I agree with the conclusion of the article:
“School’s the same for 120 years, where kids go nine to three, have long holidays, sit at desks and have to regurgitate what the adults tell them to learn, basically all over the world. We’re blaming kids for falling academic standards, we’re blaming the rise in mental ill health, we’re blaming the rise of cyberbullying. Oh, well, it all must be the fault of the mobile phone,” Marilyn Campbell told Al Jazeera.
“I mean, what a simplistic view of how we are educating our children in a different world and taking away that main tool that we’re all using in society and saying, ‘No, the kids can’t have it now’.”
A balanced approach, involving regulated use and clear guidelines, may be the most effective way to harness the benefits of smartphones while minimising their drawbacks, experts say.
The general recommendation of Campbell and Edwards, who carried out the scoping review in Australia, was to leave it to individual schools to determine smartphone use and to focus on helping children to use smartphones positively.
As an educator and parent, I couldn’t disagree more strongly. Smart phones are addiction machines and childhood experience blockers. Children should not have smart phones at all until age 16. Age 16 would be a very appropriate time to introduce smart phones after their harms have been explained in detail at ages 12 through 15.
Banning cell phones during instructional time doesn’t go far enough. Students having a smart phone in their pocket is damaging. (Dumb phones are fine—SMS texting and phone calls are great.)
There has been a precipitous decline in youth mental health globally in nations where cell phones were affordable starting in 2010. The evidence is clear. Smart phones (and, more broadly, addictive dark patterns in all apps/games) are a big problem.
If you want to learn more, read the first chapter of The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt. (I’d recommend the full book if you want details, but chapter 1 is enough to give you a grounding in the data and the broad strokes of the argument.)
Out of curiosity, (given that in another comment you talked about home schooling) when you call yourself an educator, do you have a teaching certificate in your state, or other professional teaching certification?
I’m not trying to be rude, but since you began by invoking the title of “educator” as an appeal to authority in this area, I think it’s important to clarify that you are in fact such.
I’m certified to teach in my jurisdiction. I have a teaching degree, and I have completed additional professional training specific to this topic through conferences, books, and other professional development (PD).
I can’t source conference talks or teacher PD groups, so I sourced a popular press book that’s approachable to laymen.
Awesome, thank you.
“My jurisdiction” could mean their house and their degree could be from PragerU or some other sham online college. The way everything is worded so vaguely leads me to believe this is the case.
No reason to assume malice just because they’re not listing out identifying information. I don’t list my schools or company names online either. It’s not as though we could (or would) validate it anyways.
