Texas banned phones in schools as well. A local school administrator told me “in the high school, the lunch room is now loud with talking and laughter!”
Despite that, there are still parents that complain, they are as addicted to texting with their kids all day as their kids are addicted to the phone.
Despite those complaints, it’s great to see that the ban has seemingly nudged things in a healthier direction. Its a failure of leadership that schools needed a statewide ban to make such an obviously positive change.
softwaredoug · 1h ago
Phones might be as much a symptom as a cause
The related issue is parents are overly protective of teens and don't give them enough independence. You see this in a lot of different ways from parents wanting to text their kids, to only letting kids do highly managed structured activities, to treating teens as their best friends, to helicopter parenting protecting kids from all adversity, etc etc
And a similar thing happens not just with parents, but society, there are not a lot of places teens can just hang out. A lot of fun things teens would do increasingly ban minors.
If you want teens off devices, you need to give them alternatives
soupfordummies · 50m ago
There's also the symptom that almost our entire society is addicted to staring at their phones for at least 4 hours a day. Go literally ANYWHERE and just look at the people around you if you don't think so.
softwaredoug · 49m ago
The counter to phone is dog.
My dog stares up at someone until they acknowledge him. Then I end up talking to the person. And everyone has a nice interaction. Usually they get a nice serotonin bump.
rkomorn · 45m ago
Yeah. As someone who spends way too much time on their phone... I'm pretty sure that I have access to all kinds of alternatives, and that I have the agency necessary to getting off my phone.
I'm pretty sure there's an awful lot more to it.
teekert · 41m ago
For sure, and you at least acknowledge it. As do I, I'm ashamed of my screen time reports. I feel weak.
rkomorn · 39m ago
At some point I started spending more time on my computer to reduce my phone screen time.
And the worst part is that that made sense to me for a few days.
Big screen = professional tech person.
Small screen = phone addicted loser.
HN tabs open on both.
teekert · 7m ago
I think it is the same as with food, we just have to not get tempted. It probably would take something as radical as getting a dumbphone, DNS blocking additive sites, ditching the toilet-scroller. I'm on a website before I realize it.
duxup · 1h ago
One of the nicest things about the ban (not total ban) at my kids school is no more parent email "Talk to your kids about their phone" type emails.
The kids who are really abusing their phone have parents who don't care to deal with it and they're not reading the emails. The emails just hassle the parents of the kids who already don't do the bad thing.
Now if they see a phone it's taken and if taken enough times (twice) the parents have to go to the office to retrieve the phone and have a meeting.
Pressure is now on the parents and kids who are the problem.
onionisafruit · 56m ago
Funny to see a school administrator talking positively about a loud lunch room. We used to constantly get reprimanded for being too loud.
fkyoureadthedoc · 53m ago
We did too, but not as a rule and not always, just as a preference of whatever petty tyrant was standing in the lunch room that day
spcebar · 1h ago
Nature is healing. Glad to see this. I was in high school when smart phones really became widespread, and was personally still on a flip phone most of the way through. I think there's something healthy to the boredom the kids describe, which ultimately leads to socialization and introspection. 24/7 social media seems like a very destructive portal to isolation, and having a reprieve from that, if only a few hours a day, seems like a great thing.
moduspol · 1h ago
Not just socialization and introspection, and not just among kids!
I guess I'm probably preaching to the choir here on HN, but the amount of social woes we are currently experiencing that are indirectly the result of a dramatic increase in social media consumption is a lot higher than I think most people expect.
There are just so many aspects of life that one only really gets nudged into doing at least partially out of boredom, despite ultimately fulfilling so much more. When you can stave off boredom instantly and indefinitely, there are all kinds of experiences that will be substituted.
HPsquared · 47m ago
Hundreds of millions of people are totally oblivious and uncaring of their situation and surroundings, so long as they have access to enough digital distraction. It's the new opiate of the masses.
rTX5CMRXIfFG · 1h ago
I would not have learned to play the guitar if I had a smartphone then, or if the internet was any faster than a dial-up. Now I have an outlet to make something beautiful out of my loneliness whenever it strikes.
balfirevic · 50m ago
On the other hand, I would not have learned to play the guitar without the high-speed internet.
flir · 1h ago
Internet ruined me for anything long-form. I'm old enough to remember the Before Times, but a lot of people aren't.
ghaff · 40m ago
I read books voraciously and, while I do still read books, it's a pretty small number compared to what I used to do. I've been trying to pare my bookshelves of books I'm never realistically going to reread or read.
JohnFen · 1h ago
> I think there's something healthy to the boredom the kids describe
I recently heard the comedian Jimmy Carr make an excellent comment about how we as a society think of boredom as a negative, when it's actually a positive: "Boredom is just unacknowledged serenity."
naasking · 1h ago
> I think there's something healthy to the boredom the kids describe, which ultimately leads to socialization and introspection.
This. People these days talk about boredom like it's the worst thing ever.
MisterTea · 52m ago
Excellent news.
Though what bothers me is all the high schools mentioned are the top prestigious ones you had to apply to, not zoned. Brooklyn Tech, Gramercy Arts, Bronx Science, I'm surprised no comments from Stuyvesant students.
> Alia Soliman, a senior at Bronx Science, said cards “are making a big comeback.” She said kids are playing poker when they’re done with their work in some classes.
Ha! When I was in NYC high school in the 90s we were not allowed to have playing cards or dominoes. The staff would confiscate them because it was believed to encourage gambling. Quite amusing that now they are the saving a generation of kids from mindless scrolling.
HPsquared · 49m ago
They still could encourage gambling, but someone somewhere judged it's the lesser of two evils.
stronglikedan · 47m ago
Anything could encourage gambling to a person who has a penchant for gambling. Cards and dominoes are no different than anything else that can be bet on, which is pretty much everything.
HPsquared · 43m ago
Yeah indeed, phones have many games of chance also.
softwaredoug · 1h ago
When our kids learned about substance abuse, they talk about teenage brains being in a critical period. If they get addicted to a substance, while their brain is developing, the addiction runs deeper than if they were an adult. It's a much bigger challenge to break free of the addiction.
orionsbelt · 53m ago
Sounds delightful. Now do it for adults.
- an adult phone addict
teekert · 49m ago
Our school started this year: Heard one kid says: "What am I supposed to do in the breaks!!" OMG. But, the kids are playing games, talking to each other. Learning viral skills for the workplace all while relaxing. Winwinwin.
Simulacra · 37m ago
We played chess in school
duxup · 1h ago
There's no good description of the actual ban here?
At my kid's school phones and all other electronics can't be visible when class starts or ends or the teacher takes it.
I'm ok with that.
Some of the more universal bans I don't get, we should be educating kids on responsible usage, total ban seems like just pushing bad choices down the road.
Aurornis · 1h ago
> There's no good description of the actual ban here?
> At my kid's school phones and all other electronics can't be visible when class starts or ends or the teacher takes it.
All of these articles are so confusing to me because they act like banning smartphones in class is something new. Is this actually new? Were there schools where students weren’t getting in trouble for using phones during class?
The closest thing I’ve seen to an actual ban is a rule that phones must be kept in lockers during the entire school day, including between classes and during lunch. I could see this requiring adjustment for kids.
However I’m baffled by the articles that imply smartphones were not banned from use during class. Was this really ever a thing?
duxup · 1h ago
My kid's middle school made national news for their ban for several weeks.
Really it wasn't a new thing at all, just enforced appropriately. Teacher sees electronics (of any kind) and it's taken and you pick it up at the office. Multiple violations and parents get to meet with the staff to talk about it (that's the real kicker).
Yeah it wasn't new, for some reason these articles just never mention that it's really about a "new" policy that means actual enforcement.
Aurornis · 1h ago
> Yeah it wasn't new, for some reason these articles just never mention that it's really about a "new" policy that means actual enforcement
This is confirming some of my suspicion.
Smartphone ban articles are trending, so journalists feel pressured to write something about it. They all around to schools and learn about their smartphone policy, then write that as a new-ish thing so they can jump on the trend.
cooperadymas · 1h ago
The first sentence of the article:
> New York City students are one week into the statewide phone ban.
Yes, this is a new thing.
throwup238 · 54m ago
The statewide ban is a new thing, but phones were already banned when I went to school decades ago, along with gameboys, MP3 players, and all other electronics except a calculator. If you had it out in class, it would get taken away.
That kids were ever allowed smartphones to begin with is a regression from the status quo we had not long ago.
macNchz · 33m ago
It sounds to me like the distinction here is that the ban in NY specifies the entire school day, as opposed to just during class.
duxup · 56m ago
I think the other user's question is asking a broader question than you're answering. They likely know the statewide ban is new, but the school policy may not be entirely new.
Unlikely that phone usage was unlimited in class with no restrictions before the statewide ban.
JumpCrisscross · 1h ago
> we should be educating kids on responsible usage, total ban seems like just pushing bad choices down the road
Even if this is all it’s doing, that’s a win.
Most adults haven’t figured out responsible usage. Down the road, their brains will be more developed. And down the road, the average among them won’t need to learn at the rate we need them to now.
duxup · 1h ago
I feel like your description conflicts.
If adults can't manage themselves with phones then down the road makes no difference.
I feel like experience builds good choices and total bans are like just putting blinders on.
My oldest had supervised access to a phone / tablet for a while, when he downloads a game now he takes the game to gauge how much it relies on micro-transactions and so on and passes on it immediately if he thinks it is bad. That only comes form experience, and probably better to learn it when a parent can talk to him about these things rather than later in life when he is blowing his own money.
cooperadymas · 58m ago
> There's no good description of the actual ban here?
The first sentence of this article links to information about the ban itself.
Later in the article it summarizes how it is enforced.
> Schools have rolled out a range of strategies, with most schools either collecting phones at arrival and storing them in lockers or distributing magnetic pouches that have to be locked and unlocked at the beginning and end of the day.
Johnny555 · 27m ago
>The first sentence of this article links to information about the ban itself.
That article gives little information that's not in the original one, even clicking through to the article linked in that linked article gives scant details.
A personal internet-enabled device is any electronic device not issued by a school or NYCPS program that can connect to the internet, allowing the user to access content online. Examples of these personal devices include:
* Communication Devices, such as cell phones, smartphones, and smartwatches.
* Computing Devices, such as laptops, tablets, and iPads.
* Portable music and entertainment systems, such as MP3 players and game consoles.
They describe the ban in the article. Kids put their phone in pouches at the start of school and get them back at the end of the day. They say they're magnetic, I assume that describes some kind of lock or means to prevent use.
rovr138 · 1h ago
Maybe like the magnetic tags they use at stores.
majorchord · 1h ago
Apparently even suggesting that the post title needs a location in it gets you downvoted.
Simulacra · 1h ago
I like this, phones have become too severe of a distraction throughout the school day, especially in lessons. I don't mind if students have their phone at lunchtime, or outside of the academic time, but allowing them to have their phones in class has just been ruinous.
ranger_danger · 1h ago
What ban where?
Not everyone wants to read an article to even find out the location they are talking about or if this is relevant to them... otherwise what's the point of titles and headlines?
We can write much better post titles than this.
bmacho · 1h ago
Original title:
From burner phones to decks of cards: NYC teens are adjusting to the smartphone ban
rovr138 · 1h ago
It's in the article.
Come on people, read.
> Schools have rolled out a range of strategies, with most schools either collecting phones at arrival and storing them in lockers or distributing magnetic pouches that have to be locked and unlocked at the beginning and end of the day.
JumpCrisscross · 1h ago
To be fair, the title has been editorialized.
From the guidelines: “…please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.”
(I’ve flagged. Happy to unflag once title is fixed.)
Yes I understand it's in the article, but that wasn't my point.
People from all over the world read this site and many won't click on articles they aren't sure are relevant to them... why can't we put even the location of the story in the title? Is that too much to ask?
rovr138 · 1h ago
I don't think the relevant part is where there's a smartphone ban. It's that teens are adjusting to the ban on their phones. That even if they're always on them, they can actually disconnect and adjust to it.
ranger_danger · 1h ago
I don't presume to know people's reasons for wanting to read a story or not... I just think we should at least put the applicable location in the title.
Despite that, there are still parents that complain, they are as addicted to texting with their kids all day as their kids are addicted to the phone.
Despite those complaints, it’s great to see that the ban has seemingly nudged things in a healthier direction. Its a failure of leadership that schools needed a statewide ban to make such an obviously positive change.
The related issue is parents are overly protective of teens and don't give them enough independence. You see this in a lot of different ways from parents wanting to text their kids, to only letting kids do highly managed structured activities, to treating teens as their best friends, to helicopter parenting protecting kids from all adversity, etc etc
And a similar thing happens not just with parents, but society, there are not a lot of places teens can just hang out. A lot of fun things teens would do increasingly ban minors.
If you want teens off devices, you need to give them alternatives
My dog stares up at someone until they acknowledge him. Then I end up talking to the person. And everyone has a nice interaction. Usually they get a nice serotonin bump.
I'm pretty sure there's an awful lot more to it.
And the worst part is that that made sense to me for a few days.
Big screen = professional tech person. Small screen = phone addicted loser.
HN tabs open on both.
The kids who are really abusing their phone have parents who don't care to deal with it and they're not reading the emails. The emails just hassle the parents of the kids who already don't do the bad thing.
Now if they see a phone it's taken and if taken enough times (twice) the parents have to go to the office to retrieve the phone and have a meeting.
Pressure is now on the parents and kids who are the problem.
I guess I'm probably preaching to the choir here on HN, but the amount of social woes we are currently experiencing that are indirectly the result of a dramatic increase in social media consumption is a lot higher than I think most people expect.
There are just so many aspects of life that one only really gets nudged into doing at least partially out of boredom, despite ultimately fulfilling so much more. When you can stave off boredom instantly and indefinitely, there are all kinds of experiences that will be substituted.
I recently heard the comedian Jimmy Carr make an excellent comment about how we as a society think of boredom as a negative, when it's actually a positive: "Boredom is just unacknowledged serenity."
This. People these days talk about boredom like it's the worst thing ever.
Though what bothers me is all the high schools mentioned are the top prestigious ones you had to apply to, not zoned. Brooklyn Tech, Gramercy Arts, Bronx Science, I'm surprised no comments from Stuyvesant students.
> Alia Soliman, a senior at Bronx Science, said cards “are making a big comeback.” She said kids are playing poker when they’re done with their work in some classes.
Ha! When I was in NYC high school in the 90s we were not allowed to have playing cards or dominoes. The staff would confiscate them because it was believed to encourage gambling. Quite amusing that now they are the saving a generation of kids from mindless scrolling.
- an adult phone addict
At my kid's school phones and all other electronics can't be visible when class starts or ends or the teacher takes it.
I'm ok with that.
Some of the more universal bans I don't get, we should be educating kids on responsible usage, total ban seems like just pushing bad choices down the road.
> At my kid's school phones and all other electronics can't be visible when class starts or ends or the teacher takes it.
All of these articles are so confusing to me because they act like banning smartphones in class is something new. Is this actually new? Were there schools where students weren’t getting in trouble for using phones during class?
The closest thing I’ve seen to an actual ban is a rule that phones must be kept in lockers during the entire school day, including between classes and during lunch. I could see this requiring adjustment for kids.
However I’m baffled by the articles that imply smartphones were not banned from use during class. Was this really ever a thing?
Really it wasn't a new thing at all, just enforced appropriately. Teacher sees electronics (of any kind) and it's taken and you pick it up at the office. Multiple violations and parents get to meet with the staff to talk about it (that's the real kicker).
Yeah it wasn't new, for some reason these articles just never mention that it's really about a "new" policy that means actual enforcement.
This is confirming some of my suspicion.
Smartphone ban articles are trending, so journalists feel pressured to write something about it. They all around to schools and learn about their smartphone policy, then write that as a new-ish thing so they can jump on the trend.
> New York City students are one week into the statewide phone ban.
Yes, this is a new thing.
That kids were ever allowed smartphones to begin with is a regression from the status quo we had not long ago.
Unlikely that phone usage was unlimited in class with no restrictions before the statewide ban.
Even if this is all it’s doing, that’s a win.
Most adults haven’t figured out responsible usage. Down the road, their brains will be more developed. And down the road, the average among them won’t need to learn at the rate we need them to now.
If adults can't manage themselves with phones then down the road makes no difference.
I feel like experience builds good choices and total bans are like just putting blinders on.
My oldest had supervised access to a phone / tablet for a while, when he downloads a game now he takes the game to gauge how much it relies on micro-transactions and so on and passes on it immediately if he thinks it is bad. That only comes form experience, and probably better to learn it when a parent can talk to him about these things rather than later in life when he is blowing his own money.
The first sentence of this article links to information about the ban itself.
Later in the article it summarizes how it is enforced.
> Schools have rolled out a range of strategies, with most schools either collecting phones at arrival and storing them in lockers or distributing magnetic pouches that have to be locked and unlocked at the beginning and end of the day.
That article gives little information that's not in the original one, even clicking through to the article linked in that linked article gives scant details.
Here's the NYC public school district policy:
https://www.schools.nyc.gov/about-us/policies/cell-phone-and...
This is what's covered under the ban:
A personal internet-enabled device is any electronic device not issued by a school or NYCPS program that can connect to the internet, allowing the user to access content online. Examples of these personal devices include:
Not everyone wants to read an article to even find out the location they are talking about or if this is relevant to them... otherwise what's the point of titles and headlines?
We can write much better post titles than this.
Come on people, read.
> Schools have rolled out a range of strategies, with most schools either collecting phones at arrival and storing them in lockers or distributing magnetic pouches that have to be locked and unlocked at the beginning and end of the day.
From the guidelines: “…please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.”
(I’ve flagged. Happy to unflag once title is fixed.)
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
People from all over the world read this site and many won't click on articles they aren't sure are relevant to them... why can't we put even the location of the story in the title? Is that too much to ask?