Distraction or asset to learning?

TTUTA

THE RECENT ban by the French authorities on the use of smartphones, tablets and other internet-connected devices in the classroom should come as no surprise to us here in Trinidad and Tobago, given the challenges teachers have been facing in the classroom regarding said technology.

The ban was based on numerous studies which have indicated that these devices can be more of a liability than an asset to the delivery of curriculum. Indeed, the French authorities have located the ban as an outcome of a public health concern, citing issues of cyber addiction, sleep disruption and bullying as outcomes of the growing phenomenon of screen addiction.

The ban covers students three-five years of age and gives them the option of turning the devices off while at school. However, acknowledging the benefits of the technology there are exceptions to the ban. These include students with disabilities and its use in the classroom and school for pedagogical purposes.

The law follows a 2010 ban covering the use of smartphones during all teaching activities. The French authorities have thus clearly indicated that while this may be a technological advance, it should not be allowed to monopolise lives.

While many parents may argue that these devices are essential safety and security tools and thus insist on their children having them while at school, very few parents insist and ensure that they are used as teaching and learning devices. Teachers have been consistently complaining that they pose a serious distraction to the teaching and learning process.

Unfortunately, while many parents acknowledge the constitutional right of their child to ownership and enjoyment of property, the responsibility that accompanies the enjoyment of such rights are often ignored. Our schools’ authorities are constantly faced with the challenges of abuse/misuse of the technology as well as damage and loss of such property. Treating with these issues is very time consuming and distracts from the teaching and learning process.

While many may argue that such technology places the world of information literally at the fingertips of students, such access requires a certain level of maturity, given the ease with which misinformation and falsehoods can be propagated using such media. Many children are given these devices from a very tender age and suffer “screen addiction” in quick time.

This phenomenon has prompted researchers and mental health experts to coin the term “nomophobia,” an abbreviation for “no mobile phone phobia” or the fear of not being able to use a cell phone or smart device. A recent study in the United Kingdom showed that approximately 66 per cent of people surveyed had some form of nomophobia.

Studies in South Korea conducted on teenagers with internet and smartphone addiction showed their brains had higher levels of neurotransmitters that slow down neurons, resulting in reduced levels of control and attention and rendering people more susceptible to distractions.

A 2015 study conducted by the London School of Economics and Political Science showed that banning smartphones in schools resulted in a marked improvement in test scores, especially among low achieving students. The study indicates that low achieving students are more likely to be distracted by the presence of these devices, further suggesting that restricting mobile phone use can be a low-cost policy to reduce educational inequalities.

While it may have been perfectly legal for students to bring these devices to school according to the policy position of the Ministry of Education, many school administrators have been forced to restrict the use of these devices in the classroom owing to the distraction they posed. Some have even adopted the extreme and legally risky position of taking the devices away from students for the duration of the school day.

Cyberbullying via the engagement of social media has also become prevalent among many students, very often leading to violent confrontations.

The recent position adopted by the French authorities weighed against the “bring your own device to school policy” adopted by some countries should cause us here in Trinidad and Tobago to rethink our decade-old policy position regarding the use of communication technologies in all its forms, given the emergence of new research.

While the problem may vary in magnitude from school to school, it is clear that there are certain mental and physical health risks associated with the misuse/abuse of these communication technologies and parents and the wider society would do well to educate themselves on the issue. These devices must be restricted to being an asset to learning and not a liability.