this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
989 points (82.9% liked)

Memes

45665 readers
945 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (9 children)

It's like every time a person says "see, this is what happens when you don't hit children" at every behavior issue. Even though we know that hitting children objectively worsens behavior over doing nothing, but they insist that doing the only thing they know, even if harmful, is better.

But we know children learn better without phones https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/the-evidence-is-clear-students-learn-better-without-mobile-phones-in-class/276071 You are the person insisting on hitting the child here.

Putting phones in school makes learning harder.

When you have a room of 30 students and 29 of them are complaining about something ... point out how unlikely it is that those 29 students are the causal variable.

You are saying 29 out of 30 people can't be right, which is very wrong. But what you miss is that it's really 3-4 kids disrupting and the rest going along because it's easier.

It's the path of least resistance, and people will jump onto the easy path.

"Personal Responsibility" attitudes just doesn't work for crowd dynamics,

Except they do. Look at all the examples of Japanese fans cleaning stadiums.

In a crowd most people will follow the norm. If the norm is playing on your phone and not listening, the you have a bad time. It's not punishing kids because teachers are bad at their jobs, it's setting a behavioral norm.

Next time you dislike your teacher think about when you got stuck in a group with people who wouldn't do anything. Now imagine a class full of them. If just one or two more people put in a little effort good things would happen.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

But we know children learn better without phones https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/the-evidence-is-clear-students-learn-better-without-mobile-phones-in-class/276071

I disagree. For two reasons. First, there is only a couple studies in your link, and its "difference-in-difference" strategy does not seem (at least prima facie) to shown effective isolation to only a single variable. Second, it seems to be making the same mistake previously made by Psychologists in the "hitting children" debate, making unsubstantiated (or "common sense") conclusions about the gulf in the middle after only doing a quick analysis of the two extremes. Further, your link also calls question your claim by pointing out Switzerland did not find any effectiveness in banning phones.

And the "hitting" reference was intended to point out the concern against positive advancement. There was a time where psychologists thought hitting was better than nothing even when they knew it was net harmful and so did not strongly discourage it when parents could not or would not embrace more modern parenting strategies. The same is true of phones in school (and, per your link, laptops in college). Looking at the laptop studies I could find, they have the same methodological problems the phone studies have. They're looking presumptively at distraction, and setting up an experiment where distraction is more pronounced.

Yet laptops have a lot more research than phones. Studies mentioned above compare ubiquitous laptop use and scores, while failing to address that each individual that uses a laptop averages higher scores than individuals who do not. What studies I could find with phones could be moving in the direction of that same dynamic that shows missing understanding of how to be use technology in learning.

Let's look at the other side of things. Another study (again, possibly flawed...I don't trust either side's phone studies much yet) found that removing a phone ban in NY caused an increase in overall student obedience and educational productivity, at the cost of "school culture". As someone who grew up as a victim of "school culture" in a world where teachers supported bullying (and in many places they still do), I have no problem with that trade-off. Of course, this study does directly contradict your educatoronline article.

From this fairly balanced piece (which agrees with both my article and yours in some ways):

"If educators do not find ways to leverage mobile technology in all learning environments, for all students, then we are failing our kids by not adequately preparing them to make the connection between their world outside of school and their world inside school"

...which is more important than test scores.

You are saying 29 out of 30 people can’t be right, which is very wrong. But what you miss is that it’s really 3-4 kids disrupting and the rest going along because it’s easier. It’s the path of least resistance, and people will jump onto the easy path.

Is that something you can cite, or just your own personal "pick em up by their bootstraps" opinion? Do you have any experience with crowd simulation? Can you show any evidence that your explanation is likely, or even reasonably possible?

Except they do. Look at all the examples of Japanese fans cleaning stadiums.

That's... not an effective or topical rebuttal at all. Did you misunderstand what I meant by "Personal Responsibility" attitudes? I referred to blaming the individuals in a large group for their failure instead of blaming the causal elements of the group. I have to deal with that type of problem regularly, where a manager tries to blame a majority of his reports (all capable and talented) of being the problem when something goes wrong. Guess who I ultimately find responsible?

Next time you dislike your teacher think about when you got stuck in a group with people who wouldn’t do anything.

Thankfully, I'm decades out on that. From the kinds of things I see and read about education, I'm grateful I don't have to go back. But then, my education started after school anyway.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

It's concerning that you think the absence of a device is comparable to the presence of a action, in this case hitting.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s concerning that you think the absence of a device is comparable to the presence of a action, in this case hitting.

I'm genuinely lost on how you think the only variable here is whether something is being banned or being encouraged. Or should I say, it's "concerning". Did you have a smartphone in school?

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

Fyi when you resort to trying to mock people, they won't want to talk to you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Hmm. I'm curious about this. I repeated the words you used because I thought it was appropriate to do so. Were you resorting to trying to mock me in the first place?

If so, then "glass houses" and all that. If not, then please don't take my reply as mocking. I genuinely mean it. And I am genuinely curious if you had smartphones in school. We didn't have them when I grew up.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)