Six years ago, as officials at the Netherlands’ Calvijn College began considering whether to ban phones from their schools, the idea left some students aghast.
“We were asked whether we thought we were living in the 1800s,” said Jan Bakker, the chair of the college, whose students range in age from 12 to 18 years.
While the majority backed the idea, about 20 percent of the parents, teachers and students surveyed were staunchly opposed. Some were parents who worried about not being able to get hold of their children during the day, while a handful of teachers argued it would be better to embrace new technologies rather than shun them.
Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons
Still, school officials pushed forward.
“Walking through the corridors and the school yard, you would see all the children were on their smartphones. Conversations were missing, the table tennis tables were empty,” said Bakker. “Basically we were losing the social culture.”
Four years after Calvijn College became one of the first schools in the Netherlands to go smartphone-free, it’s no longer an outlier. As students head back into classrooms across mainland Europe, a growing number of them will be forced to leave their mobile phones behind; In France, 200 secondary schools are testing a ban while French-speaking primary schools in Wallonia and Brussels, in Belgium, have moved forward with their own prohibitions. In Hungary, a new decree requires schools to collect students’ phones and smart devices at the start of the day.
Italy and Greece have adopted milder approaches, allowing students to carry their phones with them through the day but barring their use in classrooms.
For those at Calvijn College, the sweeping tide of change is thrilling. From the moment they began requiring students to either leave their phones at home or lock them up for the day, school officials watched as the culture of the school transformed.
“Basically what we had lost, we got back,” said Bakker. “The students playing with each other and talking to each other. And a lot less interruptions in the lessons.”
Other schools across the country began getting in touch, curious about the impact of the ban. In January, the Dutch government entered the debate, urging schools to ban mobile phones, tablets and smartwatches from most secondary school classrooms across the country. The recommendation was recently extended to primary schools.
Late last year, as secondary schools across the Netherlands geared up to follow the recommendations, researchers at Radboud University seized on the chance to take a before and after snapshot of the change.
They polled hundreds of students and parents, as well as dozens of teachers, at two schools with imminent plans to do away with mobile phones on school premises, visiting the schools again three months after the ban was enacted.
About 20 percent of students reported that they were less distracted once smartphones were off limits, said Loes Pouwels, one of the researchers, while teachers described students as being more attentive and focused on their work in class.
“So I think in terms of cognitive functioning, overall it was a positive thing,” Pouwels said.
Many students also reported more real-life social interactions and that the quality of these interactions had improved. They also found a reduction in cyberbullying as students were offline more of the time.
Three months after the ban, however, not all students had embraced the idea. About 40 percent said that going phone-free had allowed them to better enjoy their breaks while 37 percent said they missed their phones.
“I am forced to socialise when I’m not in the mood, which is often,” one respondent told researchers.
At Calvijn College, officials have little doubt that the ban has been positive. When it was first rolled out, there had been talk of eventually allowing older students to incorporate phones back into their school day.
The idea was dropped after the changes they observed, said Bakker.
“That discussion is gone. Nobody is talking about that.”
Instead it has been replaced with a quiet pride that, when it comes to smartphones in classrooms, the school has been well ahead of the curve. “We went through a time when people were saying that we weren’t a modern school, that we were going back in time,” Bakker said.
Nowadays it’s the opposite, he added. “It feels like a nice confirmation that the trouble we went through was not for nothing.”
April 28 to May 4 During the Japanese colonial era, a city’s “first” high school typically served Japanese students, while Taiwanese attended the “second” high school. Only in Taichung was this reversed. That’s because when Taichung First High School opened its doors on May 1, 1915 to serve Taiwanese students who were previously barred from secondary education, it was the only high school in town. Former principal Hideo Azukisawa threatened to quit when the government in 1922 attempted to transfer the “first” designation to a new local high school for Japanese students, leading to this unusual situation. Prior to the Taichung First
The Ministry of Education last month proposed a nationwide ban on mobile devices in schools, aiming to curb concerns over student phone addiction. Under the revised regulation, which will take effect in August, teachers and schools will be required to collect mobile devices — including phones, laptops and wearables devices — for safekeeping during school hours, unless they are being used for educational purposes. For Chang Fong-ching (張鳳琴), the ban will have a positive impact. “It’s a good move,” says the professor in the department of
On April 17, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) launched a bold campaign to revive and revitalize the KMT base by calling for an impromptu rally at the Taipei prosecutor’s offices to protest recent arrests of KMT recall campaigners over allegations of forgery and fraud involving signatures of dead voters. The protest had no time to apply for permits and was illegal, but that played into the sense of opposition grievance at alleged weaponization of the judiciary by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to “annihilate” the opposition parties. Blamed for faltering recall campaigns and faced with a KMT chair
Article 2 of the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (中華民國憲法增修條文) stipulates that upon a vote of no confidence in the premier, the president can dissolve the legislature within 10 days. If the legislature is dissolved, a new legislative election must be held within 60 days, and the legislators’ terms will then be reckoned from that election. Two weeks ago Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) proposed that the legislature hold a vote of no confidence in the premier and dare the president to dissolve the legislature. The legislature is currently controlled
RSS