Study finds smartphone bans in Dutch schools improved focus
Technology
52
Beiträge
23
Kommentatoren
24
Aufrufe
-
Who better to poll than teachers for this type of study? They are the ones in the trenches and can gauge the results.
Yeah, except science does not work like that.
-
Yeah, except science does not work like that.
Yes, it does. A subjective response can absolutely be an objective result.
-
Yes, it does. A subjective response can absolutely be an objective result.
This is not a demonstration and this does not qualify as a scientific proof.
They polled teachers. It ir like I polled religious and conclude that God exists because God speaks to most of the people I polled. This is not science, sorry not sorry.
-
I am shocked they allowed them in school tbh. They were not allowed at school for millennials. Granted phones were new but all the flip phones and such were not allowed at schools.
I was super shocked when I saw kids using their phones and laptops in class. When I was in school, the moment your phone went off it was confiscated and you had to pay to get it back at the end of the day. It created this culture amongst the kids that no matter who you were, if your phone went off, people will have coughing fits and make noise to cover it up. Super funny every time it happened too.
-
Really? Slippery slope argument?
This is a good thing, take it
You can only use the app on one phone!
You can use the ShiBanu app (https://shibanu.app/) only on one phone at a time! If you try to use the ShiBanu app on two phones, the app on the first phone will stop working.
Please note the following:
- The ShiBanu app is designed to work only on a single phone.
- If you switch your phone, you need to re-register the ShiBanu app on the new device.
If you have any questions, please contact support at https://shibanu.app/contact.
-
You can conclude that teachers experience a better classroom environment. There was also 1/3 that did observe academic improvement.
E: Also, a teachers subjective experience is still an objective result if you are considering the qol aspect of the policy.
I mostly care about longer term impacts. The ban has only been in place for a year and a half, so it's really not much to go on.
-
I don’t think there is a good answer here. I didn’t really want my kids to have phones either but all you’re doing by denying them the primary social tool of their generation is ostracizing them from their peers.
Being a parent sometimes feels like a series of un-winnable choices.
What peers? They mostly play with neighborhood kids, and we have contact info for a few that live further away and arrange things that way. Our kids aren't teenagers yet, but my sister's are and they seem to do fine without phones as well. My friends growing up mostly had phones, and I worked around that as well.
I think people are making a much bigger deal about it than it really is. Maybe it's a larger issue in other areas, but honestly, my kids mostly want one to play games, not contact friends.
We certainly reevaluate regularly, but I'll need a pretty good reason to give my kids their own phones. I'm much more likely to have a loaner they can share, and only for a fixed amount of time.
-
I am shocked they allowed them in school tbh. They were not allowed at school for millennials. Granted phones were new but all the flip phones and such were not allowed at schools.
They where in NL though, you just wheren't allowed to have them in class.
But a lot of people here cycle to school and sometimes though roads that aren't that safe so in that case it was handy to have a mobile phone to call with. -
Agree with this, but I don't supply my kids with phones at all, despite their friends having them. If there's an emergency, they can go to the office or ask their teacher. If that's not possible, the school will likely call instead (e.g. when there was a bomb threat a couple of years ago).
I have chosen to not give my kids phones, but I also think other parents should be allowed to choose differently. Everyone's circumstances are different, and I don't want the government stepping in to make parenting decisions for me, even if my decisions would be the same. That's overreach and I will absolutely oppose it.
And what if they get into trouble on their way home? Or the way to the bus, supermarket or whatnot?
-
Who better to poll than teachers for this type of study? They are the ones in the trenches and can gauge the results.
Teachers can't guage worth a damn
-
Polling professionals and experts on their opinions is perfectly reasonable to publish as a preliminary study on a subject
Sure, but it is not a study general public, like us on lemmy, should care about. It needs a follow up before making decisions.
Yet you can already see people calling for phone bans...
-
That's another type of study that is also worthwhile. But the effects of distracted students on teachers and the classroom as a whole is also relevant.
Yes, but there's a huge degree of bias whenever you ask people anything. Obviously teachers are going to think phones are detrimental to class focus, and thus they're more likely to say their ban helped with that same focus
Same thing If you asked students, but reversed
-
This is not a demonstration and this does not qualify as a scientific proof.
They polled teachers. It ir like I polled religious and conclude that God exists because God speaks to most of the people I polled. This is not science, sorry not sorry.
Good example! That poll would be a relevant result for a percent of the population the believes in god.
-
I mostly care about longer term impacts. The ban has only been in place for a year and a half, so it's really not much to go on.
Short term and long term impacts are both worthy of study, surely.
-
Yes, but there's a huge degree of bias whenever you ask people anything. Obviously teachers are going to think phones are detrimental to class focus, and thus they're more likely to say their ban helped with that same focus
Same thing If you asked students, but reversed
Both great metrics to have, true.
-
And what if they get into trouble on their way home? Or the way to the bus, supermarket or whatnot?
What trouble? Adults don't want to mess with kids (most child abuse happens with close aquaintances, not random crazies on the street), so their biggest threat is going to be bullies around their age, and a parent stepping in will just make that problem worse, so they'll need to learn to deal with that on their own anyway.
I personally have never had an issue going to/from school, other than the typical bullying on the bus. The most likely problem they'd run into is getting hit by a car, in which case they need paramedics and police, not me, and those emergency services will call me once they identify them (and I trust random strangers to call emergency services if a kid gets hit).
The only time I expect my kid to need to call is if they're at a party or something outside of school and need to be picked up because they don't feel comfortable. When they get to an age where that's a thing, we'll have a loaner phone for them to use.
-
Short term and long term impacts are both worthy of study, surely.
Sure, but short term impacts are generally unreliable, since there are a lot of cases of coincidence, like a good policy having no immediate impact or a bad policy having the desired impact. Longer term studies account for that randomness.
-
What trouble? Adults don't want to mess with kids (most child abuse happens with close aquaintances, not random crazies on the street), so their biggest threat is going to be bullies around their age, and a parent stepping in will just make that problem worse, so they'll need to learn to deal with that on their own anyway.
I personally have never had an issue going to/from school, other than the typical bullying on the bus. The most likely problem they'd run into is getting hit by a car, in which case they need paramedics and police, not me, and those emergency services will call me once they identify them (and I trust random strangers to call emergency services if a kid gets hit).
The only time I expect my kid to need to call is if they're at a party or something outside of school and need to be picked up because they don't feel comfortable. When they get to an age where that's a thing, we'll have a loaner phone for them to use.
Falling off your bike and cracking your head open or breaking something or whatever. I used to bike through somewhere where not a lot of people would pass by.
Or even worse, get hit by a tractor who didn't see you and not be found until later, which can cause permanent damage. Happened to somebody I know sadly, she is disabled for life now. Yes, the person in the tractor should have been more careful and have seen her, but you can hit somebody with one of those and not notice it.
I also never said they should use the phone to call the parents, you can also call 112 with those.
-
Falling off your bike and cracking your head open or breaking something or whatever. I used to bike through somewhere where not a lot of people would pass by.
Or even worse, get hit by a tractor who didn't see you and not be found until later, which can cause permanent damage. Happened to somebody I know sadly, she is disabled for life now. Yes, the person in the tractor should have been more careful and have seen her, but you can hit somebody with one of those and not notice it.
I also never said they should use the phone to call the parents, you can also call 112 with those.
Right, but if you're in a situation where you need emergency services, chances are you won't be in a situation to call. For the vanishingly low chance of that being necessary (esp. in my case where I take them to/from school since there's no bus service), I trust strangers to call since my area is sufficiently densely populated for someone to see what happened.
If you live in an area where such things are more likely, I absolutely agree that you should be able to make that choice. I firmly oppose any school-wide ban on phones for that reason, I just happen to agree that, generally speaking, kids don't need and shouldn't have phones.
And if you really feel the need for your kid to contact you or emergency services, there are devices like Gabb watches that have only the functions you need. So please, consider those before considering a smartphone.
-
Right, but if you're in a situation where you need emergency services, chances are you won't be in a situation to call. For the vanishingly low chance of that being necessary (esp. in my case where I take them to/from school since there's no bus service), I trust strangers to call since my area is sufficiently densely populated for someone to see what happened.
If you live in an area where such things are more likely, I absolutely agree that you should be able to make that choice. I firmly oppose any school-wide ban on phones for that reason, I just happen to agree that, generally speaking, kids don't need and shouldn't have phones.
And if you really feel the need for your kid to contact you or emergency services, there are devices like Gabb watches that have only the functions you need. So please, consider those before considering a smartphone.
Kids shouldn’t have smartphones no, but it can he handy for a group of kinds to have at least some kind of phone. Heck even a phone without a sim can be used to call 112.
