• sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          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

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              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.

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  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.

        • ClusterBomb@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          17 hours ago

          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.