One of England's largest school academies to go phone-free

[msi_school]

I don't understand the process behind pouches, I assume the rule is that if a phone is seen it is confiscated, isn't that the rule anyway?

[Ditto]

There is a lot of research, but the conclusions are at best inconclusive, or don't ask the people under discussion (students) and instead rely on opinions from parents and teacher or (at worst) are pushing a particular agenda rather than trying to answer the question.

 

I am aware of Jonathan Haidt's work and he (in particular) has received quite a lot of criticism from his peers. That's before we raise our eyebrows at his assertion (in said book) that students should be more religious and his support of policies that seek to remove LGBTQ content from the Internet:

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2024/05/candice-odgers-teens-smartphones/678433/

 

(or Nature link if you have a subscription: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00902-2 - I couldn't find a free version)

 

Thanks @pete, I appreciate the further perspectives. Indeed your comments about Haidt reflect my comment that "I don't agree with everything in the book".

 

I suspect our CEO is aware of some of the other inputs, but I will forward your links to ensure he has a chance to read them.

 

Your comment with regards not asking children and young people directly is particularly important I believe. I'm pleased to say that the charity I work with in relation emotional well-being and mental health are very proactive in engaging with CYPs. We have a 'User voice' whether those involved are directly consulted with the work we do. Indeed, just last year we went through a costly company re-branding exercise, and the children and young people were directly consulted before it all went live.

Having read the article Candice L. Odgers article, the same underlying question remains - what is behind the explosion in demand in the need for mental health support for children and yound people. I will post some key data facts shortly. Out charity, and that includes my opinions too, do not think it comes down to social media and smart phones. With the CYP (and families) we support, there are many varied and complex stories and circumstances behind them. A couple of personal comments on things that have struck me, and feedback from staff. One colleague also works as a playground assistant. The school as a trailed a 'no phone' playground on Friday's. What the colleague observed was audio-feedback - she commented that the 'sound' of the playground changed. What was happening is the pupils were engaging much more face to face. After a while, the children themselves asked for the scheme to be extended. So, on that minimal data point, I think there is reason to look at phone use in schools. Personally I would prefer to see an approach that isn't DfE driven banning. I spent 9 years as a governor at a school that banned anything that created challenge e.g. gaming cards, pocket toys, scented water drinks - almost without fail, the strategy was to ban! We didn't see eye-to-eye on that particular approach.

 

To other things I have picked up. Where action is taken that results in better sleep patterns, the results are clearly noticeable - that I think is true for as in all stages of life. Finally, it is very clear to me to socio-economic situation does relate to CYPs outcome. The cost of living crisis in my view is a really important consideration.

 

Finally, my charity is mostly supporting Surrey based CYPs. The term 'double depravation' is increasingly being used to reflect the fact the gap between the "have's" and "have not's" is widening. There is in very small geographical areas, extreme wealth and high levels of depravation, and that contrast is ever more visible.

[mthomas08]

What is interesting is how all of a sudden this is major news when some schools banned phones years ago. We banned them years before Covid! Yet the news yesterday were discussing it like it's all brand new.

 

Did it shock me? Yes actually, we were a device school at the time and supportive of BYOD.

Did I support? Mostly yes. I had reservations.

Was it a good idea due to behaviour etc? Absolutely (it did help pre-covid)

 

Behaviour since Covid right now is awful to the point Ofsted hammered us hard... REAL hard.. If we allowed phones, we would have a much worse situation with behaviour and online bullying.

One thing I do not miss, is constantly having to get involved with online bullying or phone usage or CCTV jobs because of phones.......

 

Now my opinion has changed to fully supporting the phone ban. The way we have the rules setup, is perfect.

They should not be seen or heard. They can bring them in for safety before and after school, but again - should not be seen or heard. Switch them off in the bags/lockers. I have to say it is the ONE rule kids are generally following well.

 

We're even encouraging staff to not use their own devices unless they don't have access to IT and with the safeguarding updates (according to DSL) and the digital standards, we should be asking questions: Do we really need them?

 

I think the reasons for kids to have personal phones in school are shrinking.

[dmj]

You're only allowed a computer if it's bigger than a book!

 

If it doesn't sound ridiculous now, it certainly will in a few years. Surely it's the unfiltered access that needs to be challenged, not the size of the device.

[synaesthesia]

That's the thing isn't it - BYOD is getting so difficult to manage effectively, it's either so awkward it's easier all round to not bother, or it just doesn't work because privacy requirements don't tally with safeguarding requirements. So if you remove one of the biggest factors of BYOD - the device, then it's a lot simpler all round

[Rob_D]

You're only allowed a computer if it's bigger than a book!

If it doesn't sound ridiculous now, it certainly will in a few years. Surely it's the unfiltered access that needs to be challenged, not the size of the device.

 

Nothing to do with the size of the device. Another way to look at it would be "you can use anything you want as long it doesn't have a celular connection" It still biols down to "no phones".

[sigma]

Surely it's the unfiltered access that needs to be challenged, not the size of the device.

 

Exactly that. How would schools meet their filtering and monitoring KCSIE obligations if pupils have unfettered internet access through their phones’ data contracts or other personal devices? And please don’t say parental controls…

 

Our pupils can bring their phones to school but they are confiscated if “seen” during the school day.

[dmj]

Nothing to do with the size of the device. Another way to look at it would be "you can use anything you want as long it doesn't have a celular connection" It still biols down to "no phones".

 

 

My handheld games console works nicely as a desktop computer, and I don't think phones are far behind that.

ultimately, as laptops and "phones" (aka computers) merge into a single device it's going to boil down to 'no computers' unless the govt work out how to make a 'learning safe' filter for all under 18's devices.

[Rob_D]

ultimately, as laptops and "phones" (aka computers) merge into a single device it's going to boil down to 'no computers' unless the govt work out how to make a 'learning safe' filter for all under 18's devices.

 

No outside/unmanaged devices doesn't sound's like a reasonable thing for a school to say, I mean how many places have actual BYDO setups? I don't see why the norm couldn't become: At school/work you use the school's/company's device to do your work, at home you use your own device for whatever you want.

Personally, I'd rather that than national level filtering for all kids (if that's what you're talking about).

[Ditto]

Broadly relevant to this thread. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c77x44zplkyo - Instagram changing default privacy settings for 'teen' accounts. Doesn't overcome age lying though...

[dmj]

No outside/unmanaged devices doesn't sound's like a reasonable thing for a school to say, I mean how many places have actual BYDO setups? I don't see why the norm couldn't become: At school/work you use the school's/company's device to do your work, at home you use your own device for whatever you want.

Personally, I'd rather that than national level filtering for all kids (if that's what you're talking about).

 

We did BYOD did back in the day, 6 or 10 yrs ago - I think the school is still doing it. This was before external SIM devices were commonplace though so I guess that's just a lot harder to deal with now.

This was my original point - that the schools that are banning phones are in fact banning computers. personally I'd ban the SIM cards, but that just harder to police.

[midweek]

We still do BYOD. Despite my advice and warning, there is no appetite for the financial and administrative impact of anything else (we're an Independent though so a lot of focus is on budgets and costs to parents).

[pete]

We also have BYOD for Y12 and Y13.

 

Our schools have the "if your phone is out during the day and spotted, it's getting confiscated until the end of the day" rule for Y7 - 11.

 

Y12 & 13 can use their phones during private study or if the class teacher OKs it. They can't have them out in the corridors (stops whining from younger students, prevents traffic jams from students on their phones).

 

We are quite rural, the majority of students travel by bus and buses only come along every hour or two. Having an independent means of calling your parents is essential.

[Koldov]

I guess it depends on the size of the school as to what administrative/budgetary impact any kind solution of has.

 

But I saw on the local news a primary school promoting the fact they are going 'phone free'.... what?! A primary school!! We're a small school, with primary age pupils and we have never allowed children to have their phones during the day.

 

Just checked with our admin staff and any children who bring a phone to school have to hand it in to reception. Out of over 300 children they have roughly 6 -10 phones handed in a day and they return them at the end of school.

 

Obviously if you have 1000+ children in a secondary/upper school I can see that won't work as you'd need storage and have an admin burden collecting and returning, which is where the 'keep it in your bag/locker' policy comes in I guess... but what kid isn't surreptitious enough to hide it in their pocket on a trip to the toilet, or have a buddy keep an eye out on the playground...

 

BYOD is a terrible idea IMHO and only serves to save the school money providing devices. But a phone is not a device that should be used for T&L and certainly not a personal one, I honestly can't believe anyone ever thought that was a good idea. There's no filtering if they're using data, there's the fact that you can't control the content on the phone, there's the fact that they can video or take photos of themselves or other students, etc... In an education environment with 'children' (as defined), a suitable desktop, laptop or tablet should be used, with filtering and restrictions governing its use.

 

I'm old, I get that... I'm not tied to my phone and half the time I don't even know where it is, but for anything more than just a quick internet search I prefer a tablet or even more preferable a laptop/desktop. If I'm searching for anything that I need to see details of, or need to examine documents I don't want to be zooming and scrolling on a phone screen...

[Ditto]

BBC publish an article casting doubt on mobile phone bans in school suggesting it's not having the impact hoped for https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8plvqv60lo

 

It is worth reading the Lancet publication that BBC refer to as it gives a clearer picture whereas the headline might leave you with a slightly skewed understanding - see https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(25)00003-1/fulltext

[Ditto]

Those that do read the Lancet article will note the use of WEMWBS as a primary outcome measure of mental wellbeing. This does not render the report 'nebulous' - it is possible measure objectively something that is subjective -

[synaesthesia]

Taken with a pinch of salt. There's absolutely no doubt the removal of phones has a positive impact from the perspective of schools, but it does cause other problems related - withdrawal, attention spans etc. Out of the frying pan, into the fire. Easy to speculate how much of this is down to over reliance on this tech and certainly the modern parental technique of shoving a tablet/phone in a young child's hands as a babysitter.

[Rob_D]

Even the article itself, once you get past the headline, seems to be pretty pro restricting phone usage in schools.

[Ditto]

For me there are a couple of big takeaways from the (Lancet) report.

 

Firstly, the article state "... the negative associations found between increasing time spent on phones/social media and worsened mental health and wellbeing do provide evidence on the need to address phone and social media use in adolescents, and school policies should be developed as part a more holistic approach."

 

On the same point "...in moderation (e.g., <2 h per day) screen-based activities can be advantageous for mental health and wellbeing, as well as other associated health and behavioural outcomes (e.g., sleep, physical activity, classroom behaviour, and attainment). At higher levels of use the reverse effect tends to be seen, with increasing time spent on phones and social media associated with decreasing levels of mental wellbeing and higher levels of anxiety, and depression. Poor academic performance, disruptive classroom behaviour, and less time spent in physical activity and sleep are also more likely in adolescents who spend a greater proportion of time on smartphones and social media."

 

In essence, what the article shows to me, is that school policy in isolation is having little effect, a far greater, wider, societal change is required. That would require the social media and technology companies engaging with changing their ways, and I think that is a major challenge.

 

The other point that really struck me, is of all schools approached about the survey, 94.4% did not even bother to reply, not even to decline. I know schools can get bombarded with approaches, but given the explosion of growth in mental health and wellbeing referrals, I would have hoped for better engagement in the subject. Maybe a 5% engagement is in the norm, I don't know. Finally, just to say this is just one study - there's a long way to go with this topic.

[PotNoodleTech]

Thing is changes need to be made at the parental level first as it seems to be coming the norm to just give your infant kids ipads to shut them up which they then take all the way through school and into adult life.

 

The number of pupils walking around here not looking where they are going they literally cant put theyr phone down for one second to make sure they don't fall down a flight of steps, it's pathetic. You can't blame social media or schools for it all as they are being given the devices often at a very early age by guess who, the parents.

[jthompson]

You can't blame social media or schools for it all as they are being given the devices often at a very early age by guess who, the parents.

 

IMHO, if we're handing out blame for a crisis in young people's wellbeing, the lion's share of it should be directed at the ravenous, predatory social media industry which has deliberatly calibrated itself for maximising the holding of attention.

[mikes]

We see kids on phones all the time, even my friends 10 year old has a data plan - we almost decided to go the route of collecting everyone's phones at the beginning of the day and handing them back but decided the admin headache would be unworkable (lost phones, how do you prove a kid doesn't have one stashed in a bag etc...) Either govt needs to crack down hard on social media use for under 16's (which will just backfire - kids will use underground social media - i.e. I block Google chat and the kids just edit spreadsheets back and forth to chat to eachother now)

 

I think the big problem isn't phones/technology per sé. It's a cultural one. Imagine if in the 1980's when kids were programming BASIC on a BBC Micro, or in the 1960's where kids were emulating binary counting in their desks by hand, they were all given access to modern networked mobile phones - do you think we'd have the problems we have now? The problem is people have lost faith in the system and kids who had no faith in school have children of their own who also think it is a waste of time. Perhaps the education system itself needs a big change.

[Koldov]

The problem is people.

 

FTFY...

 

I know it's pessimistic, but really this is the way of humanity. You give people a reason they will hate each other (sometimes not much of a reason), you give people guns and they will shoot each other, you give people the internet and social media, soon you will find the worst of humanity spewed out across the web (and not even in the dark corners anymore). You know the NRA slogan 'guns don't kill people, people kill people'...? Don't get me wrong, I'm fairly anti gun, because I've grown up in the UK and never hunted or done any gun related sport (unless you include Counterstrike) and to my mind almost nobody actually needs a gun of any sort... but the statement is true. Social media as such isn't the problem, we are... (I'm not going to get all 'as a species we are fundamentally a plague upon the earth' but you get my point). I know they've got the algorithms to keep you scrolling just like computer games do to keep you playing and the data mining to push adverts and content based on your interests or what you've searched for (which isn't always advisable given the nature of some of the content out there)...

 

But, the problem is people, always has been and always will be, nothing is new, the internet and social media only makes it easier, magnifies it, spreads it further and quicker, makes it accessible but also invasive and influential on a massive scale.

 

My OH and I often comment when we've looked up how to do something, where to find something or even how old someone is... 'how did we survive before the World Wide Web..?' and we're of a generation that's probably only really had it for half our adult life. As in how did we do anything before phones, computers, etc. But I guess we had a formative part of our life grounded in reality (actually I'm VERY glad social media was not around in my late teens/early 20s), not like kids today who have their head in the clouds from day one. Maybe we just haven't advanced enough and our brains haven't evolved quickly enough to deal with it, but kids are plugged in to the Matrix from birth now.

 

The internet is like politics or religion, it could be used for so much good but very rarely is and that's our fault, if we weren't intrinsically horrible, there would be nothing horrible on the internet. As usual we need policing and protecting from ourselves...

[jthompson]

Just because a child is exposed to touchscreen devices and apps since before they were vocal or walking, it doesn't mean that their human brain is going to develop in some new way to 'handle it' as it might develop to handle certain foods or personal interactions (i.e. more natural experiences). A child that is brought up to be regulated by means of a smartphone is a child that isn't able to regulate themselves (at least not very well). Yes, that means parenting has to be very mindful of that trap, but declaring that it's all on parents is not going to get anywhere. Even with something that's not so new and unknown, like ultra-processed foods, you have to look to the industry to both apportion blame and to drive change.

[mthomas08]

Parents need to do their part.

Schools need to do their part.

Social media needs to do their part.

Society needs to do their part.

 

Nothing is 100% but we all need to do our part... As a parent, the buck starts and stops with me. I can't rely on others... certainly don't feel like social media are going to do anything. I find it very strange when the media are quick to slaughter say TikTok but never Twitter (X) or Facebook. Hell, I'm old enough to remember when both Twitter/Facebook went through heavy criticism....... all the big names demanded they do better. This was usually evolved around terrorism and incitement to commit acts of terror. Yet, recent years this has magically toned down unless directed at TikTok..

 

So I have no faith at all in these companies doing anything to improve things.

 

We have MDM + internet filtering for a reason and going down the route where any device should be controlled with MDM.

 

Do I blame schools for banning phones? Nope.

I was a governor when it was discussed and I'd say 99% of staff and parents were united on it. The 1% had concerns over travel to/from school which was put at ease because they can bring them, just not be seen or heard. So off or silent.. in the bag.. and stay there.

 

Considering the digital standards and safeguarding changes in recent years, we should be doing more MDM on anything possible. Our safeguarding has jumped through a lot of hoops to tighten things and now more involved with this kind of a thing.

 

Some of this reminds me of comments about internet filtering... it will stop T&L.. it will make it look like we're controlling it all... it will discourage device usage... slow down lessons... make things difficult.. why block when a new one is found 2 minutes later.. the kid swill find a way around it....

 

If they're not a problem, I'd simply prepare a plan for it and file it away to review every year - governor level.

From our point of view, I have a list of every risk device and the final ones are in progress for possible MDM iPads.

 

We already ban phones and I will be shocked if the school considered a u-turn, even when we join a MAT.

 

I see more and more down the route of banning phones.

 

In a perfect world it would be great to just whip them out and use them for a bit of research or email access etc and have no filtering.... no MDM worries...... but we don't live in a perfect world.