Banning phones in schools should be a decision for head teachers and not "imposed nationally by the government", England's children's commissioner has said. Nine in ten secondary schools restrict the use of smartphones, according to a survey of 19,000 schools and colleges commissioned by Dame Rachel de Souza. Dame Rachel said children were racking up hours of screen time at home instead, and that "the people with the real power here are the parents". Her comments come as the general secretary of the UK's largest teaching union said a government ban on phones would "take the pressure off schools". Dame Rachel told BBC Radio 5Live that the vast majority schools were already restricting and banning phones, adding: "Blanket ban if you want, but they're doing it." The former head teacher cast doubt on how effective a ban would be on those schools without strict policies, noting that the government can impose rules but "unless a headteacher really believes it, they won't do it properly". A minority of schools want a ban because they are "worried about parents" not supporting the decision, she said. "That's why I'm saying parents, 'get behind your school'." Dame Rachel told BBC Breakfast that "parents have to remember they are not the friends of their children" but are "there to protect their children [and] put the boundaries around them." Her survey suggests 99.8% of primary and 90% of secondary schools limit pupils' use of phones during the school day. Most primary schools (76%) require pupils to hand in their phones or leave them in a secure place during the day, whereas most secondary schools (79%) say phones must be kept out of sight and not used. The survey did not cover how thoroughly these policies are implemented, or their success rate. A separate survey of 502 eight to 15-year-olds, also commissioned by Dame Rachel, suggests: "These children are not spending these hours on their phones while sat in school," Dame Rachel said in a new report. She said schools should educate young people about online risks - but parents and carers needed more help to manage their children's online habits and technology companies must "take responsibility for making the online world safe". She added that she would back any head teacher's decision to ban phones, but added: "It should always be their choice, based on their knowledge of what's best for the children in their own classrooms, not a direction imposed nationally by the government." However, her report also recommended the government should "conduct more research into the potential benefits of wider restrictions on children's use of phones, particularly social media". The Netflix drama Adolescence has raised awareness of the type of content children can be exposed to online, such as misogyny and violence, and the risks involved. A survey commissioned by BBC Newsfound that more than a third of secondary teachers have reported misogynistic behaviour from pupils at their school in the last week. A government spokesperson said social media platforms already have to take down illegal material under the Online Safety Act, and the same law would soon protect children from other harmful online content. And the government has said there isalready guidance on how schools can restrict the use of phones, which head teachers can decide how to put into practice. But Daniel Kebede, the general secretary of the National Education Union, said he believed a government ban on smartphones in schools would "assist parents, but also take the pressure off schools". "Most schools do have rules in place, but [a ban] would create a uniformity across the school system, which would be very important and ensure that a new culture was developed in which smartphones were not in possession during school time," he said. He said the UK should considerfollowing in Australia's stepswith a social media ban for under-16s, adding: "We have to view the online world, social media and mobile phones in the same prism as we view the tobacco companies. These are harmful to our young people and they need regulating."
Leave school phone bans to head teachers, children's commissioner says
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Children's Commissioner Advocates for Head Teacher Autonomy on School Phone Policies"
Bbc News
7.8
TruthLens AI Summary
Dame Rachel de Souza, England's children's commissioner, has emphasized that decisions regarding smartphone bans in schools should rest with head teachers rather than being mandated by the government. According to a recent survey of 19,000 schools and colleges, approximately 90% of secondary schools already impose restrictions on smartphone usage. Dame Rachel pointed out that while many schools are successfully managing phone use, parents must also play an active role in supporting these policies. She highlighted the importance of parental involvement, urging them to establish boundaries and recognize their responsibilities in guiding their children's online behavior. She noted that while blanket bans may be suggested, schools are already implementing their own measures to control phone usage, which vary significantly in effectiveness depending on the leadership and commitment of individual head teachers.
In her discussions, Dame Rachel acknowledged the need for further research into the benefits of broader restrictions on children's smartphone use, particularly concerning social media platforms. She indicated that while schools should educate students about the risks associated with online activities, parents also require assistance in managing their children's technology habits. The issue of online safety has gained prominence, especially following the release of the Netflix drama 'Adolescence,' which shed light on the harmful content children may encounter online. The government's existing Online Safety Act aims to mitigate these risks by ensuring that social media platforms are held accountable for illegal content. However, the general secretary of the National Education Union, Daniel Kebede, argued that a government-enforced ban on smartphones could alleviate pressure on schools and create a unified approach to managing mobile phone use in educational settings. He advocated for a cultural shift that would regard mobile phones and social media with the same caution as harmful substances, suggesting that protective measures should be taken to safeguard young people's well-being.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article addresses the ongoing debate surrounding the regulation of smartphone usage in schools, emphasizing the need for head teachers to have autonomy over such decisions rather than having a blanket national policy imposed by the government. Dame Rachel de Souza, England's children's commissioner, highlights the existing practices within schools, revealing that a significant majority already impose restrictions on phone usage. The article raises questions about the role of parents and the effectiveness of government interventions, presenting a nuanced view of the issue.
Motivation Behind the Article
The piece appears to aim at shifting the conversation about smartphone bans in schools from a top-down governmental approach to a more localized, school-specific strategy. By advocating for head teachers to have the final say, the article suggests a potential empowerment of school leaders and the acknowledgment of their unique understanding of their students' needs.
Public Perception
This article seeks to create a perception that most schools are already managing smartphone usage effectively. It encourages parental involvement and support for school policies, potentially fostering a community-oriented attitude. The emphasis on parents needing to set boundaries may resonate with audiences concerned about children's screen time and its implications for education.
Potential Concealment of Information
While the article presents a strong case for localized decision-making, it lacks detailed insights into how comprehensively these policies are enforced and their actual success rates. By not addressing these points, there may be an implication that the existing measures are sufficient without a critical examination of their effectiveness.
Manipulation Assessment
In terms of manipulative potential, the article has a moderate degree of manipulation. It uses persuasive language to frame the issue in a way that supports the narrative of decentralized decision-making while simultaneously emphasizing parental responsibility. This could lead to a bias in how readers perceive the necessity and effectiveness of government intervention.
Reliability of Information
The information presented in the article appears to be credible, as it references a survey of schools and a separate survey of children. However, the lack of detail regarding the implementation and success of the policies could lead to questions about the reliability of the conclusions drawn.
Community Resonance
The piece is likely to resonate with communities that prioritize parental involvement in education, as well as those concerned about the impact of technology on children. It may appeal more to parents, educators, and policymakers looking for solutions that empower schools rather than overarching regulations from the government.
Economic and Political Implications
The discussion around smartphone bans could influence educational policies and practices, potentially affecting school funding and resources dedicated to technology. If more schools enforce bans, there may be a shift in how educational technology companies approach their products and marketing strategies.
Global Context and Power Dynamics
While this article primarily focuses on the UK context, it reflects broader global concerns regarding children's screen time and technology's impact on education. These discussions are relevant to ongoing debates about digital literacy and child welfare worldwide.
Use of Artificial Intelligence
There is no direct indication that AI was used in drafting this article. However, the structured presentation of data and the framing of arguments might suggest the influence of AI-driven content strategies in newsrooms aiming for clarity and engagement.
Conclusion
Ultimately, the article presents a case for localized decision-making regarding smartphone bans in schools while encouraging parental involvement. It effectively highlights existing practices but leaves some critical questions unanswered, which could affect its overall credibility.