this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025
357 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

72498 readers
4548 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zapzap 27 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The "study" is that they asked teachers, "Hey, how's it been going?" and the teachers answered, "I feel like my students are paying attention more now."

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Polling professionals and experts on their opinions is perfectly reasonable to publish as a preliminary study on a subject

[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Sure, but it is not a study general public, like us on lemmy, should care about. It needs a follow up before making decisions.

Yet you can already see people calling for phone bans...

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It is absolutely relevant enough to be published publicly.

Yet you can already see people calling for phone bans...

Yes, because they should've been banned 10 years ago

[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago

Based on what data?

[–] zapzap 1 points 2 days ago

It's a sensible first step.

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Who better to poll than teachers for this type of study? They are the ones in the trenches and can gauge the results.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You shouldn't poll anyone, instead look at test results. If there is better focus, it'll improve learning outcomes like test scores, graduation rates, and reduces instances of cheating. IMO, if we poll anyone, it should be parents about how much assistance they give their kids (i.e. are they filling in the gaps in their education less?).

It's nice that teachers think kids are paying more attention, but that only matters if kids are learning more.

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That's another type of study that is also worthwhile. But the effects of distracted students on teachers and the classroom as a whole is also relevant.

[–] HollowNaught@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, but there's a huge degree of bias whenever you ask people anything. Obviously teachers are going to think phones are detrimental to class focus, and thus they're more likely to say their ban helped with that same focus

Same thing If you asked students, but reversed

Both great metrics to have, true.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sure, I just don't trust results from subjective studies, unless it's tracking trends over time. So maybe if they had opinion polls like this before smartphones were a thing in classrooms, while smartphones were a thing, and after they were banned I'd trust the results somewhat. But if we're just tracking an after-the-fact poll, it just feels like confirmation bias. I believe teachers have an incentive to overstate the impact of policies that give them more control, because they want to encourage more such policies, even if they aren't effective at achieving tangible results.

So yeah, I distrust this type of study. I don't think it's necessarily worthless, I just don't think many conclusions can be taken from it.

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You can conclude that teachers experience a better classroom environment. There was also 1/3 that did observe academic improvement.

E: Also, a teachers subjective experience is still an objective result if you are considering the qol aspect of the policy.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mostly care about longer term impacts. The ban has only been in place for a year and a half, so it's really not much to go on.

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Short term and long term impacts are both worthy of study, surely.

Sure, but short term impacts are generally unreliable, since there are a lot of cases of coincidence, like a good policy having no immediate impact or a bad policy having the desired impact. Longer term studies account for that randomness.

[–] MITM0@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

Teachers can't guage worth a damn

[–] zapzap 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah, like, if you're just gonna ask someone, they'd be the ones to ask.

[–] ClusterBomb@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, except science does not work like that. 😐

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, it does. A subjective response can absolutely be an objective result.

[–] ClusterBomb@lemmy.blahaj.zone -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is not a demonstration and this does not qualify as a scientific proof. 🤷

They polled teachers. It ir like I polled religious and conclude that God exists because God speaks to most of the people I polled. This is not science, sorry not sorry.

Good example! That poll would be a relevant result for a percent of the population the believes in god.