I love the passing notes example. I found myself recently referring to the idea that using a dictionary in class would’ve been taboo but eventually became the act of a true scholar, in reference to use of AI in school. But you wouldn’t want a student using a dictionary in class if it wasn’t for a task, never mind a book,
Dictionaries; computers; the Internet; AI. Phones contain the first, are the second and use the third to access the fourth…. Unfathomable magical portals in their pockets to all the world’s knowledge and distractions.
Smacks of the frog still in the boiling water that they are in school at all for me.
Haidt didn’t ask him outright about phones in schools but Tyler Cowen would, on the basis of his conversation, probably approve. He seemed more concerned about limiting opportunities for the most able than he did about their impact on the median student:
I like Haidt and I liked the book, but I wonder if it's a tactical mis-step to have defined the argument in these terms. We seem to have got to a point where if you can't produce 35 gold standard large scale RCTs proving the link between phone use and mental health then you're guilty of fomenting a moral panic.
Reading and listening to him in the last few weeks, I think it’s obvious that his own criticism of smartphones is far more aesthetic / philosophical than it is empirical - that they produce an ugly culture that wastes precious time. So his reliance on RCTs et al are a tactical manoeuvre speaking to a opinion-formers who are less comfortable with such normative positions.
Let’s hope he’s right and that his tactics bear fruit!
We banned them in Melbourne state schools a few years back. There was the same bleating at the time about putting the genie back in the bottle and digital divides and student revolts and all that. And then they just did it and it was both great and very easy. Kids are very used to following rules in schools.
Great read. I've given Haidt's book a wide pass, as I never saw any evidence that adding in phones or online resources actually improved student learning. What I believe is that these new ways of learning are a very poor resource, actually they're lazy. And if we know that to be true, why do we insist on keeping them in classrooms?
I listened to this episode. I respect Cowen, and find him very smart, and appreciate his unexpected takes on things, but at times he shows he's out of touch, and I just don't think he understands how detrimental phones have been to school. Okay, yes, a very, very small group of (gifted) students might benefit from having them, but those benefits are dwarfed by the distraction and havoc they wreak for everyone else. Like, please.
As a middle school teacher, I can tell you that our school has students keep their phones turned off and in their backpacks. We are a phone free school. Do students ask to go to the restroom, take their bag and use them in there, probably. The phone free zone was the school's response to students using technology to bully other students, and send messages during classes and lesson, so we banned phones during school hours. It's better-not perfect.
In the context of higher education teaching I am making a conscious effort to ask students to put their phones away during lessons (I can't see any way a university can have a ban, or that it would be appropriate). But there will be some activities where I want them to use their phones, so it is a case of using them for the correct thing, not being there as a permanent distraction and temptation.
Even in Further Education, where we have 16-22 year olds struggling for their critical GCSE Maths, there seems to be a tricky balance between the positive (e.g. the students enjoy Quizziz, which gives them some quick thinking practice) vs the negative (continual disruption, massive arguments UNLESS there is an absolute institutional practice). So, as usual, the issue comes down to a discipline concern - will ALL the teachers enforce whatever the rule is ALL the time?!
I love the passing notes example. I found myself recently referring to the idea that using a dictionary in class would’ve been taboo but eventually became the act of a true scholar, in reference to use of AI in school. But you wouldn’t want a student using a dictionary in class if it wasn’t for a task, never mind a book,
Dictionaries; computers; the Internet; AI. Phones contain the first, are the second and use the third to access the fourth…. Unfathomable magical portals in their pockets to all the world’s knowledge and distractions.
Smacks of the frog still in the boiling water that they are in school at all for me.
Haidt didn’t ask him outright about phones in schools but Tyler Cowen would, on the basis of his conversation, probably approve. He seemed more concerned about limiting opportunities for the most able than he did about their impact on the median student:
https://conversationswithtyler.com/episodes/jonathan-haidt-anxious-generation
I like Haidt and I liked the book, but I wonder if it's a tactical mis-step to have defined the argument in these terms. We seem to have got to a point where if you can't produce 35 gold standard large scale RCTs proving the link between phone use and mental health then you're guilty of fomenting a moral panic.
I agree.
Reading and listening to him in the last few weeks, I think it’s obvious that his own criticism of smartphones is far more aesthetic / philosophical than it is empirical - that they produce an ugly culture that wastes precious time. So his reliance on RCTs et al are a tactical manoeuvre speaking to a opinion-formers who are less comfortable with such normative positions.
Let’s hope he’s right and that his tactics bear fruit!
Yes, very true. "An ugly culture that wastes precious time" - that's a great summary of his book.
We banned them in Melbourne state schools a few years back. There was the same bleating at the time about putting the genie back in the bottle and digital divides and student revolts and all that. And then they just did it and it was both great and very easy. Kids are very used to following rules in schools.
Great read. I've given Haidt's book a wide pass, as I never saw any evidence that adding in phones or online resources actually improved student learning. What I believe is that these new ways of learning are a very poor resource, actually they're lazy. And if we know that to be true, why do we insist on keeping them in classrooms?
As an educator, I agree with the "lazy" argument.
I listened to this episode. I respect Cowen, and find him very smart, and appreciate his unexpected takes on things, but at times he shows he's out of touch, and I just don't think he understands how detrimental phones have been to school. Okay, yes, a very, very small group of (gifted) students might benefit from having them, but those benefits are dwarfed by the distraction and havoc they wreak for everyone else. Like, please.
As a middle school teacher, I can tell you that our school has students keep their phones turned off and in their backpacks. We are a phone free school. Do students ask to go to the restroom, take their bag and use them in there, probably. The phone free zone was the school's response to students using technology to bully other students, and send messages during classes and lesson, so we banned phones during school hours. It's better-not perfect.
In the context of higher education teaching I am making a conscious effort to ask students to put their phones away during lessons (I can't see any way a university can have a ban, or that it would be appropriate). But there will be some activities where I want them to use their phones, so it is a case of using them for the correct thing, not being there as a permanent distraction and temptation.
Even in Further Education, where we have 16-22 year olds struggling for their critical GCSE Maths, there seems to be a tricky balance between the positive (e.g. the students enjoy Quizziz, which gives them some quick thinking practice) vs the negative (continual disruption, massive arguments UNLESS there is an absolute institutional practice). So, as usual, the issue comes down to a discipline concern - will ALL the teachers enforce whatever the rule is ALL the time?!
Well, you can do stuff like this on a phone: http://koda.nu/arkivet/9848290
We used to swear using calculators in the "old days" like the numbers '7734' upside down spelled "hell" and so on. We felt so naughty.