Girl without smartphone unable to join in lesson — 'I feel guilty for not buying my daughter one for school'
Girl without smartphone unable to join in lesson — 'I feel guilty for not buying my daughter one for school'
A mum says her daughter came home in tears after she did not have a smartphone to use in a lesson.
These people are supposed to be experts in child development.
Completely irresponsible for the school to be encouraging 11 year olds to have smart phones.
All studies about this are still too recent to have reached your common school. Teachers fall exactly in the age span of people that can't let go of their phones in an almost unhealthy way and probably were pretty excited, when they found this game online - to share with the kids.
That's just my impression though
IANAL OR AP NOR AE
Most teachers are aware how bad smartphones are, at least from the surveys I've seen. They're more skeptical of them than parents or children. I think this case is kind of an outlier.
That story is incredibly disturbing....
Only one 11-year-old girl in an entire class did not have a smartphone...?
How long has smartphone ownership and normalized for that age? What age did they first get them?
That's got to be wreaking havoc on their developing minds....to say nothing of their social development.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, go long on pharma.
Just because a kid has a phone, it doesn't necessarily mean they have full access to it. My daughter has had her own phone since she was 3 years old, she is now 8 and still rarely gets access to her phone - maybe an hour a week on Saturday mornings or if we're going on a long drive. There's never any fights when she has to put it away, and she's learning good device usage habits.
I'm unclear how your comment relates to the article, or my comment. Because even if I took you at your word, your anecdotal story would still seem to place you as an outlier, maybe.
Clearly an entire class of preteens, minus one girl, has full access to their smartphones, and I'm betting at least a portion of them had just as much access when they were 8 years old.
Also, not for nothing, but you might want to consider the possibility that a child's usage and behaviors on a smart device might change once it becomes an unsupervised activity. Or maybe it won't, I don't know you or your child, so who am I to say.
When she gets to teenager age, just make sure to let her live a little.
On the one hand, the grumpy old man in me agrees completely.
On the other, they've been saying this for all of history, since that new-fangled writing wreaked havoc on our ancestors' children's memories. And it did in fact do that, but we changed.
Attention span is just going to become vestigial in the general population as it becomes less necessary in an evolving technological and sociological environment, just like memory and penmanship.
You might want to take a look at this: https://jonathanhaidt.com/anxious-generation/
Yeah it's not really up for debate, the science is only growing more conclusive on how smartphones negatively impact a developing brain, especially social media.
Also, attention span is not vestigial... It's pretty important function of your brain, and can't just be replaced by technology....but I was more referring to anxiety and depression disorders, which again, are on the rise.
I'm also kind of confused why you included penmanship in there, as that is not something a child's development requires to be healthy. It's simply a skill, and one that has been replaced by typing, almost 1:1.
Pretty sure kids get phones before they can speak these days. Because flashy lights keep them entertained when otherise they'll just yell and scream.
Fund education properly. That includes technology for students.
I find school issued devices problematic personally.
The school gets to monitor your kids constantly and they control what gets censored. Not to mention it can stigmatized low income families.
I’d smart devices are required for the lesson, the school should supply them.
Income tax from the rich should fund it. Especially large businesses and rich people.
In the states that's exclusively how it's done. No classroom activity would require private ownership of technology.
Ms Lewis said she began to feel "pressure" on parents to buy smartphones as her daughter left primary school, but decided not to over fears about how it might affect Ava's mental health.
Capitalism has brainwashed people.
This isn't the same, but it reminds me of when I was a manager and got stuck with the weekends for awhile. Nothing at all happened on the weekends. So I told my team (I think there was 8 of us) that we could play some games to pass the time.
We settled on a party game, I think it might have been for the Switch. And I hooked it up to the giant TV we used for stats during the week. Everyone was excited. I was pumped.
Then the game forced everyone playing to download an app on their phone. The disappointment was audible.
Dumbest fcking thing ever for a game.
11? That is definitely too early.
It is reasonable with the proper setup and restrictions. Giving them unrestricted access to it all the time is problematic. It becomes straight up harmful when you throw in addictive and social apps.
My parents didn't get me a phone until after they forgot to pick me up from school and I was left there for three hours. And even then it was a fliphone.
Honestly phones themselves aren't the big issue. The problem is the software. I wish we had a stronger push to get kids F-droid and AOSP. While they aren't perfect, the apps on F-droid should not exploit your kids.
Also web filtering