8 ms·

This is so wrong in so many ways. - There's supposed to be a computer in front of every kid since grade one. Schools are instead banning the little computers k

This is so wrong in so many ways. - There's supposed to be a computer in front of every kid since grade one. Schools are instead banning the little computers kids smuggle in. - Hypocrisy. Smartphone bans are pushed by people who use them all the time themselves. - This is the same thing as with corporations locking down employees' computers. It's a policy designed for the worst behaving kids to the detriment of the best behaving ones. Poor use of time and poor self-control become expected and even the best kids will slide towards these low expectations. - Totalitarian policies like this get passed only because teens and tweens are disenfranchised. Democratic government trying to enforce similar population-wide ban wouldn't last long. - It's not about games or social media. Those are actually tolerated far better than apps like Socratic, which are treated like criminal level of cheating. This is technophobia all the way through. I could go on and on about this. Contrary to people nitpicking details (health, parent contact, practicality of enforcement), I think this is fundamentally wrong.

vc9999 3y ago
There's supposed to be a computer in front of every kid since grade one. Schools are instead banning the little computers kids smuggle in [A computer to use in the school as a means of education is not the same of letting kids use a cellphone in class] - Hypocrisy. Smartphone bans are pushed by people who use them all the time themselves. [Because they are adults not kids] - This is the same thing as with corporations locking down employees' computers. It's a policy designed for the worst behaving kids to the detriment of the best behaving ones. Poor use of time and poor self-control become expected and even the best kids will slide towards these low expectations. [employees are not kids, also employees are not in school they are in a job] - Totalitarian policies like this get passed only because teens and tweens are disenfranchised. Democratic government trying to enforce similar population-wide ban wouldn't last long. [Totalitarian policies? This has to be a joke] - It's not about games or social media. Those are actually tolerated far better than apps like Socratic, which are treated like criminal level of cheating. This is technophobia all the way through. [Of course. It's not about games and social media, it's a about kids not using a cell phone while in the classroom]
- guy98238710 3y ago
  > A computer to use in the school as a means of education is not the same of letting kids use a cellphone in class It is the same thing if the computers are uncensored as they should be. Kids are supposed to be taught responsibility since early age. If it can be done for computers, it can be surely done for smartphones. > Because they are adults not kids As someone else detailed in comments, this is aimed at secondary education and up, i.e. young adults (teens and tweens) rather than children. > Totalitarian policies? This has to be a joke Think again what would happen if your government tried to enforce this against adults. Wouldn't you call it totalitarian? > it's a about kids not using a cell phone while in the classroom It's about kids not using any computing device in the classroom. 19th century education. As I have said, this is technophobia all the way through.
- steve_adams_86 3y ago
  I know there’s a point to be made that they’re adults and not kids, but hear me out. I’m 37 and discovered around age 32 that I used my phone too much. It had crept into my waking life over around 8 years and became a real problem. Today I use a lot of strategies to prevent this, and it’s still challenging to ensure I don’t use it too much. Kids are surrounded by adults like me or even worse than I am. They use their phones so much, rarely to any useful effect, and they train kids to do the same thing. Adults reject advice or instruction to use their phone less, always certain that they don’t do it for any bad reasons and that they’re in control. Yet they aren’t. It’s a widespread, chronic, and tragically influential problem. Kids are using their phones way too much, but they’re only mimicking what so many adults around them are doing. Phones also help fill agency gaps in their lives by allowing them to entertain themselves and socialize without relying on an adult to make things happen. Taking that away is hard and genuinely removes something positive from their lives — especially from their perspective. I know some adults are not hypocrites. These days I’d like to think I’m not, but I certainly was. I think we need to have a handle on that problem before we can ban phones for kids without reasonable pushback from them.
  - dcsommer 3y ago
    Correct parental examples are key to successfully training healthy habits, but phones are plenty addictive in their own right. It's not just a problem of bad parental examples. Why do you think the parents are addicted in the first place? Are children somehow immune? Hypocrisy is not the main thing here.
WheatMillington 3y ago
"Totalitarian policies" my man these are children in school. I am 100% confident from your reply that you are not a parent and have spent very little time around kids.
- guy98238710 3y ago
  I am a very caring parent and I have an exceedingly well-behaved kid. I am always kind and I have very few rules. My kid has unrestricted phone time but still prefers other stuff like Scratch. If you are thinking of children as prison inmates that deserve the totalitarian treatment, perhaps you are doing something wrong.
  - EntropyIsAHoax 3y ago
    [dead]
- strus 3y ago
  > these are children in schoo Policies apply to secondary education, i.e. high school. You are an adult in higher grades of high school.
dahwolf 3y ago
You haven't given a single reason in favor of smartphones in class, but there's a zillion straight forward reasons to disallow/constrain them.
- guy98238710 3y ago
  Why do you need reasons to allow smartphones? Isn't allowing any kind of behavior the default in free societies? You need a good reason to disallow something and especially so in case of a sweeping mass measure like this. I haven't heard any arguments against smartphones that wouldn't be shallow BS about "addictiveness" (seems everything is "addictive" these days) or "distraction" (as if there weren't other opportunities for distraction). PS: I did mention some reasons: computer for every pupil, Socratic app (and others), maintaining high expectations, resisting technological regress in schools that are already backwards. Not that this would be an exhaustive list.
  - dahwolf 3y ago
    "Isn't allowing any kind of behavior the default in free societies?" No? What exactly is so difficult to understand about a school being there for educational purposes, and the smartphone directly distracting from that?
    - guy98238710 3y ago
      > "Isn't allowing any kind of behavior the default in free societies?" > No? Err, are you living in a (relatively) free society? My country has this principle written in the constitution: people can do anything the law does not prohibit whereas the government can only do what the law expressly permits it to do. I would think that's the standard in democracies.
      - dahwolf 3y ago
        You must have never heard of rules or duties? No, you cannot do whatever the hell you want at school or at work.
unethical_ban 3y ago
I disagree with the premise or conclusion of every point you made. Computers as a tool for educational purposes is different than a TikTok stream. Adults using smartphones is different than children using them during learning periods. And for what it's worth, adults should use them less during work hours. In any case, this bullet point is no justification for letting kids use social media in school. Corporations locking down work terminals is legally permissible and morally correct. Unless you like the idea of a computer illiterate bank teller downloading zero days to the internal network because they have some fundamental freedom to browse the web on company resources. It isn't totalitarian, I disagree completely with the use of that term and with the implication that teenagers should have franchise at any level above local. Yes, school for children has different expectations than adults in an open society. It is about games and social media.
- guy98238710 3y ago
  > Computers as a tool for educational purposes is different than a TikTok stream. But nobody is banning TikTok. All schools that do anything about smartphones are always banning smartphones as such. Nobody is showing the kids how to use computers properly nor is anyone expecting them to use them for anything but games and social. Schools are just giving up on the subject and closing themselves in 19th century world. The same TikTok justification would be used against school computers until they are locked down so much they cannot be considered universal computers anymore. > Corporations locking down work terminals is legally permissible and morally correct. And a reliable way to get rid of the best employees by optimizing the whole organization for the worst ones. This is schools we are talking about. Pulling everyone down to the lowest standard of behavior is clearly against schools' mission. Schools should be instead optimized for the best students and push everyone to be their best selves. > It isn't totalitarian, I disagree completely with the use of that term and with the implication that teenagers should have franchise at any level above local. This is a bit OT, but aren't teenagers smarter that pensioners in every way you can measure except vocabulary? Aren't teenagers emotionally, cognitively, and physically clearly closer to 18+ adults than prepubescent children? If so, what makes you think they aren't effectively adults? Anyways, prepubescent children don't get to vote for practical reasons, specifically because they don't care and because they are under strong influence of their parents. Neither reason applies to teenagers.

vc9999 3y ago

There's supposed to be a computer in front of every kid since grade one. Schools are instead banning the little computers kids smuggle in [A computer to use in the school as a means of education is not the same of letting kids use a cellphone in class] - Hypocrisy. Smartphone bans are pushed by people who use them all the time themselves. [Because they are adults not kids] - This is the same thing as with corporations locking down employees' computers. It's a policy designed for the worst behaving kids to the detriment of the best behaving ones. Poor use of time and poor self-control become expected and even the best kids will slide towards these low expectations. [employees are not kids, also employees are not in school they are in a job] - Totalitarian policies like this get passed only because teens and tweens are disenfranchised. Democratic government trying to enforce similar population-wide ban wouldn't last long. [Totalitarian policies? This has to be a joke] - It's not about games or social media. Those are actually tolerated far better than apps like Socratic, which are treated like criminal level of cheating. This is technophobia all the way through. [Of course. It's not about games and social media, it's a about kids not using a cell phone while in the classroom]

guy98238710 3y ago
> A computer to use in the school as a means of education is not the same of letting kids use a cellphone in class It is the same thing if the computers are uncensored as they should be. Kids are supposed to be taught responsibility since early age. If it can be done for computers, it can be surely done for smartphones. > Because they are adults not kids As someone else detailed in comments, this is aimed at secondary education and up, i.e. young adults (teens and tweens) rather than children. > Totalitarian policies? This has to be a joke Think again what would happen if your government tried to enforce this against adults. Wouldn't you call it totalitarian? > it's a about kids not using a cell phone while in the classroom It's about kids not using any computing device in the classroom. 19th century education. As I have said, this is technophobia all the way through.
steve_adams_86 3y ago
I know there’s a point to be made that they’re adults and not kids, but hear me out. I’m 37 and discovered around age 32 that I used my phone too much. It had crept into my waking life over around 8 years and became a real problem. Today I use a lot of strategies to prevent this, and it’s still challenging to ensure I don’t use it too much. Kids are surrounded by adults like me or even worse than I am. They use their phones so much, rarely to any useful effect, and they train kids to do the same thing. Adults reject advice or instruction to use their phone less, always certain that they don’t do it for any bad reasons and that they’re in control. Yet they aren’t. It’s a widespread, chronic, and tragically influential problem. Kids are using their phones way too much, but they’re only mimicking what so many adults around them are doing. Phones also help fill agency gaps in their lives by allowing them to entertain themselves and socialize without relying on an adult to make things happen. Taking that away is hard and genuinely removes something positive from their lives — especially from their perspective. I know some adults are not hypocrites. These days I’d like to think I’m not, but I certainly was. I think we need to have a handle on that problem before we can ban phones for kids without reasonable pushback from them.
- dcsommer 3y ago
  Correct parental examples are key to successfully training healthy habits, but phones are plenty addictive in their own right. It's not just a problem of bad parental examples. Why do you think the parents are addicted in the first place? Are children somehow immune? Hypocrisy is not the main thing here.

WheatMillington 3y ago

"Totalitarian policies" my man these are children in school. I am 100% confident from your reply that you are not a parent and have spent very little time around kids.

guy98238710 3y ago
I am a very caring parent and I have an exceedingly well-behaved kid. I am always kind and I have very few rules. My kid has unrestricted phone time but still prefers other stuff like Scratch. If you are thinking of children as prison inmates that deserve the totalitarian treatment, perhaps you are doing something wrong.
- EntropyIsAHoax 3y ago
  [dead]
strus 3y ago
> these are children in schoo Policies apply to secondary education, i.e. high school. You are an adult in higher grades of high school.

dahwolf 3y ago

You haven't given a single reason in favor of smartphones in class, but there's a zillion straight forward reasons to disallow/constrain them.

guy98238710 3y ago
Why do you need reasons to allow smartphones? Isn't allowing any kind of behavior the default in free societies? You need a good reason to disallow something and especially so in case of a sweeping mass measure like this. I haven't heard any arguments against smartphones that wouldn't be shallow BS about "addictiveness" (seems everything is "addictive" these days) or "distraction" (as if there weren't other opportunities for distraction). PS: I did mention some reasons: computer for every pupil, Socratic app (and others), maintaining high expectations, resisting technological regress in schools that are already backwards. Not that this would be an exhaustive list.
- dahwolf 3y ago
  "Isn't allowing any kind of behavior the default in free societies?" No? What exactly is so difficult to understand about a school being there for educational purposes, and the smartphone directly distracting from that?
  - guy98238710 3y ago
    > "Isn't allowing any kind of behavior the default in free societies?" > No? Err, are you living in a (relatively) free society? My country has this principle written in the constitution: people can do anything the law does not prohibit whereas the government can only do what the law expressly permits it to do. I would think that's the standard in democracies.
    - dahwolf 3y ago
      You must have never heard of rules or duties? No, you cannot do whatever the hell you want at school or at work.

unethical_ban 3y ago

I disagree with the premise or conclusion of every point you made. Computers as a tool for educational purposes is different than a TikTok stream. Adults using smartphones is different than children using them during learning periods. And for what it's worth, adults should use them less during work hours. In any case, this bullet point is no justification for letting kids use social media in school. Corporations locking down work terminals is legally permissible and morally correct. Unless you like the idea of a computer illiterate bank teller downloading zero days to the internal network because they have some fundamental freedom to browse the web on company resources. It isn't totalitarian, I disagree completely with the use of that term and with the implication that teenagers should have franchise at any level above local. Yes, school for children has different expectations than adults in an open society. It is about games and social media.

guy98238710 3y ago
> Computers as a tool for educational purposes is different than a TikTok stream. But nobody is banning TikTok. All schools that do anything about smartphones are always banning smartphones as such. Nobody is showing the kids how to use computers properly nor is anyone expecting them to use them for anything but games and social. Schools are just giving up on the subject and closing themselves in 19th century world. The same TikTok justification would be used against school computers until they are locked down so much they cannot be considered universal computers anymore. > Corporations locking down work terminals is legally permissible and morally correct. And a reliable way to get rid of the best employees by optimizing the whole organization for the worst ones. This is schools we are talking about. Pulling everyone down to the lowest standard of behavior is clearly against schools' mission. Schools should be instead optimized for the best students and push everyone to be their best selves. > It isn't totalitarian, I disagree completely with the use of that term and with the implication that teenagers should have franchise at any level above local. This is a bit OT, but aren't teenagers smarter that pensioners in every way you can measure except vocabulary? Aren't teenagers emotionally, cognitively, and physically clearly closer to 18+ adults than prepubescent children? If so, what makes you think they aren't effectively adults? Anyways, prepubescent children don't get to vote for practical reasons, specifically because they don't care and because they are under strong influence of their parents. Neither reason applies to teenagers.