Hacker News Reader

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]

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.

> I think we need to have a handle on that problem before we can ban phones for kids without reasonable pushback from them.

Do you feel the same way about cigarettes?

Yeah, I think I do. No one should be smoking. It makes no sense. Adults should be discouraged and it shouldn’t be condoned in common areas. Teens get this treatment, adults should too.

Edit: if people want to smoke privately or without sharing second hand smoke, I don’t think they should be stopped. I’m not trying to say it should be outlawed or something. I just don’t like being around it or having it normalized to kids (or even adults — we shouldn’t accept it as something people do so casually, especially in close proximity to non-smokers).

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.

I don’t think children are somehow immune. I think the fact that the phones are evidently addictive warrants adults working harder to set a better example.

Expecting kids to abstain from using them in an area should mean adults don’t use them either, though I can imagine cases where it is warranted and makes sense. But, here I think the adult should be expected to only use the phone when warranted.

Perhaps this isn’t typical, but the teachers in my kid’s schools use their phones way too much. It sets such a terrible example. I can try all I want to make screen time intentional in my home, but they go to school and see people (including adults they’re supposed to trust) using their phones without much restraint. I went on a field trip with my youngest and was blown away by how much the teachers were disappearing into screens on a regular basis.

To me, that’s a complete failure to model good behaviour. If kids are growing up with that, who are we to arbitrarily tell them they have to do better?

> 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.

"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.

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.

> these are children in schoo

Policies apply to secondary education, i.e. high school. You are an adult in higher grades of high school.

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.

> 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.

To the first point: If we assumed this is a dichotomy, which would you prefer? The government banning social media from all minors' devices? Some MDM that disabled it by force during certain hours, requiring intrusive software?

Or, that we remove the problem by removing the tool entirely and without inspecting the devices contents?

You talk about using computers properly, which is a noble goal, but the banning of phones in classrooms has multiple reasons behind it. One of which is the belief that social media and smartphone games are addictive. Should we teach kids how to smoke cigarettes responsibly during their lunch break?

Children can be taught how to use computers in diverse and interesting ways since early age. I know, because I did it with my kid. And I did not exhaust the possibilities, so it can be certainly done much better if educational professionals invest themselves in the topic. As most parents aren't up to the task, schools are supposed to do it since kindergarten, but instead of offering positive and enjoyable examples, they choose to spread the sort of fear-inducing negative technophobic propaganda many people are repeating here.

As for what I mean by technophobic propaganda, just listen to yourself: "the belief that social media and smartphone games are addictive". People aren't stupid. Psychological trickery can get games and media only so far. People crave a variety of experiences. It's not that hard to keep students' attention either by offering an interesting subject, by listening and being honest (for a change), or just by being there as a parent or teacher.

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.

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.

"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?

> What exactly is so difficult to understand about a school being there for educational purposes, and the smartphone directly distracting from that?

Smartphone is a universal computer. You can use it for a variety of tasks, including education. Schools are supposed to teach that rather than throwing students back into the stone age.

Smartphones (and computers in general) aren't just any tool. If used properly, they are powerful cognitive multipliers. Removing them from schools is like giving every student a lobotomy, because they aren't using their brain the way they are supposed to.

"Stone age"? Your exaggerations are hardly fitting. What educational tasks is a phone necessary for? Sure, you can search things and have a calculator ready. Out of Excel, Python, math, English, history, art: what use is a smartphone in learning those subjects/skills? I think it can safely be said that most people with smartphones out during class aren't engaged with the content; certainly not while the teacher is actively talking. Students have plenty of time to use social media or whatever outside of school.

To make no bones about it: I'm currently a student. I've so far never seen a need to use my smartphone for an educational reason. I've often seen people who have phones out when the teacher is talking. There should be no debate about smartphone usage in class generally being distracting, potentially to people other than the users. You may not agree with the proposed rules, but you're vastly overstating your case.

> "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.

You must have never heard of rules or duties?

No, you cannot do whatever the hell you want at school or at work.