this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
294 points (95.9% liked)

News

23014 readers
3 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
294
Phones are distracting students in class. More states are pressing schools to ban them (www.nbcnews.com)
submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
130 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In California, a high school teacher complains that students watch Netflix on their phones during class. In Maryland, a chemistry teacher says students use gambling apps to place bets during the school day.

Around the country, educators say students routinely send Snapchat messages in class, listen to music and shop online, among countless other examples of how smartphones distract from teaching and learning.

The hold that phones have on adolescents in America today is well-documented, but teachers say parents are often not aware to what extent students use them inside the classroom. And increasingly, educators and experts are speaking with one voice on the question of how to handle it: Ban phones during classes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

On the other hand, this is how we know about teachers doing things they absolutely shouldn't do.

I read books in class. I drew pictures in class. I just looked out the window and daydreamed. Kids aren't going to pay attention just because you take away their phones.

EDIT: I'm honestly amazed people are against that. Are you not aware that this is why we have videos like this that expose racist teachers?

https://abc7.com/fontana-sequoia-middle-school-teacher-racial-slur/13092208/

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Wow, that math one! They did the same thing in my kid's math class! It was during Covid, so the teacher recorded it himself without a second thought! I couldn't believe what I was seeing!

I hear what you're saying about recording. But Im not sure phones in class are the answer.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don't know what other answer there is to stop teachers getting away with this shit. The racism and sexual harassment I saw on display when I was going to school in Indiana in the 80s and 90s was not a secret. But since it was always the teacher's word against the kid's, the teacher always got away with it. The only time I can think of that it didn't happen was when a very devoted girl and her family in my high school spent a lot of time and money in court suing a teacher who sexually harassed her in middle school. He had his job the whole time (he was finally fired when he lost the case).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Security cameras in classes? They have them on busses.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Exactly. If a student doesn't want to pay attention, it won't.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

I think the exposing teachers part is even more important. I edited my post to show a link to a student who filmed a teacher being racist above.

Here's another link to another incident to show that isn't a one-off

https://www.kansascity.com/news/state/missouri/article275311416.html

I got all kinds of mistreatment by teachers in school and saw even worse stuff happen to other kids. Racism, sexual harassment, violent threats, etc. But we didn't have phones with cameras in them back in the early 90s, so they got away with it. They can't anymore... unless they ban phones, of course.

EDIT: I don't suppose one of the many downvoters would take the time to explain why giving children the ability to expose teachers like this should be taken away from them in the name of getting kids to pay attention.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

EDIT: I don’t suppose one of the many downvoters would take the time to explain why giving children the ability to expose teachers like this should be taken away from them in the name of getting kids to pay attention.

To give you a genuine response, it is at least conceivable that the potential harm caused by allowing students with adolescent brains constant access to platforms that are explicitly and intentionally designed to be as addictive and distracting as possible is greater than the positive impact of outing the occasional bigoted teacher.

I'm not saying this is definitively the case because I'm neither a sociologist nor a psychologist, but I think it's fair to say that we can objectively state that this is at least possible.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If it is because people think it's occasional, I hope they've changed their minds now that I've posted 7 links. 5 of them I found within a few minutes of searching (all five in total, not each). The other two I found instantly.

Because I disagree entirely that this potential harm is worse than the actual harm on these videos.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don't think throwing any amount of links at each other is a particularly productive way of answering the question. I can just as easily find an equal number of reports from teachers saying how keeping kids off their phones is nearly impossible and makes it much harder to actually teach. Plenty of teachers would strongly disagree that social media is merely a 'potential' harm.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Reports from teachers vs. actual video evidence are not really comparable, are they?

Because the former goes back to the old problem of their words against the child's, which is exactly why cameras are helpful.

If there is actually data backing up what those teachers claim, fine. But otherwise we're talking about subjective claims vs. objective video, the latter exposing activity that should be a firing offense at least if not necessitating criminal charges.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Sure thing, here's some random studies.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/digital-distractions-in-class-linked-to-lower-academic-performance/2023/12

About two-thirds of U.S. students reported that they get distracted by using digital devices, and about 54 percent said they get distracted by other students who are using those resources, the PISA results found.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5648953/

The main findings of the study were that 67% of students were distracted by use of cell phones and 21% of them were extremely disturbed and it affected their learning.

https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp1350.pdf

We find that following a ban on phone use, student test scores improve by 6.41% of a standard deviation. Our results indicate that there are no significant gains in student performance if a ban is not widely complied with. Furthermore, this effect is driven by the most disadvantaged and underachieving pupils. Students in the lowest quartile of prior achievement gain 14.23% of a standard deviation, whilst, students in the top quartile are neither positively nor negatively affected by a phone ban. The results suggest that low-achieving students are more likely to be distracted by the presence of mobile phones, while high achievers can focus in the classroom regardless of the mobile phone policy. This also implies that any negative externalities from phone use do not impact on the high achieving students. Schools could significantly reduce the education achievement gap by prohibiting mobile phone use in schools.

Students themselves report phones being significantly distracting, including to other people that aren't using them, and there's even evidence that banning phones directly increases student performance, especially amongst low-performing students.

How does this compare against the benefits of exposing teacher bigotry? I won't pretend to know how to quantify that, but I'm not making the positive claim that banning phones is necessarily worth the loss of ability to expose teachers. My only point is that it is plausible that this is the case, and I think I've supplied decent evidence for that. Policy questions very rarely are between "good option" and "bad option", but rather "bad option" vs "worse option".

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Okay, that is fair. The original article did not bring any numbers. And that does make me conflicted, but I think after seeing all that I saw going to a red state public school that some sort of way for students to show that their teachers did something they shouldn't have and be believed is necessary as an alternative or we'll go back to what I grew up with.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

To be clear, speaking as someone who got to enjoy being a gay atheist teenager going to school in rural Missouri, I get your point. However, negative things that directly impacted me or people like me aren't necessarily more important than negative impacts on other people, and when you're faced with decisions that genuinely do come down to direct trade-offs, you have to take a comprehensive and holistic view.

To throw a stupidly exaggerated example out, if I had a button that would fire every homophobic teacher in the country but also reduce the academic performance of all students by 5%, I personally wouldn't feel comfortable pressing it. Of course on the flip side, I probably wouldn't enjoy being faced with the opposite button that increases all students performance by 5% but also introduces some amount of homophobic teachers. My only point here is that these aren't simple and easy questions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I guess the main question is if a digital device is inherently distracting or if the issue is how it is used. Also at a certain point a distraction is a tool that can be used for learning too.

I was a privileged kid in a private highschool we didn't have smart phones yet (they came out when I was in college) but we did have laptops in class.

At first we had full Internet access via WiFi. Then the school slowly started to filter traffic by blocking certain sites. So naturally I learned for to install a proxy on Firefox so I could go to addictinggames.com during the especially boring parts of class. I would still take notes (enough to pass all my classes) and some teachers were so entertaining that I never wanted to do anything but pay attention.

Eventually a teacher did catch me playing a game and sent me to the Deans office. He saw all the things I did to circumvent the schools internet filters that he asked if I would like to spend an elective period at the it office. I said yes. So for one period a day I would help students with basic things and I learned a lot from the other guys in the office. I got super into computers and now have a career built on that experience.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Teachers can be shit without being racists: https://youtu.be/ha8RN1iWrug

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Not all of the links I provided were racism.