A government minister has said he is “sure all schools” already restrict the use of mobile phones to some extent. Schools minister Damian Hinds about new government guidance encouraging mobile phone bans and about the dangers of screen time for children. Here’s what we learned from his evidence to the education committee. 1. ‘All schools’ restrict phone use Hinds said he was 鈥渟ure all schools have some degree of restriction on using mobile phones鈥. Gillian Keegan 鈥淣owhere is it allowable to pull out your phone in the middle of maths and start doing stuff.” But he said the government was trying to 鈥渃reate a new norm…we want to make the whole school day free of mobile phones and all that comes with that鈥. 鈥淭here鈥檚 never been a pretence that mobile phones aren鈥檛 already severely restricted in most schools.鈥 Announcing the guidance last month, education secretary Gillian Keegan said “around half of schools do not ban mobile phones…and of the half that do, many still allow them in break and lunch times”. 2. ‘Option’ of statutory guidance remains The minister was also asked if the government would make the guidance statutory if it was not followed. He said he thought 鈥渁ctually, pretty much everybody welcomes there being that norm鈥. 鈥淎nd so I鈥檓 not anticipating there being a problem implementing this. But if there were, you鈥檙e quite right, that option remains to make statutory.鈥 3. Hinds shares concerns over school travel contact The government鈥檚 mobile phone guidance set out four 鈥渙ptions鈥 for restrictions, but warned it was 鈥渘ot an exhaustive list鈥. The first option was no phones on school premises, meaning they 鈥渕ust be left at home or with parents鈥. But MPs warned of parents being unable to contact pupils on their way to and from school. Hinds said they were 鈥渞eal concerns鈥, and 鈥淚 think sometimes there has been a misunderstanding of what we鈥檙e talking about鈥. 鈥淪o the prohibition that we have talked about is during the school day, it鈥檚 not to and from school. 鈥淥f course schools may decide to do something else, something extra. I think that would be a minority. But that is absolutely not what we are requiring. And actually I absolutely get the point about travel to and from school and so on.” 4. Pupils can ‘copy out’ timetables MPs also raised concerns about pupils being able to access things like online timetables. Hinds said the government had 鈥渢hought about鈥 timetables, but 鈥渢o be honest, we don鈥檛 think it is insurmountable to copy out a timetable鈥. He said there were 鈥渂igger questions about access to digital learning resources and so on鈥, but added that 鈥渢ypically a phone isn鈥檛 the best way to do that actually. Typically you need a bigger screen, the way you sit is different鈥. 5. Setting a national limit ‘impossible’ During the hearing, Hinds resisted calls to commission guidance from the chief medical officer, Sir Chris Whitty, on “safe” levels of screen time for children. Hinds said he didn鈥檛 disagree with the 鈥渦nderlying principle鈥, but warned of difficulties in setting a cap. 鈥淓ven very small amounts of very harmful activity could be just as bad as relatively quite large amounts of, say, educational, prosocial activity. 鈥淎nd I think for that reason, trying to come up with the magic number of what鈥檚 the limit, I suspect is nigh on impossible.鈥 He pointed to the recommendation that everyone eat five portions of fruit or vegetables a day, from which 鈥渘o harm can come鈥. 鈥淚f you were to say two hours a day online is ok, oh boy there is a lot of harm [that] could come. But also there will be many, many people who are online for more than two hours a day, for whom no harm comes.鈥 6. Online safety law excludes schools to avoid ‘doubling up’ Hinds was also quizzed about why the education technology used in schools was not covered by the new online safety act. Chair Robin Walker said they had heard evidence that the omission meant 鈥渢he child on the way to school on the bus has more protections than the same child in the school in the classroom鈥. But Hinds said it did not apply because there was 鈥渁lready a set of statutory requirements around child protection and child safety, safeguarding in schools鈥. 鈥淭here is already a much fuller regime because it includes in-person inspection by Ofsted. And in formulating the online safety bill as it then was government was seeking to have a proportionate regime which did not double up on regulatory aspects.鈥
User432 13 March 2024 A large part of the issue I haven’t seen being discussed is with teachers no longer telling pupils what the homework is or providing them with the materials to do the homework. It is now all set online and completed online – when answers are to be written in books the screen is still required to read the task and any supporting documents. It’s not just about the school day, it’s about the amount of hours school expect a child to use technology. We see a rise in anxiety and a lack of concentration with pupils, yet we allocate all their homework for them to access on the very device that is beeping at them every second, as a friend, or in most cases, another random child sends a thousand pointless ‘snaps’ and so they are constantly distracted and flicking between homework and various social apps. Surely the first step in reducing the use of screens is to reintroduce homework diaries and make pupils responsible for writing down and understanding their homework and due dates, and enabling them to work off line on at least 65% of homework assignments. This may mean more printing budget required and more thought from teachers in allocating homework but will enable parents to provide screen free time in the evenings – at the moment this is virtually impossible.