3 ms·
The only friction here is 'you're not allowed to do that' - which doesn't typically work on teenagers. We had the same rules for dumbbphones and iPod's 20 years
by basisword 3mo ago
The only friction here is 'you're not allowed to do that' - which doesn't typically work on teenagers. We had the same rules for dumbbphones and iPod's 20 years ago and it didn't work then.
- oblio 3mo agoI've talked to parents of kids where they banned smartphones and the difference is palpable. And good.
- Jtsummers 3mo agoIn many US schools, they'd take those things away (and return them at end of day, typically) 20-30 years ago. But it helps when it's policy, if it's not a policy then the teacher has no backing from the school.
- bilekas 3mo agoIt definitely reduced usesge though. I was the same age in teens with dumb phones and they were only banned in class. Either way, it's better to have the restrictions in this case than a free for all because teenagers will push limits constantly. I don't see a downside to this.
- throw1234567891 3mo agoIf it’s legally grounded you get more options.
- amelius 3mo ago> which doesn't typically work on teenagers Depends. You have "good kids" and "bad kids". If this law helps the good kids, then that's at least a win.
- zdragnar 3mo agoIt absolutely worked in my school a little over 20 years ago. Teachers and staff always took away disallowed devices and that set the tone quite well.
- Rebelgecko 3mo agoFwiw when I was in school kids would definitely check their phones from time to time or send an occasional surreptitious text. But it wasn't as pervasive as it is today- I was pretty shocked to see even at the elementary school level how much class time kids spend on their personal devices
- dbbk 3mo agoEh? It did work. You'd get it confiscated off you.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]