Madison

Why I'm broadly skeptical of device bans in K-12

Watching a local phone ban policy snake through the community this week. Like others have already said, my concern is mostly related to enforcement, as we know enforcement for all school policy lands unevenly across school populations at the expense of Black students. But also, my experience is that the local school system is not communicative in a way that reinforces student and parent desires for two-way communication, especially considering the logistics of having kids who need transportation and after school arrangements.

When I was young, there was a pay phone on every corner and a central landline in every home. We don’t live in that world anymore – in our world, phones and other personal devices are part of our daily processes for school, work and family logistics and communication with friends, family and the broader world. Same for kids with devices.

None of this means screens are neutral or that Jon Haidt is entirely wrong about attention and comparison dynamics. But Haidt et al diagnose a genuine social problem and locate the cause as technology design, then arrive at solutions that are driven by individual consumer behavior. Ultimately he does not call for taxing and regulating algorithmic platforms, regulating algorithmic amplification of distress, regulating algorithmic amplification of marketing, reducing economic precarity, or doing anything about climate change linked to tech. All of the behavioral changes indicated (device bans, Faraday bags) set up fights between kids and adults on phone access at the individual behavior level, fights with consequences that generally land harder on certain students.

While this issue roils locally, my kiddo’s locker was broken for two months this year, and while waiting for repair, she got dinged for having her device in her pocket in class when the locker wasn’t a secure option. She had shoes stolen from her locker in the meantime, proving the point.

I spoke with my kiddo at length to get her thoughts. Her takeaway as an 8th grader is that kids have second and third secret devices that they hide from parents and teachers already – often, mom and dad’s old devices slipped from a junk drawer and connected to wi-fi. She suggested we adults don’t fully appreciate the kids’ ingenuity around their devices, and how they view their phones and tablets as the means to get and stay connected with one another.

While talking, I was reminded of the dance between students and the school system’s IT department during the COVID-19 shutdown. In our community, the kids were in remote learning for a full year and a half, and the IT department chased them around their approved digital tools like a game of whack a mole, shutting down access to chat and collaboration. In the meantime, almost no socialization happened between students that wasn’t directly observed by teachers, on camera. By 2021, the kids were engaged in secret, digital note-passing, chatting within Google docs and slide decks to avoid teacher surveillance. Where there is a will, there is a way.

Here’s one way to use an AI summary function: stress testing opinion pieces against the facts. I ran the latest essay from local urban development curmudgeon Paul Fanlund through Claude and asked it to stress-test his arguments about ageism and city development in Madison, WI. Here’s what it says:

“On housing, Fanlund implies that development pressure is ideological overreach and that its critics skew old. Neither holds. Madison has a genuine supply problemthe city is targeting 15,000 new homes by 2030, and opposition to density isn’t age-sorted; it cuts across longtime homeowners who feel the planning process has been opaque.

“On streets, the column is flatly at odds with the evidence. Road diets reduce crash frequency and severity, and decrease pedestrian exposure to traffic. Older adults are among the most vulnerable pedestrians — street calming protects them more than it inconveniences them. Framing lane reductions as an anti-senior policy inverts what the safety data actually shows.

“There’s also a structural irony: Fanlund criticizes generational stereotyping while using “older residents” as shorthand for a specific political position on cars and density. That’s the same move, just pointed in a direction he agrees with.”

I served for two years on a traffic commission, and in my experience the civic tension between “road diets” and other road calming methods is real. The problem with advocating for traditional interventions like signage over modern interventions like road diets and roundabouts? Nobody listens to them.

Fellow Madisonians, someone pulled together a website ranking local businesses in Madison by how local they are (by what criteria, idk). In my experience, this is one way we’re likely to see AI used in the next couple of years, via prototyping and/or executing ideas that result in dynamic websites.