Embracing the Bogeyman

If you’ve read most of what I’ve written in this column about AI, social media, smartphones, and traditional schools trying to ban all of these recently, you know that I’m not convinced schools know what they are doing, whether it be banning these potential learning tools or using them more effectively in the learning process.

My friend Julia Freeland Fisher recently wrote an article for Getting Smart online titled “Beyond Bans: Schools’ Role in a Hard Reset on the ‘Phone-Based Childhood.’” I read with interest Fisher’s take on the dilemma facing us, both inside public schools and out, when it comes to how we use these relatively new devices and technology for the betterment – not the demise – of our young learners. Fisher writes,

“Last month, a story by Jonathan Haidt in The Atlantic broke through the firewall that often separates education reform and parenting conversations: people from both my personal and professional network circulated Haidt’s scathing take on the immense costs that smartphones and social media have exacted on children and adolescents.”

“In ‘End the Phone-Based Childhood Now,’ Haidt carefully traces the decline of play and independence (and its relationship to increased risk aversion and anxiety), the rise of smartphones (and the harms of 24/7 access to an under-regulated digital world on brain development), and the dark side of techno-optimism (that laid the foundation for a whole generation to get swept up in new tools that had few guardrails in place).”

“His piece masterfully weaves together a host of data points demonstrating how, in the course of a single decade, childhood and adolescence were ‘rewired’ to be ‘more sedentary, solitary, virtual and incompatible with healthy human development.’ The shift was seismic. ‘Once young people began carrying the entire internet in their pockets, available to them day and night, it altered their daily experiences and developmental pathways across the board,’ Haidt writes. ‘Friendship, dating, sexuality, exercise, sleep, academics, politics, family dynamics, identity – all were affected.’”

“Haidt concludes his manifesto with four simple (although not necessarily easy) steps to correcting course: 1) no smartphones before high school, 2) no social media before 16, 3) no phones in schools, and 4) more independence, free play, and responsibility in the real world.”

“His recommendations are directed at society as a whole. But the belie an inconvenient truth that education systems must face head-on: schools are inextricably linked to the good, bad, and ugly of what’s happening in the consumer market. Schools may not be responsible for the dumpster fire that phones and social media have ignited, but they are also one of the few institutions – besides the highly decentralized institution of the ‘family’ – with the power to protect and enrich young people’s social lives and healthy development.”

“Banning phones in schools could help. But based on my own research, here are three things that education policymakers, systems leaders, and edtech providers will need to wrestle with if they want to take Haidt’s recommendations seriously:

“Advocate for Business Model and Policies that Promote Prosocial Behavior – One of the ironies of the devastating disconnection that phones and social media have produced is that these tools, at their inception, were breakthroughs in scaling connection itself.”

“Used properly, dreaded screen time can morph into precious face time, connecting us across time zones, expanding the reach of our networks, and affording us more frequent and low-cost conversations with loved ones and colleagues around the world.”

“Those very affordances could make the four walls of schools radically more permeable: Imagine a classroom where, at the press of a button, middle schoolers could talk to an actual scientist about a project they’re working on, or high schoolers could hear about a wide range of college and career experiences from alumni of their school. These are not just possible, but incredibly affordable, with modern technology.”

“But until we reckon with an acute lack of incentives and policies to build positive social connection, banning phones is likely the safest route. Because if the past twenty years of social media have taught us one thing, it’s that we have a startling dearth of business models and policies that support tech that promotes prosocial behavior. Social media platforms make money on engagement, and even more money on addiction. There are few business incentives to encourage young people to build positive connections online, much less to spend more of their time deepening and diversifying connections offline.”

…

“Build Family Engagement to Buoy Collective Action – School and families are going to have to work together when it comes to a hard reset on tech use and social media. That won’t be easy.”

“As Haidt points out, part of what’s driven troubling rates of tech addiction and ensuing isolation has less to do with technology and more to do with a collective action problem: parents, schools, and policymakers struggle to define, agree upon, and deliver on what’s ‘good’ for children.”

…

“Build Real-World Experiences in the Age of AI – There’s another article that should lend urgency to getting this right. It’s a memo from the $35 billion dollar venture capital firm Andreesen Horowitz called ‘It’s Not a Computer, It’s a Companion!’ It came out last summer and hasn’t made the rounds in my education or parenting circles. But it needs to.”

“It’s a road map to a dystopian future where AI companions ‘live among us’, where AI boyfriends and girlfriends are touted as ‘better than’ the real thing, and where Silicon Valley cashes out on the very same vulnerabilities that social media has exploited.”

“Read alongside Haidt’s piece, the memo should make your blood boil. Nowhere does the word loneliness appear despite being the bedrock and fuel for this emerging market of AI companions.”

…

“The picture these two articles paint is not a pretty one: but it’s one where schools must play an even larger leadership role. By prioritizing prosocial behavior, investing in deeper family engagement, and leaning into the power of real-world learning, schools can help today’s young people reclaim their childhood – and lessen the likelihood that AI companions steal the next generation’s.”

It seems like Julia Freeland Fisher has just presented the new strategic plan for learning organizations everywhere.

Ask young learners to work together to develop models that promote prosocial behavior.

Ask young learners to lead a movement whereby their families engage with them to decide how to best use AI, social media, smartphones and the like for the betterment of the young learner and their loved ones.

Ask young learners to create real-world experiences, sometimes supported by technology and its devices, that improve their lives, their families’ lives, and their community’s life.

But I wouldn’t expect traditional schools to be interested in adopting this type of strategic plan. They’re too busy trying to find talented teachers, improving their curriculum, and designing the next test.

And the idea of banning smartphones is just ridiculous. That Genie is out of its bottle.

Til tomorrow. SVB