There’s nothing new about children and adults being treated differently.
Their brains are literally not fully developed. Some facets of life they’re literally ill-equipped to handle and policies should reflect that.
If you’re a teenager reading this, consider.
There are a few adults who are saying that teens should have unrestricted access to the internet.
Look and you’ll see that most of them are getting money from you being on the net.
There are a few adults who are saying that teens should have unrestricted access to the internet.
I am. It saved my life
Their brains are literally not fully developed
The brain doesn’t stop developing till your thirties, source. According to this argument 30 year olds should also be subjected to banning.
It’s not about role modeling. It’s about learning and attention spans.
Yeah, but explain that to the children, especially young ones.
I do teaching, and when I set rules about not using phones during class - I put mine to the pile too. You can present the most compelling argument ever, but there’s a much higher chance it’s gonna reach fifth graders if you actually practice what you preach, and show the example of self-discipline, otherwise it will feel dishonest or unfair to kids, because they’re kids.
With that in mind, take them from the adults too lol. I know some adults who are chronically online
The adults already have a job. They’re fine.
The students can’t even read anymore because they’re dumb as rocks.
Same with adults. lol
There’s ample evidence that social media and smartphone addiction affects developing brains significantly worse than it affects fully-developed brains.
Banning cell phone use in school is a good thing.
Critics don’t want to hear that young people whose brains aren’t fully developed yet have poorer impulse control than adults…
But young people whose brains aren’t fully developed yet have poorer impulse control than adults.
We don’t want to lose our rights because of shoddy neuroscience being misinterpreted for political gain
On the “different rules for adults and students” thing… if the adults model responsible cell phone use, i.e. never in the classrooms or hallways during school hours, never “ducking out” to their car or the teachers’ lounge just for B.S. doom scrolling or un-necessary calls, IMO that would be much stronger than just banning phones on-prem for kids and adults alike.
The real key: you should control your cell phone, it should not control you - same thing as so many other addiction problems. And, there will be addicts who genuinely are incapable of controlling it, and cold turkey tee-total zero usage has been shown to be the most effective answer for them - just like alcoholism, not drinking is nothing to be ashamed of, having a problem and drinking anyway is much much worse.
There’s ample evidence that drugs addiction affects developing brains significantly worse than it affects fully-developed brains.
Banning drugs use in school is a good thing.
Banning drugs use in school is a good thing.
You’re right. Nothing that isn’t perfect is worth doing.
I guess we should just wait to act until every student can’t focus on something for more than 30 seconds instead of 60. Definitely a better idea because, after all, just ignoring the problem always works.
Oh right cause the war on drugs totally worked. My point is that addressing the consequences won’t solve the problem, like those children’s won’t go home and be glued to their phones.
like those children’s won’t go home and be glued to their phones.
if they can put them down for 6 hours a day, that’s huge progress over saturating in it every waking hour.
It’s not about enforcing behavior. Not primarily. It’s about setting a precedent of what is important.
There’s a huge difference between “They didn’t let me drink underage but I did it anyway and became an alcoholic.” and “They explicitly let me drink and I became an alcoholic.”
The former AUTOMATICALLY comes with increased caution from even the people who break the rules. And more importantly, it completely removes the “I didn’t know” from the equation. Personal acceptance of the consequences of one’s actions is the first step to fixing it later, but with no rules, it’s easy to get bogged down in “Nobody stopped me. It’s THEIR fault.”
I’m not saying it’s a bad thing but it’s like keeping an eye on your alcoholic friend for 6 hours then just leaving and letting him help himself on the drinks cabinet. It shifts the blame from the problem to the victim. Yeah it’s a good start but these children are already addicted at very young ages. Also it’s not like this problem is only affecting kids, adults are affected as well.
We took away all their other options, then complain they’re always on their phones. It’s cruel
I understand your point.
And it’s absurd, as I illustrated.
Maybe that’s an issue with social media and the other apps on children’s phones, and not the phones themselves. So maybe it requires a combination of regulation on social media, plus better awareness from parents, instead of a blanket ban on a technology tangentially related to the problem.
This take is giving: 🙈
“If we don’t see it, it’s not happening and yay we saved the kids!”
fully agree. Most CT schools already have banned cellphones, theyre just adopting it on a state level.
It’s all made up to justify control
No, it isn’t.
Make friends with a few schoolteachers and listen to their stories.
My kid goes to school where they recently instituted this strategy.
It feels like I’ve seen a marked improvement in their social behaviors.
Between smartphones and the COVID years, this generation has had it rough for social development…
I’m always confused by this as “back in my day” teachers would just take our devices away if they were chasing distractions.
Then again that was back in the 2000s before smart phones and wifi everywhere.
Young people are kinda cooked I guess. Between nic vapes and brainrot they are in for a rough time.
Really shouldn’t be a ban. Just have teachers do what they always do take away the distraction and return it at end of class.
The second a fucking cell phone ban in schools hit at a legal level. Its just going to fucking evolve into regulations and bans around cell phone use for us plebians at work. Which will then be used to punish and attack people.
Bans for kids rarely stay that way.
Alot of company’s have cell phone rules btw, my mom works in a factory, they can’t use their devices other than during breaks. They can write you up and fire you as long as there’s written rules and shit.
Same, we had texting and snake, but if the teacher saw you doing either (aside from maybe shop class) they would confiscate it til the end of class.
Young people are kinda cooked I guess.
Always have been.
True that, before though I’d say it was a low flame, now it’s like medium high, the brainrot is much worse now than ever. If you go into the tech without any guidance you’re just fucked.
Yeah, not sure what the bill does when phones are already banned in schools by teachers? (I’m a headline reader so maybe i missed the reasoning)
Young people are either cooked OR the easy access to vast knowledge could help them out. So maybe all we will see is the IQ distribution become much weirder (only people on far sides of the graph, nothing in the middle).
Damn I make good theories.
The problem is just like any generation there’s the kids who will take advantage of the resources available to them to better themselves, and then there’s the kids that just absorb the brain rot and end up just cooked.
It was fine when they could be contained in factories and kept occupied like the drones they were turned into. Now the drones just wander around causing trouble.
Sure, we give the kids alcohol, let them drive, let them vote- wait we don’t!? What do you mean there’s always been these kinds of differences!?
I wonder if some of those critics are by an odd coincidence funded by phone related entities.
I suspect it would be more likely social media companies.
BTW a bit unrelated (unless it is social media companies behind it), in the comments I saw somebody against the ban mentioning school shootings and worrying about not having contact with their child. I think banning smart phones and allowing “dumb” ones would be a good compromise for that specific issue.
We used to not have cell phones, and we were fine! I hate this kind of argument that implies it’s required. It absolutely is not. Sure, it would be nice to know if your kid is alright, but it’s not going to change the outcome. Should we accept all the negatives just for this small niche benefit? That doesn’t seem smart.
I think smartphones have ruined parents as much as kids. They feel compelled to know exactly where their kid is at all time. They don’t get the freedom to explore and learn for themselves anymore. Sure, being able to communicate is great when it’s needed, but I think there’s so many negatives that have come with that. I guess the option of payphones are gone, so there really isn’t an alternative left.
In our case, the phones are allowed to be on their person just not allowed to be brought out of the pocket or whatever except in case of emergency. Even between classes and lunch.
Some classes institute a “phone cabinet” where students are expected to put their phones in the classroom during class.
So the phones are always at hand, but not actively messing with their lives.
It’s the same here as well. I don’t have an issue with it. If stuff starts popping off, I at least want my students to be able to tell their loved ones some last words before being gunned down.
What I don’t want is them being on a screen in my class. They struggle to think without being told something by AI or whatever.
“Mister, can I search up what a dog looks like?” Bro you live in the city, you’ve seen dogs.
Using these as an excuse for arbritary additional restrictions doesn’t make your arguement stronger, it makes those restrictions morally suspect. This arguement means we need clearer frameworks on what is and isn’t a reasonable restriction on account of age to avoid the drinking age being a justification for erosion of rights
Texan here, working for a school district where these types of laws have already been implemented: I’m pretty sure it’s about controlling narratives, not improving education.
Kids use their phones to fact-check teachers, record teachers improperly addressing students, record fights, and verifiably report on very real issues within the school. I haven’t seen any educational benefits from banning cell phones, only that it’s been easier to sweep stories under the rug and to refute concerning complaints from children in need.
this is nonsense.
Oh okay, my bad. I guess I’ll just change what I see and hear.
I live in CT, and I guess I’ll just lie about what I see and hear too?
We mine as well live in different countries tbh
We mine as well live in different countries tbh
I absolutely agree. My nephews went to pre-K in Connecticut, and the opportunities available to them absolutely blew my mind. I genuinely believe that there was a measurable dip in their academic progress when my sibling moved back to Texas.
From the metrics side of things, I work with one of the larger districts in Texas, build a lot of reports for the district, and work very closely with the district directors of communication and other leadership. From this perspective, I can tell you that there are a lot of potentially messy scenarios that were addressed before the public ever heard about them. But after these cell phone laws, the amount of resources that went into “crisis response” have plummeted, and moved instead into marketing. Primarily because it’s harder to report and verify incidents without concrete evidence.
Part of these new cell phone laws, and what got a lot of buy-in from districts, was that kids were recording fights in the bathrooms, and that preventing kids from recording the fights would remove the incentive to fight because there wouldn’t be video to upload to social media. But, we haven’t seen a decrease in the number of kids getting written up for fighting; we’ve only had a decrease of community outcry, because they don’t see the fights anymore.
I argue that these cell phone laws were never intended to modify the quality of education or increase the safety of the students, but that they were always intended to merely take away the kids’ ability to verifiably report incidents, or expose issues to the public. Outta sight, outta mind, right? If this were really about getting students to disconnect while they were in school, we wouldn’t give every kid a Chromebook, on which they can look up ridiculous shit, send stupid messages, and leverage LLMs to do all their work for them.
I don’t think that the communities in Texas nor in Connecticut support these laws with the intent to silence their children, and to have blinders put on them. And even if the educational boards and lawmakers in Connecticut aren’t as malicious as the ones here in Texas, they’ll still unintentionally muzzle the students as a side effect.
I read all this, and I can only think about my time in school pre cell phone.
I think about how today, there are in house couselling service centers in nearly every school in the state, staffed by mandated reporters. My school counselor is the reason my abuser went to jail, she helped me.
I dont believe they are taking away thier voice. We all have that. I teach my kid to use his, he’s not muzzled.
We can disagree, we do, and that is okay. I just think the positives outweigh the negatives. Phones were banned in High school when I went (grad. '06) and theyve been banned at my sons school already for years.
The state is just aligning with what most districts have already done here. I appreciate you saying you dont think lawmakers intend to harm children (but they are). least we agree half way?
I lived in Dallas for 3 years while I was doing a postdoctoral fellowship. Kids in Dallas were going to class in trailers. I was also moonlighting doing curriculum design for TX state testing. I would have to grade sample questions answered by students, and like 90% of the responses I got from high schoolers indicated they were barely literate. (FWIW my background is in neuroscience/cognition, not education, and I was developing science test questions for standardized tests.) I opted not to have my family move down to Dallas during the fellowship after seeing how bad education was there.
There are lots of areas like that throughout Texas, unfortunately. In a disappointing number of the campuses in San Antonio, some of the lowest performing schools are the only place where many students get to eat, get new clothes that fit, enjoy HVAC, and not get assaulted by family or neighbors. Many of those schools have unofficial metrics that they prioritize: were the kids safe, did they eat, did they talk to someone if they needed help? What is considered a monumental success in those schools is if the teacher says something that low-performing students find engaging enough to write down.
These are the schools that the state is shutting down. Many of the students are left in a lurch without a safe way to get to their new school. These are generally in areas with high minority representation. It’s almost like Texas’s goal is to fail specific groups of kids.
Then why did you comment lmao
That article is about CT, not texas, why did you comment?
I commented to ask why you posted a comment that added nothing to the conversation. The first comment you replied to made a valid comparison to where the laws in question have already been implemented. Instead of engaging with that productively, you rudely dismissed it out of hand.
ok
i suspected it as much. teens have been recording inappropiate behaviour by school admistrations. any statutory rape, relationship they dont want that to hit neews. before cellphones, i caught 1-2 professors/instructers using outdated or misinformed facts in bio. this probably where its good to fact check
I’m sorry, is there a massive problem of adult teachers and staff at school being constantly glued to and distracted by their phones such that it prevents them from teaching and doing what they are otherwise there to do?
No?
… Maybe the critics can ask ChatGPT what a false equivalence is.
We had early smart phones back I was in high school.
We also had this rule.
Its fine.
If its not fine, you have an addiction problem, and should seek help.
I agree with you that adults having smart phones is a different problem than children having smart phones.
Here’s where you lose me. The critique isn’t that adults are distracted. The critique is that being a role model means modeling the same behavior and showing by doing. That is the argument I see disengenuously misrepresented in this comment section again and again. That is a separate argument from adults have a problem with using their phones at inappropriate times during the work day/adults are addicted to their phones.
I can also unilaterally state that smart phones are also addictive for adults and are also bad for our mental health and well being.
The fact is, adults absolutely do have problems with staying on task and avoiding their phones during the work day. I see this in the field I work in and in other fields. This is so prevalent there are whole industries where its common to see “no mobile devices allowed in vehicles” stickers and decals on work trucks.
Oh, well, most adults being paid to pefrom their role, their tasks and duties, at a job, most of them are essentially de facto capable of role modelling proper phone usage, otherwise they’d be fired.
You just don’t use it while you’re actively working, you know, actively engaged in the act of teaching a lesson, overseeing a lab day, etc.
If a teacher was constantly on their phone, while they’re supposed to be teaching, they’d get reported and reprimanded and eventually fired.
This isn’t disingenuous, to hold this assumption… this is how things have worked for a long time.
Yeah, yeah a construction or transport crew should also have restrictions on distracted driving or otherwise operating a multi ton vehicle, yes, same as a forklift operator.
They should be fired if they egregiously violate safety protocols.
Systems exist and have existed to do this.
The problem that is going on in schools is that a combination of over-exhausted and underpaid teachers, combined with incompetent/corrupt admins have just looked the other way on this for so long that its become a problem not only in schools, but also all the places those kids who went to those schools go after they’ve graduated.
The solution is not to equivocate, the solution is having higher standards.
And just to be clear: addictive behaviors and patterns start in adolescence, and then progress and worsen and broaden when they are not identified and addressed.
This is … very widely the consensus of all kinds of studies into all kinds of addiction.
So having teachers model proper usage of the useful but potentially very addictive device… is arguably the most important area of society to do this with.
If you want a society that isn’t constantly distracted by their rectangles… you should exemplify to them how to properly use the rectangles from a young age.
I took the headline to mean the critics of the law were saying they don’t want teachers to be allowed to have cell phones on the job. I wonder if a lot of the commenters here took it the exact opposite way (teachers and students should be allowed to have cell phones, rather than teachers and students should both be banned from having cell phones in schools).
I think that may be where the crisscross is.
I’m sorry, is there a massive problem of adult teachers and staff at school being constantly glued to and distracted by their phones such that it prevents them from teaching and doing what they are otherwise there to do?
Um… while I wish it weren’t so, it does happen quite a bit, and should be taken more seriously than it is.
False “addiction” accusations are used to imply that the thing you want to control in people is a problem of lack of self control requiring external intervention
Oh I’m not implying, I’m directly stating it.
If you cannot go 24 hrs, 48 hrs, a week, without using a phone for anything other than making actual phone calls on it, you have a problem and need, at bare minimum, a hobby.
I’d suggest reading whole books.
There is so much literature on how massive (especially shortform) social media use destroys your ability to concentrate, lessens your attention span, causes addiction, and is intentionally designed to cause addiction.
Its literally come out in court, fairly recently.
If you can’t hit pause on this on your own, yeah, you need help.
At this point, I don’t know where that help is going to or should come from, but I know an addict when I see one.
Because I am one.
I’m addicted to nictoine, I start getting real pissy around the 24 hr cold turkey mark.
I certainly would count myself amongst those who would need actual help to actually quit.
Difference here being, my nicotine habit isn’t and wasn’t tolerated or accepted in public school, I did that shit to myself, a decade afterward, as a legally/socially self responsible adult.
Fuck that. If you can’t stop schools from getting shot up, banning phones is the wrong move.
Phone use can be “banned” while allowing them to have phones on their person for emergencies.
Just banning them being out.
That’s already school policy in every school, and has been for literally decades now.
You don’t need a law for that.
STOP ARGUING. DO AS I SAY.
NO, YOU CAN’T HAVE A PROTECTIVE BALLROOM!!Exactly, people are at gunpoint, and yet this post is filled with slippery-slope propaganda. Its classic Lemmy, too unrestrained to realise discrimination applies everywhere.
Yeah! Kids shouldn’t have different rules than adults! Same rules for all ages!
Sincerely,
The Pedophiles
And the tobacco industry. And the gamling industry.
And the mining industry
Yeah wtf? TONS of things have a set of rules for adults and kids, that’s literally what being a minor means… how is this a bad thing? Adults aren’t kids, kids aren’t adults… why should they be treated the same?
The pedophiles are the ones making these rules. (Source: the Epstein files) isolation enables abuse, and these policies aren’t being made in a vacuum but as part of a comprehensive attack on access to information and connection
Sounds good, we should let kids drink and smoke pot then right. You can drive a car at any age, any age person can buy cigarettes. No more age restrictions on games and movies…
Staff at schools are adults, many of which are responsible for the lives of other living humans. The critics must all have the maturity of school children.
I said this before: I know schools that do not have cell phone bans yet the students simply don’t use them. Its called engagement and respect, and teaching kids appropriate use.
I think considering laws like this says more about a broken education system (or lack of parenting) than a cell phone problem.
respect
Really goes to show that discrimination and ageism can be resolved just like that. We treat peers like peers and listen to them, not silently dictate what they should/shouldnt do. This post is in essence a giant slippery slope.
Well, we have to fill our prisons somehow.
What better way than a new felony Use of Instagram law. School Resource Officers may even get to use their tasers on children more often, resulting in free training at no taxpayer expense!
Schools are now places where children are legall required to go and have no rights while they’re there. Gross abuses of children can be done with nothing more than the most vague and unproven suggestion that it’s for “safety” or “education”
Don’t be silly, we simply need to ban phones for adults and we’d solve a BUNCH of other problems too…
Like being dissidents aginst the government, for example
I actually would argue this is a fair comparison though. Phones are for contact with others unlike the other things you mentioned they can also be very helpful in an emergency. A teacher will want to contact their family to let them know they are safe just the same as a student would. I think that’s where the real issue is. We have so many school shootings and parents want to be able to connect with their children in those situations. It may be distracting for learning but at the end of the day as a parent the school shootings are alarming and no one is doing anything about it and this makes it seem scarier from that perspective. No one is even addressing that part of it
As a parent I’d rather have my child not districted by a phone in an emergency. My child will be safest in those situations if the staff contact the authorities and the kids are focused on following their instructions. In both situations, phone or no phone, there’s nothing I can do until the situation is over.
Edit: and using the threat of school shootings yo ruin school for most children when so few schools will ever be in that situation is absurd. Those parents should put more of their energy into gun control and thr availability and affordability of mental health treatment.
Yeah the authorities in texas showed how great of a job they do right?
It’s not the threat of a shooting that’s ruining it it’s the actual shootings dude
Yeah you’re right, kids with cell phones in class would have solved all of that.
I never said it would solve it but until it’s solved I would rather not also give up access to communication with my child in an emergency.
The fact that anything can, with enough baseless and politically motivated fear mongering, be added To that list with no consideration for civil liberties is a massive problem.
Not sure if you realize this but its well established in the US that kids in schools don’t have those.
That’s a huge problem
we should let kids drink and smoke pot then right
In a lot of cases, showing them how to drink and smoke pot in moderation would be healthier than the outright bans which they circumvent and then go binge when they can get away with it.
You sound like you think people have significant ‘control’ over ‘kids’ buying and consuming cannabis, alcohol, and cigarettes, etc. … Kids already consume cannabis and alcohol and cigarettes etc. even though you pretend you ‘don’t let them’ (threaten them) and harrass them. Prohibition from alcohol to cannabis, for example, has not reduced consumption, but rather reduced supply, increased prices, and decreased quality. Repression tells consumers you hide value on the other side of your unilateral decree. On the other hand, instead of a facsist authoritarian totalitarian approach of repression, in comparison, an approach with education, legalization and decriminalization has reduced prevalence of consumption of drugs, including amongst kids; for example, Portugal has decriminalized all drugs (in ~2001); they offer drug consumers education and treatment instead of incarceration and difficult to verify products from difficult to verify producers and sellers in dark places. But the big billionaire homicidal dealers (Merck, Pfizer, United Health Care, etc.) have a lot of monetary incentive of polluting media messaging with muddy murky moral panics like the ones you just put your discursive hands in today. That being said, kids should indeed get education on things like the importance of paying attention in lectures, doing their homework on schedule, secure use of technology, blockading attempts of the feudalist advertising industry of manipulating their opinions, blockading big tech from literally spying on them and selling their opinions and bodies left and right, etc. Fun fact: that problem (cell phone use in course rooms where course work (e.g. lectures and note writing) should occur) has also been having widespread occurence among ‘adult’ students in university courses.
When a school principal sits across a meeting table with me and starts spouting “we have absolute zero tolerance for _______ here, that just does not happen on MY campus.” I know that further logical, reasoned, evidence based conversation is pointless, at this point it’s about bargaining and threats - what do they want from me, what unpleasantness can convince them that I can do to them? Anything “for the kids” is just a lie, and a joke to them.
I could see this making sense if the American education system wasn’t already broken beyond repair. Otherwise it doesn’t improve education. Simply gives more control to corrupt schools.
In my country a similar cellphone ban in schools has been implemented. Except in our schools kids actually learn quite a lot. It’s far from perfect, but far from terrible too. It may or may not have a noticeable impact on students’ performance. That remains to be seen, since it was implemented fairly recently. Perhaps scores from this year will indicate either an increase or a decrease.
Though of course, politicians are unlikely to care and even if it ultimately leads to a decline, they won’t cancel it.
Yes, we have different rules for kids and adults. Does anyone want to argue that we shouldn’t? Really? Let’s hear it.
I take it the argument that kids need their phones to be safe at school has been completely debunked? Otherwise, they’d use that one, like parents have since this whole fiasco started.
To anyone old enough to remember when schools didn’t allow personal phones, because they didn’t exist, the idea that they should be allowed is ludicrous. Same for allowing food, or chit-chat, or kids to get up and wander around the class during instruction, or all the other stupid shit that goes on now in schools, from what I’ve read.
Agreed - no cell phones in school, for anyone. If someone needs to contact me while I’m teaching they can go through our admin team!
Hopefully only smart phones. I don’t care what the school says, my kid will have a flip phone or something so they can contact me and take pics and video. Like everyday a new grooming case comes out and they want less surveillance?
Now you see why they want bans. Phone cameras filming abuses of power is one of the most powerful civil rights advances ever. These phone bans are designed to harm children
The kids also use them to bully the shit out of eachother
If this is the reason you want a cell phone, your efforts are misplaced. Most of these sort of sex offenders are parents, relatives, or friends of the family. Those are the people your kid would need to record.
You would be more likely to protect your child by making him wear a helmet along with his seatbelt or feeding him food that doesn’t suck.
Teachers fall into the same category, you doof.
Funny how that doesn’t apply to literally anything else
