Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>- Social media and doomscrolling without sufficient parental controls: Several OECD countries are already addressing this by introducing or considering restrictions on teenagers’ access to social media.

Surely this time banning things will improve test scores!

Even before you get to the scores in the report, it shows what percentage of students come from schools that have banned phones. There doesn't seem to be any obvious correlation where banning phones from school gives better results. Eg Estonia averaged 520 points with 26% of students from schools that ban phones. 88.9% of students were in NZ schools where cellphones are banned, but NZ averaged 511 points.

I think before we start banning more "random" things we should consider whether these bans actually produce results. Let the countries that are making these changes run their banning experiment and the rest of us should wait and see whether their scores meaningfully improve afterwards.



Thanks Aerroon for sharing ! Banning social media is indeed an experiment and we don't know yet how efficient it will be.


Score results aren’t alone sufficient proof about whether a ban on phones in school is successful or not.

Phones also enable classroom distractions, waste teachers time, and enable antisocial behaviours kids like the engage such as bullying.


>Score results aren’t alone sufficient proof about whether a ban on phones in school is successful or not.

If the scores aren't increasing as a result of it, then why are we doing it? We're clearly not asking for legitimate input from the people who are actually impacted by these policies (students).

Also, everything "enables" bullying. Bullying is not a problem that's caused by things. It won't go away when you take the things away.


> then why are we doing it?

Re-read my initial comment.

> It won't go away when you take the things away.

You don't know what safeguarding and harm minimisation means, do you?


>You don't know what safeguarding and harm minimisation means, do you?

They're weasel words people use when their proposal doesn't actually work.

"It's totally making things better, you just can't see it in any objective stats."

Neither of those can be measured nor are they the reason we have schools in the first place. But they sound nice.


> They're weasel words people use when their proposal doesn't actually work.

No. They have concrete definitions that are just inconvenient for your argument. A+ in mental gymnastics though.


They can have concrete definitions, but they conveniently don't have objective measures.

I don't need to do mental gymnastics, because the purpose of school is learning. If measures can't improve learning outcomes then they shouldn't be forced onto everyone.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: