• Blog Home
  • About Us
  • “Spotlight”
  • Non-Public Schools
    • Charter Schools
    • Private Schools
    • Home Schooling
  • SWW School Districts
    • School Boards
      • Evergreen
      • Vancouver
      • Battle Ground
        • BG School Board
      • Ridgefield
      • LaCenter
      • Camas
      • Green Mountain
      • Hockinson
      • Washougal
  • Legislation
    • WA State Legislation
    • Federal Legislation
    • Other Legislation
  • General
    • Common Core
      • ELA
      • Math
      • Testing
      • Opt-Out
      • References
      • CC Groups & Organizations
    • WAKids
    • ESSA/ESEA
    • Privacy & Data
    • Social Emotional Learning (S.E.L.)
    • PBIS
  • Archives
    • 2020 OSPI Election Archive
      • 2020 OSPI Race
        • Maia Espinoza
        • Chris Reykdal
      • Ron Higgins
      • David Spring – Superintendent of Public School Candidate 2020
    • Washington State School Funding – Post McCleary
    • 2018 Elections
      • 3rd Congressional
      • 17th Legislative
      • 18th Legislative
      • 49th Legislative
    • 2017 School Board Elections – SWW
      • Woodland School Board
      • Washougal School Board
      • Camas School Board
      • Evergreen School Board
      • Vancouver School Board
      • Hockinson School Board
      • Battle Ground School Board
      • Green Mountain School Board
      • LaCenter School Board
      • Ridgefield School Board
    • WA 2016 Elections
      • Education Questions for 2016 Election
      • WA State Superintendent of Public Instruction
      • Governor
      • WA State Lt. Governor
      • WA State House – District 17
      • WA State Senate – District 17
      • WA State House – District 18
      • WA State Senate – District 18
      • WA State House – District 49
      • WA State Senate – District 49
      • US House – 3rd District
      • US Senate – Washington
    • Battle Ground Bond – April 24, 2018
    • Feb 2018 Battle Ground Capital Bond
    • Evergreen Feb 2018 Capital Bond
  • Resources
  • Polls
  • Contact

Southwest Washington Education (K-12)

"The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became the truth." - George Orwell

You are here: Home / Computers / Should cell phone use during school be banned?

October 2, 2018 By Admin1 Leave a Comment

Should cell phone use during school be banned?

Distractions. Games. Texting. Surfing the web. How much time do students with smart phones spend using them during the school day? Does the use of cell phones detract from the educational experience? Does learning suffer? 

From an article at: https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/when-smartphones-go-school

  • In the United States, 73 percent of teens own or have access to a smart phone. A mere 12 percent have no cell phone. Those numbers come from a 2015 survey by the Pew Research Center in Washington, D.C.
  • Some 90 percent of teens with cell phones send texts. The typical number is 30 texts per day. That’s the median number from the Pew data. Additionally, the Pew report shows, 92 percent of teens go online daily. Almost one in four claims to be online “almost constantly.”
  • “Texting on things that are unrelated to class can hurt student learning,” Kuznekoff found. Overall, the control and class-related-message groups did 70 percent better on the test than did students that could text and tweet about anything. That control and relevant-message groups also scored 50 percent higher on note-taking.

In a 2016 published study at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1053&context=aste_facpub  they concluded:

  • While mobile devices may be a “hot-topic” on the educational agenda, it appears that introducing them into K-12 classrooms may actually be detrimental to student achievement. Although mobile-devices are largely hailed as catalysts for communication, findings from this study suggest that further exploration is needed into the actual usage of mobile-devices by students (e.g., the students in this study used mobile devices in ways other than communication more frequently than solely for communication purposes). Furthermore, although students almost unanimously report wanting these devices, access to mobile devices may not always translate into use and utility in K-12 classroom settings. Before teachers, administrators, parents, or professionals introduce mobile devices into K-12 classrooms further research should look to clarify a variety of important questions. For example, further inquiry should focus on identifying specific ways mobile device improve or harm student learning. Research related to the classroom impacts of mobile devices (e.g., student achievement, student demeanor, classroom environment) needs additional exploration and emphasis is needed on the apparent disconnect between student plans and practices for the use of mobile devices. Ways that mobile devices can balance restriction and freedom of access in classroom settings is another promising area for future research. Inasmuch as mobile devices provide access to a variety of information the issues surrounding data and personal 57 privacy and mobile device integration should be studied. Additionally, inquiry exploring why students do not choose to use mobile devices in all classroom and lesson settings despite the overwhelming desire to have access to these devices would help decision-makers and key stakeholders as the increasingly ubiquitous presence of
    mobile devices demands answers to these questions.

From a study published in 2016 titled:  Cell Phone Addiction: A Review – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5076301/   they concluded:

  • In summary, there is still much work to be done in this field in light of the limitation of its concepts, criteria, and methodologies. It is highly probable that we may regard the cell phone as an object of easy addiction for vulnerable, addictive, or problematic personalities while allowing for problematic and compulsory use in specific situations and contexts. In addition, it is necessary to broaden the range of analysis in this field to the adult population, with the aim of obtaining a global consideration of the use and abuse of the cell phone. Although the cell phone certainly entails risks for young people and adolescents, problematic consumption indubitably exists in adults as well.

Suicide rates increase as the amount of time spent using electronic devices increases with clear evidence that more than 5 hours a day (laptops; tablets; cell phones; home computers; gaming)

  • https://swweducation.org?p=1399   Gray Matters: Too Much Screen Time Damages the Brain – in Children
  • https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/11/171130170212.htm   Excessive screen time linked to suicide risk
  • https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3477910/   Social Media and Suicide: A Public Health Perspective

Technology has its place. Used correctly and appropriately it can be a useful tool. Used too much there are clear concerns about negative impacts that need to be explored and defined. In the meantime minimizing rather than maximizing may make sense. You decide.

Filed Under: Computers, Education, Mental Health, Safety, Technology Tagged With: achievement, devices, education, smartphones, student, suicide, technology, texting

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Categories

  • 4 Day School Week (1)
  • Abuse (1)
  • Addiction (4)
  • AI (3)
  • Battle Ground (24)
  • Bonds (47)
  • Book Review (4)
  • Camas School District (18)
  • Cartoons (11)
  • Censorship (1)
  • Charter Schools (18)
  • ChatGPT (2)
  • Classrooms (9)
  • Climate Change (1)
  • College (1)
  • Common Core (223)
  • Comparisons (51)
  • Competency Based Education (4)
  • Computers (24)
  • Control of Education (196)
  • Covid (9)
  • Creativity (6)
  • Critical Race Theory (10)
  • CSE (2)
  • Data (63)
  • DEI (3)
  • Deniers (2)
  • Disabilities (1)
  • Discipline (6)
  • Discrimination (11)
  • District (25)
  • DoE (1)
  • Education (198)
  • Elections (7)
  • Enrollment (1)
  • Equity and Equality (14)
  • Equity/Equality (16)
  • ESEA (7)
  • ESSA (32)
  • Evergreen SD (13)
  • Federal (17)
  • FLASH (9)
  • Funding (71)
  • Games (2)
  • Gender (25)
  • General (29)
  • Gifted (3)
  • Grading (3)
  • Grit (4)
  • Hand Writing (1)
  • Health (21)
  • Hockinson (12)
  • Homeschooling (38)
  • Humor (1)
  • Individuality (27)
  • Indoctrination (2)
  • Jobs (9)
  • Kindergarten (23)
  • KNOW (3)
  • LaCenter SD (5)
  • Laws (7)
  • Learning (85)
  • Learning Pods (1)
  • Legal (4)
  • Legislation (35)
  • Levys (55)
  • LGBTQ (5)
  • Local (16)
  • Math (35)
  • McCleary (3)
  • Mental Health (27)
  • Micro Schools (1)
  • Money (37)
  • Music (1)
  • NEA (2)
  • Nutrition (1)
  • OBE (1)
  • Opt-Out (15)
  • OSPI (38)
  • Parents (23)
  • PBIS (2)
  • PDC (1)
  • Personal Pronouns (2)
  • Phonics (1)
  • Play (2)
  • Policy (18)
  • Politics (22)
  • Poverty (1)
  • Pre-School (19)
  • Privacy (16)
  • Private Schools (6)
  • Project Based Learning (PBL) (1)
  • Pronouns (1)
  • Public Schools (50)
  • Puzzles (2)
  • Quiz (1)
  • Reading (14)
  • Recess (2)
  • Resources (2)
  • Ridgefield (29)
  • Safety (9)
  • SBAC (44)
  • School Boards (50)
  • School Budgets (3)
  • school choice (20)
  • School Data Project (1)
  • Security (7)
  • Self identity (7)
  • Sexuality (30)
  • Social Emotional (27)
  • Social Justice (10)
  • Social Warriors (4)
  • Special Ed (2)
  • State (19)
  • Students (5)
  • Survey's (3)
  • Taxes (30)
  • Teachers (78)
  • Teaching (46)
  • Technology (51)
  • Testing (132)
  • U.S.P.I.E. (1)
  • Unions (18)
  • Unschooling (2)
  • USDOE (12)
  • VanSD (15)
  • Video (9)
  • Vocational (3)
  • Vouchers (11)
  • WAKids (4)
  • Washougal (11)
  • WEA (4)
  • Wokeness (4)
  • WoodlandSD (12)
  • Writing (1)
  • WSSDA (5)

Copyright © 2026 · Education Pro Theme On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in