Professional Documents
Culture Documents
issue with mobile technology is not the convenience or the benefits that come with it, rather the
influence it has on the younger generation that changes the way they behave and the way the
think. Technology may not seem all that bad considering is has provided the education with
system online courses, homeschooling, and resourcefulness, but in actuality only 3% of all
digital media time is spent on creating and expanding the mind (Rideout 13). As Generation Z
ages with technology, it is prevalent in many correlational studies as well as theorists that the
use of social media, mobile devices, and the internet negatively affects the development of the
adolescent brain and thus changes their behavior and hinders their educational experience for
three main reasons: a dependence on others through posts, a loss of long-term gratification
The problem is a one that goes beyond the classroom and is integrated in the everyday
lives of teenagers and students. The use of social media encourages insecurity and addiction.
The function of a “like” is used to boost the self confidence and happiness of the user or owner
of the post. In fact, a survey done by News Statesmen says that 89% of all user say that “likes”
give them happiness. As users continue to post and receive attention via “likes”, they will begin
to loose their own sense of internal satisfaction in their experiences, including school work. They
will not feel self-accomplished if they base their gratification on “likes”. In fact, since the release
of social media and mobile smartphones, depression rates have risen 58% for women and it
happens that women use social media 3 times more than men (Walton, Rideout 14). Using
social media and phones in moderation would reduce the pressure for teenagers to constantly
In addition to the usage of social media, it was briefly mentioned earlier that phones are
addicting. This is nothing far from the truth. The nature of a cellular phone and the notifications
that come with it are without a doubt addicting. The New York Times surveyed teenagers, and
72% said that they have an urge and are pressured to respond to messages or notifications
right away (Homayoun). It is simple, whenever a “notification” is sent, the human mind releases
endorphins, the chemical directly in charge of motivation and reward, which triggers happiness
instantly (LaFata). This leads to the user to respond to the notification, which may result in
another notification; thus, the loop of phone addiction continues. Because the short term
happiness from notifications are easy to obtain, users will be fixated on gaining happiness
quickly, and will not see the satisfaction from completing long-term goals and aspirations.
Students, addicted, will fail to reap the long term benefits of starting an assignment early,
working hard on it, and receive their desired grade. In other words, addicted students rather use
their phones.
Addicted users actually have a chemical effect in their brain. Dr. Hyung Suk Seo from
Korea University, did research on addicted teens, in which he concluded that the area for the
top-down attention control, gray matter, was smaller in addicts. Their GABA receptors and
balance were also unstable, resulting in anxiousness as well as moodiness (LaMotte). This
directly correlates to the amount of control a user will have over their own attention, in this case,
addicted users will have a smaller attention span to pay attention in class, or anything other than
their phone.
From another perspective, many others will argue that mobile technology has done
nothing but benefit the education sector. To start off, the use of tablets are much cheaper than a
laptop or desktop, and it is much more mobile. Mobile cell phones also have use in the
classroom. Because most students have cellular phones, it is simple for students to set
reminders or take pictures when needed. For example, if a teacher writes down review material
or important dates on the classroom board, is is as easy as a picture for the student to
remember such dates. In addition, assuming the majority of a classroom will have a mobile
phone, the classroom can engage in “Kahoot”, an online quiz website. Many teachers have
utilized the website because it allows for the whole class to participate at the same time and
receive feedback instantaneously. Given that there is benefit in the classroom with phones,
there are negatives as well. The main issue that teachers struggles with phones are cheating
and distraction.
The issue with phone usage is ever-expanding, however, this project will focus on
finding a solution for the problem inside the classroom that can still reap the benefits of having
technology, but eliminating the negative side effects. After a great deal of research, a phone box
is the most cost effective, benevolent solution. The issues listed above are the effects of
addiction and excessive phone usage, which can not be controlled outside of the the classroom.
However, the phone box is aimed to reduce the amount of screen time per day to lessen the
effects described above, as well as benefit student’s educational experience with the absence of
a phone.
What exactly is a phone box? Well, a phone box is a box, cabinet, or area in which
students will put their phone in for the duration of a class period. The phones will be placed
there at the beginning of the class and retrieved at the end. The phone box is used to a
teachers desire, meaning that phones can be taken out when a teacher chooses. This flexibility
allows for the teacher to let their students have access to their phones when needed in an
academic setting or a break. The phone box will effectively reduce screen time when students
What is causing the urgent issue to prevent students to use their phone in the
classroom? To give the most in depth reason of why a phone box is the best solution for the
issue of phones in class and their negative effects, a CCCFC evaluation (Causation, Coverage,
Cost/Benefit, Feasibility, and Comparison) will be used as a structure for this project.
Teens average 9 hours consuming media a day, and children from 8 to 12, 6 hours
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/11/03/teens-spend-nearly-nine-
their day, including sleeping. School, on average is 8 hours a day, and the average teenagers
center/sleep-in-adolescents). This means that either the remaining time of the day other than
school is spent entirely consuming media, or there is an overlap where students use their
phones during school. The latter, would be correct. According to a survey done by The Atlantic,
94% of all students use their phones in class, whether it be academic or socially. 54% in the
94% however, say to be using social media or texting friends in class. Even worse, in another
survey done by CBS News 35% admit to using their phones to cheat during a test. 80% of all
the students however, do use their phone for academic purposes whether it be accessing an
online textbook or taking pictures of a powerpoint (Kelly). Given the statistics above, the usage
of phones in class are both beneficial and detrimental. These statistics are all the reason for the
use of a phone box. A phone box will not only decrease the 6-9 hours of screen time in a
student’s day, but flexibility of phone usage by control of the teacher will prevent students from
using their phone to cheat, text, or use social media, all the while letting them still use the phone
How will the phone box cover the students in the education system? As the
phonebox is implemented in the classroom, all the students in the classroom with the phone will
be affected. Larger classrooms and lecture hall would be more difficult for a larger box would be
needed. For this reason, the phone box solution is guided towards high school, middle school,
and elementary schools where the class sizes are below 35. The issue is not who is covered,
rather HOW will it be implemented TO cover the students. Standardizing a curriculum or an idea
with in a education is simple, with in the same intuition it is. For example, if an elementary
wanted to implement the phone box, it would be simple to propose the box to the school board
for the school. If the proposal passes, the school would have to ask for permission from their
district office. Assuming it passes, those covered are only the students in elementary school. To
take even it farther, one would have to bring it up to the district office, then the county office, and
then the state’s department of education, and after that the U.S. Department of Education. It
would be difficult to standardize the phone box, but so is every other idea in the education
system. However, many teachers have already implemented the phone box, without the need of
How feasible is the phone box? In reality, many elementary school teachers along
with secondary school teachers have already utilized the phone box in their classrooms without
consent of higher authorities. Many would also argue that the phone box is a grey area because
the teachers are taking the students belongings without permission. However, this is legal
because of the “In Loco Parentis” case in 1985 with New Jersey vs. T.L.O. The case stated that
when a minor goes to school, the teachers are acting as the student’s guardian or parent during
the duration of the class (Education Law). This means that teachers are allowed to withhold the
possessions of students if they see fit, in this case cell phones. The case for universities are
different, however. Because the students are over 18, the “In Locus Parentis” clause is no
longer in effect, so it would be illegal to take the students’ phone. But, students are in class and
in college for their own interest of learning, so it would be the students own integrity to give their
device to the box to enable a better learning environment. Other solutions such as a class set of
tablets and phones and even an internet proxy that stops students from accessing unacademic
websites would be much more costly as well as more difficult to set up. The phone box itself is
as simple as it sounds, there is no need for any extra technical set-up and is extremely cost
“Deciding When to Give Your Child a Mobile Phone.” Popative, 24 May 2017,
www.popative.com/deciding-give-child-mobile-phone/.
www.nationwidechildrens.org/specialties/sleep-disorder-center/sleep-in-adolescents.
Gaille, Brandon. “11 Cell Phone Use in School Statistics and Trends.”
trends/.
Homayoun, Ana. “Is Your Child a Phone 'Addict'?” The New York Times, The New York
addict.html.
Kedmey, Dan. “Test Scores Rise After Cell Phones Banned From School.” Times, The
This popular article explores the results of what happened when schools posed strict
rules on phones and banned them. The number one find was that test scores rose 6% after
phones were strictly banned from schools. It claimed to be equivalent to 1 extra hour in school
with the absence of phones. The article was written for regular Times readers as well as people
interested in the influence of technology. Dan Kedmey is a journalist for The Times Magazine.
LaFata, Alexia. “Generation Notification: Why Our Brains Literally Love Notifications.”
behind-notifications-obsessed/866812.
This popular articles is written to be posted on Elite Times. It talks about the biological
side of social media. It speaks about how human brains are wired to like social media via the
release of multiple chemicals, the major one being dopamine. LaFata continues to explain that
being addicted to phones will lead to social awkwardness as humans will be conditioned to
interact with their phones rather than humans. LaFata is the Senior Editor at Elite Times and a
graduate from Boston College.
LaMotte, Sandee. “Smartphone Addiction Could Be Changing Your Brain.” CNN, Cable
study/index.html.
This popular article addresses the new form of phobia, “Nomophobia”, short for no
mobile phone phobia. LaMotte summarizes many researches done about phone addiction. The
main one being the brain's chemistry in a person who is already addicted (set by guidelines in a
nomophobia questionnaire). GABA in a person brain who is addicted are too high, and it slows
down neuron firing in the brain. Too much GABA and attention span will be shorter. LaMotte is a
journalist for CNN and the CEO of Health Trust Media, LLC.
Lenhart, Amanda. “Teens and Mobile Phones Over the Past Five Years: Pew Internet
Looks Back.” Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech, 19 Aug. 2009,
www.pewinternet.org/2009/08/19/teens-and-mobile-phones-over-the-past-five-years-pew-
internet-looks-back/.
Lesgold, Alan, et al. Evaluating Educational Technology: Effective Research Designs for
This scholarly book focuses on seeing the effects of educational technology to students.
The chapter cited however, is “Detecting Technology’s Effects in Complex School
Environments”. This chapter talks about how students will simply just study for a test to pass it,
without understanding the concept or and depth of the subject. Lesgold proposed a maturity
model, an innovation that adapts to the user. His program has adaptability and will test students
based on how they do during the exam or program itself. He claims that it will improve outcomes
for lower-income households. Lesgold is the educational psychologist and dean for the
University of Pittsburgh School of Education.
Novotney, Amy. “Procrastination or 'Intentional Delay'?” Monitor on Psychology,
Kelly, Rhea. “Survey: 94% of Students Want to Use Their Cell Phones in Class.”
cell-phones-in-class.aspx.
This popular article talks about the usage of cellphones in the class. Rhea has done her
research and found many statistics on the percentages of cellphone usage by teenagers in
class. This includes how many use their phone in class, if they use it for social media or class
work, to check in for class, etc. The article is targeted to the readers of campus technology as
well as those interested in the teenagers’ use of phones in the classroom. Kelly Rhea is the
executive editor at 1105 Media.
Rideout, Vicky. “The Common Sense Census: Media Use by Tweens and Teens |
Common Sense Media.” Common Sense Media: Ratings, Reviews, and Advice, Common
The scholarly article and report talk about the research that Rideout has conducted and
the conclusions drawn from them. Most importantly, Rideout surveyed over 2,500 tweens and
teens (8-12) about what media they enjoyed using the most, and how they accessed it. This
directly relates to my questions as he addresses the issue in his key findings sections of the
paper. The article was published in 2017 and Rideout does research on a national scale for
children, technology, and low-income families. The audience would be other scholars in the
same research field and at the Northwestern University.
Rideout, Vicky. “Media Usage by Kids Age Zero to Eight.” VJR Consulting , 2017,
vjrconsulting.com/children-media/.
The article and report talks about the research done, which was the parents of kids
between 0-8 monitoring their child and documenting the amount of time in which the child was
engaged in media and what devices they used to access it. This includes watching TV, video
games, and virtual reality. This article was also published in 2017 at the Northwestern
University. Rideout is a professor at the university, and this article has been published to gain
the attention of scholars as well as many news outlets such as CNN and USA Today.
Tait, Amelia. “‘Both Hugely Uplifting and Depressing’: How Do Social Media Likes Affect
media/2017/01/both-hugely-uplifting-and-depressing-how-do-social-media-likes.
This article did a research study on social media and likes and the happiness that comes
along with the user. They list out many statistics about how people value likes, how many
people want more likes, how many people get jealous of likes, etc. Written to the readers of
News Statesman, the article was written by Amelia Tait, the digital culture writer for News
Statesman's tech sector. This article provides a realization that much of the modern population
values likes and are somewhat attached to their social media and image.
Tsukayama, Hayley. “Teens Spend Nearly Nine Hours Every Day Consuming Media.”
switch/wp/2015/11/03/teens-spend-nearly-nine-hours-every-day-consuming-
media/?utm_term=.6782c7746be2.
This popular article talks about the research the Common Sense Media had done and its
analysis on it. Hayley Tsukayama talks about how the recent emergence of the phone and the
correlation is has with teenagers and screen time are negative effect on their behavior. She
emphasizes that addiction is a large part of the screen time. The intended audience are the
normal readers of The Washington Post as well as people who are interested in teenagers
screen time. Tsukayama is a reporter for The Washington Post that covers consumer
technology.
Walton, Alice G. “Phone Addiction Is Real -- And So Are Its Mental Health Risks.” Forbes,
addiction-is-real-and-so-are-its-mental-health-risks/.