Slashdot Mirror


Schools That Ban Mobile Phones See Better Academic Results

HughPickens.com writes: Jamie Doward reports at The Guardian that according to a recent study in the UK, the effect of banning mobile phones from school premises adds up to the equivalent of an extra week's schooling over a pupil's academic year with the test scores of students aged 16 improved by 6.4% after schools banned mobile phones, "We found that not only did student achievement improve, but also that low-achieving and low-income students gained the most. We found the impact of banning phones for these students was equivalent to an additional hour a week in school, or to increasing the school year by five days." In the UK, more than 90% of teenagers own a mobile phone; in the US, just under three quarters have one. In a survey conducted in 2001, no school banned mobiles. By 2007, this had risen to 50%, and by 2012 some 98% of schools either did not allow phones on school premises or required them to be handed in at the beginning of the day. But some schools are starting to allow limited use of the devices. New York mayor Bill de Blasio has lifted a 10-year ban on phones on school premises, with the city's chancellor of schools stating that it would reduce inequality.

The research was carried out at Birmingham, London, Leicester and Manchester schools before and after bans were introduced (PDF). It factored in characteristics such as gender, eligibility for free school meals, special educational needs status and prior educational attainment. "Technological advancements are commonly viewed as increasing productivity," write Louis-Philippe Beland and Richard Murphy. "Modern technology is used in the classroom to engage students and improve performance. There are, however, potential drawbacks as well, as they could lead to distractions."

24 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. Schools that ban game consoles see better results by The+Real+Dr+John · · Score: 2

    Shocking

    --
    A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
  2. "6.41%" by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 5, Insightful
    6.41% of a standard deviation, according to TFA. Not exactly the same thing.

    As usual, don't trust journalists. :(

    --
    My first program:

    Hell Segmentation fault

    1. Re:"6.41%" by rubycodez · · Score: 2

      6% of a standard deviation is essentially zero

    2. Re:"6.41%" by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      6.41% of a standard deviation, according to TFA. Not exactly the same thing.

      As usual, don't trust journalists. :(

      When I was doing my masters degree I attended lectures where professors allowed laptops in class. Some people used them for taking notes like I did but a sizeable number of students just sat there posting on Facebook, web-surfing or playing FarmVille or some other dumb ass flash game. I'll never understand why people do that, they pay an arm and a leg in school admission fees, spend the entire semester goofing off and are then surprised when they flunk out or pass the course by the skin of their teeth. I don't think banning laptops, tablets and phones will do much good, people will just find another way to goof off but I can relate to why teachers want to ban these devices. It's the students who goof off all semester who blame everybody but themselves and write the most scathingly critical reviews of a course and its teacher and that's bloody frustrating when you know perfectly well that their failure is nobody's fault but their own.

    3. Re:"6.41%" by TeknoHog · · Score: 2

      When I was doing my masters degree I attended lectures where professors allowed laptops in class. Some people used them for taking notes like I did but a sizeable number of students just sat there posting on Facebook, web-surfing or playing FarmVille or some other dumb ass flash game. I'll never understand why people do that, they pay an arm and a leg in school admission fees, spend the entire semester goofing off and are then surprised when they flunk out or pass the course by the skin of their teeth. I don't think banning laptops, tablets and phones will do much good, people will just find another way to goof off but I can relate to why teachers want to ban these devices. It's the students who goof off all semester who blame everybody but themselves and write the most scathingly critical reviews of a course and its teacher and that's bloody frustrating when you know perfectly well that their failure is nobody's fault but their own.

      This. I'm also seeing people waste lecture time on dead-tree shit like sudoku and hanjie, as well as good old social chatting, so it's certainly not a question of banning this or that technology. The really dumb thing is that when exams come up, they need to spend more time catching up on the material they could have learned when it was first presented, while I can enjoy my free time posting on Slashdot.

      I understand that people learn in different ways, but perhaps those who don't dig lectures could be using that time for something fun/useful instead. It just seems like pure waste. I've had my share of too early mornings and days off sick, when I know it's better to stay at home and study on my own.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  3. Now if we could only do it for drivers... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 2

    We might see a great deal of improvement, particularly for the underachieving ones.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  4. Re:Reduce Inequality? by EvilSS · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If that's really what lifting the ban does, then I'm fine with it. I just don't see how allowing phones will accomplish this (ie - I have an iPhone 6 and you're stuck with a hand-me-down MicroTac).

    Lower-income schools tend to have more security such as metal detectors and bag searches in NYC. This caused an odd business to pop into existence where students would pay private businesses (usually vans that stopped outside the schools in the mornings and afternoons) to store the phones during the day. Public schools in more affluent areas don't have these security measures, so students there could get away with just carrying the devices into the school. Keep in mind a lot of kids walk to school in NYC so the worse the neighborhood, the more you probably want your kid to have a phone to call home in case of emergency, and yet due to the increased school security and the blanket ban on cell phones, they are more likely to be the ones forced to either not do so or pay for storage during the day.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  5. Re:imagine that. by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I learned mathematics, the technology that we used was intentionally kept below the level of the curriculum we were learning. We didn't get to use even so much as simple four-operation calculators until we were doing double-variable algebra. We didn't get to use scientific calculators with extended functions until we were well into trigonometry. We didn't get to use graphing calculators until we were well into calculus. At each point, the technology was only added once we had demonstrated proficiency with the lower-level skill, so that the calculator made the time-consuming part of the lower-level skill less, so we could focus more on the current lesson. The only use of computers for mathematics that I can remember was in the DOS and pre-Mac-Apple era when we would play Number Munchers in the computer labs. We were literally handed 5.25" floppy disks to boot the computer on, and as such the computer would only do the one function that we were to engage in. For math in the computer lab that was Number Munchers.

    My biggest concerns with the introduction of technology into the classroom are that first, we don't really have any killer-app that justifies the expense, and second, that by using general-purpose computers we are making it very easy for students to use the computers for a purpose other than what's intended. It's extremely easy to get off-task when you have the bulk of the Internet at your disposal, even if there's content filtering. General purpose computers give students almost unlimited choices in what to do, and only one of those choices is the intended one.

    We need the right applications that don't yet seem to exist, and we need computing platforms that are restricted in the use of the computer, to make it function better as an educational platform. We also need to stop introducing too much technology too early, so that students develop basic skills and demonstrate proficiency before they get electronic crutches.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  6. Re:Reduce Inequality? by tnk1 · · Score: 2

    Older than dirt is the idea of school uniforms. Which would effectively reduce the perception of inequality in a school.

    You know, I don't think I would have minded a school uniform in my public school, if it was reasonably comfortable and didn't look heinous.

    I don't think we should ban things due to "inequality", but being harassed about what you wear is something you get in places with a high degree of immaturity, such as high school and LA. And honestly, from the other side, there is envy from the have-nots for the people who have things. Due to social development of children and teens, it can be overly pronounced and highly distracting.

    Of course, I am not sure how unbanning cell phones helps with "inequality". I'd think that telling Richie Rich with his iPhone 6 supersized to leave it at home would actually improve perceived equality, because the poor are less likely to have a phone, and much less likely to have a *good* one.

  7. Re:Schools that ban game consoles see better resul by readin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When I was a kid we weren't allowed to bring basketballs to school. Nor were we allowed to bring walkie-talkies. We couldn't bring treadmills to use during class. A distraction is a distraction. How can anyone be surprised that banning them improves academic performance. The only thing surprising is that they weren't banned a decade ago.

    --
    I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
  8. Re:In class is a problem- not so much at school by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Mainly they said they banned phones, but technically any kind of electronic device was banned. It was the stupidest policy ever when near EVERY kid (it was a well to do area) had one in school. Nobody took them out in class...

    Sounds to me like the policy was incredibly successful. The purpose of the policy was not to actually take away everyone's devices. The purpose of the policy was to prevent devices from becoming a distraction, and to give administrators and teachers recourse if a device posed a distraction. This works even if the device is somewhat concealed, like a music player connected to headphones going through the students clothing up to skin-colored wires to earbuds hidden behind hair- with this stated policy if the student was using the device in lieu of paying attention in class then the school could confiscate the device to remove that distraction from the student.

    I went to high school just before the cell phone migrated its way into teenagers' hands. I still got to see my friends; we simply had to make plans when and were to meet up. I would even argue that my friends were better friends, because we actually did stuff together and had common interests, not an electronic means of connection requiring little to no effort to maintain that one could just play lip-service to. The cell phone is a convenient tool, but all-waking-day connectivity doesn't mean that things are actually better simply through having it.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  9. Re:imagine that. by ZorinLynx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    >as such the computer would only do the one function that we were to engage in.

    Then you had kids like me, who would hit CTRL-RESET to drop to BASIC, then write amusing programs to pass the time. :)

  10. Re:Schools that ban game consoles see better resul by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    When I was a kid we weren't allowed to bring basketballs to school.

    When I was a kid, we didn't even know what basketballs were. We used to have to throw severed heads through hoops, and let me tell you, it's tough to dribble a severed head. And instead of the "pick and roll" we had the "disembowel and roll". That's why nobody wanted to play defense.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  11. Re:imagine that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The technology has many killer apps that detract kids from listening to the teacher and doing homework, while still getting good grade by sneaking the right answer on the device. This goes on unnoticed until they are tested in the old fashioned way: with pen an paper. And at that time it is already too late to undo months maybe a year of slacking.

  12. Re:Reduce Inequality? by ganjadude · · Score: 2

    trying to force every discussion on anything into a discussion on social justice is not only pointless, but it turns people off of your cause.

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  13. Re:Reduce Inequality? by EvilSS · · Score: 2

    Then seriously have the phone locked up at the front office or something. What they should be doing is making the ability to store the phone during school hours more equal, rather than just giving in and allowing them to be carried during the day.

    It will be up to each school to determine their own rules. If they don't, then a set of default rules will be used (phones put away during class, can be used during lunch, etc. It's in the article in TFA I believe).

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  14. Re:Reduce Inequality? by EvilSS · · Score: 3, Informative

    Um, they do have lockers in NYC don't they? Wouldn't that be logical place to store a phone?

    Yes, but they are generally INSIDE the school, past the metal detectors. The old rule banned the phones on school grounds period. They were not allowed in the door.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  15. Re:cell phones by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Heard of teachers? They are supposed to be in charge, and are the ones who should be calling ambulances, fire departments and police if needed. The kids should be focused on learning, not facebook.

    --
    If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
  16. One more way to showcase inequality by ocsibrm · · Score: 2

    Too often kids are focused on their shoes, or fashion, or yes, their phone. Anything really that makes them seem imperceptibly better than their peers. In my opinion, schools would do well to switch to uniforms and keep phones out of class rooms. The less inconsequential nonsense they have to care about, the better.

  17. Re:imagine that. by stephanruby · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...we need computing platforms that are restricted in the use of the computer, to make it function better as an educational platform.

    Cheap Chromebooks the sim card explicitly removed and without the wifi password used to fill that niche, but now most new Chromebooks are touch-enabled and they'll be able to run Android soon. In other words, Google is about to mess it all up for parents.

    And it won't be long until one kid figures out how he can download an apk to a usb stick or a memory card, and can play it on a friend's Chromebook. By the time 5th period rolls around, everyone in his school will have seen it done. And within a week or two, all kids who use Chromebooks in the entire United States will have seen it done (even if they themselves do not have direct internet access).

    At that point, parents will just have resell their Chromebooks on Ebay and trade them in, for either paper notepads or old-fashioned electric type-writers. Or they'll be forced to just place the Chromebooks under lock and key like they've been forced to do with the wifi hub, the router, and everything else.

  18. Re:imagine that. by sfcat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A few smart kids screwing around to find workarounds isn't the same thing as all of the kids being able to get to anything at any time. Working on the device to find workarounds at least requires engagement and interest to focus on a single task.

    Spoken like someone who has never taught a group of 15 yr olds in a computer lab. I assure you, if it allows them to play games, get out of work, or look cool; the dumbest 15 year old kid will turn into a computer whiz in minutes. I've seen kids who can't speak with even passable grammar and terrible grades complete complex hacks to get around doing work. Many times the hack was harder and more useful than that lesson being taught. People are weird, kids are even weirder.

    --
    "Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
  19. Re:imagine that. by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A few smart kids screwing around to find workarounds isn't the same thing as all of the kids being able to get to anything at any time.

    That's not the point I was making.

    All it takes is one smart kid to screw around. Then, he'll be so proud of himself if he finds something, that he'll find ways to show off his trick to as many other kids as possible (especially to the other kids with Chromebooks).

    The same goes for a kid that finds the workaround online, or stumbles onto it through social media. He'll brag to other kids as if he invented the workaround himself.

  20. Re:Low income students can afford mobile phones? by tompaulco · · Score: 2

    no text.

    Yes. I live in a low income school district and volunteer at the school and almost all of the students have mobile phones. In fact, as far as I can see, there appears to be an inverse relationship between income and cell phone proliferation. It might be that the latter contributes to the perpetuation of the former.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.