Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Should mobile phones be banned in schools?
In my country, phones are already banned in schools and they will even confiscate it from you if you are caught with one. To be honest, I believe that phones shouldn't be allowed in schools since they really do not really have any major purpose. Maybe flip phones or keypads would do the work but smartphones are not a necessity, at least in my place. But I can understand why people wouldn't like this ban. Banning smartphones or not, it won't stop the bullying or other cyber crimes that may happen. Also, banning doesn't really help. Students would still bring phones into the school. I don't​ know how it works in Australia but if phones were allowed before and now they are suddenly banned, it won't change anything much. Instead I think that phones should still be allowed in the schools of your country because a sudden ban won't do anything. The rebellious teens would still bring them and it would just be a nuisance to handle all of this. It is better to retract this ban and have the students bring smartphones and if the phones do serve a purpose in the classes of Australia then it's all more the reason to retract this ban.
[-] The following 1 user says Thank You to Famknight for this post:
  • Ena
How did you not expect that in a discussion thread...?

This is most active discussion thread that has been created here in months.

At this point you're admitting that assigning blame to smartphones is a complete blind guess (you just couldn't come up with any other potential factors). And if we consider that the mental health issues are mostly constrained to specific regions (while smartphones are a worldwide phenomenon), that blind guess seems quite a bit off the mark.

Its not a blind guess, its based on correlation. 

You're missing the point here. What I was saying is that "smartphones have no purpose in class" is a non-argument because that has never been grounds for banning items in classrooms. It's an excuse. Side arguments like this one (i.e., statements that are true at face value, but don't actually derive in the conclusion, since they also apply for a large number of cases where the conclusion doesn't) are often used as anchors to conceal weaker points; in your case, you were making a point about mental health and disruptiveness, for example. These "bonus statements" only obscure the real point; if the argument is strong enough to hold, it doesn't need them

I think I see what you're saying here and I agree. 

People who have had little exposure to smartphones in the past tend to have significant struggles using them. You will have invariably met hundreds of people who cannot use basic functions of their phones. There's no reason to believe schoolkids are any different.

I literally have not met anyone under the age of 40 that struggled to use a smartphone. The only people I've met that struggled with smartphones were older people. 

That being said, the ability to search for further information is one of the main skills taught in any school (particularly in later grades/years); that's the reason they have many assignments and group tasks involving research. The need for this ability to be taught has been established for decades, and it is part of any school system worth mentioning. Once upon a time, research implied making a tour to the local library; nowadays, we have better technology. Teaching how to use this nearly-omnipresent technology will always result in a better understanding of available tool

There's not much difference in looking up something on a Smartphone and on a computer (or almost any other device). If you teach someone to look something up on a laptop (which is what schools already do), they will most likely be able to look it up on a smartphone.  

The "it's only a ban in school" argument doesn't hold in this light, because (1) it's implying that it's okay to ban things without good reason (since none has been quoted; only excuses why the ban wouldn't be so bad, such as this one or "it doesn't have a use in class") if the ban is limited, and (2) it disregards the fact that school is the perfect environment for teaching how to use smartphones in a better way (which does include exercising restraint and not losing focus on class).

You are making it sound as though smartphones are an extremely complicated technology that nobody knows how to use yet. This may have been true a decade ago, but its no longer true now. Again, I bet the average teenager can figure out how to look something up on their phone in less than 30 minutes

[citation needed]

I assumed it was self-evident that smartphones were distracting and thought we actually agreed on this. However, I looked it up and found this:

I'm quoting the studies in a spoiler for easier access.

So there is scientific evidence that cell phones are distracting. I'm curious if you have any evidence that there banning phones results in students having better self-control or better research skills.
"anyway.. why do people keep saying my name? i don't sim anymore lol"
[-] The following 1 user says Thank You to Ali for this post:
  • Ena
I agree with the ban. I can't imagine being a teacher in a class full of students with half of them not paying attention due to having their phone out. Not only is it rude but it makes the teacher look bad when the student's end of year exams come in.
Cellphone use was banned at my high school between the morning and afternoon bells. I never had an issue with that, and still don't; you want kids to not be distracted while they're listening to a lesson. They have short attention spans as it is.

Post-secondary is different. They would never ban phones there. Besides, if you get distracted there, you're just wasting your money.
[Image: Denj139.gif]

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)