a number of seconds, to cut off that sort of automatic behavior, and they work as long as the delay to load the site is less than the time and effort it takes to open up your addons manager and disable the addon.
its a blanket rule, which has almost no exceptions. So there are some silly parts. One of my kids is in band and the school uses YONDER pouches. They have had to dig out some really, really old analog tuners to use. They have a fraction of the capability of a $4 IOS app, but the kids are supposed to keep their phones in a special sleeve with no exceptions... (so many kids break that rule, or throw an old dummy phone in the pouch)
Tuning by ears is an important skill for musicians, learning that is beneficial. For example, you cannot rely on apps to tune your signing voice during performance.
The old Nokia in school wasn't a problem. You get in trouble for playing snake. The iphone 1 wasn't really a problem. There weren't that many, and it served as a calendar.
But year after year, release after release, the industry deliberately loaded more and more addictive machinery, pushed more and more boundaries, until it's beyond unacceptable.
As an aside, it's amazing how hard it is to turn the modern phone into a no-nonsense tool, and I'm an adult with self-control, a deep understanding of dark patterns, and a fully-functioning brain after 3 cups of coffee.
Completely. I'm a software engineer that has a better shot at this than just about anybody, and I have no idea how to give a child a phone that's not just digital crack. If you think ScreenTime etc will do the job you probably have no idea what's actually happening on your child's phone.
They disappeared for a few years, but now you can buy a dumb phone, for example running KaiOS, that charges with USB-C and supports modern cell networks. You can even get a Nokia!
There is absolutely no need to buy a smartphone to any kid younger than 15. Now for high school students it's a bit different, they should be old enough to have self control and respect rules to keep their phones in their bags during class.
They were not. The rule now is that they have to go into a special bag that cannot be opened while school is in session. Before they could be left in a backpack and snuck out or used between classes.
I once had to sit in the principals office for bringing in some electronic fishing game. How we went from that to phones being allowed is insanity. They came like a tsunami.
Just wait until you find out the benefits of taking them away from kids altogether! Phones are a mental health hazard for children, there is no benefit for them having a phone. The only downside is they feel left out when their friends only want to sit around and scroll TikTok, and can't manage to have any in person interactions without their face in a screen.
None of my children have phones, and when they do get one, it will be when they are driving and will be a dumb phone for sending text messages and making calls.
Every parent when the kids are 0-3 says "I won't give them sugar/chocolate", "absolutely not having an iPad/iPhone before 14/15/16 years old", " no TV in their bedroom" etc.
That's the only bummer here. I do agree with this policy, but no one voted for it. The governor just said "you're going to do this".
Yes, yes, I know - people elected the governor. But this sort of policy seems like something that should require legislative approval, not just one person deciding the whole state must do something.
For every time something good comes of that kind of behavior, there's 10 times when it's a disaster.
> The kids also weighed in on the debate around the extent of the ban. The two options bandied in Salem were a “bell-to-bell” policy or just inside classrooms. The latter would allow kids to use their phones during passing period and lunch. Several advocated for that change. That mirrored the debate within the Oregon legislature. It ultimately led to a stalemate and the need for Gov. Kotek’s executive ruling.
It sounds like the legislature broadly agreed on the ban, but couldn’t agree on a couple final details. Insofar as an executive is useful, that’s the case for it: calling the shot in the face of several good (or bad!) options but no clear winner.
The legislature (of states and the federal government) routinely passes laws explicitly giving the head of state the power to make decisions like this without passing a law. The most recent one in Oregon about schooling was SB 141.
This is a fun bureaucratic aside, but in Oregon the governor _is_ the statutory superintendent, rather than an elected official. (There are other oddities in Oregon: policy is otherwise extremely devolved, _and_ because property taxes are capped, funding goes through the legislature.)
Now ... what do we do about the rest of society. This problem isn't just a school problem, it is whole of society, escpecially senior citizens. They are more prone to the problems of phones, social media, and continuous disinformation ... and they vote.
I'm a little confussd... was there a point they were allowed? I went to school in the late 2000s, and even at that point if a teacher saw you with a cell phone it was immediately confiscated.
In the last 10 years, driven a lot by school shootings, the tide shifted and parents started fighting schools about letting their kids keep their phone "so they can be contacted in emergencies". The schools gave up fighting with the parents.
Laws like this give the school cover to confiscate the phones and say "talk to your congressperson if this bothers you, my hands are tied".
Around 2015 or so they became a lot more accepted. From talking to teachers, a surprisingly large amount of the distraction is parents texting kids while they're at school.
> a surprisingly large amount of the distraction is parents texting kids while they're at school
We're entering pretty substantial numbers of parents who grew up or at least spent their entire adult lives with cell phones and the expectation of constant communication. In fact, from my anecdotal experience, the mid-older millennial cohort is the worst at expecting immediate replies at all hours to any form of communication be it social or work.
One of the things I realize I'm grateful for in hindsight is parents who didn't grow up with that, and had no problem calling the front desk of the school if there was a legitimate emergency that needed to involve pulling me out of school. And it turns out for anything short of that, the news could wait until 4PM.
I wonder how much of that is actually parents texting kids, and how much of that is that kids are using that as an excuse to why they checked their phone mid class.
That seems like one of the easiest excuses for kids to make that is hard to argue against.
Yeah, there was a recent NYT article about the ongoing phone ban/pouch discussion and one parent reported having a shared Google Doc for emergency communication with their kid to work around the lack of a cell phone. The nature of such emergencies was not discussed, but I cynically suspect it was along the lines of "do you want mac n cheese or nuggets for dinner?"
Consider how many people are clingy and/or just have questionable judgement about boundaries with their friends, family, and acquaintances in general, usually with a healthy dose of neuroticism thrown in for good measure.
Consider that lots of these people have kids, and when they do, they tend to have a very friend-like relationship with them. Like, they aren't just magically better at this stuff when it's their kid.
These situations are a source of a great deal of this behavior, and the "I can't contact my kid-friend!" anxiety.
It's some of both. Parents do text their kids during the day, but kids also pull out all the excuses when caught.
Even when I was in high school "I was responding to my mom" was the go-to excuse when caught using a cell phone. I had one teacher who would actually read what was on the screen (this was before locking your phone was common and probably lawsuit material today, but things were different) and call kids out when they were lying. The threat of having a teacher read your text messages was enough to put an end to cell phone usage in class.
When I was in high school in the early 2010s it was down to every teacher to enforce their own policy on phones. In practice, this meant that it was wildly variable, kids were getting texts from kids in more permissive environments (the gym teachers had no issue with you playing on your phone as you did a mile walk) which was driving FOMO and leading to students leaving the classroom to check their phones, lots of trying to sneak a look when teachers were distracted, etc.
The rollout of LTE data and more-modern smartphones + social media during that area was a nuclear bomb on teenagers's ability to focus in hindsight. I can distinctly remember the divide between dumb phones/ipods/early smart phones with slow data, and modern social media + fast cellular data to get around school network bans. Things went from the occasional student thinking they were clever with a wired headphone down their sleeve to near constant distraction very rapidly.
The "innovation" has been basic leadership -- setting policies at the school/district and in this case state level. Consistent expectations make it easier for students to follow the policy. Some schools have gone as far as physically locking phones away for the day, though reading the article it sounds like that's not what Oregon is doing.
From my teacher spouse's perspective, a lot of it seems to be the monetary value of smartphones. Some kids are coming to school with the latest and greatest $1000+ smartphone, so if the teacher drops it, scuffs it, misplaces it, etc, the parents are coming after the teacher about an item with real value. Teachers don't want any part of that battle so confiscation is now off the table.
Previously, the confiscation was the teacher's policy.
"I dunno Mom, at the start of 4th hour I put my iPhone in the basket Mrs. Wormwood makes everyone drop their phones in, and when I got it back after class the screen had this big crack in it. It wasn't because I dropped it in 3rd hour in Mr. Lockjaw's PE class while walking and checking Instagram, nuh uh. Can you get me the iPhone 17 Pro Max instead of the iPhone 17e this time?"
And then at conferences (or worse, at the PTA meeting or school board meeting) Mrs. Wormwood is going to hear from Mom how she broke Johnny's phone and cost them $1100.
Now it's state law. It's not Mrs. Wormwood's decision to confiscate phones from students, preventing little Johnny from texting Mama when there's a lockdown, it's the law and her hands are tied.
I'm not sure what law you're referring to. The linked article discusses the implementation of an executive order in Oregon that mostly bans use of cell phones during school time.
Some schools may do things differently, but it seems like the one highlighted in the article allows the kids to keep phone in their backpacks: "Rather than use pouches or lockers, students are allowed to keep their phones safely stored in their backpacks"
I'm also confused by stories that imply that kids were allowed to use their phones during class.
The local schools I'm familiar with allowed phones in backpacks, but if you got caught using it during class there were consequences.
Enforcement was never perfect. Some teachers didn't care, some students were sneaky enough to not get caught. Yet the consequences seemed to keep the kids afraid of using phones for the most part (from what I've been told, obviously I wasn't sitting with them in class).
Some of these articles are written like entire classrooms were just scrolling their phones during class? I don't get it. Was there just a total lack of enforcement?
Late 2000s was just after smartphones became a thing, and before they became a crack epidemic. In my personal experience, it has really been bad for about the last 10 years, getting better over the last few years however. Took a few years for everyone to really understand how bad the problem had become and how quickly.
Here in india it became normalised to bring it to school around 2016. But even today it's completely not OK to use it in class. It'll be confiscated immediately.
Right? when I graduated HS in 2008 phones had always been banned. If you got caught with one out, you could have them just not out and in theory off, you would get detention and your parent would have to come get it. When did it suddenly become OK to have phones out.
I was in high school in the early 2010s. In 2010 I went to a school that gave all students ipod touchs, which seemed futuristic at the time. By 2012 phones weren't banned from school, but a teacher would still take it if you were blatantly using it during class.
'Engaged Students, Joyful Teachers' ... but sad Zuck !
As soon as this becomes popular and Zuck's engagement numbers tank, prepare for a propaganda campaign of nuclear proportions - maybe they even pull the OG Sheryl Sandberg back to steer the PR ship. And with the current crop of cronies in office, don’t be surprised if a new ID bill will be introduced that requires "social connectivity" as requirement for ID verification. Your "trust score" might eventually depend on how much data you feed Zuck's sucking machine and whether you’ve hit your daily scroll quota. If you think that sounds crazy, you haven't been paying attention to how fast the goalposts are moving.
For a country that likes to brag about being a "democratic republic", the 2 major areas of society (school and work) are the most fascistic top-down authoritarian structures we have.
And sure we can vote every 2 years. Yay.
But what freedom do we have when schools can steal student's property, or a business owner can fire you for speech made outside of work.
The obvious reasons. People who do not have political agency should not have decisions made that prevent them from using their own devices in a setting that they are legally required to be in. That's not how things should work. One group of people should not be setting policy for another group of people in this matter. The victims of these policies aren't infants; they will be adults in about five minutes.
Blankets bans and these idiotic 'oh just ban phones/computers entirely, pen and paper am i rite?' ideas have a ton of nasty externalities that no one seems to care about. They reduce the quality of life for people who rely on AAC (having your actual voice on the device you carry day to day is nice, having a lesser experience without your actual data is intolerable + 'everyone' having the kind of device that you use for this purpose prevents you from standing out at all times) in service of chasing and responding to a moral panic.
In the real world, kids just unenroll Chromebooks via the nine million exploits that have been found over the years (many of which are unpatched and some are hardware flaws) and load software that lies to the management system about the state of the device. They do whatever they want on on those devices - which is mostly 'doing their actual work without staff being able to spy on their screen/being able to play a simple game when they have no work to do'. The people using phones in class are the exact same people who were using iPods in class, were using non-smartphones in class to text constantly, using Discmans in class and so on. To pretend that smartphones are somehow different from that past involves gesturing towards pseudoscience and non-credible actors. For more on this: https://www.techdirt.com/2026/01/21/two-major-studies-125000...
These policies have both possible problems - the 'gun control problem' (you can't really achieve anything that you claim to care about while also issuing kids laptops that are used in class + you have to issue laptops in order to much of the kind of relevant teaching necessary in 2026, so there is no real way around this problem) and also the problem of the policy itself not addressing an actual real problem that exists - it's mostly a moral panic about social media, not some real problem of widespread usage of phones during class. The people who are interested in learning will learn, the others will not, that's that. People should be treated as individuals rather than a faceless blob of youth who need hostile policy designed for them. I'd also remind lawmakers that these people will be adults in about five minutes and resentment can easily carry over into the voting booth.
By the way, the Oregon ban is illegal and will be tossed out the moment that it gets to the appropriate level of judicial review - the Governor cannot make law.
I have no idea how you've generated this principle. I'm going to ignore the noise.
1) "The victims of these policies aren't infants; they will be adults in about five minutes."
You've made no case for why adults couldn't be banned from using phones in class.
2) "They reduce the quality of life for people who rely on AAC..."
I don't know what this stands for, but if it is some sort of handicap, exceptions can be made. It's fine to ban wheelchair use in school for people who don't need wheelchairs. Even if having a wheelchair makes you stand out because everybody isn't using one.
3) "To pretend that smartphones are somehow different from that past..."
That past is very recent, and is also garbage. Chromebooks, iPods, cellphones, and "Discmans" in class is also a terrible idea. If whatever advantages that Chromebooks provide (I don't want Google in schools at all, but ignore me) are nullified by the fact that kids can bypass the security on them, get rid of them.
4) "...you have to issue laptops in order to much of the kind of relevant teaching necessary in 2026"
You definitely don't.
5) "The people who are interested in learning will learn, the others will not, that's that."
That is a good argument for not even having schools. But we have schools because we are concerned with setting up situations that can make it easier to learn, even for children who are less interested than others.
6) "Also, the Oregon ban is illegal and will be tossed out the moment that it gets to the appropriate level of judicial review - the Governor cannot make law."
The state can make policy, though, for its own schools. If this ban extended to private schools that weren't taking any money from the state, I could see this being a problem. This includes "vouchers."
If you are going to ignore 'the noise' (the actual content of my post) we don't have anything to talk about and you should not reply. Do not reply to me if you are not going to actually respond to the content of my post.
I'll reply to what I want, and I think I pulled out the actual content of your post.
The rest of it just seems to be strange pronouncements you are making about what people should and shouldn't want to do, and the motivations of the people you don't like.
I mean, sure. They are old enough to make their own decisions? Alright, then they are old enough to be expelled from public schooling for those decisions. They can decide to disrupt the classroom, or they can decide to get an education. They don't get to fuck up everyone else's education with no recourse because they are still children, while simultaneously retaining all personal rights because they are nearly adults.
> At some point, I think we are going to have comms devices imbedded in our heads and whatnot.
This will have limited impact because, at some point shortly after that, the moon will hatch and the lunar dragons will consume our satellite infrastructure, disabling all comm devices.
You can't make policy now based on nebulous ideas about possible futures, particularly not when those ideas aren't based on any reasonable inference.
Ah yes, some point (possibly 100s of years into the future) we have to be concerned with a sci-fi scenario not borne in reality so we can't possibly ban cellphones now. Just ignore all the negative externalities of these mass misery machines, we have to plan for a future that has no basis in reality!
There needs to be a politics of rejection, because I an assure you 95% of humanity does not want a device implanted in their skull where communication sent to you is unblockable.
SV has clearly cooked a generation of engineers that think working on ad surveillance tech is the pinnacle of humanity and not just another American moral failing that is wrecking the world while a select few profit off it.
All I actually mean is I'm sure that soon there will be some cell phone equiv tech that teachers won't be able to ban/control without scanning their entire bodies every day for RF signals.
We're talking about kids, not adults. You ban cell phones for the same we weren't allowed to play our Gameboy during class when I was a kid. They lack the self control and decision making capabilities to forgo something fun for the sake of something important.
Not to mention we have plenty of studies that show even a silent phone sitting quietly in your pocket or on your desk can be an attention drain, as you're subconsciously waiting for a notification to go off.
I'm amazed it took this long for the schools to finally ban the damn things.
I quit all social media (unless you count hackernews I guess), killed all notifications except calls and text messages, and regularly leave my phone in another room while I'm working or doing anything that requires prolonged attention. Helped a lot.
I'm doing the same thing except YouTube and certain niche subreddits have been very hard for me to kill off. Also apps that I want to check up on every now and then get put behind a firewall so they can only access the network when I allow them to, but some are still able to send me notifications despite being blocked. I need to figure out how they are getting around that or better yet just uninstall the app. After I killed off all the big tech social media slop I found notifications for random things to be almost as bad.
I kept YouTube as well, but I tend to use it more as a podcast app then a video app. I try to only listen to it when I'm doing other stuff like doing dishes or walking the dog.
That's interesting that you have problems with notifications. I'm on Android and if I turn them off they've pretty reliably stayed off. I don't even get notifications for emails. Just calls, texts, and a few important ones like my credit cards notifying me when they're used.
> In crafting its policy, Estacada incorporated feedback from parents. That led to some key decisions around the cell phone ban. Rather than use pouches or lockers, students are allowed to keep their phones safely stored in their backpacks. That was for two reasons — it allows students to contact loved ones during emergencies, and many parents use phone trackers to keep tabs on their kids.
I'm glad to hear this. They're currently trying to shill the magnetically sealed pouches in the UK, but the flaws are obvious: massive bottleneck at the pouch station would delay entry and exit from the building, phones would be unavailable during emergencies or to record incidents of crime or staff malpractice, and financial burden on schools.
Students can be trusted to obey a simple "no phones in class" rule.
Don't get it twisted, almost every Portland-area school has gone full in on the stupid fucking Yondr pouches, and yeah it fucked up entry/exit: https://katu.com/news/local/portland-students-adapt-to-new-c...
They also begged parents to help pay for them: https://www.govtech.com/education/k-12/portland-schools-ask-...
A friend's kid needs an exemption from their doctor because their phone is also their glucose monitor and diagnostic tracker, and the exception only allows them to unlock the pouch under supervision when necessary.
What a vulgar situation. Policy made from a moral panic and - look at that - it is negatively impacting actual people who exist.
It's not a moral panic. There are loads of studies indicating that disconnected classrooms produce better outcomes for students.
I'm not sure what argument there is for allowing all students unfettered access to their phones, but feel free to present one.
There can be moral (or other) panics to real dangers. That doesn't mean cool heads don't lead to better solutions.
People panic in fires, trampling one another trying to get out. The danger is real, but so is the damage caused by the panic.
Here people are responding to real harms but we're often jumping to conclusions. Trying to act too fast. Thinking it is better to do something rather than nothing. But that's not always true. We see this happen with all sorts of complex problems we face these days. People care more about having an answer than they do a solution. This one is no different. We get bad answers like the above because people are rushing and not thinking about the consequences. But if things were as easy to solve as were wish they were then they'd already have been solved. The "easy" part only comes after a lot of hard work and really only from a high level
What does this have to do with kids having phones during school?
I'm responding to your comment. It is exactly as on topic as your comment...
There are no reputable studies showing both correlation and causation there.
I'd argue you don't need a study, just reasoning. I mean, a study would be good, but we also have brains on our shoulders.
Learning to read or to do mathematics is like anything else, it takes practice. We know, intuitively from our own lives and observes virtually all humans, that humans perform better with less distractions. It would be hard to learn how to play the Tuba with me screaming behind you. It would be hard to learn chess with a movie playing in front of you.
Phones are distractions. Less phones = less distractions = better performance, smarter kids, more likelihood to graduate, higher average income.
I'd link to some of the many studies published by reputable sources, but I suspect you'll brush them aside with your caveats
That 'caveat' is the actual science. So it's a pretty big deal.
More meaningless words that can be defined as needed by you to support your rather bizarre agenda.
Numerous peer reviewed articles published in reputable journals have reported that there are advantages to banning cell phones in the classroom, yet you as the sole arbiter of "actual science" declare otherwise.
We don't actually need "actual science" to conclude that phones in classrooms are likely causing problems. We can observe them in action causing problems and take actions even if the peer reviewed double blind study hasn't been done
Actually, we do. That's kind of the entire point of science.
We have to make the best decisions we can with the information we have
The point of science is to provide better information for us to make decisions with, not to prevent us from making decisions at all until it's done
If we waited for science to settle and provide the best information possible, we would never get anything done
Kids are smart. My school district has sealed pouches.. Its amazing how many kids throw an old phone in there, and put their actual one away hidden on silent.
Which I guess gets looked the other way, since they aren't using it in class.
It's definitely a mix of the actual phone pouches and the bans giving teachers actual authority and permission to confiscate phones when they're out and disruptive. IMO there's likely a shift that happens with pouches where there are enough kids following the rules and only having one phone in the pouch that it tips the social balance over. That would be harder with just teacher enforced bans I think.
It's definitely a hard problem over all balancing their completely disruptive nature if there's no bounds to the issues around safety and parental worry from not being able to contact their kid all the time which phones have made the norm.
> Students can be trusted to obey a simple "no phones in class" rule.
Anybody who has spent even a day teaching knows how wildly inaccurate this statement is
Anybody who has spent a day in school as a student knows that students can’t be trusted to follow the rules.
People in general can't be trusted to follow the rules. That's why we have the inforcement.
Students are just little people
This is how it works in my kids' school. Not Estacada, but not that far away, and not in Portland. No pouches or lockers, just an understanding that phones which are seen will be confiscated. First time they get sent to the office and returned as the student leaves school. Second time they have to be picked up by a parent.
You'd think it would be a huge deal with rebellious teens, but my daughter says it has basically been a non-issue.
>Students can be trusted to obey a simple "no phones in class" rule.
I'm honestly not educated on the topic right now since I haven't been in school for 15 years and have some time left before my daughter starts, but is this rule really not in place in most schools? How could any school justify not having this rule at the very least, regardless of how well-enforced it is?
I always assumed it was a lack of enforcement due to understaffing that was the problem
It’s a lack of enforcement due to unruly, unparented children,
in most regions’ school districts.
I tend to avoid placing the blame on individuals (parents in this case) when the problem being described is so widespread. People act as rationally as they can, so if it's that common, it's a systemic failure. Scolding the masses is a fool's errand.
> People act as rationally as they can
We’re talking about underdeveloped minds in the face of excruciating social and physiological pressure.
I’m pretty sure the systemic failure is, in part, that parents are, en masse, abdicating their responsibilities of guiding their children through the minefield of modern technology, from iPad kids on up.
The reasons why vary - and include being addicted themselves.
I’d love to hear any anecdotal evidence to the contrary - not just a dismissal, or being called a fool.
The society that supports phoneless children no longer exists. It stopped sometime in the 2010s. Taking away phones doesn't bring that infrastructure back, it culminates in something new and worse.
One example is the tension between childrens' independence and roaming and the now lack of payphones. Taking away a cell phone doesn't bring back payphones. It either reduces a child's independence or puts them in more dangerous situations. What it doesn't do is return them back to a time when a couple of quarters could call mom or dad.
Who said take phones away?
No, teach them some motherfucking respect,
so they know, instinctually, that when someone’s talking to them for 30-60 minutes they should pocket or bag it.
Sorry, but childrens' lack of respect was lamented in Antiquity. I don't see that changing in the next 5 years if it hasn't changed in the last 2000.
As a known exception, not as a rule.
Disrespect toward supposed authority figures as a default is a very modern concept.
Want to back that up? Because every source I have for the last 2000 years complains it's a new phenomenon.
Could you clarify your position?
Just reads like you’re agreeing with me, now.
No, I disagree.
Okay, finally unraveled your comment:
you’re saying the complaint is that in that era it was also thought of as a new phenomenon.
That makes some sense - it’s been a declining slope, with a huge drop-off point.
But was there also evidence of less-competent people coming out of the end of the machine that’s supposed to produce people to keep the civilization functional?
Probably happened at one time or another - but it was probably also considered a problem……
My original “as a default” verbiage is doing a lot of heavy lifting, but is there for a reason.
I'm so sorry. But consider that you're simply wrong.
Teaching them respect sounds a lot harder than just confiscating their phones.
No doubt,
that’s why the pendulum has swung as far as it, in the direction it has!
That doesn’t make it the right call, necessarily legal in every jurisdiction, or even moral (in certain edge cases).
Calling back to my earlier comment: handing your kid an iPad for all of their free time is easy, too!
The sealed pouches are a bit of theatre. My son's school has a policy that pupil's can take their phones to school but if one is seen or heard on the school grounds it'll be confiscated and the owner's parents called to come pick it up on their behalf. From what I hear they're not shy about applying that policy either.
Offsetting part of the punishment to the parents (having to get them to come in to the school to collect the phone) is going to help get the policy reinforced from home in most cases.
My kid’s school had a similar policy. I didn't mind having to go out of my way to collect the phone and didn’t pass any of that on to my kid, they were annoyed enough about having it confiscated that it only took a few times before they modified their behaviour accordingly.
>Students can be trusted to obey a simple "no phones in class" rule.
And what if they don't? En masse?
At first a lot of parents get inconvenienced coming to get confiscated phones and if that doesn't inspire them to discipline their kid at home the school can move to the more draconian pouch systems.
I don't understand. We had a "no phones in class" rule when I was in school over a decade ago. It was the obvious default. How did it go away, and how is this new policy different from the obvious? Are they saying that until now their policy was that phones are openly allowed in class? Why??
> it allows students to contact loved ones during emergencies, and many parents use phone trackers to keep tabs on their kids
That's such bullshit.
- There is no emergency that require students to contact anyone. Communication can go through the school
- Parents have no business tracking their kids when they're at school
> Parents have no business tracking their kids when they're at school
The tracker sends a notification when they're not at school, that's the point. Plus, I can lock down social media apps only during school hours. Blanket statements like this are plain ignorant. Also, I'm glad Utah finally passed a similar ban. Phones in use in class are a tremendous distraction 99% of the time.
If you kid is not at school, you will know. Kids weren't able to get away with hooky 20 years ago, let alone now. If they do it enough you'll have a court date!
I think this mostly boils down to our ever-connected society producing unreasonable expectations of communications. It is a very, very recent phenomena that you can instantly contact whoever whenever you want. Previously, it was common place to be unreachable for most of the day.
Realistically, your kid will survive, and even thrive, if you are not able to contact them for 8 hours a day. There is a downside to this kind of tether. It's a new type of ever-present anxiety, like someone breathing down your neck. Half of raising kids is teaching them what to do. The other half is leaving them alone, so they can learn to be competent adults.
This is ridiculous. The school will notify you if the student is not at school, or the teachers will eventually (or their grades/missing assignments).
Also you don't need to track your kids to enable school time mode, if you want to lock down their phone during school.
What are you going to do when they go to college? Track them? Monitor them? Make sure they go to classes?
At some point, you just have to trust your kids to do the right thing. It's a part of them learning how to grow up and be independent. It's better to make mistakes the younger you are so you can learn from them when there is less on the line.
This is even more ridiculous, how about that?? My particular school will send a message at 5pm daily with any attendance issues, but I can be notified instantly through the app. Why would I ever choose to be less informed? Also, I appreciate your points about college, but have you noticed a large number of students disproportionately boys are disenchanted with the whole education system at large and opting out of college. I'm clinging on to a hope that mine will see the value, but there are lots of different developmental speeds and some students need more guidance than others. You do realize some high school students just become burnouts, right? Your one size fits all, hands off and trust mentality is naïve and if you happen to be a parent, hopefully you'll be able to avoid the situation of parenting a student in crisis. Cell phones are a major problem in schools and I'm glad to see efforts being made to address it
I don't agree with tracking kids but you're being silly. I ditched in high school and my parents didn't find out. This is true for plenty of people. Sure, it was 20 years ago but we had cellphones too. It's not like we were in the dark ages and schools couldn't call
Your high school didn't call your parents to tell you you missed a class?
Where I live we get a phone call the same day if our kids miss a class without prior notice.
Usually no. If you missed multiple yeah, but mostly they didn't care.
Though they started to my senior year. You'd get detention or even suspension if you did it too much. It was especially problematic with us in the AP/IB programs. My older sibling's class (AP/IB) ditched so much it was messing with the state attendance records.
But maybe they didn't call because we were in the advanced programs. The people ditching the most were the ones getting good grades. The school still has a pretty good ranking in California (top 20%).
And frankly, if they called... just delete it off the answering machine before your parents got home.
Or the other thing, get your elder sibling to call you out. Or call in pretending to be the parent or elder sibling. People did that all the time. It's not like the school knows your parents' voice. And well, now that's easy to fake, right?
Oof, the “my child is my property” parents are not gonna like this.
> Students can be trusted to obey a simple "no phones in class" rule
That was the general policy before these bans. It was not working.
My son, who recently graduated high school, went to a school that banned phones but insisted on laptops (providing them for the kids who couldn't afford one). He said it was ridiculous, as none of the kids had any problem using their laptop for anything they would have used the phone, which was mostly texting, scrolling social media, watching videos, and playing games. Even when the school tried to lock down services, as soon as one kid found a way around it, they all did.
The whole "browser game" industry is built on this phenomenon. It's about getting kids on school laptops mindlessly looping on something while shoving ads in their face.
Honestly, get the tech out of classrooms. A few 8 bit machines that can run LOGO are far more genuinely educational than all the gunk they have today.
What? Browser games were half of what made flash popular back in the day before laptops were even a normal consumer device.
You're spot on with classrooms not needing tech though. They add complications and distractions on top of an already difficult task.
Flash was founded in 1993, and while desktops were much more popular laptops were indeed a product sold to consumers
I grew up in the 2000s and I remember almost everyone in the computer lab would be playing Flash games, until someone came in and yelled at us because it wasn't "educational" enough.
They almost let us play RuneScape (something something medieval history?) until they saw me firebolt a rat and declared it unacceptably violent.
I visited my old school once, a few years after graduating, and was startled to see many people on their laptops in the hallways. I guess they had become required. I had graduated right around the time smartphones came out, and we didn't have laptops either. (You'd see a laptop at school occasionally but it was a rare sight.)
I'm glad the fanciest thing I had was a TI-84, because it got me to spend most of my time socializing, which I think was pretty good for my development.
Gotta get schools back to using paper homework. There's so many of those awful online classroom portals for homework. Absolutely trash software, technically speaking.
TurnItIn.com was starting to be a thing when I was in high school. I found out it didn’t sanitize the papers you upload and had no CSRF protection, so I could upload a doc with inline JavaScript to hit the change-password and logout APIs.
Was pretty impactful for my education, just not in the intended way
Way back when I was in school (2004 or so) I set up a proxy on my personal website to get around them blocking email, because I don’t want to have to save things to a damned floppy drive.
I then let a teacher use it because he was frustrated half of his search results would get blocked. From there, it spread like wildfire. Eventually they blocked it and from then on the IT guy would give me a side eye whenever we crossed paths.
Anyways, I can only imagine the clever ways kids get around things now. If it’s not per device, all a kid would need is a mobile hotspot to be king.
Back in the day when every hotel that was charging for WiFi was stupidly leaving port 53 wide open, I wrote an IP over DNS tunnel to get free WiFi. Worked great until I went to a hotel in Tokyo and turned it on. Suddenly my network connection was completely dead. They were clearly watching for shenanigans. Took me a few minutes to figure out they had redirected my MAC address to the bit bucket. I spoofed my MAC to a different one, and then behaved, as well as admired those IT guys.
Yeah, back when I was in school it was a cat and mouse game of finding a new proxy every week when the last one got blocked. The minute someone found a new one, it was everywhere.
I decided to sidestep the whole game and run my own proxy at home. I didn't have enough bandwidth for multiple users, so it was just me. I don't think IT ever caught on.
We'd just copy democrakey thumb drives and use those, since the network filtering was done using IE policies and not anything actually network level
My son is in middle school and it's the same thing. They can't have devices in the classroom, except for the school mandated device that does everything the phone does and more.
Yeah it probably took about 15 seconds for the first kid to figure out that you could just share a google doc with your friends and use it for texting.
It’s hard to imagine a slow, overworked, somewhat inept, bureaucratic school board, with a thousand other things it wants to care about, managing to stay ahead of thousands of crafty and highly motivated teens.
It should be more simple devices with only helpful apps like books reader and learning videos player, not general access devices
they brought laptops to cafeteria? outside? the core issue is usage of phones outside of the class, no? if he used it during the class, cool (we all gad boring teachers). if he was able to use it after the bell rang that is not having a ban
I remember reading somewhere else that there was a psychological benefit for kids as well. Not having the constant pressure to check the device. Just seems like a big win all around.
In our district phones are banned during the day. Most students don't care about their phones, what they care about is FOMO. And so the ban does great to not only reduce distractions but also the cognitive load of constantly wondering what they're missing.
I surprisingly found this with my Apple Watch. was so concerned it would make me even more plugged in. But in reality now 90% of the time I get a junk email I just say “huh” instead of needing to open the phone to see what it is (and the other 15 notifications). Can’t have fomo if you know you’re not missing out, amirite?
That's still quite insane. I get a lot of email daily but notifications onto about priority / important ones.
Which is about 1-2 per _week_.
I think this more about it coming from a higher authority than the school itself.
Many schools have similar bans but they don’t get support from many of the pupils or their parents as both groups have members that just believe it is the school choosing to overstep their authority.
Now it is a diktat from above it makes the school’s job in enforcing it much easier. They can just point to the relevant legislation/diktat and say that their hands are tied, if you disagree here are the places you can go to voice your opinion. Meanwhile we (as a school) have no choice but to apply the rules, etc.
This notion discomforts me. It has poor implication for decentralization of decision making, i.e. federalism in school administration.
That is exactly why this is a success.
It's tough to imagine how different it must be for kids now than when I went to school.
I know there's a billion other reasons, but I've heard parents say they want their kid to have a phone so they can keep in touch if they need to.
When I was a kid, cell phones weren't a thing (at least for kids) so the once or twice a year I needed to call a parent I went down to the office and asked to use their phone.
Then I got to have whatever, usually embarrassing, conversation with my mom while everyone in the school office stared at me. Good times.
I agree with the cell phone bans (I would extend it to all electronic devices, schools should be pen and paper). But we just got our phones taken away in highschool.
Surely an electronic wrist watch is fine, and maybe an mp3 player. Also graphing calculators.
Do graphing calculators actually help people learn? We used them in high school, but when i needed to take calculus in university we didn't use them. I'm doubtful they are good for learning especially when trying to teach the foundations.
Complete waste for anything math related for me. Did act as a proper gateway into coding though!
I distinctly remember writing a minesweeper game, using the built-in programming language. Not the fast compiled one you needed a cable to transfer! Just button presses.
Same for me. Felt like a superpower.
Personally, playing with the graphing and algebra functions on the calculator were hugely informative. Rapidly trying out different things, seeing how they looked how tweaking things would cause adjustment, all added educational value.
I feel like graphing calculators enable exploration in a way that doing it manually with pen and paper cannot. Obviously, pen and paper is super valuable as well, but I feel that they are complimentary.
Back in the day the feature I liked most about my TI-82 was the amount of information that could fit on the display, the formatting options available, the ease of entering and editing what you entered, and the amount of past entered formulas that would be saved and how easy they were to retrieve. It made doing large blocks of basic BEDMAS math very quick and less suspectable to errors caused by accidentally hitting the wrong key entering in large formulas, and very easy to go back and find out where I messed up and quickly retabulate everything.
All of that mostly comes up in physics and chemistry were its about knowing what long formulas you need to plug the numbers you have available to you to find out what you need to know. Oddly enough their seems to be very little benefit to using a graphing calculator in a actual math class.
> BEDMAS
I think I figured out what the B stands for, but where I'm from, we call it PEDMAS - the P standing for Parentheses.
It really depends on the level of the class and the goals. Usually by the time you're getting to calculus you're moving away from simply calculating a numerical answer anyways and the problems where you do need to find one just to test that final step can be finessed so they're simple to calculate by hand and eliminate the problem of full computer algebra system calculators that can handle the symbolic manipulation too.
In my case it did. I took "advanced math" (trig, mostly) in high school from an abysmal teacher. Ignoring her and developing an intuition through graphing was the best thing ever. I had the best final grade in the class.
They were brilliant in electric engineering classes. I found these calculations very tedious.
For maths not so much, as it was less about providing a numerical answer, and more about understanding the question.
I don't see the need for it. The only time I ever needed to graph a function was to answer a homework problem that specifically asked me to. Having your calculator do it misses the point.
Why do you need a music player in school?
"Need" might be strong, but I am okay with music players. My ADHD self is able to focus many times better if I have certain kinds of music playing to block out nearly talking and other distracting sounds.
I gave my 16yo ADHD kid an mp3 player with hours of “ADHD focus” music on it.
It’s proven very useful a few times where a few ND-unaware teachers have confiscated phones that the ND kids use to help them focus.
They don’t get it to use it whenever they want but there are some situations where they are allowed to use it and where having a phone is tricky given the lack of trust some teachers have.
Old school technology fallbacks are sometimes useful. Who knew.
Having all been in high school, I think we can all agree that lack of trust is warranted. Not for every kid, but for enough of them that blanket rules make sense. We also don’t allow students to use the calculator app on their phone for tests, and instead make them buy the “old school technology fallback” version.
An MP3 player seems like a good compromise, and far cheaper than the phone they’re replacing.
Listening to music can help people focus.
In 2026 the number of people with mp3 players that are not also smart phones is vanishingly small.
If you are interested in standalone digital audio players (DAPs), I just recently bought this:
https://www.fiio.com/echomini
For ~$60 you get a device that can play every type of audio file and has better sound quality than your cellphone + streamer combo.
I've been reading more about Chinese hardware and if you've been sleeping on it there are a lot of great Chinese consumer products that are both extremely high quality + very cheap.
Turns out when you have tens of millions of engineers they pump out banger after banger. Also always hilarious, in an enduring way, finding the factory engineers engaging with consumers on random forums that take their feedback seriously.
Note that in this case, you are getting what you pay for: I had a FIIO DAC that sounded amazing but was really bad about full-scale turn-on, sync and desync pops to the extent that it damaged my speakers. Yes, perfect power sequence hygiene would have prevented the problem, but one can't always be ready with the amplifier volume knob when their playback system crashes.
ah good to know. Outside of having a very basic dac for my cans on my desktop, I wouldn't think of any serious equipment failures could happen. Probably wrong to assume that these things are engineered to be safe/redundant.
This is going to be my first DAP in like 15 years, zune being the last one I had. Pretty excited to rock it out for a bit.
There's a current fad out there to move to more single-service type of devices rather than using a phone for everything. Want to try it out myself to be more intentional with my digital actions and ween myself away from corporate social media.
Woah, skeuomorphism writ large!
If they're allowed and help where phones wouldn't or don't there are still lots of options for stand alone MP3 players with minimal or no connectivity. They still exist as a market because they're dirt cheap to make.
music players were often essential for my ability to stay focussed on my work and reading.
During class time?
not all classes are 100% lectures. many of my kids classes have 15-30 minutes of "work time". sometimes entire periods are "work periods" when they have a big project or whatever.
For the walk home
I mostly just listened during homeroom and lunch period. But once I was sent to in-schoool-suspension in high school in the early 2000s for listening to my mp3 player (Diamond Rio PMP300) after I finished taking the yearly standardized tests the state used to judge schools.
This was some 20 years ago, but
- iPods? Taken away
- didn't have fancy smart watches, so those were fine. But I'm sure a modern smart watch wouldn't fly
- graphing calculators were fine. Just don't make it too obvious you were playing Pokemon Red on it.
This has absolutely been the standard in every school around where I live for years. Anecdotally, however, I wouldn't go so far and say it lead to "engaged students" and "joyful teachers" :)
UK here. My kid's school is insane. They think they are so progressive because they banned personal phones entirely, which is fair enough. But they forced us to buy marked up Yondr pouches, which is not fair.
However this isn't the only problem. They also force us to pay monthly for iPads with wonky ass Logitech cases to be issued on which they do everything on Google classroom.
Google Classroom is an abhorrently bad bit of software on an iPad. It's just horrible in every possible way. Clunky, interface sucks, slow, unreliable.
Then they give detentions when children can't submit work, some auth issue means the entire device goes down the toilet for two days, documents won't open because the staff use Office instead, they keyboard case craps out and you can't type with anything but the screen, the staff forget to submit the work until an hour before it's due, the entire school wifi network is down for a week and they have no backup.
They should ban that too. Technology MUST be fit for purpose in a classroom and most of it isn't.
Go back to paper for everything. Work, journals, timetables, the lot. And the teachers can use whatever to drive projectors in the classroom.
When I was in uni I would repeatedly get told that such issues with their software were fine because the lowest N quizzes/homeworks/etc wouldn't get counted. So instead of spending that leeway on a bad day I had to use it on their servers being down or whatever.
I teach CS in the US and I have gone back to pencil-on-paper quizzes for my classes. I allow one page of hand-written notes and given them a quiz review beforehand where I essentially tell them what's going to be on the quiz.
My intent isn't to trick anybody with hard questions, but rather to force the knowledge through their head out through their hand, then back through their eyes and through their hand again.
Next semester I'm doing in-person paper readings, where the first 20 minutes of the class are reading a paper I print out and hand to them, we discuss the paper in class, then they submit their annotated papers to me for a participation grade.
An irony of the AI era.
This is the way of the future.
Probably a similar problem to AI. Using AI for the sake of AI in an engineering workflow probably wastes time right now. Using technology in the classroom for the sake of using technology is probably similar. Is it really creating access, opportunity, saving time. All that? I am skeptical. I have had similar experiences with my children over time. There was a layer of technology that made sense for education. Probably peaked when I was in school in the 90s.
Well saving time it does not.
My daughter got a 0/20 for a test that she sat and did. Now she's not a complete idiot so this was suspicious. I asked about it and they said that it was likely that she didn't get any questions right. I asked for them to provide me with a copy of the exam paper so I could independently verify that.
Magically she got a 17/20 grade updated but no paper appeared. I pushed it further and was told it was resolved. I raised a formal complaint immediately and they did a full investigation. The conclusion was there was a defect in the system used for tracking progress and it was losing information imported from the exam system. They had to manually enter over 200 student papers again due to this.
No one had noticed or actioned it or saw it was a serious issue until I raised a formal complaint.
When technology is in the loop it's very difficult for anyone to take personal accountability as demonstrated.
My partner is currently in an online college program for computer science. The platform and way they have structured it feels like actual computing hell. There is so much friction compared to what I know a more seamless learning experience online should be like.
They're having computers make management decisions...
Do you have an elected schoolboard? In my state, if something was that bad, there would be no end to the meetings and public complaints.
There is an academy board. Unfortunately it's filled up with the sort of people who should never be allowed on a board of any sort.
> Go back to paper for everything. Work, journals, timetables, the lot. And the teachers can use whatever to drive projectors in the classroom.
Kids in Gen Alpha and beyond cannot fathom using analog tools for school work. Their collective minds would break.
Yeah definitely agree with that. I have one.
I have worked in Edtech for the last 15 years, and I stand by it when I say most of it is just added noise.
1:1 programs are a waste of money and time. Students don't need continuous access to a computer. Shared computer labs with a set goal for the time will always have better outcomes.
Kids frankly aren't learning more today with all this tech in the classroom than they were twenty years ago with paper and whiteboards, and the metrics prove it.
> They should ban that too. Technology MUST be fit for purpose in a classroom and most of it isn't.
Absolutely agree.
It’s just bad luck that your kid is in a school that can’t get it right.
My 16yo kid’s (state) school is far from perfect but the school provided laptop works well, is reasonably locked down and policed, and is fixed or swapped out quickly if there is a problem. Sure we have to contribute towards it but we can (and we pay extra to help cover the cost for someone who isn’t able to pay for it). There are no similar tales of broken WiFi, unavailable servers or whatnot.
They went through some problems where there were multiple systems in use and the kids regularly got confused about where they had to check for homework, with different teachers for the same subject using different systems, but that was resolved eventually.
Phones are officially banned but enforcement is sometimes sporadic. If they do take the piss with it then it gets confiscated and a parent has to come in to get it released (the school has some generic Nokias to hand out at the end of the day if the kid has to have some way of being in contact). That deals with the majority of it.
They seem to have got the balance mostly right in terms of doing enough to keep the lessons mostly distraction free, and also reducing access to keep FOMO down (if hardly anyone has access to their phone during the school day then they, as a group, don’t think they are missing out on much).
Not a fan of them going back to paper for everything, but 100% on screens isn’t good either, especially as the exams are pretty much all paper based.
Man. Offloading all tbose costs to parents is stupid. But that aside: why is it always that edTech seems to have such shoddy software?
> why is it always that edTech seems to have such shoddy software
The people buying it have shoddy qualifications to evaluate it.
Exactly. They take the claims from the vendor as true without validating them.
Used to work in edtech. It's because like most software purchasers, the schools literally only care about a feature matrix. Fixing bugs or performance was considered a waste of feature time and thus of potential contracts.
My children's secondary school (England) also banned use of phones, but the rule was that the phone had to be switched off and kept in the school bag, which was all very sensible.
State schools cannot charge for essential equipment needed for the curriculum. Some schools are taking the p. If all parents told them to do one they would have no leg to stand on, and it is rather scandalous that nothing is done to stop this at Council and government level (they probably prefer to turn a blind eye rather than footing the bill).
They just step around that with a policy that you aren't allowed to bring phones into the school if you don't have one. Yes they are arseholes.
This reminds me of university. Thankfully I did it long enough ago that a lot of stuff was still pen and paper, but some obvious stuff used computers (I did finance and econ, so some programming, lots of spreadsheets and statistics, etc...).
We had some student portal thing online for submitting assignments, MS Office was "required", but the portal was weird and it was right after the .doc/.docx fiasco so everything related to office was a shitshow. Some of our profs simply gave up on the blessed tech stack, issues assignments as Google Docs files, and had us submit assignments through Google Docs. So much easier. I know Google gets a bad rep because of weird perceptions about surveillance, but no one does cloud syncing better. And because most of their software is browser based, it does basically "just work".
Not having distraction devices in a classroom is such a basic concept. I'm surprised it required government intervention. Every half decent school principal should've banned them in their school, and if the principal didn't, the individual teachers should have banned them from their classrooms. The first time a kid had to have a question repeated to them because they were looking at their phone should've been the last time phones were permitted in that class.
Part of the problem is with each step down the ladder there's less authority and support and more chances for blowback from angry parents going higher up the chain. Teachers fear not getting support from principals if they're DIYing a device ban, principals fear blowback from complaints to the board or superintendent etc.
There's also the normalization problem at the teacher level where kids are used to using them in other classes so it's a bigger lift to get different behavior in one specific class.
For what it's worth — my last workplace did not allow cell phones in the building and I learned to love it. When people attended meetings, we all made eye contact and talked about the task at hand. Nobody ever got distracted by notifications or tuned out with boredom. And since we all had traditional telephones at our desks, someone would come get you if your family was calling with for an urgent crisis. I miss it.
My kids' school banned phones during the school day. The principal promised that the office would relay any messages if parents call, and they do. I would be interested to see if there are already statistics showing academic success. That is, are grades and test scores affected by phone bans? The article talks about graduation rates, but doesn't directly address grades and scores.
> I would be interested to see if there are already statistics showing academic success.
It's fair to expect that data, though honestly at this point, it might also be reasonable to expect data that increased screens IMPROVE the outcomes before allowing or issuing them.
Here in Amsterdam, most of the schools have a complete ban(!) for pupils below age 15 or 16. It has been a great decision so far. My daughters are essentially phone (and internet) free until they come hone from school. I love it
It’s the right idea but it also puts the burden of enforcement on teachers that are already over extended, especially in schools where behavioral challenges are more prevalent. Great in a scenario where students are compliant, and a nightmare in environments where they’re not.
I don’t have a solution to that problem, but I also think it’s important to acknowledge it’s not all sunshine and roses.
I’m saying this as a person with close friends in Oregon school systems, based on the experiences they’ve shared with me.
> It’s the right idea but it also puts the burden of enforcement on teachers
As opposed to what? Enforcing rules of the classroom is part of the teacher's job.
I don't understand this objection. What's the alternative? Just let the classroom be a free for all because we don't want to burden teachers enforcing rules? Put a separate security officer in the classroom?
Enforcement becomes easier, not harder, when the rules are uniformly applied everywhere and without exception. There's no gray area and less temptation to bring the phone out because they know they'll lose it wherever they use it, even if it's in the hallways.
Hundreds of comments and not one seems to think this is misguided - unusual for this community. Save the children I guess.
Mostly I think that's because it's pretty obvious smart phones, and the applications that inhabit them, have been a net negative for adults and children.
Unironically yes, save the children by not letting them be on smartphones all day during school.
Given the free market nature of cellphones, where vendors and companies have unfettered access to monetize users, having cellphones in school is akin to making school children line up and listen to sales pitches from companies around the world for several hours a day, instead of focusing on education.
I think this is likely a good concept for schools, but I want to see the data and not opinions. Lack of evidence based policy is what got us here, we should at some point start using evidence based policy to get us out of it.
There are many sources for data on before and after school cell phone bans. Oregon is far from the first to implement this. 35 US states have some form of school cell phone ban, and I believe the UK is doing a nation-wide ban. There is a good amount of supporting data measuring results on this topic.
Any data that discusses the effects of jurisdictions that still have refused to pass or enact such provisions?
My understanding is that these are already banned in most schools and the practical difference between enforcing this at a state or national basis is basically nonexistent vs simple local enforcement.
"Banned" is only meaningful if there are consequences for defying the ban. My experience as a high school English teacher in a handful of schools across several states was that admin is, generally, unwilling to implement a hard ban on smartphones because a significant portion of parents would vocally object (to put it mildly).
Pushing the ban to the state level acknowledges the broad inability of district level leadership to self-police these problems.
If anything I suspect it helps reduce the adversarial relationship between local schools and their parents. "State law, not our policy, sorry." Sounds childish, but hey, if parenting has taught me anything it is that plenty of people never outgrow childish behavior.
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity
Any ban above school level is silly.
I would love it if my laptop had a "study mode" for when I am trying to debug something or learn something new using my laptop. Some of us have less than stellar self-control, so a study mode which requires a multi-step rigamarole to shut off might prevent me from casually checking my email or a news website when I am supposed to be learning a new data structure or figuring out a data corruption bug. I have no idea how it would work in real life: I need access to the internet to lookup API documentation, download libraries, and read online books, but I imagine something could be worked out.
(This article mentions that not only are cell phones banned at the featured school, but these kids have hobbled laptops that supposedly help them focus on school work, although the imperfect nature of the hobbling has unintended consequences).
A combination of https://selfcontrolapp.com/ and Hammerspoon automation and you can lock yourself out of pretty much everything.
I managed to build myself exactly this with Claude's help. There are 3 levels of protection.
1. I use an app called SelfControl, which blocks websites temporarily.
2. I have a script which watches `/etc/hosts` with launchd and reverts it to a version pulled from a server if the file changes. This blocks websites I never want to go to.
3. I setup a 'focus mode' with hammerspoon prevents me from launching certain apps, and makes me wait 30 seconds and type a string of text when I want to switch it off.
Yes, all of these things can be disabled when I want to, but the point is that they all add some fiction and give me a chance the reconsider the distracting action I was about to take.
I've been doing it for about 2 weeks, so far it's working pretty well!
Create a separate Mac / Windows non-admin account just for coding? I’m sure there are parental control measures for either platform. As time goes you can update the deny list of web sites.
Another thing that helps is recording your screen for the whole day. Once you start doing review in the evening it will create back-pressure on the monkey brain that jumps to distractions.
Yet another thing is to setup a separate computer. You can browse crapnet as long as you want, but you have to walk to another desk. The back pressure is subtle but has long-term effect and requires very kittke will power.
>Create a separate Mac / Windows non-admin account just for coding?
Yes, I got as far as creating a separate account on my MBP a few years ago and I do programming and open source stuff with that account. And it has helped quite a bit! Although it's not perfect (case in point, I am here on HN right now).
Here is how it would work in real life:
The laptop would come with a study mode button.
You would push it and turn off distractions.
Then 5 minutes later you would disable it just to send a chat.
Then since it was off, you'd just quickly check TikTok.
Then while you're at it, it just a quick break, you'd pop over to Twitch.
3 hours later...
If you can't teach yourself restraint, a button won't help.
That’s a very simplistic view.
Granted it won’t work for 100% of people but I’m sure it would work for lots of people.
Something as simple as a button you have to press to disable it is often enough of a barrier to prevent people from doing that as it makes the context switch from work to non-work more obvious than simply alt-tabbing to a different browser window.
Slowing down the dopamine feedback loop works. Many impulses that lead to distraction are automatic, not conscious. Ever closed a Hacker News tab just for your fingers to immediately re-type the URL into the bar and hit enter? There are browser extensions that delay loading pages on a given site for a number of seconds, to cut off that sort of automatic behavior, and they work as long as the delay to load the site is less than the time and effort it takes to open up your addons manager and disable the addon.
>> just for your fingers to immediately re-type the URL into the bar and hit enter?
No. That sounds pretty effed up.
its a blanket rule, which has almost no exceptions. So there are some silly parts. One of my kids is in band and the school uses YONDER pouches. They have had to dig out some really, really old analog tuners to use. They have a fraction of the capability of a $4 IOS app, but the kids are supposed to keep their phones in a special sleeve with no exceptions... (so many kids break that rule, or throw an old dummy phone in the pouch)
Tuners?
We had the oboe tune from a tuning fork, then the rest of the band tunes off of that. Or everyone tunes from a piano.
Tuning by ears is an important skill for musicians, learning that is beneficial. For example, you cannot rely on apps to tune your signing voice during performance.
Pianists are musicians that don't tune their instruments. People that use computers, too.
A whole band tuning by ear? Ouch!
Good ... do it the old way ... I support the blanket ban, wish it would go further. It's a good start.
It's crazy to me that cell phones, and especially smart phones, were ever allowed in the classroom during class.
I suspect it was sneaky.
The old Nokia in school wasn't a problem. You get in trouble for playing snake. The iphone 1 wasn't really a problem. There weren't that many, and it served as a calendar.
But year after year, release after release, the industry deliberately loaded more and more addictive machinery, pushed more and more boundaries, until it's beyond unacceptable.
As an aside, it's amazing how hard it is to turn the modern phone into a no-nonsense tool, and I'm an adult with self-control, a deep understanding of dark patterns, and a fully-functioning brain after 3 cups of coffee.
Completely. I'm a software engineer that has a better shot at this than just about anybody, and I have no idea how to give a child a phone that's not just digital crack. If you think ScreenTime etc will do the job you probably have no idea what's actually happening on your child's phone.
You can buy a dumbphone. For example a Nokia 3210 4G.
Interestingly dumb phones are making a comeback.
They disappeared for a few years, but now you can buy a dumb phone, for example running KaiOS, that charges with USB-C and supports modern cell networks. You can even get a Nokia!
There is absolutely no need to buy a smartphone to any kid younger than 15. Now for high school students it's a bit different, they should be old enough to have self control and respect rules to keep their phones in their bags during class.
They were not. The rule now is that they have to go into a special bag that cannot be opened while school is in session. Before they could be left in a backpack and snuck out or used between classes.
They are not allowed in any school I've been to, especially during class.
I once had to sit in the principals office for bringing in some electronic fishing game. How we went from that to phones being allowed is insanity. They came like a tsunami.
Smart phones came out like 20 years ago. Why did it take so long to ban them in schools?
Just wait until you find out the benefits of taking them away from kids altogether! Phones are a mental health hazard for children, there is no benefit for them having a phone. The only downside is they feel left out when their friends only want to sit around and scroll TikTok, and can't manage to have any in person interactions without their face in a screen.
None of my children have phones, and when they do get one, it will be when they are driving and will be a dumb phone for sending text messages and making calls.
Every parent when the kids are 0-3 says "I won't give them sugar/chocolate", "absolutely not having an iPad/iPhone before 14/15/16 years old", " no TV in their bedroom" etc.
They ALL cave lol
Sounds dystopian and backwards, especially now with cutting access to AI tools that could accelerate educational achievement
"decreed by executive order"
That's the only bummer here. I do agree with this policy, but no one voted for it. The governor just said "you're going to do this".
Yes, yes, I know - people elected the governor. But this sort of policy seems like something that should require legislative approval, not just one person deciding the whole state must do something.
For every time something good comes of that kind of behavior, there's 10 times when it's a disaster.
FTA:
> The kids also weighed in on the debate around the extent of the ban. The two options bandied in Salem were a “bell-to-bell” policy or just inside classrooms. The latter would allow kids to use their phones during passing period and lunch. Several advocated for that change. That mirrored the debate within the Oregon legislature. It ultimately led to a stalemate and the need for Gov. Kotek’s executive ruling.
It sounds like the legislature broadly agreed on the ban, but couldn’t agree on a couple final details. Insofar as an executive is useful, that’s the case for it: calling the shot in the face of several good (or bad!) options but no clear winner.
The legislature (of states and the federal government) routinely passes laws explicitly giving the head of state the power to make decisions like this without passing a law. The most recent one in Oregon about schooling was SB 141.
This is a fun bureaucratic aside, but in Oregon the governor _is_ the statutory superintendent, rather than an elected official. (There are other oddities in Oregon: policy is otherwise extremely devolved, _and_ because property taxes are capped, funding goes through the legislature.)
Now ... what do we do about the rest of society. This problem isn't just a school problem, it is whole of society, escpecially senior citizens. They are more prone to the problems of phones, social media, and continuous disinformation ... and they vote.
I'm a little confussd... was there a point they were allowed? I went to school in the late 2000s, and even at that point if a teacher saw you with a cell phone it was immediately confiscated.
In the last 10 years, driven a lot by school shootings, the tide shifted and parents started fighting schools about letting their kids keep their phone "so they can be contacted in emergencies". The schools gave up fighting with the parents.
Laws like this give the school cover to confiscate the phones and say "talk to your congressperson if this bothers you, my hands are tied".
There is a difference between being allowed to have the phone (in your pocket) and taking it out in the classroom.
Yes, and parents were getting mad at the school when their kids couldn't reply to their midday texts.
FWIW i'm outside the US so maybe there are cultural differences.
Around 2015 or so they became a lot more accepted. From talking to teachers, a surprisingly large amount of the distraction is parents texting kids while they're at school.
> a surprisingly large amount of the distraction is parents texting kids while they're at school
We're entering pretty substantial numbers of parents who grew up or at least spent their entire adult lives with cell phones and the expectation of constant communication. In fact, from my anecdotal experience, the mid-older millennial cohort is the worst at expecting immediate replies at all hours to any form of communication be it social or work.
One of the things I realize I'm grateful for in hindsight is parents who didn't grow up with that, and had no problem calling the front desk of the school if there was a legitimate emergency that needed to involve pulling me out of school. And it turns out for anything short of that, the news could wait until 4PM.
I wonder how much of that is actually parents texting kids, and how much of that is that kids are using that as an excuse to why they checked their phone mid class.
That seems like one of the easiest excuses for kids to make that is hard to argue against.
No, no, it's the parent.
Parents calling their kids in class isn't as rare as you might think...
Yeah, there was a recent NYT article about the ongoing phone ban/pouch discussion and one parent reported having a shared Google Doc for emergency communication with their kid to work around the lack of a cell phone. The nature of such emergencies was not discussed, but I cynically suspect it was along the lines of "do you want mac n cheese or nuggets for dinner?"
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/25/style/yondr-pouch-school-...
Consider how many people are clingy and/or just have questionable judgement about boundaries with their friends, family, and acquaintances in general, usually with a healthy dose of neuroticism thrown in for good measure.
Consider that lots of these people have kids, and when they do, they tend to have a very friend-like relationship with them. Like, they aren't just magically better at this stuff when it's their kid.
These situations are a source of a great deal of this behavior, and the "I can't contact my kid-friend!" anxiety.
It's some of both. Parents do text their kids during the day, but kids also pull out all the excuses when caught.
Even when I was in high school "I was responding to my mom" was the go-to excuse when caught using a cell phone. I had one teacher who would actually read what was on the screen (this was before locking your phone was common and probably lawsuit material today, but things were different) and call kids out when they were lying. The threat of having a teacher read your text messages was enough to put an end to cell phone usage in class.
When I was in high school in the early 2010s it was down to every teacher to enforce their own policy on phones. In practice, this meant that it was wildly variable, kids were getting texts from kids in more permissive environments (the gym teachers had no issue with you playing on your phone as you did a mile walk) which was driving FOMO and leading to students leaving the classroom to check their phones, lots of trying to sneak a look when teachers were distracted, etc.
The rollout of LTE data and more-modern smartphones + social media during that area was a nuclear bomb on teenagers's ability to focus in hindsight. I can distinctly remember the divide between dumb phones/ipods/early smart phones with slow data, and modern social media + fast cellular data to get around school network bans. Things went from the occasional student thinking they were clever with a wired headphone down their sleeve to near constant distraction very rapidly.
The "innovation" has been basic leadership -- setting policies at the school/district and in this case state level. Consistent expectations make it easier for students to follow the policy. Some schools have gone as far as physically locking phones away for the day, though reading the article it sounds like that's not what Oregon is doing.
From my teacher spouse's perspective, a lot of it seems to be the monetary value of smartphones. Some kids are coming to school with the latest and greatest $1000+ smartphone, so if the teacher drops it, scuffs it, misplaces it, etc, the parents are coming after the teacher about an item with real value. Teachers don't want any part of that battle so confiscation is now off the table.
But this new law also involves confiscation.
I don't think that explains anything.
Previously, the confiscation was the teacher's policy.
"I dunno Mom, at the start of 4th hour I put my iPhone in the basket Mrs. Wormwood makes everyone drop their phones in, and when I got it back after class the screen had this big crack in it. It wasn't because I dropped it in 3rd hour in Mr. Lockjaw's PE class while walking and checking Instagram, nuh uh. Can you get me the iPhone 17 Pro Max instead of the iPhone 17e this time?"
And then at conferences (or worse, at the PTA meeting or school board meeting) Mrs. Wormwood is going to hear from Mom how she broke Johnny's phone and cost them $1100.
Now it's state law. It's not Mrs. Wormwood's decision to confiscate phones from students, preventing little Johnny from texting Mama when there's a lockdown, it's the law and her hands are tied.
Previously where, though? In this specific Oregon school district?
It's not up to the teachers' discretion in the schools near me.
I'm not sure what law you're referring to. The linked article discusses the implementation of an executive order in Oregon that mostly bans use of cell phones during school time.
Some schools may do things differently, but it seems like the one highlighted in the article allows the kids to keep phone in their backpacks: "Rather than use pouches or lockers, students are allowed to keep their phones safely stored in their backpacks"
I didn't see anything in the article or the text of the EO about confiscation. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1R5kfyMYsA6cg3VQKutUxLTIGVpI...
thats funny, if i park illegally and my car gets damaged while towed, no ones paying for those damages.
I'm also confused by stories that imply that kids were allowed to use their phones during class.
The local schools I'm familiar with allowed phones in backpacks, but if you got caught using it during class there were consequences.
Enforcement was never perfect. Some teachers didn't care, some students were sneaky enough to not get caught. Yet the consequences seemed to keep the kids afraid of using phones for the most part (from what I've been told, obviously I wasn't sitting with them in class).
Some of these articles are written like entire classrooms were just scrolling their phones during class? I don't get it. Was there just a total lack of enforcement?
Late 2000s was just after smartphones became a thing, and before they became a crack epidemic. In my personal experience, it has really been bad for about the last 10 years, getting better over the last few years however. Took a few years for everyone to really understand how bad the problem had become and how quickly.
Here in india it became normalised to bring it to school around 2016. But even today it's completely not OK to use it in class. It'll be confiscated immediately.
Right? when I graduated HS in 2008 phones had always been banned. If you got caught with one out, you could have them just not out and in theory off, you would get detention and your parent would have to come get it. When did it suddenly become OK to have phones out.
I was in high school in the early 2010s. In 2010 I went to a school that gave all students ipod touchs, which seemed futuristic at the time. By 2012 phones weren't banned from school, but a teacher would still take it if you were blatantly using it during class.
'Engaged Students, Joyful Teachers' ... but sad Zuck ! As soon as this becomes popular and Zuck's engagement numbers tank, prepare for a propaganda campaign of nuclear proportions - maybe they even pull the OG Sheryl Sandberg back to steer the PR ship. And with the current crop of cronies in office, don’t be surprised if a new ID bill will be introduced that requires "social connectivity" as requirement for ID verification. Your "trust score" might eventually depend on how much data you feed Zuck's sucking machine and whether you’ve hit your daily scroll quota. If you think that sounds crazy, you haven't been paying attention to how fast the goalposts are moving.
Saw this the other day: https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/5726492-social-media-...
Writer’s org’s founders include Meta, among many others: https://itif.org/our-supporters/
I’m no expert here, so leaving this as a datapoint
Social Media Bans are never the answer says unbiased author Zark Muckerburg
more like gaolposts amirite
For a country that likes to brag about being a "democratic republic", the 2 major areas of society (school and work) are the most fascistic top-down authoritarian structures we have.
And sure we can vote every 2 years. Yay.
But what freedom do we have when schools can steal student's property, or a business owner can fire you for speech made outside of work.
I'm actually surprised there isn't more of a focus on school and work reform and a lot of focus on... everything else
Phone bans are bad.
Why is that?
The obvious reasons. People who do not have political agency should not have decisions made that prevent them from using their own devices in a setting that they are legally required to be in. That's not how things should work. One group of people should not be setting policy for another group of people in this matter. The victims of these policies aren't infants; they will be adults in about five minutes.
Blankets bans and these idiotic 'oh just ban phones/computers entirely, pen and paper am i rite?' ideas have a ton of nasty externalities that no one seems to care about. They reduce the quality of life for people who rely on AAC (having your actual voice on the device you carry day to day is nice, having a lesser experience without your actual data is intolerable + 'everyone' having the kind of device that you use for this purpose prevents you from standing out at all times) in service of chasing and responding to a moral panic.
In the real world, kids just unenroll Chromebooks via the nine million exploits that have been found over the years (many of which are unpatched and some are hardware flaws) and load software that lies to the management system about the state of the device. They do whatever they want on on those devices - which is mostly 'doing their actual work without staff being able to spy on their screen/being able to play a simple game when they have no work to do'. The people using phones in class are the exact same people who were using iPods in class, were using non-smartphones in class to text constantly, using Discmans in class and so on. To pretend that smartphones are somehow different from that past involves gesturing towards pseudoscience and non-credible actors. For more on this: https://www.techdirt.com/2026/01/21/two-major-studies-125000...
These policies have both possible problems - the 'gun control problem' (you can't really achieve anything that you claim to care about while also issuing kids laptops that are used in class + you have to issue laptops in order to much of the kind of relevant teaching necessary in 2026, so there is no real way around this problem) and also the problem of the policy itself not addressing an actual real problem that exists - it's mostly a moral panic about social media, not some real problem of widespread usage of phones during class. The people who are interested in learning will learn, the others will not, that's that. People should be treated as individuals rather than a faceless blob of youth who need hostile policy designed for them. I'd also remind lawmakers that these people will be adults in about five minutes and resentment can easily carry over into the voting booth.
By the way, the Oregon ban is illegal and will be tossed out the moment that it gets to the appropriate level of judicial review - the Governor cannot make law.
They shouldn't have chromebooks either...
I have no idea how you've generated this principle. I'm going to ignore the noise.
1) "The victims of these policies aren't infants; they will be adults in about five minutes."
You've made no case for why adults couldn't be banned from using phones in class.
2) "They reduce the quality of life for people who rely on AAC..."
I don't know what this stands for, but if it is some sort of handicap, exceptions can be made. It's fine to ban wheelchair use in school for people who don't need wheelchairs. Even if having a wheelchair makes you stand out because everybody isn't using one.
3) "To pretend that smartphones are somehow different from that past..."
That past is very recent, and is also garbage. Chromebooks, iPods, cellphones, and "Discmans" in class is also a terrible idea. If whatever advantages that Chromebooks provide (I don't want Google in schools at all, but ignore me) are nullified by the fact that kids can bypass the security on them, get rid of them.
4) "...you have to issue laptops in order to much of the kind of relevant teaching necessary in 2026"
You definitely don't.
5) "The people who are interested in learning will learn, the others will not, that's that."
That is a good argument for not even having schools. But we have schools because we are concerned with setting up situations that can make it easier to learn, even for children who are less interested than others.
6) "Also, the Oregon ban is illegal and will be tossed out the moment that it gets to the appropriate level of judicial review - the Governor cannot make law."
The state can make policy, though, for its own schools. If this ban extended to private schools that weren't taking any money from the state, I could see this being a problem. This includes "vouchers."
If you are going to ignore 'the noise' (the actual content of my post) we don't have anything to talk about and you should not reply. Do not reply to me if you are not going to actually respond to the content of my post.
I'll reply to what I want, and I think I pulled out the actual content of your post.
The rest of it just seems to be strange pronouncements you are making about what people should and shouldn't want to do, and the motivations of the people you don't like.
I mean, sure. They are old enough to make their own decisions? Alright, then they are old enough to be expelled from public schooling for those decisions. They can decide to disrupt the classroom, or they can decide to get an education. They don't get to fuck up everyone else's education with no recourse because they are still children, while simultaneously retaining all personal rights because they are nearly adults.
I don't think banning is the right solution to this. At some point, I think we are going to have comms devices imbedded in our heads and whatnot.
I think the right approach is finding teaching techniques that still work when every human has all the world's info at their finger tips 24/7.
At some point, an uninterruptible, 24/7 live connection to the rest of the world is inevitable.
I'm not convinced a human teacher is a required part of this.
> At some point, I think we are going to have comms devices imbedded in our heads and whatnot.
This will have limited impact because, at some point shortly after that, the moon will hatch and the lunar dragons will consume our satellite infrastructure, disabling all comm devices.
You can't make policy now based on nebulous ideas about possible futures, particularly not when those ideas aren't based on any reasonable inference.
Ah yes, some point (possibly 100s of years into the future) we have to be concerned with a sci-fi scenario not borne in reality so we can't possibly ban cellphones now. Just ignore all the negative externalities of these mass misery machines, we have to plan for a future that has no basis in reality!
There needs to be a politics of rejection, because I an assure you 95% of humanity does not want a device implanted in their skull where communication sent to you is unblockable.
SV has clearly cooked a generation of engineers that think working on ad surveillance tech is the pinnacle of humanity and not just another American moral failing that is wrecking the world while a select few profit off it.
"imbedded in their heads" was a bit over the top.
All I actually mean is I'm sure that soon there will be some cell phone equiv tech that teachers won't be able to ban/control without scanning their entire bodies every day for RF signals.
We're talking about kids, not adults. You ban cell phones for the same we weren't allowed to play our Gameboy during class when I was a kid. They lack the self control and decision making capabilities to forgo something fun for the sake of something important.
Not to mention we have plenty of studies that show even a silent phone sitting quietly in your pocket or on your desk can be an attention drain, as you're subconsciously waiting for a notification to go off.
I'm amazed it took this long for the schools to finally ban the damn things.
I don't disagree that people lack self control.
My only disagreement is that bans on cellphone-like tech will be at all enforceable in the near future.
They're kids... Even in some dystopian ass scifi future we all have implants in our eyes or some shit, we aren't doing that to kids...
> We're talking about kids, not adults.
Frankly, I believe the world would be a better place if we did a lot more banning of smartphones for adults, too. They are like crack.
I quit all social media (unless you count hackernews I guess), killed all notifications except calls and text messages, and regularly leave my phone in another room while I'm working or doing anything that requires prolonged attention. Helped a lot.
I'm doing the same thing except YouTube and certain niche subreddits have been very hard for me to kill off. Also apps that I want to check up on every now and then get put behind a firewall so they can only access the network when I allow them to, but some are still able to send me notifications despite being blocked. I need to figure out how they are getting around that or better yet just uninstall the app. After I killed off all the big tech social media slop I found notifications for random things to be almost as bad.
I kept YouTube as well, but I tend to use it more as a podcast app then a video app. I try to only listen to it when I'm doing other stuff like doing dishes or walking the dog.
That's interesting that you have problems with notifications. I'm on Android and if I turn them off they've pretty reliably stayed off. I don't even get notifications for emails. Just calls, texts, and a few important ones like my credit cards notifying me when they're used.