this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2025
529 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

68639 readers
3506 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I can't believe it wasn't like that since the beginning.
How is it not one of the many distracting things they would ban immediately?

[–] CaptnNMorgan@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Some definitely tried. I got suspended in middle school because I forgot to turn my phone on silent and it went off in class. They had a "zero tolerance" policy, so it didn't matter that it was an accident

[–] FourWaveforms@lemm.ee 3 points 11 hours ago

I think it has to do with the Columbine school shootings.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Make school fun and not a prison and then kids don't need phones like their office worker parents do.

[–] Jimius@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 day ago

You could be in the finest school in the world and the phone would still win.

Also, France started doing this a few years ago already and has seen improvement across every metric. Better grades, more socializing, 80% less bullying, less anxious kids. They only downside they found? Parents complaining they were unable to call the kids at any moment.

Doesn’t matter if the teacher is an absolute gem and knows how to captivate kids who want to learn. Most kids prefer the dopamine hit from social media and other phone usage compared to actually learning. It just ruins it for kids who actually want to learn.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What's funny is all the rich tech elite send their kids to schools that don't use tech to the same degree as public schools. Wonder why.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

Because personal tutors are engaging directly with the student the whole session?

Probably because elite schools have smaller class sizes or teacher/student ratios thereby making it less necessary to have the ability to disseminate information via mass means with technology. Put it all up on a big screen where 30 kids can see it, send the assignments out to 120 kids via google classroom on school issued chromebooks (because there are plenty of kids from families that cannot afford computers), and do all the grading and review digitally. I’d be willing to bet those expensive private schools use plenty of tech, maybe kids carry Macbook Airs instead, but there’s no escape from tech in schools.

[–] iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com 43 points 2 days ago

We've had a similar ban in the Netherlands for a year or two now. Mobile phones were already not allowed in classes. Kids seem to have survived.

[–] RecipeForHate1@lemmy.ml 32 points 2 days ago (8 children)

Brazil did it a while ago. Nobody died [yet]

[–] Wanpieserino@lemm.ee 1 points 18 hours ago

Brazil and nobody dying, what kind of propaganda is this?

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (14 children)

Does anybody but me remember when schools banned walkmen? What about portable CD players? Gameboy? This happens everytime a new technology becomes popular and schools don't know how to regulate it they do this.

The downside is, a fair few student will have their phones confiscated by the school. But it won't dissuade them from bringing them in. You make them better at hiding them instead of creating tools and protocols to enforce for when they can and can't use them.

The crazy thing is, this should be about schools not wanting to be liable for or responsible for these pieces of tech. But Everytime I see legislation like this, it's to do with "children's mental health", or these devices being a distraction.

Model it. Nobody should be allowed to have a phone in schools by this metric. No phones for students? No phones for teachers and administration.

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

If they have to hide their phones now, they won't be using them as much, which is The end goal.

You might be living proof that not using tiktok does not necessarily make you smart, I'll give you that point.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 0 points 19 hours ago

They already had to "hide the phones". Literally France already passed a law stating that phones aren't allowed in elementary and middle schools for students. Those phones previously had to be kept in a backpack or pocket and weren't allowed to be used on the premises.

This new law does one singular thing, so far as I can tell (which isn't made clear in either of the articles I read). It actually actively makes students surrender phones at the beginning of the school day and locks those phones away in a centralized location the students don't have access to.

The problem with that is what I have been saying in subsequent comments. There are protocols in place for what happens when a student breaks the rules. But A. They mention nothing at all about how they will know a student is carrying around a phone in their pocket or using it in the bathroom. And B. they mention nothing about the repercussions for skirting such rules and regulations.

Additionally, if this is about student mental health (as they claimed), it does absolutely nothing to teach them about the dangers of cell phones, nor does it even remotely teach them to moderate cell phone use.

[–] Pirata@lemm.ee 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (18 children)

Does anybody but me remember when schools banned walkmen? What about portable CD players? Gameboy?

Except none of these things were feeding Andrew Tate or Joe Rogan garbage straight into their highly impressionable skulls.

I, for one, support the banning of phones in schools. The social media addiction has been shown to cause depression, particularly in girls, and the brainwashing is ever more apparent.

If anything, this policy fails by not going far enough. I question whether kids should have access to social media at all before a certain age.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I remember when people didn't have phones on them 24/7 and kids didn't die and parents could call the school if they needed to talk to the kids. Somehow we survived.

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And a bunch of people didn't but we don't talk about them, it was the norm back then.

[–] faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Teddy sniffing glue, he was twelve years old, fell from the roof on East 2-9, Cathy was eleven when she pulled the plug, twenty six reds and a bottle of wine.

But people don't like that song, so you're right about not wanting to talk about it.

[–] deeferg@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Speak for yourself, thats a constant banger at the jams with friends.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rippersnapper@lemm.ee 21 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Yeah I think the adverse effect of handing an iPhone to a 10 year old in Atlanta, when that teen is still highly impressionable unrestricted and unsupervised access to the internet is far worse than handing a kid a Gameboy on which they can only game, or a Walkman on which the worst thing they can do is listen to Cardi B.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] wjrii@lemmy.world 91 points 2 days ago (14 children)

I mean... fine? France always does things kind of top-down and there's certainly no reason you have to have your phone readily available, and plenty of evidence it's good to be away from it.

It's not like they need to get to their phones to tell their parents there's an active shooter on campus. 😐

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›