How can schools help roll back the 'phone-based childhood'

[UNITED STATES] During this week's webinar, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt outlined four criteria for restoring a "normal human childhood." Haidt stated that there were no smartphones before high school. His additional three rules: No social media until the age of 16, no phones in schools, and significantly more play and freedom in the real world. Schools, he said, play an important role in supporting these changes, from enforcing cellphone bans to educating families on the significance of such limits. "We need to roll back the phone-based childhood and restore a play-based childhood, and to do that you have to have schools and families," he told me. "They have to be working together to do this, to change childhood."

The impact of these proposed changes could be far-reaching, affecting not only children's mental health but also their social and cognitive development. Experts argue that by limiting smartphone and social media use, children may have more opportunities to engage in face-to-face interactions, develop crucial social skills, and explore their creativity through unstructured play. This shift could potentially lead to improved emotional regulation, better problem-solving abilities, and enhanced communication skills among young people.

Haidt is the best-selling author of The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness, which presents research on the strong link between increased smartphone and social media use and rising rates of adolescent anxiety and depression. Haidt joined California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Superintendent Alberto Carvalho for a webinar on Tuesday organized by Daybreak Health, a school-based teletherapy service. The panel also included Nick Melvoin, a member of the LAUSD Board of Education who drafted the district's upcoming cellphone ban.

The conversation focused on youth cellphone use, namely prolonged exposure to social media on smartphones, and how it has replaced unstructured playing and increasing independence to the harm of youngsters all across the world. "Levels of anxiety, sadness, and self-harm were relatively steady from the late 1990s to 2010, 2011. There's really no hint of any shift, and then about 2012, the numbers suddenly skyrocket for boys and girls," Haidt explained. "So we had a teen mental health crisis that exploded out of nowhere - no sign of it in 2011 and by 2015 it was everywhere."

According to Haidt, the time aligns with millennials switching from flip phones to smartphones, with Generation Z being the first to experience puberty while perusing social media. As this became the norm, he claimed, adolescent mental health and academic performance plummeted. However, Haidt made it clear that these unfavorable results are the result of both social media use and a lack of unstructured play in the actual world. Such play, he claimed, is a biological requirement, or "what you need to do to wire your brain."

The implications of this technological shift extend beyond mental health concerns. Educators and child development specialists have observed a decline in students' ability to focus, engage in critical thinking, and develop essential interpersonal skills. The constant connectivity and instant gratification provided by smartphones may be rewiring young brains in ways that make it challenging for them to engage in deep learning and sustained attention – skills crucial for academic success and future career prospects.

"It's not just social media - it's the transition from a play-based childhood, a normal human childhood, where kids are doing things in the world: developing social skills and making eye contact and getting sunlight in their eyes and all the things we think of as part of childhood," he told me. "That kind of ends between 2010 and 2015."

Taking Collective Action

Haidt believes that turning the tide on this worrying trend and proposing new standards would require collective action, and schools are best positioned to generate the required momentum. The simplest step is to go phone-free, which he describes as a "very low cost, very high benefit" strategy to start pushing youngsters in a healthier direction. He suggested that schools notify families about smartphone limitations while also informing them that science supports this and that they must do their part. He believes that schools should inform children and parents that having a smartphone before high school, using social media before the age of 16, and lacking proper playtime and freedom in the world are all unhealthy.

While the proposed changes have garnered support from many educators and mental health professionals, some critics argue that completely banning smartphones may be an oversimplification of a complex issue. They contend that responsible use of technology can have educational benefits and that teaching digital literacy and responsible online behavior might be a more balanced approach. This debate highlights the need for nuanced policies that address the potential harms of excessive smartphone use while also acknowledging the role of technology in modern education and society.

Haidt believes that districts should do everything possible to incorporate more play into the school day and encourage greater independence. He cited Let Grow, a nonprofit he co-founded, as a resource for school-based initiatives such as the Let Grow Play Club, in which students are given time and space to play without adult supervision.

Districts around the country are beginning to accept such changes, as indicated by the current surge of smartphone restrictions in US schools. LAUSD, the country's second-largest school district, plans to adopt a bell-to-bell cellphone ban in January, and California has followed suit with the Phone-Free School Act, which requires all state public schools to limit or ban smartphones by July 2026.

"Everyone who has limited phone use during school time has seen an improvement in academic performance, has seen an improvement in social conditions, fewer behaviours, less bullying, just less disruption," Thurmond told the audience.

The major criticism schools receive when it comes to student smartphone limits, according to speakers, is that parents want to be able to call their children in an emergency, but LAUSD Superintendent Carvalho claimed this does not affect student safety. "We hear a great deal about how students need their phones in the event of an emergency," he told me, "but what we've actually seen is that the use of phones among students actually interferes with their ability to focus and follow procedure during crisis." Melvoin stated that schools are responsible for determining how to reach families in an emergency, as well as how parents and students can connect on less pressing concerns.

As schools and districts move forward with implementing these changes, it will be crucial to monitor their effects and gather data on student well-being, academic performance, and social interactions. This evidence-based approach will not only help refine policies but also provide valuable insights for other educational institutions considering similar measures. Additionally, involving students in the conversation and decision-making process could lead to more effective and widely accepted solutions, fostering a sense of ownership and responsibility among young people regarding their technology use.