6 ms·
Bill limits smartphone use in California schools
- giancarlostoro 2y agoAs a millennial I never understood any time I hear about this sort of thing since I remember phones were strictly forbidden and teachers would take them from you. Not sure if California was different from Florida, but I could have sworn Florida passed similar legislation if I am not mistaken. Only after school were teachers laxe for obvious reasons. During lunch time we were not expected to use phones.
- OptionOfT 2y agoBorn in 1988. Just like you, Nokia 3310. Banned in high school. I remember being 'caught' with a Game Boy Advance, tried to hide it, teacher saw me, and actually told me it was fine.
- DaoVeles 2y agoI was about to say. Phones were not allowed and this was when the 3310 was the peak of mobile tech to have! This is Melbourne Australia.
- LikelyClueless 2y agomidwest of United States, 2007(7th)[12-13yo]-2012(12th)[17-18] - 2007(7th): The mosquito ring tone was a popular notification ring tone. I recall a friend testing it with my math teacher during class. He could not hear it. - 2010(10th): The last time I recall passing notes in class... I got caught. Apologies to my Geometry teacher. He was one of the best teachers I had. - 2012(12th): I(late to the party) bought my first phone... The only time I recalll using my phone was when went to the bathroom and accidently dropped it in in the toilet. :'( ... 3 days in a bag of rice and it worked just fine. I'm sure I must have used it in the toilet too many times for that to have happened, but I don't recall ever using it in class, as the punishment was confiscation of the phone and it wouldn't be returned until a parent signed off in person.
- starspangled 2y agoYes, at some point, "the experts" seem to have decided that it was very important children must be allowed to have their smartphones in class. Totally ridiculous. I guess that marks my ascension to curmudgeonhood.
- vundercind 2y agoA loud minority of parents agitated for it enough that lots of schools caved. Educators don’t want phones in classrooms.
- starspangled 2y agoNo, I've certainly seen a lot of education sector academics argue for allowing them. Just do an internet search for it and you'll find "experts" on both sides. I don't know about the teachers at the coalface, I can imagine their word carries about as much weight as any pleb worker in a bloated bureaucracy like education. I have seen stories about teachers being assaulted bullied and attacked by child and parent when trying to enforce these bans though, so I would be surprised if even those are unanimous on the issue.
- cykros 2y agoThere are a lot of parents that have this fantasy in their head of a school shooting in which their child calls them to say goodbye. Or, much more delusional, thinks there'd be anything they can do to help them in the event their child is in one, and can contact them. Much more likely the case, the phone makes a sound, vibration or otherwise, and gives away the child's location to a would be shooter.
- RGamma 2y agoIt was forbidden; that didn't mean certain people I may have known cheated in the Latin exam via online translations while all sitting at the windows for better light and connectivity.
- marklar423 2y agoAnybody know why this has to be a law? Whats stopping each school or the DOE from making their own rule, just like all other school rules?
- decremental 2y ago[dead]
- DiscourseFan 2y agofines, pulling funding
- dehrmann 2y agoLow-hanging bill before an election.
- ianbicking 2y agoIn part I see this as the legislature stepping up to be the bad guy, and taking pressure off schools. School administrators know phones are a problem, but a minority of students and parents are very vocal and make it hard to put bans in place. Pretty much every school allows teachers to ban phones in their class, so we have the fully devolved approach already, but it just puts the burden on teachers, it's not real autonomy.
- pj_mukh 2y agoMan, so many of Californias problems is just: “vocal minority is very loud, everyone else disagrees but are too busy to come yell at electeds, so we can’t fix this obvious problem. Done. Problem festers”
- ryandrake 2y agoThis is a problem throughout the USA, not just California. A tiny minority of loud, belligerent bullies with infinite free time ruin everything.
- ianbicking 2y ago
- pipeline_peak 2y agoOne guy named Bill did it all himself, statewide?
- malkia 2y agoWonder what Ted would say?
- pipeline_peak 2y agoDid he give one of his Ted talks recently?
- bentt 2y agoOur local high school just instituted a no phones in class policy. When kids enter the classroom they put their phones in a numbered pocket on the wall. They retrieve it after class. The teachers are so happy.
- Loughla 2y agoMy experience is that it's not the kids with the problem. It's the parents. Not being able to contact their kid 24/7 is apparently a travesty. I don't get it.
- bentt 2y agoYeah we live in a progressive monoculture and apparently, progress means no phones in class. Parents and teachers are united.
- cykros 2y agoIt's amazing how such a simple policy has changed so much for my wife's experience as a teacher as well. Some of the kids still do their best impression of Gollum, but for the most part, the teachers have suddenly found themselves able to actually, you know, teach again. Some for the first time in years.
- Aloha 2y agoI think this is great, phones (largely) should be banned in schools.
- colechristensen 2y agoI don’t think this is the kind of thing that should be a law. Local school policy is good enough
- mcmoor 2y agoI've heard that it's needed to counter heavy parent opposition. If it's not enshrined higher, the PTA will not hear the end of it.
- colechristensen 2y agoI am ever more disturbed by how often people want the law to enforce their preferences. It is absurd for the state to reach into the classroom to regulate cell phone use.
- simoncion 2y ago> Local school policy is good enough An angry parent that can't possibly imagine life without immediate access to their kid throughout the school day is likely to respond differently to the statement "This kid can't have their phone on during the day." when the reason is "local school policy" than when the reason is "state law". In the former situation, a sufficiently-offended parent will likely try to get the administrator in question fired (or -at minimum- make their life dreadfully difficult). In the latter, the only people the parent can really appeal to are the folks in Sacramento. Busybodies like that rarely have the clout to do anything meaningful to the governor or his staff. Anyway. It's quite possible that local school administrators requested that the governor help them out by making it so they can say "Sorry, I'd love to help, but The State says I have to order teachers to ban phones from classrooms. You know how it is. Take it up with the governor if you're mad about it.".
- cykros 2y ago
- option 2y agoWhy do we need state bill for that? Any reasonable school should've had a school level ban on phones since 90ies.
- goosejuice 2y agoTo those saying this shouldn't be law, and instead school policy, that is precisely what this bill is requiring is it not? Further, it gives protection to students who might need a device for whatever reason. That's probably the most important piece of this bill. Many students require the use of assisted technology and poorly run school systems, such as the one I was in, are more likely to harm students if they are to roll their own policy without such protection. This seems reasonable to me.
- Aloha 2y agoParents will howl at the local admin if its locally changeable policy - I suspect that the thought of being out of touch with their children is unbearable.
- vundercind 2y agoThis is exactly why they’re not already banned in practically all schools. Teachers and admin want to. Enough parents throw a fit if they can’t text their kid in class just to shoot the shit (seriously) that lots of schools have just given up, though. There are only so many hours in the day.
- roenxi 2y agoThis is a minor matter that is a strictly California thing so sure, they can roll this way if they want. Worse things have happened. But if you want the outline of why this sort of thing shouldn't be a law, the issue here is that it might be that the best educators will ban devices. It might be that the best educators encourage and leverage devices. Or it might even be that they take no position on the matter. Any which way, either there is consensus and the Californian legislature doesn't need to act because the schools can, or there is no consensus and the Californian legislature should leave it to parents and educators to sort out without pretending it has some sort of competence to add anything to the mix. Legislating everything that seems like a good idea at the time is a pretty safe way to end up doing real damage as people initially had many options to act cleverly but now do not. This is not something that the politicians have any reason to be dealing with.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- m463 2y ago"specified that school districts have the authority to regulate the use of smartphones during school hours" "require every school district, charter school and county office of education to adopt a policy limiting or prohibiting the use of smartphones by July 1, 2026" sounds like this explicitly allows responsibility, and requires it be taken.
- adamnemecek 2y agoSchool is a distraction from the internet.
- kelsey98765431 2y agothe internet is a better school than some old decrepit building with middle aged dweebs who get paid 40k a year to stand for 40 minutes at a time each
- remixff2400 2y ago> Be kind. Don't be snarky. > Eschew flamebait. (Hacker News guidelines) There's a perfectly fine topic for debate here, but you'd do much better to word it in a less inflammatory way. The internet has a lot of material, but kids also learn a lot from being around their peers. Lots of families have both parents that work and can't watch their kids at home, or take them to extracurricular activities. Also, depending on what area you're in, many teachers that I know have Master's degrees and do in fact know what they're doing, but are hamstrung in other ways.
- adamnemecek 2y agoThey have a masters in what? Education, generally. There’s a reason they have the lowest GMAT score https://www.umsl.edu/~gradyf/AverageGMATbyMajor.pdf https://www.umsl.edu/~gradyf/AverageGMATbyMajor.pdf
- internetter 2y agoLots of people in the comments supporting cellphone bans in school. To play the devil's advocate: the role of high school is to transition students between childhood and adulthood. In adulthood, nobody will tell you to get off your phone. You will simply suffer repercussions if you cannot preform. If you can perform, nobody should care. So why are we babying students by incessant confiscation and phone cubby nonsense? "ok 17 year olds! lets put our phones away in our numbered phone cubbies!!" Redirect them, sure. Teach about tech literacy. Find the middleground between these two stages of life. But at this point, it should be ultimately the student's choice.
- RandomLensman 2y agoThere are lots of professional environments where you cannot just use your phone.
- internetter 2y agoWhere? Nuclear power plants? I'd wager that at least 95% of high school graduates will be bringing their phones on site.
- RandomLensman 2y agoMore secure or controlled environments: Could be in manufacturing, defense, medical, but also some business settings, for example.
- oidar 2y agothere is difference between having your phone with you and using it while on the job. If you are scrolling tiktok on your job, you won't have it for long.
- internetter 2y agoThat is exactly the point I was getting at when I wrote > In adulthood, nobody will tell you to get off your phone. You will simply suffer repercussions if you cannot preform. If you can perform, nobody should care. On the job, you will fail if you have a tiktok addiction. On the job, there are no phone cubbies.
- Razengan 2y agoBecause “prohibitions” always work out. When we will we start designing society AROUND and WITH the inevitable pace of progress instead of making it a wall in the way?
- qwerpy 2y agoI don’t think a world of carefully curated dopamine in your pocket is progress for the human race. And besides, these bans _are_ designing society around the existence of cell phones.
- Razengan 2y agoThese responses remind me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTHggXwrJJQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTHggXwrJJQ
- internetter 2y agoWhere do the bans end? Should offices get phone cubbies as well?
- not_a_bot_4sho 2y agoWith schools. This is narrowly focused on education, so the slippery slope concerns don't hold much weight. Although it's worth noting that many jobs, office jobs included, prohibit phone use.
- vundercind 2y agoPhones mostly aren’t progress, as far as schools go. Game boys and walkie-talkies weren’t either. Playing cards. Marbles (in the classroom). Instamatic cameras. And the ban on passing notes is basically ancient. Those same things but on one tiny computer doesn’t suddenly make them good to allow in schools.
- 6510 2y agoCongrats everyone, the pocket computer has developed into a useless turd to the point it actually harms productivity to the point it has been banned where it should have been the most productive. Oh and grades are failing since it was carefully designed to ruin attention span. This message is intentionally short. I would have preferred to put it long form with less sarcasm but that would require hope for improvement and more attention than I'm worth.
- ChrisArchitect 2y agoRelated: Governor Newsom signs bill to protect kids from social media addiction https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41610709 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41610709
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- PeterStuer 2y agoI'm all for banning phones in class. Still I wonder. Is this to save the children or to save certain teachers from being exposed on libs of tiktok?