195. Will The Smartphone Ban In Schools Actually Change Anything?

0:00 Hello everyone, welcome back to another episode of Teach State Repeat. My name is Dylan and my name's Hayden and we are today going to be diving into the news that was recently put out there. Phones will be banned in schools. What's that? I thought phones were already banned in schools. Yes, of course, but it's becoming law, enshrined in law that schools will be phone free, specifically smartphone free places for personal devices. First thoughts? My gut feeling is that is a great change, a welcome to change, and it'd be interesting to dive into now what the actual differences are then, because like you said, I think most people understandably are like, oh, I thought that was already a thing. Definitely. I thought they already were banned. I thought, this is something I've felt like I've been seeing on the news for ages. And also what we'll do is because I did a video of this online, a reel about it, just explaining what's going to happen.

0:45 We'll obviously dive into what you just said, but we'll also look at the pros and cons, the things people are saying, why it's really good. But also interestingly, what a lot of people are commenting on that reel saying actually, you know what, I get this, but XYZ, we're going through the potential drawbacks of this kind of policy. But yeah, you're right, in terms of gut feeling, I also think this is a good thing, to be honest with you. I don't think schools should be a place where where phones are. And I think specifically smartphones are the cause of this. You know, I'm, I'm not thinking of a Nokia 3310. Yeah, that's not what I've got in my head here. Bring them back. It's smartphones, you know, with, with apps designed to take attention. And in a classroom, where should the attention be? Certainly not on a phone. Yeah. On me, that's a teaching. Exactly that, exactly that. So let's let's dive straight in.

1:27 I think we can have a look at what the guidance literally says because this guidance has existed for a while. We'll go through the the whole timeline of it and maybe get a good idea of what most schools are kind of already doing. So there's been effectively there's been a phone ban for a few years already, just wasn't legally binding. So in February 2024, the previous Conservative government published mobile phones in schools. It was non statutory guidance and encouraged schools to prohibit phone use across the entire school day, including break and lunchtime. The headline stat from that document by The Age of 1297% of children own a mobile phone, which sounds shocking, but I'm not surprised if you haven't at all. Well, a lot of parents say, obviously we come from primary school perspective.

2:08 I, I do think it is a different conversation as well. I think I, I really, really, truly can't think of any, any reason why primary school should be allowed. We'll come on to later why lots of people think maybe secondary should be, but we, we hear it a lot and about you had, and obviously you were in year 6, you kind of got that that line was a bit closer to you year 4. Not many kids had a phone, but a lot of parents say secondary school you can have a phone. Yeah, I always found year 6 was the transition year at the beginning of the year, not the majority of children. My past didn't have phones. By the end of the year, the majority of children did have phones. So I quite often found that was the 11th birthday, the changes. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Generally, or a lot of it is like, are we going to start walking to secondary school soon? So we're going to get ourselves ready. And one of the things that often comes in to that is having phones, which can well.

2:50 OK, Cross. So the guidance offered kind of a menu of approaches, ways to go about it, you know, off and away in bags, hand in on arrival, lockable pouches, secure storage areas and schools basically were just free to to choose whatever they wanted and whether or not even they listened to this guidance. It was just guidance critically, and this is so important, it'll come up a few times. It's explicitly built in some flexibility for SEND. So medical needs I've myself have taught, I think, let me think about it, get it right. I have taught four different children in my career who use a mobile phone to track their blood glucose levels. And it is vital for them and it allows them to be fully inclusive in the classroom. I don't think anyone I think we can just turn our critical thinking on for a second. No one saying phones should be banned in schools is is saying and that's for those kids with diabetes. They shouldn't have it either.

3:39 No one course they should no one thinks that. And but even even extended out to I think further. And this is also a good thing within this net of flexibility young carers EAL pupils maybe when it comes to translations and things mental health needs and exceptional circumstances. I think that's that's really important to put out there that when we we say phone ban, like everything in life, there are some exemptions. Exactly that. I mean, that's the only that that's it, isn't it? What more is there to say? Of course, there's some exemptions. Have you got some really unique circumstance where there shouldn't be a phone, don't worry, but there should be a phone. Sorry, don't worry. I'm sure that will be taken into consideration. It will. Absolutely. So hey, do you want to talk us through them? Because this, this was introduced, like I said, February 2024, a couple of years ago, January this year, there was a bit of a refresh under the new government. Yeah, exactly.

4:24 So under Labour there was a bit of refresh, stronger language behind it as well. So all schools should be mobile phone free environments by default. I like that idea. Default anything other than this should be by exception only. So even in that centres alone, they're still building in this idea of there are some cases though obviously Ofsted started looking at phone policies as part of every of every inspection as well from April 2026. So. So the thing that really interested me there is it's, it's already guidance. It's it's, it's out there. It's it's clear, a lot of people agree with it. And we can see here the reality. The Children's Commissioner survey out of 19,000 schools found that 99.8% of primaries and 90% of secondaries already have policies restricting phone use during the school day. So this is already happening.

5:11 Yeah, it it does make me think, OK, so what's changing now? And I think all you need to do is go back to what we said about there. There was a refresh on the labour and it was just stronger language. Yeah, it was just the the language that came across was like you should do. But it still had that keyword should all schools should be mobile phone free, there should be only exceptions, etcetera. It's that word should that is what's really being tightened now, right? Definitely. And there's one other thing I want to talk about in this because it's something we spoke about months ago when we were talking about social media bans. And then we were then we kind of widened it to should be bans, phones and schools. We had a little conversation on the podcast and I remember saying to you that just saying you have a policy doesn't necessarily mean it's actually remotely good or effective. And I do think, and I said it then and I'm glad it's coming to fruition, I said, I do think there's a space for the government to step in and take a bit of ownership of this and, and say, OK, well, actually, if we make it more official, make it legally binding, then maybe some of the policies that might even be within that 99.8% or that 90% that aren't really doing a very good job and, and they're not effective, maybe they'll review them and actually put in more effective policies. So I think there's still scope to say that the stat alone, 99.8% of of primaries have that have this policy doesn't necessarily mean that it's solved. Yeah, and oh, every school already does it. Well, they might do, but they might do it better. They might.

6:28 There might be better ways or approaches they can take and take it more seriously. But but even even let's just put the focus on secondaries because that's where there's a bit more of a gap and really more of a problem. It's just not really a problem in primary schools, honestly. Obviously someone out there will say think of a story they maybe have got, but in general, it's very much secondary thing. 90% is a lot, but there's still that means 10%. That means one in 10 schools don't have a policy about no phones in schools, which to me is is outrageously high. You know, oh, it's only 10% and that is thousands of schools. Yeah, that's enough, isn't it alone to make to be like, OK, let's. Do it's worth doing this? I think so. So thinking about what the new law will actually be then. So this is basically what's been announced. Skills Minister Jackie Smith told the Lords that the government will table an amendment to the Children's well-being and Schools Bill.

7:11 We did a whole episode on the Children's well-being and School Bill. Again, have a search in the top if you want to listen to us dive into that. But this is going through as part of this, there'll be an amendment that will put it on a statutory footing. So it's no longer non statutory, it's just guidance. No, it's going to be statutory. You have to follow this. So this basically means that the guidance itself won't necessarily be changing. It will just be that instead of it just being guidance, name will change. So this is where they're tackling. Not .2% in exactly in primary schools and the 10% exactly that gap is like that will be tackling that percentage. Precisely. And this is what the DfE online it says it will give legal force to what schools are already doing in practise. Yep, this is something we'll come on to later where people say, well, what's the point then? All it's going to do is add to teachers workload or to teachers anxiety or more more importantly, leadership's anxiety around the fact that what they were already doing is now a law.

7:59 And if something out of their control, for example, a kid brings something in, what's going to be the the outcome? Is it going to be the the school that are responsible now because it's the law that's not allowed. We'll go into detail about that a little bit later on. So it's worth listening to. But it is it is that basic. It comes off that consultation. And I think there is a huge drive in the public and also of in the profession. If you talk to teachers overwhelmingly, we did a poll on our Instagram and 94% of people said yes, this should be a law. Only 6% said no, we should stick to the guidance. So it wasn't even an option that we shouldn't have this, but it was overwhelming the amount of teachers who we asked who said no, this should be a law.

8:40 And what's really interesting is that this is AU turn in a in a way, Yeah, this government doing a U-turn. What shock. So literally last year, the government responded to essentially people talking about it being a law, and they rejected it. And they did the classic thing that governments often say, which is no, no, no, no, no, no, we're what we're going to do is allow it to be school LED. The the school can just decide which has a place and is very useful in a lot of ways. And schools should be in charge of a lot of things. But I find it fascinating how within six months you can just completely change your mind and pretend you haven't just changed your mind. You know, six months ago it can be school LED. Why can't it be school LED now? So, so something's changed. Either you didn't think it then or you do think it now. I don't know which way around it is, but my, my core understanding here we're thinking about what's changing. I mean, it's important for people to understand the actual guidance and the actual rules.

9:26 And what the government are saying schools should do isn't actually changing. It's merely the fact that it's going to be on a more statutory footing, a bit more consistent, some people are saying. 100% there's some, there's some interesting feedback from people. I've got two things here, I think not necessarily contradicting each other, but they're sort of opposite ends of the spectrum, I guess. So Pepe Delacio from the Association of School and College Leaders said a statutory ban doesn't really change much. It's kind of addressing what we were just saying a minute ago, because most schools already do this. If you just look at those numbers, like I was saying, yeah, most schools already do and says what would actually help is government funding for storage. Surprise, surprise, it comes back to money. Obviously, if we can implant most things in schools, it does generally require some sort of money behind it. You think about like lockers or if they're doing like you get those little pouches, those things, they obviously cost money.

10:10 So like it is all and well well and good saying school has to do this now, but in. But you have to fire 2TA's. Yeah, exactly right. In today's climate is like, what are you saying? We have to find the money from other things that we're always very scarce that's. Exactly what they're saying, yeah, As they always do. Obviously it has to come with funding, you know, and Paul Whiteman from the National Association of Head Teachers said the upside of this is clarity and consistency. And I really agree with this, by the way. And I read this as like, yes, this is exactly what I was thinking. It removes ambiguity between schools and, and he said, but schools need time and support to communicate with parents. So both people are saying really interesting things and both are backed up with, oh, but we need something though. We we need something systemic to help this. I found, can I just very quickly say something on this? Yeah, I just just because I've had a lot of people comment on the reels and stuff and the generic tone was definitely between these two things and they kind of justified both and said but and they both came back to that funding. Yeah.

11:04 It was like, well, well this is pointless, it's already happening, we need some funding. And then other people said, yeah, it's great, it's fantastic, but we need some funding. It was like, it was almost as if on it was superfluous, whether it was a law or not. It was like, OK, is it a law? I don't care, it's guidance. Yeah, cool. OK, Well, most people are doing it, whatever that fine, whatever we have to, it has to come with support to actually implement it. And I find it really interesting because I would like to think the fact it becomes law means that it's being taken more seriously and therefore means that funding will come as a part of it. But it feels like it's missing that next step which kind of undermines that move from guidance to law. It's like, OK, well you're just now forcing me to go into a deficit to make sure this happens. You're now forcing me to make sure that my form tutors. Part of their job now becomes policing phones, taking them in at the start of the day and giving them out the end of the day.

11:50 That's time that's going to be taken up when I'm not going to expect them to do less work. So it's more work for them, increases workload, increases cost, if we're really serious about this. But I get fed up with the government saying you must do these things and please go and that's the end of it. Can we have something for it please? Do you think 2 questions really. Do you think there's a middle ground where even if they don't address the funding thing, turning this into law will still make an impact? For example, with the 10% of schools that don't do anything at all right now might do what the other 90% are already doing. Yeah, I'm on. I'm on that question now. I'm on the side much more of Paul Wightman from the National Association head teachers who were saying this gives clarity, it gives consistency, It's good.

12:32 I, I agree with that. I agree with that because already the 90% who are doing it aren't getting more funding as well. I don't, I don't automatically think therefore it's pointless. I'm just saying it would be nice to see the move to law also coming along with we're really taking this seriously. We're going to make it law now. We're putting a lot of pressure onto youth school leaders to make sure that this is happening. It's it's, it's going to be a case of it being unlawful if it doesn't fall. So therefore we're going to help you. I feel like that next step is missing and I still land on the side of it's good, but I completely sympathise with people who say, well you're not even helping us do it so what's the point? Second question to try and push back a little bit, and I don't know there's much thought in this at all really, but. Well, you're saying it so. Is there? Is there such a side large I thought?

13:13 You, I thought. You I. Was thinking so deeply I was like sorry nor difficult. There is thought that isn't. There, yeah, there's there is thought, there is thought, but I don't know if there's, you know, I don't know. Was he right? So it is there another middle ground where sometimes as teachers in the profession, we like to say we can't possibly do anything without funding. Whereas this could be a situation where it's just a case of just rejigging things, just reallocating things, just moving things around. Let me hear me out. If one of the solutions from the law doesn't actually require you to buy things, for example, if the policy is just you can't take your phones to school, that is the policy, yeah. I think you have to buy lockers and things. Yeah. And schools just go, well, you're not getting US funding, so we'll have to do that one. Yeah, I think that's stupid as well. So I think it's ridiculous because whether you, whether you like it or not or agree or not, and this is where people even more agreeing with it than me come in or like, no, we there was once a time in the 70s where no one had a phone ever and we were just fine.

14:08 OK, but it is acceptable and understandable that you might want to have your phone if you're travelling to school on your own or after school. Maybe you're going somewhere that isn't home, Maybe you're going to a club. You walk yourself to a football club and then you go home from your football club late at night back to home. It's reasonable to expect that child should have their phone on them. So if you're saying just simply no, don't bring your phone into school anymore, I think that's a really weak policy. That's just that's not putting into account everything else around life in general and just putting it at the centre. Oh, well, we're at school, we say no. Like I don't think that's very useful at all. I think the main reason why you shouldn't have phones in school is distraction thing in lesson time and potentially a thing during break times and lunch times that cause anxiety around WhatsApp groups, etcetera.

14:48 Just just that it's at least control that time in school. But I think going outside of that is just nonsense. So what I would say to that person is I understand what you're saying. There are, there are obviously ways we can do this, which means we don't have to have extra money in place. We could just outright ban phones. But I don't think anyone actually, I don't think the vast majority people think that's a good idea either. So I would say I think it's flawed in that it would be a bad implementation of this policy, but it would see into other aspects of life which I think are wrong, and children and parents should be able to decide whether a child has access to a phone in those respects. Yeah, that's a really interesting point. I think that's kind of where I was landing when I was debating whether to ask you that or not 'cause I was like there is a middle ground where there's a multiple. There's another policy was that is said at the earlier what was suggested was just put in your bag and put it away.

15:32 But we know that's kind of a weak policy because kids just get out of their bag. They've got access to it really. So like yeah, you can do that if As for the. Only way in this. Yeah, you're right, We can. We can and the only way in saying that is if this, if this law comes in, at least schools can do something straight away and then and then it opens up the discussion too, OK, everyone's now doing this thing. You're not giving us any extra funding. So we've had to be limited to these options. Let's let's assess how effective these options are. They're not very good government. So what's the next step? And I think it's the implementation of the policies as well. If there's a policy that's put in place, which is that phones away and don't touch them, the, the, the act of a child getting their phone out shouldn't mean school's broken the law they're in, they're in trouble, right? It what it, what it should be is maybe we're just looking at the implementation. What's the policy around if a child does do that? Is it being implemented properly? If, if all of those answers are yes, then nothing should happen to the school.

16:20 I agree. So that's the worry again, of it becoming a law. It's like there's too much on the school where it's going to be the school's problem. And if a child does something wrong, suddenly it's a school who's in an issue and it adds stress to that. I think that would be a bad version of this law, which is why it needs to come as a holistic approach with everything. And that's where, you know, we will come on to later. The pushback, I think there's some really good pushback about it. I don't necessarily think that on its own that pushback means that we shouldn't do this. I think it means that we should do this and take into account these pushbacks and these ideas and therefore give schools some slack around it or therefore change maybe what the policies. Might be definitely. People are rightfully and understandably worried about the law thing about like who's accountable and accountable to what and what makes you accountable and what's the consequences out for the school, right? But you can, you just know as well, like in this situation I just gave where there's no funding and schools are saying, OK, we haven't actually got any budget, so we're just going to have to go down the route of kids, you're not allowed.

17:07 And we know we had this rough policy before, but it's really strict now. You're not allowed your phones in school, right? You know what would happen, don't you? Because if Ofsted came in or whatever, the government body came in to hold accountability and you happened to go to a school where it was a real problem. It was a genuine issue that the kids just are not following that policy and the school has put in place everything they can. Who, who's going to, what's going to happen? They're going to say, well, this policy is not suitable enough. You need to be having some sort of lockers or, or some sort of system that requires funding. And it's just going to be this annoying loop of the schools basically being told this policy isn't good enough and also not being given the funding to do the better version of the policy. And I can already imagine that happening. And it's annoying me, just like the thought of it, because you just know that's how stuff works and. And that's the, the idea from this is that, that that's where it'll come in terms of, you know, you're, you're talking about the schools.

17:52 Then it got blamed basically for not living up, for not having the funding. It kind of it, it makes like put my head in my hands when I read about what it actually looks like in terms of like the enforcement and stuff. Because what this doesn't do, this doesn't criminalise children, right? If children bring their phone into school and they're on their phone, this ban doesn't mean that the child has broken the law and it's, and it's, and it's criminalised the child. That's not what's going on here. What it, what it is, is it's about the school and the policies that are in place and the rules that are in place. And what made me, like I said before, put my head in my hands was just thinking about reading about what it means. Basically it's Ofsted. Basically it's Ofsted. Ofsted. Like we already said, they're already looking at these kind of policies. Ofsted will have more power to pull people up and pull schools up. We know how can inconsistent Ofsted is on this when they do it on stuff which is lower level, which isn't even to do with the law.

18:39 We know how consistent they can be with like look, walking into a classroom and just deciding the chronology was off in history. Therefore it's so you know, you've not met the expectation. It's just so inconsistent and the idea that I can really understand why teachers look at this and go right, so who's who's, oh, it's Ofsted is it? Oh, the school level enforcement is Ofsted. OK, for sake, I can imagine it being like, well, OK, this isn't really going to be helpful at all. So Ofsted assesses every school's mobile phone policy and its implementation as part of the inspection. So a school that has a written policy but is visibly failing to actually enforce it, IE the phones are out of break, no one's doing anything about it, teachers are ignoring it. That's the key part. They risk failing meeting the expected standoff behaviour. So it falls under that category there and that that's where it's going to be hitting schools a bit more. I think as long as it's actually implemented fairly, which is what's the policy, how's it being implemented, then I think it's OK, right?

19:36 Sure. If an inspector comes in and sees a child with their phone at break time and is failing the school because of that, I think that's a nonsense. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Because it has to be about what's in place to stop that happening, not does it ever happen. Yeah, 100%. And I think that's possible, you know, yeah, I, I am, I am one to, I am one to bash offstead for being inconsistent. But but also you look at other areas safeguarding, they're pretty consistent with safeguarding. Like I think this, I think they, it can exist that they're pretty consistent with this thing, which to me, I'm like, I'm almost banding with safeguarding in the way. Like the process will work in terms of checking it and looking at it and the importance of, of making sure it's implemented. But I think they can do it with that. OK. They're inconsistent with history because it's just it gets ridiculously subjective at that point, but they can, they should be able to be pretty consistent of around one single policy in the school.

20:21 So. Can I can I explain what I mean though in terms of why I think the comparison works? Because the, I've heard of inspect to go in and we'll just ask a child to simply say, what's the chronology of maybe like the, the, the Iron Age, the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, and the child didn't know what order it came in. Then the, the, the, the inspector on that information alone has said chronology's bad at this school. Sure. Without actually looking at what the planning looked like, without looking, without thinking about what the lesson looked like, without thinking what the teacher actually taught and just taking on face level. This child didn't know the chronology. Therefore chronology is bad at the school to me is the same as looking at a child's got their phone out there for everything to do a phone in this whole school is bad. Well, no, there was a whole policy on chronology. We've had some training on chronology.

21:01 The lessons itself explicitly taught the children the order. If one child doesn't remember that, it doesn't mean chronology is bad. But there are some inspectors who I have heard of who've gone in, tested a child on chronology in that respect, and then said, oh, they have a weakness there on chronology. No, there isn't a weakness on chronology. That child just didn't know same thing here the child's got their phone at a break time all weakness on the on the policy of of phones in school. No there isn't that child has just gone against the rules and implementation that our everything a leadership team could have done everything teachers could have done has been done. We can't judge those things and I've seen off they do that on the side of education in lessons. I I'm. Just saying I don't want to see that happen with this. Yeah. Do you know what? You're absolutely right. Because when you're given that analogy, I was like, OK, how does that same analogy work for safeguarding? And it is different.

21:44 Yeah. Because actually as an often inspector, if you did flag up, there's only one child I saw on safeguarding issue with that's an issue. It's not the same, you know what I mean? I'm like, yeah, actually that is enough to flag a, a school wide thing of if there is one child safeguarding, it's safeguarding is so elevated in terms of the importance. It's like they're just not the same. I agree. So yeah, they are a bit different, but I still think it's doable. Yeah. I agree, but you're right though because also the chronology thing is doable and it's not being done so there is clearly a flaw here in it's. Just the inconsistency, that's what worries me. That's that's what worries me there. Definitely, yeah, definitely. So, you know, day-to-day in schools, this is very much really happening. Very interested to hear people already in our WhatsApp community, we've had discussions about this, about what it looks like. We've got some secondary school teachers in there. Some use pouches, lockers, some just don't allow it. So no phones on site at all.

22:29 This is what you mentioned. That's an option. I don't necessarily think that's a good option, but it's the simplest approach. Yep, no phones is good. They bring it. Doesn't cost anything, you just don't take it. But I don't think it's the best one handed on arrival. So they're collected often from staff like I mentioned about just another thing for staff for tutors to do. Someone's already said that on our comments, like, oh, it's me, we'll be doing this then. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Like, OK, yeah. You know what? Yeah, you should. You have a right to say it's just extra workload for you, because it is. And at the end of the day, you have to go and back and meet your class and hand them out. Oh, that child was 10 minutes late because they were kept behind. Well, I've just got to wait to give them their mobile phone for 10 minutes. That's annoying. Locked pouches. I think this is the more realistic one, but this comes with a cost. You have to implement that and often away in bags. This is just a loose model. I think I get the impression eventually maybe that will be something which is picked up more upon of just like, you know, really implementing this, but we're just saying just put it in your bag. Is that enough?

23:17 Maybe it is, maybe it isn't the the best option there for me personally seems to be if we're going to make this a law and a rule, we have to have a policy where that there's something you can put it away for the day. It's still your thing. It's away for the day and you get. And I think, you know, diving into that more as well, like the whole idea of locked pouches or lockers or things like that with there is an argument to say that again, you can still do this without finding like, do you need some fancy pants locker or pouch? Can there just be a Can you just find a box that anything doesn't have to spend loads of money? It's scale that you can put a class teacher can put it on. Like I'm thinking of me as a class teacher. I have a floor in this. Primary is different to secondary. I'm just saying now OK like secondary, my secondary got like 1200 kids OK, but I wouldn't expect tutor but I wouldn't expect every single individual tutor to just have a box. Like maybe maybe it's just the boxing. I get it, maybe I'm not.

24:06 I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm saying it's a scale thing as well. I agree it doesn't change the workload thing. You still I agree with you don't have to be fancy. I'm disagreeing with myself anyway, yeah, because I think there is a big floor in this because I think you could easily say would like naively just do that. Just give every form tutor a box. They put it, they lock it, they put it in a cupboard, crack on it opens the door to so much. There's so many little variables there where like I've had it before where a phone's been taken and I have no idea. It's been literally in my cupboard. And somehow in the process of either them getting collected in or getting handed out, the end of the day that phone's been taken because I just chucked in some cheap communal box. There's nothing official there. So it it does open the door to yeah, we can do this cheap way, but there will be some inefficiencies with it. If we have, like, dedicated lockers or pouches named things, there's a little bit more official, more security, more security, less risk on the teacher being accused of. Well, you gave my phone to someone else. Yeah.

24:52 You didn't check when you were giving out those 32 phones in four seconds because that's what you have to do. Suddenly now you gave that to the wrong people and they went home with it. Now my child's not got their phones. Yeah. Yeah. Honestly, like they're trying to do the best in the situation. We just don't need to open those doors. So going down something more official makes sense to me as someone who has done the one we're just saying and constantly being a bit worried that I'm going to do it wrong or imagine right this this happened. I mean, this I guess could happen in any situation. Imagine if you dropped a kids phone because you're just trying to put in a little basket or something like that. You you're taking responsibility. They've got to give it to you and you're putting it in your cupboard. Just remove those things and. Let's not see Smash. Oh no, 32nd phone in a row? What are what are the chances? Yeah. So in general, you know, the law won't.

25:34 I don't think this law coming into effect will make sweeping changes as to what schools look like. Yeah, the majority like that. It won't make sweeping changes as to what the outcomes for a child who breaks the rules will necessarily be. I think it's going to be more about at the top level Ofsted and leadership. I think they're the ones who are going to feel the pinch a bit more and therefore teachers who are implementing policies that have been put in place that unfortunately I think could definitely be increasing workload as well, which is a huge issue. We will come on to more push back later because there is more, but I thought we could save that. We could just split this up now into why in general teachers want this and then talk about the the the teachers who maybe have some reservations about it. So let's have a look. Number one thing. I think it can be split into three.

26:15 The number one thing I see all the time is just essentially the grind of being in the classroom. 100% that's the one everyone thinks. Exactly, If you're a teacher at the front trying to it can, it can already be quite hard to get the children to be motivated to learn about Richard the 3rd right. That can already be quite a tricky thing to do. But what doesn't help is if someone's got Snapchat open. Someone just described it through messages and stuff. Yeah, yeah. That I I honestly, I cannot think of one reason why we would think that that's OK. No, like, I agree. Oh, it's alright, isn't it? Yeah. Why do you care? Because I want them to just listen to the lesson like. That's obviously because otherwise what's the point? Everyone's wasting their time. What is the point of this whole environment? Yeah. Oh, but some children concentrate more when they're fiddling with something.

26:55 Then I'm sorry they're not concentrating more if they're looking at their messages. Yeah, it's not they're. Not and if they want, if they do concentrate more because they're fiddled with something, give them something to fiddle with that isn't interactive. Yeah. There isn't a message board that isn't social media. Yeah, like, I'm not saying it doesn't exist. What I'm saying it doesn't have to be that there's no oh, actually, do you know what he doesn't need Snapchat open because it's how he concentrates. Yeah, no, it's. Not. Yeah, no, it's not such. A poor excuse, It's. Just ridiculous. So that's the first one. The second one I think is very widespread as well. But maybe it's just in terms of amount of people saying it's just a little table though, because bullying and safeguarding, yeah, those issues can still exist even. Of course I can. So you know, how many, how many times even in primary school have we as the teacher where schools we're not allowed mobile phones by the way, we still as teachers get approached by parents and say, oh, the WhatsApp group at the weekend really kicked off all the time.

27:40 It doesn't matter what the school policy on phones will be. So I think this, whilst this is important, I don't think necessarily that this ban will be addressing this massively, but it's still important. 100% I watched a promo video ages ago and you have to take into mind that it was a promo video for like, I think it was some sort of pouch or lock or something. I can't remember what the product was, but it was one of these kind of things, right? And in the video they were talking to children at schools and they were very much addressing this idea of like bullying and safeguarding. And there were a couple of girls on screen who were saying that although obviously these things still exist outside of school, it has genuinely reduced it in school. Like the reality and the stress of things happening in school via like covert messaging and things. And, and you being not like thinking I'm, I'm not aware of what's happening out in the loop, whatever was a genuine stress and anxiety. And they, and they literally said that having that taken away by itself is just enough, a good enough reason for them to just be satisfied with not just no one having phones in school. And I was like, yeah, do you know what? There will be probably loads of little nuances like that that maybe we don't understand because we're just not those children in those schools using those phones in these nuanced ways anymore.

28:37 But it's obviously there's obviously going to be things that it positively impacts attacks by just all of the children, not having them identified, phone, not having their phones. No, sorry. It's how I listen. Yeah, yeah, yeah, no, I got, I got on Instagram and yeah, scroll Reels and that's how it helps me. Listen to you. No, no. Fair enough. Yeah, actually. So I'm trying to teach you something here so could you put your phone away Yeah. Put it in your pouch. I'm so sorry. But yeah, anyway, the whole point of that was I just think, I just think even though it's not solving bullying and it's not solving safeguarding, it is helping it though, and children are saying that it's helping. So let's listen to them. And I think that that voice of the child is actually really important. And it's something that we often just crossover in general. I think when education is like what the kids actually think, like important stuff.

29:19 The vast majority of people I've spoken to have said who've implemented policies like this have said the kids have enjoyed it. Yes, the kids actually do like it. They're not going, I wish I was on Snapchat. They're just going, oh, this is actually quite good. What's your Third Point? My Third Point is social development, and this is this is this is so keen. It's not what came to the forefront of my mind. But of course it's true because currently a lot of a lot of schools have policies around you're not allowed, you're not allowed. You found your lesson. I don't think there's many schools who allow that, right? Let's just make that clear. But they'll then children will be allowed to get their phone and access it at break times and lunch times. When I was in school, it was like when smartphones were starting to be a thing. I had my phone. We had our phones at lunchtime, at break time we still had them. And the social aspect of just saying, you know what, actually, if you hand it in the start of the day, obviously breaks and lunchtimes are included in the day.

30:05 So you don't have your phone anymore. Play a bit of football, have a chat with your mate, go to the library and read a book, do a little bit of homework, talk to your friends. And and if we can, if we can force, if we can force that in terms of give children social time during the school day where we know they don't have access to phones, that's going to help them. They might not get that outside of school. It's one of the rare situations where when my grandparents or that generation will say, well, back in my day and normally roll your eyes, but when they say back in my day, we didn't have these phones and we socially interacted and we talked to each other and we developed our social skills and we played games and we became more physically fit by as a result all these things, right? I'm like, yeah, you're right.

30:47 It was better. That was literally better. Like it's hands down. I can't even argue. There's so many other things where I'm like, Oh well, there's so many nuances. You don't understand this one. I'm like, yeah, it was better. It is just worse in every way for children to just be SAT with their heads down on phones at breakdown to lunchtime rather than doing all those other things I just said. It's literally worse. It's something to to think about. Obviously the union backing is really strong. There's a lot of the, you know, you know, public backing of this in general. It all makes sense to me. Everything we talked about there there is mixed. There is mixed evidence and and it's specific and I I talked about it. So University of Birmingham smart school study 2025 S the first proper rigorous one in terms of the UK evaluation on this found that restrictive school phone policies did not on their own lead to better mental well-being, better sleep or better grades because phone use outside of school still overwhelms what happens in it.

31:36 And I think it's really good to draw a parallel to our episode last week about school school dinners where we said this on its own, though, won't tackle diets being bad because most of what children eats outside of school. It feels like a very similar point here, which is great, but it's not really going to solve all of this because kids just go home and then go and do the cyberbullying online. They go home and then they sit on there scrolling for six hours. This is still happening outside of it, and it dwarfs the impact we can have in school. What's your thoughts? A. 100% my first thought there is I was going to throw it back to you and say what what would you say to the situation? Let's just say where a government, this is a typical thing they do, a government would stand up and say we've solved. Yeah, the mental health crisis in young children.

32:17 Yeah, in the same way we've we've solved. Retention because maternity pays doubled. Yes, we've solved this will solve retention for women in their 30s going back to work because we went from 4 weeks full pay to 8 weeks full pay, right? No it won't. Very interesting discourse there, isn't there? Why? Why is that interesting to you? Because, because what? What winds me up is it can it can dwarf what is a good thing to do. Doubling maternity pay from 4 weeks to 8 weeks is obviously a good thing to do. It becomes laughable when put next to that is we've sold retention. Yeah, that's not true. Ridiculous. Not true. Same thing here. If this phone ban is put alongside. So we are. We have solved the mental well-being of our children because they now don't have phones in school. Shut up. Yeah, that's not what it's done.

32:57 It's it's a step in the right direction. It's a good thing it has positives. It's cool, it's awesome. We're all behind it. Please stop pretending politically to turn it into bigger than it actually. Is huge solutions. Exactly that it's not going to be huge solution because still Mark Zuckerberg has the eyes of that 15 year old on his reels for six hours in a row when they get home. Yeah, it can be a good thing, but let's just just calm it down. And I don't think anyone should be pretending it's going to solve absolutely everything. That includes people on both sides. So someone on one side who loves this and says it's to be on end all you can, you can, you can like this, but let's not pretend it's going to solve everything. You can also think that this is not a good thing, right? But you, you must accept that it's going to have a positive impact.

33:38 It's not going to have zero impact. It's not going to have 100% impact. So whichever side you're coming from, can we just agree that it's still a good thing to do something, right? It's going to do something. Yeah, yeah, that's right. That's it. Yeah, the the, yeah, just diminishing any good that something has by putting a label on it of something it doesn't fix is so annoying because there'll be a lot of people who won't, that they will say, well, it's not solving this issue you've said it solves, so it's terrible, right. Rather than ignore, if we didn't say that other stupid bit in the 1st place, they might have just looked at what we did do and go, oh, that's a marginal change for positivity. Yeah, in the right direction, but. That's the issue with politics in general is it becomes. So my colour team did the best thing in the world ever. That solved everything.

34:19 I know why you feel like you've got to do this. And it's some, I'm not saying it's specific to one colour party or another, but it's kind of annoying. Yeah, when I just, it's just let's can we, can we? And we just enter a world of some realism. What's annoying is it clearly works. Otherwise they stop doing it clearly work enough. People clearly listen to that and go, yeah. To become tribal. Yeah, exactly. Because I'm not being funny. You look at it. The Conservative introduces guidance. Labour then went, I'm not going to make this law, but I'm going to make it stronger guidance so I can say I care more. And then after some pressure, Labour went, actually, yeah, we'll make it law. And the Conservatives during this time have said it should become law. They didn't make it law. Everyone's just changing what they think to try and score a point. It's insane. Look at the timeline is mental.

35:01 Conservatives introduce it but they don't want to make it law. It's just guidance. Labour come in, make it stronger guidance. Conservatives say you should be making it law, you didn't in the 1st place. Labour say no, it doesn't need to be law. Six months later Labour say now it's law. It's the best thing we need to do it. But it's different than what the Conservatives want because they want an outright banal to get what the are you doing? Like this is just it's just constant changing based on what the other team are doing. Can we just think to ourselves, what's good for the kids, what the teachers want? How can we help them? Let's do that. No chance. That's the sad reality, isn't it? It's just no chance. No. Nothing we ever do in politics will be about that. Nothing is about let's just do what's best for the kids. It's not. Sometimes it coincides and overlaps that things we do are good for the kids. But realistically they're only being done because it's the best policy.

35:42 They have all the options. That was the best one to increase vote, to increase people that interest in the party. That's always, that's just the way. It's just kind of a sad save affairs. It's a shame. Now I'm coming to a bit, I think this is a bit I'm interested in, in terms of the pushback because you and I, again, we always talk about an echo chamber that we sometimes get. We both obviously think this is a really good thing. I put a video out there which is very positive about this move. And there was obviously the vast majority of people agree, but those commenting really usefully, by the way, and I appreciate it a lot, people just commenting, not being rude, the kind of thing I like. Yeah, when they're not being rude remotely, but they're just saying, oh, I, I get this, but I have this issue with it because, and they list it and it's great. I I thought it was really good. But Dylan's here to tell you why you're wrong. No, no, no, no, no, not at all. Because some of them are right. Because again, I, I, you get very excited sometimes you do videos, you do podcasts, etcetera. And we say, I, I said the line.

36:28 I can't think of a single reason why you need a phone in the school. And straight away someone commented saying children with diabetes who are tracking. And I was like, I, I, I like, part of me was like, OK, please obviously think like obviously I think that's fine. But I did literally say, and I can't, I literally said I can't think of a single reason why I can. It was. Already exempt in your mind? Yeah, exactly that. But but but I can. If someone's listening to that whose child is diabetic, I can imagine them being like this saved my child's life. I think that use of tech is unbelievable. I've seen it transform children's lives in terms of they've got a diagnosis and now they can still stay in the classroom they love because they can get the support they need and we can give them the glucose. We can read the glucose levels and give them what they want. I think that's absolutely fine. And I do think that medical exemptions in general, yeah, are really, really, really important for this. And they go further than diabetes. Can I put some pushback some comments I've seen then like I'm gonna say them to you and you're just gonna say whether you think there's an easy way around it or if they think it's they're just they're just wrong or if you think there's some valid validity in it.

37:22 So some people will say, OK, this new policy will put the burden on those parents to disclose document and chase. So those those parents have children with with diabetes. It puts the when when every other child is told they can't have the phone, it puts the button on them to make a point rather than them just kind of going under the under the radar like everyone else got their phone. I have to just, I have to explain anyone to when they ask other than the people that need to. Know, I, I don't think that I think it might initially be a bit of a thing, but it won't eventually. Yeah, I think about primary school where there are no phones In primary school that's what I taught and I was in year 4 and a child had the mobile phone because they tried. The kids knew immediately. Yeah, that then that child didn't feel anxious or anything about it. It was like, oh, so what's that phone for? They're just tracking because they've got diabetes.

38:03 They're tracking their blood levels so we know where to help them or not. OK, carried on. No, no one actually cared. So I can see why sometimes, maybe initially there might be a bit of anxiety around it. Yeah, I think within a few months you just go over. It that's the thing, isn't it because if a primary schools it's already normal yeah whereas if in a secondary school where everyone's got their phone yeah and no one questioned it before the child with diabetes and they just went under the radar and now everyone else taking their phone away and the spotlights on them because they're on with their phone in that situation you can understand why 100 people might say Oh my child's gonna feel singled out now they. They and you know what they might do for a bit, Yeah. And I just think we have to get through that. It will just. Be fun. I feel that as well, there's not other perfect solution. Doesn't to me mean okay, fine. Yeah, we shouldn't do it. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, they might feel ever so slightly uncomfortable for a second. And actually from experience, I can tell you that it's completely fine.

38:45 And generally, if anything, I would say as well, some sometimes people say, oh, we can't have one rule for one kid and one different rule for others. They'll get confused. Honestly, from my experience of teaching actual little children, they never get confused. They're, they're not, they're not thick like they are human beings. And they very quickly understand even just small nuances in classrooms of why, why other people are not them. Oh, someone's slightly different to me and might have a different need in life. Yes. Oh, why are they allowed to go out for a quick walk to calm down? Because they're you're not angry. Yeah, You don't have you don't have this need. You're fine. They don't don't even ask that. Yeah, they don't even care. Yeah, like I think you're right. I think it's about normalising. It comes down to that. Ethos that all the differences in life we wouldn't be having this conversation it was about children with disabilities in a wheelchair of course you wouldn't be even this wouldn't even be on the table they're. Single doubt because their chair doesn't have wheels. Yeah, it's like, no, yes.

39:33 No one. Thinks that oh, no one else in a wheelchair in their classroom, yeah, OK. And, and, and with very, very quickly you completely normalise that and, and it's a better, it's better situation for everyone absolutely to have that normalised, like it's OK to be different. Should we all get wheels or no one has wheels? No, obviously some people should. Just have wheels. Yeah, right. Like it's kind of a question. Exactly that. Completely. Glasses, same thing. Hearing aids? Yeah, same thing. Right. Oh my child sing. It out, yeah, OK, but let's just give it half a day. It won't even be a thing and exactly that so. It will be the same. I I believe, I really do wholeheartedly believe that it'll be the same situation. Yeah, with clones. And one of the things the people have said is the new wording is a bit vague. So by exemption only for medical exemption for medical exemption, like it's just, they're just a worry that it's a bit too vague. So what do you say to?

40:13 That yeah, I just think at that point, you again, you just have to use your brain a little bit and like by exemption only. OK, Well, as we've got to be able to trust leaders to make those exemptions. And then when we question them, they should be able to say, oh, yes, this is an exemption because of XYZ, because of a mental health need, because whatever it might be, you know, I get people commented, you know, really serious stuff saying like, I really understand this. But I personally in school, if I did not have my phone, my life could have gone a very different way. Yeah, right. And I don't think I can, anyone can look them in the face and say, well, I don't care. You don't need your phone. It's like, OK, we we do need some exemptions. I think that's absolutely fine. In life, there are always exemptions. I don't think they'll worry about all exemptions might make people feel like they're getting it. I don't think that pales in comparison compared to. But the person with the exemption just needs the phone. Yeah.

40:58 So there's going to be some medical exemptions. I think just trust professionals, whether health professionals or professionals in school to decide what those exemptions are. Leave that trust with them and then I think that's fine. Cool, I agree. Here's another one and this is the one, the juicy one I want to get to. It's probably the biggest one. I think what comes to people's minds straight away is parents want a Direct Line to their child. You mentioned it, you glossed over it earlier. Let's dive into it a bit more. Parents say I need my child to have a phone because, for example, there's sometimes last minute changes to who's picking them up and I need and I just need to tell them sorry, uncle's stuck in traffic is going to be me but I'm going to be 20 minutes late. Yeah. I again, I think that there's ways around this that although obviously would be less efficient, I think are the way we have to go down for the overall good. Is it less efficient to have to go for a school for logistics and things like this?

41:41 Yes, of course it's less efficient. There's a middle man. Yeah. That that, that that office staff person might be busy and not get it back to you straight away. The communication might be poor in that school and not get. I think we have to look at improving those things rather than just saying, therefore we can't do this ban on school. It has to be yeah. Do you know what? There are some cons to this. This is where I agree what people are saying. There are some cons to this. Getting a Direct Line to your child won't exist anymore if there's lots of people. That's a con, OK. I don't like the vague notion of it used to be this way and we were fine when it comes to making an example for things because I think, yeah, just because it used to be something doesn't mean it is now. And a lot of people say we used to be fine about a Direct Line, we would be fine now. So no. Well, it is better.

42:22 It is better in a lot of respects to have that Direct Line because we are technologically able to do so. And it would be a step back to take that away. However, I think that in the whole grand scheme of things we can put enough in place to to go against the whole fact there is no longer a Direct Line. We can put something in place to negate that. Not fully, but enough that the benefit of doing a score band still outweighs it. That's exactly how I see it. Yeah, the best counter argument I saw because I very, my gut feeling was the whole my instant thought was, OK, well, what did we do before 20 years ago for Christ's sake? Like schools obviously operated fine and emergencies were we just went through the school office and someone made a really, really good counter of yeah and back. And the last time that was the reality. We also had triple the funding and we and we had three office staff.

43:06 Rather than two. Rather than one. And now it's at the point where it's become so inefficient in some, some people are saying it's so inefficient now to try and go through the office. Like it's actually like that's that's much worse. Like I need to get this urgent information and it's taking three hours. Yeah. Because because of the systems in place. Exactly. And you know, if if a child is, you know, reluctant to be in school and doesn't trust the school system, but is trying to go to school and is there and wants to contact their parents, having a bad day halfway through the day, that child's not going to go to the office who they don't trust or like and say I need to speak to my mum, please. So there there are slight issues there along the way. I'm not saying I'm not saying there aren't issues. No, I think it's ridiculous both ways here to turn around and just say, wow, that's just not an issue. Of course it's an issue for some people. It'll be there, you know, very, very personal to them and it will be a problem for them.

43:50 And that is going to happen when this comes in. And I think we just need to work on that rather than say we can't do the ban. I genuinely think that's the best push back though, and I actually didn't think that at all before we start recording this and looking into this episode, but I genuinely think the whole idea of parents want that Direct Line for the reasons you said. We are more technology, technologically advanced. It obviously is better to have a Direct Line. Schools are obviously more stressed now. The budgets are way lower. They have fewer staff to deal with these things. They're already at capacity without this policy, like in offices, all those things. I'm like, yeah, it's not wrong. It's not wrong. Here's a really interesting one that a lot of people come into this more than I thought would, was that phones are used in classrooms as classroom tools, as educational tools. And we had a lot of people maybe that art teachers and they need to take photos of things, right, right.

44:36 And their point is that they rely on children's personal devices in order to do that because they don't have the funding or the correct amount of of, of, of actual, you know, cameras in the classroom to do it. Now listen, my gut instinct and I'll, I'll let you expand on this, but I'm going to tell you my because my gut instinct is we should never be relying on personal devices to access a curriculum or access a course. That's ridiculous. It's broken. What the hell? And I think maybe let's, if we rewind to when I was 23 and a bit more bulshy, I would just simply dismiss this and I would say we shouldn't be. It's ridiculous. Don't use personal devices for that. What you know about that's your problem. Why are you? Why are you relying on personal devices? I'm not, I'm older now and actually realistically, they obviously don't want to be relying on personal devices. And this is another, to me, clear example of the government saying, no, we're going to ban this thing because of these reasons and we're not going to implement any support whatsoever to help you get around the fact that it's banned now. So if you do art and you rely on personal devices because of it, or whatever it might be to rely on personal devices in the classroom, we're going to strip that away from you now, but not replace that so you can actually do it. Yeah, I find it's fascinating because I think there are genuinely 2 quite equal ways to think about it. The art analogy, I would go as far as saying that that's a school issue.

45:57 You, you you don't need you do not need personal devices to deliver the art curriculum. No, but you need personal devices to take pictures of things because you don't have the cameras to do. You don't need to take pictures of things you. Do need to take pictures of things in art because it's how you reference stuff. I, I, I have had art teachers comment. We can't sit here and say you don't need to do this thing. Yeah, yeah. I've had literally art people comment saying we do need to do this because it's evidence that we have to submit for work. You have to have pictures of work in progress and children have to. And people have to be able to annotate it. That's what they do. So you do. Just to be clear, when I said that I mean I what I was meaning was you don't need pupils to individually take pictures of things with their own. Devices, I think they do, you can have a class camera, you don't need 30. They don't have it. That's the point.

46:37 OK, that's, that's So what I'm saying is now I'm just going to make it really clear because I, we are coming across like we, we don't work in a secondary school. We don't work in an art classroom. We're telling people what they can do and don't need to do. Multiple art teachers, and I mean like 3 or 4 have commented specifically talking about art in the curriculum. They say and they say we need personal devices to meet this, this. I fully trust that they're saying the truth. So I don't want to sit here and say you don't need that. They do because they're telling us they do. And I'm I'm I'm not willing to tell them that they're wrong based on a hunch. Yeah, OK, fair enough. That's, that's completely fair. So the second line of this problem is, and it does fall back to this then is it is a systemic problem, then absolutely the government need to step in then if it is truly essential and there is zero other way the school can go in it. Because what I was trying to imply there was there are probably some schools where it's more a preference and they could maybe get around it with a limited tech, lower tech, whatever they have for some, for some schools and that and that might be a solution in some not.

47:29 Even some schools, but for some things, I think there are definitely some things that you absolutely need for whatever, for whatever reason you need it for that course and the funding of the gap and the gap is being made-up by personal devices. And I'm saying that's wrong and it shouldn't exist. And, and we absolutely need to fill that gap with government funding. I agree with your second point, but the fact remains that as soon as this becomes policy and you can't have your phone at all during the day, that funding gap will not be filled in time and there will be shortcomings in curriculums and teachers won't be able to do things. And, and I'm just saying is, is that therefore unacceptable? Should that be part of the exemptions until that gap's made? Yeah, it's really interesting, isn't it? I mean, what leg do the government have to stand on? Because if they say no, then the next question is, OK, we need funding immediately then or you have to accept that the curriculum is not going to be delivered to. A certain standard.

48:18 And that's the issue that these people have, that that's their push back on this. And I think it's legitimate. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's one of the most legitimate ones I saw They were like, if this comes in place tomorrow, I will not be able to do this, this and this, which means I cannot do my job properly. Yeah, yeah. And I and it doesn't matter whether I think that's right or wrong. I think we all agree that's wrong. But the reality is that that is what will happen. Yeah, sure. And and therefore they're saying, therefore, I don't think this should come in because of that reason that to me, we've talked about other pushbacks where we say it pales in comparison. There's going to be some con case bit of an issue, but we just have to go over it. This to me is as close as it probably gets to me thinking. But you know what, it's awful. But we we need that. Yeah, we need that. So, yeah, like you might not like this because of that. And I think that's fine.

49:01 Yeah, No, definitely. I think if, if, if there are those true cases where there is absolutely nothing the school can do, then they're then they're stuck. There is nothing there is there is nothing they can do. Do you know what I mean? They're stuck. I just, I still think there'll probably be lots of cases where maybe resources can be reallocated. I think basically most schools will have at least some access to some shared tech or if it's a or if it's a set of iPads for the whole school or more. And it might just be a case of. What it'll have to look different when it. Yeah, of course. But there might be some cases where it can be more of a reallocation issue with the school. And it's like, OK, the reason this this class doesn't have access to those devices is because another class is using it. And if we had just done those at different timetables, then maybe they both could have. Had it, but that's just more workload. I think so as well. I don't think it's a solution by the way.

49:42 I think this, this is I would just, I just want to address because I think some people sometimes might listen and think, oh, teachers think that everything's the worst thing ever and there's no, there's nothing they could, they do everything so perfectly, There's nothing they could possibly. Do no, no. Fix it themselves and there probably are some things. That's not that that I'm gonna make it clear. No one should be thinking about this because I think I've made it very clear as well. They're saying delivering the minimum requirement of the curriculum. Yeah, this is what we need to keep. What? I feel like we're falling into the trap here of constantly saying, well, we could just find a way. Oh, well, we could just do this. They're saying they can't like, so I believe them that they can't. There's like, there's other things that I think fall into more what you're saying, which is I've had people say things like if they've completed the past paper in maths, the QR code and they can scan it and they can see the walk through of the video or they can see the answers.

50:23 And on a personal device, everyone can do that. Now, we don't have personal devices that would be 1 between 5:00. If we wear this personal, it wouldn't be as good. That to me is more akin to what you're saying here, which is just like, yeah, OK, well, do you know what? You just can't do that anymore personally. You will just have to do one to five. You have to take the hit there. That's fine. I think what you're saying there has loads of use cases and reasons why actually, okay fine, but it will just have to be a bit less good because it's better to not have phones in general. I do think there are explicit situations and I chose the art one on purpose because they need cameras in art where they don't have them and the only way they can do that is through personal devices. That to me genuinely is a separate thing to what we can just find a way around it. We can just get a different trolley. They're saying they can't. Like like it's not, it's not a preference thing of it's better to have the individualistic answers, feedback on a phone. It's we literally physically can't do this because of the fact we need personal devices.

51:14 That's awful. That needs to change. But until the government do that, and when the government do that, I'll be the first person to say, yes, let's ban phones. But they're not doing it. So I can't get behind it. I think that's different. Yeah, I do as well. I'm I'm really trying to push devil's advocate. I think it's good. It's good. I think that the whole the only tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny issue and it's a micro issue is I don't think it is actually like that legitimate to just assume that everyone that says they can't do something has perfectly actually is like genuinely correct. There are obviously situations in life where someone says I can't do something and they are just wrong because they're just naive to a solution they didn't understand. So all I'm saying is that there are probably some places where schools can internally look at the situation where the teacher saying I literally cannot deliver this curriculum and they go, well, actually you think you can't deliver the curriculum because the iPads are never in use.

52:01 They're never available to this time. But actually if we just reject the timetable, there's a solution here that you didn't you weren't aware of. That's all I'm saying. Do you also accept that there are some situations where they can't? Yes. So, So OK, so now I'm talking about those situations. That's cool. So, so let's talk about those situations, whether it's someone who's written it or not and you're saying they're right or wrong, whatever. Let's talk about the literal situation which we both agree will exist, where this ban means you literally cannot deliver a curriculum anymore. Is that reason enough to think we shouldn't be banning it? Yeah. Right. Yeah, that's the reason. Basically what I'm getting at is, is it's as close as it gets to me where I'm like, OK, is this an example of where this is not a fully fledged out, fully thought out thing where actually do you know what if your reasoning is the budget isn't there for whether it's actually giving you the lockers in the 1st place to do it, down to the personal devices being relied upon to deliver a curriculum.

52:51 Just banning it is a sticking plaster to say look what we've done. Taking away that nuance and now it's legitimately a legal thing doesn't allow schools to make those calls. So given that, this is really interesting because I think it's my answer, yes, there was. I do think it's completely reasonable for someone to think therefore we shouldn't ban it. Given the information and we know this then factually that there is going, there are going to be some schools out there who are in that literal situation where they absolutely cannot deliver the curriculum without use of personal devices. Do you still think we should on the holistic level? Do you still think we should ban it? Yes, because I'm a little bit of an anarchist in, in personally where I think we should let things break to make a point. So, so like I, I still think my, my point there is that you're absolutely right.

53:32 You cannot deliver it, Don't deliver it. Let's see what happens. And there are people who push back to me and say, no, it's for the kids, it's my passion, blah, blah, blah. That's fine. I'm just saying me personally, I'm an anarchist. When, when I, when I look at school funding being cut massively and then the outcomes being teachers have to do more, teaching assistants have to do more just to stay afloat. And it's like, guys, we need someone to do it. My reaction is no, we don't. We need to show that this is unacceptable. It needs to break to make a point that it's broken. I think that's the only way to get through and I think it was this. So my point isn't you're wrong. You can get around it somehow. My point is I think you're absolutely right. Let's let it break to make that point. And when it breaks and they've try and blame you, tell them and it's your one. It's your fault. Actually, we told you this was a problem and you ignored it.

54:14 Yeah, I agree. That's what I was kind of vibing for that I was hoping you were going to say that because that's very much what I think as well. Despite thinking it's a reason and reasonable reason to to not want to do it. I still think we should do it though. I still think with that, even though that class is now going to be oh, now I can't take it. Well, yeah, you can't. You have to do all the you can do all the other stuff in the Quicken doesn't acquire tech. And you know what? Realistically, there's still going to be a huge. Amount of stuff you can do. You can't do those bits though, sorry. Yeah, and. And if there's a problem with that, tell them. Because we banned phones, Yeah. And I rely on personal devices. Sorry. I know we said earlier 97% have a phone by the age of 12. Are we OK with the 3% not having this personal device to access their curriculum? There should be at no point that personal belongings are required to get through a curriculum, which we're saying is statutory that you have to do. Yeah, it's absolutely not that that should not exist. And it, it does exist.

54:59 And that's the issue here. It does exist. It doesn't matter ideologically. We sit here and say it shouldn't, but it does. So bands will have a huge impact in that respect, whether we think it should or shouldn't, it will. So that's, I think that was the best pushback person. And you know, just just thinking in general in general now, just where it lands, I don't think there will be much difference If you look at a score after this is passed from when it before it's passed, I think there'll be small differences. I think there'll be that consistency we talked about. It's weird because I land on the fact there won't be much different, but I also land on the fact. Therefore I think it's a good thing. Is there a risk that it's an ideological want from us to have this come in place where we both think, but I'm not going to talk for you, but in general, I think it won't make much of a huge difference to what we see.

55:52 But it is going to maybe make make the curriculum undeliverable for some people, is going to maybe make some children who have mental health problems and have a director at home. Is there a reality where actually that does outweigh it becoming a statutory law and should it just stick as guidance then? Maybe, but I still think the probability is way in favour of the other way that's. It so So I'm just going to finish off by asking you genuinely because I'm interested. Yeah. Why? What is it that outweighs? What is it that by becoming law? Yeah. What is it you think that therefore it out as a good point outweighs the negatives we just talked about when it happened? Two things for me that the overarching things, number one, it would address that gap, the other 10%, the other nought .2% in primary schools and #2. So I said at the beginning, I really wholeheartedly believe this.

56:36 I think even the schools that are doing it will really rethink their policies and, and snap them in that whip them into shape. I do think they're limited all the stuff we said they're limited by, by funding and things. But I honestly reckon on the whole there will be an improvement in terms of how schools think about and monitor and are aware of phone use in school and the negative impacts they can have on children. And I think it's for some schools for the first time, they'll be thinking about that. And I, and I, I just think that's worth it. I think it's worth it. I think the guidance was good. I don't think making the guidance 5% better is bad just because you can barely see any difference. Yeah. Do you know, I mean in life if the guidance is good and we make it ever so slightly better? But it's because isn't even really changing. It's just becoming law. Yeah. So that to me is the I'm just imagining it, right? I'm taking it to the M degree of let's imagine it has to do it now.

57:19 The law only makes what it makes it 1% better. It was a waste of time. It wasn't. The guidance was good already and we just made it a little bit better. Hopefully we'll do something else in the future that makes it even more better. And maybe I think potentially I'm underestimating the difference it might make. That's the other issue I think. I think it's easy to underplay and say, well, they state one it 2 differently. Most, most schools don't have that actually. If you really forensically went in and and looked at what was happening in a school, I think it could make a really big difference actually. Which if you just, you know, peek under and just look more carefully, it becomes clear that, oh actually, yeah, this is having a bigger impact. That even though the cons exist and are real and are definitely something where I understand people's reservations, that impact is bigger and and overall let's move towards this. Not not ignoring the cons trying to fix them as we go and help on the way, but overarchingly this is good to bring in. Unlike the school then, as we discussed last week, is step one.

58:12 Yeah, nothing sold from this. Stop pretending it is government police. Stop saying things are solved when they're not right. But it is a step in the right direction. And maybe it's a slight culture shift. Maybe it's enough of a culture shift, right that we that we can then implement another step where we really start trying to get into outside of school time and start maybe families more willing to listen now because they've it's been put in the public space so much and this whole culture of no phones at school, people are starting to open their ears a little bit more and go, OK, what's going on here? There was that optional thing about how I can reduce phone use at home and I wasn't interested in that year ago, but now I am. Because the kids have come back and said, oh, do you know what, Mum? It's actually really good, right? Oh, wait. OK, so I'll try and make home good as well and better. And yeah, the next step, I think once this is introduced, make it law.

58:55 Next step, arrest Mark Zuckerberg. Yeah, that's step three. I can leave you this one final thing, right? Because I feel like I have to address this because it I read this and I was like. See you next time. No, because it it was a bit annoying. I was like, I don't know what the answer is to this right. And here, here it is. OK, A generation of children is, is now going to be told that the device that they use to talk to their friends, organise their lives, navigate the world. Literally we use this tech all the time that's so integrated in our life is now contraband at the at the place that they spend most of their waking hours. Yeah. Whether it's a good policy or not, it's worth just addressing the fact that that that is a, that's an interesting dichotomy. Like we are this thing that we use for life now and work and you'll be using it as an adult all the time, your workplace and this, you can't use it in the place you're at most of the time as as a child is.

59:40 Is there any problem with that messaging? No, of course. No, I don't think so. We'll see you next time. No, no, we, we we could go to more detail next time. My my initial answer is no. And the reason is because I don't think something not being allowed in a certain environment means that thing is always bad. Yeah. You're not allowed your phone in the cinema. Why? Well, so you don't disrupt yourself and others who are trying to watch the film. Oh, but all my family's on my phone. You say my family aren't important. You say the film's more important than my family. No, I'm saying that in this environment, the outcomes we're trying to get in this environment does not involve you having the phone as a distraction. So you wouldn't say there's any confusing messages there that we're sending to children about whether phones are good or bad? Or what? It's as it's as confusing as we make it. Yeah, like if we if we really explain again, this is the other thing I say all the time. Children can be explained too sometimes like Oh no, they won't get it.

1:00:26 Yeah, they will just explain to them why we're doing this. Explain to them why we don't we're not saying it's bad. The teachers will be on their phone. I go home on my phone and we lots of our businesses on this phone. Social media has grown for us massively, which is how we reach you lovely people who listen to this podcast episode. This is being released on tech. It's on Spotify, which you'll listen to probably now on your phone. It is a phone free zone. We'd never have a spot. We'd never have this podcast. I'm not saying that this is inherently bad. I'm saying that in this environment, XYZ are the reasons why it wouldn't be great to have this right now. But you can have it straight away after. There you you go. You're off to meet your mates. You have to go to football club. You need to contact your parents. Isn't it amazing that a teenager can contact their parents now? We don't need to go back to the 70s when you found your way home when it was dark. It it. Yeah, it doesn't. I'm not saying you're going to be in trouble now if you don't do that or there's someone waiting to kidnap you, because there probably isn't, right. But at the end of the day, for those exceptional circumstances. Hiya, Mum.

1:01:14 Yeah. Oh, you can pick me up. Cool. I'll wait here. Well said, Well said. Easiest way to put it. Imagine there's a big pile of poo in the middle of the school. See you next time.