Recently, the conversation in regards to the persistent issue of the lack of teachers has been turned towards the issue of smartphone usage in high schools by Education Minister Norma Foley. She’s planning a ban in response to studies that associate mobile device usage with student inattentiveness and online bullying. The intended ban has been met with varying viewpoints from parents and educators, with some doubting it’s significance, timing, and potential to detract from other educational challenges, whilst others have generally endorsed the concept.
Guidance counsellor at Loreto College, St Stephen’s Green, Donnchadh O’Mahony, states that a smartphone prohibition wouldn’t be his top concern. He believes the severe teacher shortage needs to be emphasised as urgently as possible, as the minister has not given it as much attention as required. He also mentions that educators and principals have likely found the announcement somewhat tiresome. His school utilises iPads, which are simpler to keep an eye on due to their size, mitigating concerns like students potentially recording each other or a teacher.
Sonya Heslin, a teacher at Bandon Grammar School in Co Cork, considers the minister’s initiative as ill-timed, requiring extensive deliberation. She believes it’s a sensitive subject calling for many in-depth discussions, questioning the feasibility of a complete ban.
Contrarily, a parent, Claire Hunt, supports Foley’s plan. She views the image of her children incessantly engrossed in their phones as disheartening. She thinks schools taking action partly restores parental control.
Hunt holds the view that smartphones contribute to bullying, and she fears that their use in schools, although often surreptitious, is becoming excessive. Nonetheless, she isn’t advocating for a state-controlled approach, but rather she recommends enforcing certain boundaries.
She illustrates this with an anecdote about her 14-year-old daughter, who attended a college in Ireland where phone usage was restricted to just an hour each evening. Her daughter reported not missing her phone at all, enjoyed the absence of it, and did not experience any fear of missing out. Since returning from the college, Hunt notes that her daughter does not use her phone much. However, she concedes that any prohibition needs to be flexible enough to cater to children with special requirements.
Father of five, Alan La Casse, labels the proposed ban as absurd, arguing that other, much bigger problems impact our schools. He dismisses the notion that a prohibition could aid in preventing cyberbullying, calling it preposterous. He notes that cyberbullying typically occurs outside school hours, when children regain access to their phones.
Mary O’Grady, a mother of four, recognises the potential upsides of effectuating a ban. Despite her son’s school’s theoretical prohibition on phone use, her son informs her that his peers are continuously using their phones. She expresses concern about students’ distraction, citing recorded instances of teachers in the act of doing something captured via their phones. She highlights the educational objectives of the school and clarifies that teaching should not be seen as merely supervising children.
Jackie Aungier, a mother of two, suggests that a de facto smartphone ban is already in place in many secondary schools, even though enforcement levels may differ. She states that a written ban is already present in the code of conduct of most schools, with varying degrees of enforcement in different institutions.
Aungier discerns that the uproar will subside after a few weeks and then everything will return to its normal rhythm. She perceives it as an attempt by the Department of Education to safeguard itself and opt for an easy task to create an illusion of taking action, rather than addressing serious matters.
Dr Afif El Khuffash, a paediatrician and father of two, disagrees with the proposition to impose a smartphone ban in secondary schools. According to him, banning may not lead to lowering bullying incidents. He emphasizes that the issue of bullying is more driven by behaviour rather than the tools used. He contests, “Merely confiscating the cell phones doesn’t evade the issue. Cell phones can be educational and essential for safety. Instead of prohibiting, schools should educate children on the sensible use of phones and encourage a positive environment to curtail bullying.”
Katie Kennedy, a mother of three, feels the Minister introduced the ban to seek attention. Her son, like his elder siblings, will have to keep his phone aside during school hours. Katie explains, “children can understand the rules. Removing the phone, which is a lifeline for many, if they take it out during classes is considered disrespectful.” She finds the policy illogical as some secondary school students are adults. She disagrees with phone bans as a concept, arguing that it’s more important to teach a child how to handle a phone responsibly. “The cell phones are here to stay. Why arm them with a tool and not instruct them to use it effectively?” she reasons.