Technolandy

Day 42 (of 2024/25) I read Haidt’s Anxious Generation so you don’t have to

Overall: Not as bad as I feared… I liked his views on some of the societal glitches that need attention (free play; over-safety by parents/adults;) but some things that were understated in the rise of anxiety (guns; school shootings/violence/active shooter drills; covid pandemic). I’m starting with the school chapter and then going through the book (yes, this is how I read books – making notes as I go along… ) my conclusion is a bit different than Haidt’s – but that’s because I see the tool as having a pivotal role in the future of this experiment of education. And I don’t disagree with all of what Haidt shares… just wish he took a look at some other factors for anxiety and distraction… 

Likes: Focus on letting kids have more unstructured play; acknowledging that we are better diagnosing anxiety and depression – and adhd…; an issue being kids getting tools (and what they access) without teaching and support on how to best use the devices… if only there were a place where we had youth come together to learn things….; agreeing that giving smartphones without support has been quite the ‘uncontrolled experiment humanity has ever performed on its own children’ – noting that experiments on youth has significant ethics issues…; love his section on play based childhood – especially free play!

Dislikes: Lack of differentiating use of screens; not including gun violence connected to youth/schools; not acknowledging how many were looking at anxiety (and solutions such as CBT) well before 2010…not ‘new’; earlier note correlating rise of anxiety to ‘significant stay in hospital pre-6 years old; not looking at the element of ‘too much information’ that mobile devices enable – beyond the social media – and how that plays into the brain not being ready to process so much information. Why not spend more time digging into some of the other reasons for the desire for distraction and ‘increase’ in anxiety (many adults I meet admit that they never dealt with it as a kid… we are doing a much better, albeit tricker because of it, job at identifying and supporting youth with mental wellness.

2010 is a key trigger date that Haidt uses for the Great Rewiring because of the rise of the smartphone… but there are elements that are not looked at… 

*****the book itself*****

starting with the end in mind…. Chapter 11: What Schools Can Do Now

Haidt promotes two strategies that he would like done together:

*more free play (fully agree)

*phone-free schools (disagree)

He shares a school that implemented a ban due to rampant cyberbullying, sleep deprivation, and constant social comparisons. I have not seen how the ban has helped anxiety, removed the need for counsellors or admin to focus on bullying – cuz that stuff still happens from 3-9…

So a ban on phones is a band-aid that reduces the pain in one place, but doesn’t actually address the needs of the students (and society) to be better users of the most powerful tool to disrupt 

I’m a big advocate for tech in classrooms – the Apple IIe made my schooling so much better (not having to focus on my penmanship was the tip of the iceberg) and the class I had that was essentially 1:1 was the most communicative and collaborative (and supportive of some outdoor/nature projects) that I ever had… but even I agree ‘not needed all the time’ and encourage the reflection if it is being used as a ‘tool or toy’ <— knowing sometimes a toy (distraction) is needed to get refocused. 

Once engaged in great learning (PBL) the phones aren’t being reached for because of engagement, but as byod mindsets were encouraging – personalized devices are powerful to help timely learning/research/communication/etc

Is the focus on distractions? Then do we do similar when kids have non-academic-focused books open on their laps? Take away paper and pencils when doodling/writing notes/drawing images…? 

But… I’m mindful that not everybody is as comfortable using, modelling, adapting, and working with technology as I am… which is why I still love the overall rule: at teachers discretion. If a classroom has a ‘phone away’ plan/rule – I can work with it… but… there also needs to be some mindsets that acknowledge that some students use this tool for things other than social media’s – tracking meds being just one method… 

Other teachers are comfortable with ‘some use’ – listen to music after I’ve given the lesson.

Some of us are comfortable seeing our spaces as a place for kids to practice netiquette – and appreciate the modelling by adults (I still share my own thinking about my actions when I am in a space and have need for my phone). 

But the modelling – if no phones… then it has to apply to the adults as well – because I still hear stories of kids expressing their own frustrations of trying to get a teachers attention, but they were doing something on the phone – even admitting probably dealing with an email, but frustrated that a asynchronous task could not be paused for a real life interaction <— one of the great learning takeaways! 

I appreciate Haidt’s take on the ‘but in case of emergency – like a school shooting event’ with phones being out of reach… I‘ll just say that it is interesting that some places are more okay with AK47s than they are with cell phones. 

I’ll also hit his comment that there is ‘surprisingly little evidence that digital technologies enhance learning in the typical classroom’ – with the reminder that seamless uses of technology have been very limited by ‘projects’ exploring 1:1 (such as Peace Rivers 1:1 initiative – that I borrowed the learning from to great success in my classrooms and schools since…) and there is still a lot of fear by many teachers to integrate technology beyond ‘one-offs’ and ‘occasional’ use – imagine how the results would be if we took the same approach to writing or reading… I’d say math – but there is a neat project from Syracuse that showed not doing formal math in the first years might not be such a bad thing… but that was a long time ago… because others are scared to implement such a project. 

And there are some flaws with the tech executives choosing Waldorf schools because they are tech free – that is an elite perspective for kids who have abundant schema about tech use. Of course lower-income families who do not have generations of tech using elders to get wisdom from can be targeted for having less supervision, and more distractions. They are lacking elder mentorship. Grrrr. 

If only there were multiple ways to deal with the distracted elements Haidt continues to focus on – like airplane mode… or silencing notifications… or teaching kids how to slide things around on screens so they have a productive page that they stay on. Weird: let’s teach some good strategies – or we can continue to pretend by ignoring the problem they will just figure out how to use them effectively in out-of-school hours with less supervision and support…

Play Days without tech are always supported by me – as it is a great opportunity to (here I go again) model how to play certain games… interact with each other with good social skills… practice how to be comfortable being bored…  the things we ought to do with cell phones being present. But this is not an innate skill – much like the misunderstanding around the term “Digital Natives” – it doesn’t mean kids/generations innately know how to use these tools better… it just means that they are comfortable with them being around them – much like if you lived in a forest, you wouldn’t automatically know which plants and animals were safe or dangerous – elders would guide you. We need more elders taking tech-responsibility to teach use… IN schools. 

Love the shoutout to the Let Grow Project (I still promote https://globalschoolplayday.com) and can’t stand that some places reduce/eliminate recess breaks – I am a huge fan of the Finnish Schedule (45 mins of work, 15 mins of break) 

I did snicker when I read his ‘third way to improve mental health by improving recess is to reduce rules and increase trust’ – the same thing (gradual guided release of responsibility) I have seen work with all types of tech.

Still missing the increased ‘importance’ and time given to high stakes tests and testing periods; and the rise of school shootings as elements that have definitely distracted youth. 

Intro

There were early shares about some of the research bias of this book – some minor (correlation vs causation) some a bit bigger… talking about youth anxiety but not taking in factors such as the increase in school shootings and the resulting ‘intruder drills’. But I finally took the time to read through the book about the ‘great rewiring of childhood’ – which isn’t new… I vented about it two decades ago when we saw an increase in anxiety easily linked to the lack of choice and freedoms: after school activities were ‘anything you want – as long as it is soccer or karate’ and any time kids were alone (even in backyards) police/ministry of children would be contacted due to the lack of supervision – went so far that a draft memo was shared that would’ve made it a reportable offence for elementary (k-7) students to walk home without a designated parent/guardian… this was before pocket sized disruption devices were ultra-affordable.

Growing Up On Mars

Haidt’s introduction is around consideration of the future and a possible movement of some children to go to Mars and whether or not it would be a one way trip given the fears (radiation, gravity). Which means to an ‘of course sending a child to mars is an insane idea’ <— subtle shade on SOGI and exploration of ones own sexuality and gender identity? That’s one of my reads even though he shifts this onto technology where ‘as long as a child checks a box stating they have obtained parental permission’ they can go forward… much like apps and the internet.

Interesting in the shift he references the 2008 shift in personalized portable tech with his 2 year old mastering the touch and swipe interface – and yet ‘companies had done little or no research on the mental health effects of their products’ – which is ironic in the sense that research on children is highly irregular and immoral, so such studies have to be broad and long lasting – such as the research done on CBT (cognitive behaviour therapy) in Australia via the Friends for Life program… and then going into broad assumptions about ‘hooking children’ – social media damaging girls most and video games and porography sites hooking deepest into boys… pretty broad claims…

I agree with his concern about looking at federal laws on internet consent/knowledge, but really laws and regulations are always well behind the ways tech has worked… in many cases mindfully slowed because of special interest groups (cough gun lobby cough) that don’t want rules and regulations because of ‘individual rights’ <— hard to do both…

Claiming that there is an ‘enormous difference between social media companies and 20th century big tobacco companies’ is a bit sardonic to me – if we are looking at addiction, tobacco and social techs have very similar overlaps: seeking markets that are young and have a need for something ‘else’ (a dopamine hit from crushing candies or the soothing feeling of a cigarette or vape (a presidential candidate has declared he will support more of these) held in fingers releasing a toxic fume that placates the internal senses just as well… despite the cancer it is linked with… and yet nobody wants to stop and look at the ‘why’ – anxiety, depression, mental divergence… these are the parts people get distracted by thinking that if we ban them, they and the the mental health concerns associated with them will just fade away… 

So the books focus: Gen Z and the changing conditions of childhood; bringing in the work of Jean Twenge who looks at going beyond events children experience and includes changes in technology (ooh – read my first draft on clocks – updated one coming soon: https://technolandy.wordpress.com/2021/02/10/day-100-of-190-clocks-with-thanks-to-hopkinsjeff/) but who has similar criticism as Haidt regarding the research methodology – if you know what you already want to find, you can figure out the research tools to get to that answer… 

I find it interesting that while they both point out the changing tech of radio then television, computers, internet and iPhone, they leave out the introduction of books (as more were published, similar concerns that we raise about cell phones were brought up then on the youth of the eras) and I disagree with his notion that ‘before 2009 tech/social media generated much less of the toxicity we see today’ – it was there… it is why I was using Club Penguin to help model and moderate how my students (and kids at home) ought to explore connecting and networking with the great online community . 

And a naive claim about the trend that hit girls harder than boys – around posting images of oneself… going through puberty with a portal has been under reported on how boys have been impacted – as they were likewise ignored via magazines where girls and pressures were much more talked about than boys (our own fault as we tend to draw away from talking about tour mental and physical health – this has definitely changed for the better with the use of tech and social medias…

I do agree with his claim around overprotection and the need for free play (free deep play is another one I have long encouraged) and while he mentions the fear of unsupervised children being kidnapped… the truth remains the greatest risk is from known people who are unknown predators. Which, as Johann Hari has written, when kids/people can’t find community and connections in real life, they will turn to the online world to find that connection. And I won’t disagree with the broad strokes that there are two trends to be wary of: ‘overprotection in the real world and underproduction in the virtual world’ Key reasons why I often talk about tech use with the dual mindset of: for creation or consumption…

4 parts in the book: 1) mental health trends among adolescents since 2010; 2) nature of childhood and how we messed it up; 3) harms that result from the new phone-based childhood; 4) how to reverse the damage in our families, schools, and societies.

Looking forward to how he brings in the changing impacts of the world onto mental health: the ongoing climate change concern that has been the source of more than a couple kids generalized anxiety; the rise of gun violence/availability and the increase of anxiety and depression that identifies that as a key target; and the targeted bullying and racism partly seen through book bans targeting biopic and lgbtqia+ students, but transcends into all youth; and the better awareness of how trauma lives and reveals itself at unexpected moments because the brain is an interesting organ…; 

Hmmm he talks about a ‘collapse’ of mental heatlh, but as an educator I have seen more of a gradual decline linked to an increase of better identification at earlier ages which has helped more students better identify the challenges they are working with… no cliff that they have fallen off of…  urgent and complex? Absolutely – especially with not enough professionals able/willing to work with youth – again, under 18 is much trickier due to research rules and regulations… <— a note on the tricky part of research in this area…

I’m already perplexed that he raises the ‘more than a century of experience in making the real world safe for kids’ looking at cars, cigarettes, but not talking about guns… that should be an important one to talk about since it is the leading killer of youth (in the US in particular) . 

His foundation for a healthier childhood… I’m not opposed to, except that I’d say the ages/grades are more guidelines and the individual child may make exceptions for both earlier or later access…

1. No smartphones before high school (grade 9 for non US people) with basic phones if needed for younger. I’m not angry at this – there are good uses for portable devices in education, but a lot of those skills can be used with larger screens… I’d still support that for some, younger would work as well
2. No social media before 16. In theory, I agree – much like tobacco and alcohol and marijuana, the later the better… in practice, there are some social medias that should be available for connectivity – with oversight by families – that’s what we did… to allow practice (and mistakes) early on with supervision so that some errors would not be repeated.
3. Phone free schools. This one I think is dumb. Responsible use by adults can be modelled and taught to students who can then practice and use the phones to help their learning by having a byod with them at all times, deal with changes in plans from family and employers, because a gradual, guided release of responsibility works – greater independence when showing that the tech can work – otherwise, if worried about these distractions, put away the calculators, the laptops, the earbuds, the earrings, the shoes, fidgets in general, bracelets necklaces and other wearables that can be discreet bluetooth signals – but ban them all to be safe…
4. Far more unsupervised play and childhood independence five stars and this should be the subtitle of the book.

Part 1: A Tidal Wave

Chapter 1: Surge of Suffering

Of course the conversation is on smartphones, social media, and video games when talking to parents – my observation is that “we” are jealous of the younger generation and the tools and toys that they have that we wish we had. I just had a chat with my kids about my own scholastic endeavours and shared that I would’ve been much more successful with a portable device that would allow me to better connect images and words to share our thinking (without being penalized for ‘messiness’ of penmanship…

Worries of ‘something unnatural is going on’ is common – fears of tv time followed worries of too much radio time which followed concerns over youth spending too much time with paper tablets (books were not always viewed as sources of knowledge when used by the masses… something to consider when we decry the screens.

I do agree with the worries for some when parents share they feel they have ‘lost their child’ – this has been a generational concern – be it ‘lost to music genre; games; sports…’ and the monitoring by parents (who know their kids best) is always essential – but parenting is different than friendship… and often harder. 

I’ve got some questions:

1. “Why relates of mental illness went up between 2010 and 2015” – this wave was noticed much earlier – we in BC were using programs such as Friends for Life to address anxiety as early as 2004. 
2. “…while older generations were much less affected.” – though there have been many ‘late diagnosed’ adults and many more shared how they self medicated for a long while before they better understood what they were working with … so there have been periods where we just ignored our mental health… long periods in too many cases.
3. “This kind of connectivity offers few of the benefits of talking directly with friends. In fact, for many young people, it’s poisonous” <— this quote has a couple of wonders… what is the data to support direct communication? Cuz I know some people who were socially isolated without the phone to act as an interaction tool… and ‘poisonous’?? 

I also wonder about all media – Haida points out radio and tv, but doesn’t mention how paper tablets (books et al) were also decried for having a negative impact on society – especially youth. 

And one of the shares around “Aren’t they right to be anxious and depressed” is that it is more than ‘the state of the world’ – an issue with phones as that it gives more content… information… belonging to any and all events throughout the world… It isn’t just that there was the Sandy Hook School Shooting, but the connectivity and ‘first hand’ reports made it feel as connected and real as if it happened just down the street. But this is a broader media concern of mine… just magnified because of how personalized the cell phone device can customized the news and information world. Much like Climate Change – the ‘threats of the past that did not historically raise rates of mental illness’ were delayed information – edited by writers and publishers – now the information comes first hand… this was first seen with the Vietnam war where images were shown in much more detail than previous wars… and continues with people being able to share and show concerns in real time… and having other generations dismiss things like climate change as something ‘we will get to – after the economy is doing better’… nothing like dismissal of a very rational fear to encourage anxiety and depression…

And why girls? Maybe because the biggest role model for this has been a teenage girl… who has been dismissed, made fun of, and had to fight to have her ideas heard at the UN Climate Change conference…

Sigh… saying canada should not be as impacted as US doesn’t factor in how much of the media bleeds over – especially violence and how things are impacting youth. Trust me… we are greatly influenced by world events and especially in the US (in part w/me are worried that people who conceal weapons in the US think that their rights extend to other countries when they cross the border…) and to think that a multinational increase is not influenced by american politics or school shootings is very convenient… too convenient… and wishing that countries and kids were isolated from the news around the world…. Which the phones have definitely made more available (and I will agree that the ‘too much information/too easy to get information is an issue that the brain is/was not ready for…)

“No other theory has been able to explain why rates of anxiety and depression surged”…. 

Part 2 – the backstory

The decline of the Play-Based Childhood

Definitely not arguing with the premise of this chapter; for decades I have pointed out the ‘lack/loss of choice for kids’ – kinda devolved to ‘you can do anything you want after school… as long as it is either soccer or karate’. But I blame adults and systems (such as governmental organizations dealing with children and families) for removing these options… which in a sense forced kids to find their playspace in the virtual space….

Haidt makes the claim that after the “Great Rewiring” kids were consuming content because of the smartphones… I’d push that (as Johann Hari has proposed) people go to the phones when they don’t find their connections in ‘real life’ – and then we can factor in the dopamine rushes that developers program their games to release… much as casinos and arcades did in the past – but why not look closer at why the kids are seeking dopamine hits this way…

Slow growth childhood:  agree with the evolution needing three great things:

1. Free play – (Play is the work of childhood) but there is modelling and encouragement that is needed from other people – it is not an innate ability, the curiosity is. Love the push for more free play as seen through Global School Play Day initiatives: https://globalschoolplayday.com (which I have been supporting from year one) But Haidt coordinates the decrease of unstructured time to the early 2010s but I noted it with my oldest a few years earlier… but that’s not convenient information…
2. Attunement – children want to connect and smartphones disrupt this face-to-face interaction. Here I agree and wish there was less screen time for younger humans. As much as I am a fan of technologization and see computers (and cell phones) as an important equalizer and disruptor to traditional education, it’s not all day (my classes/school that were most techie were also the most involved in work with nature) and a gradual guided release of responsibility. We practiced, and I modelled, a LOT.  
3. Social Learning – humans are cultural creatures – my argument is that not all things from the past are good to continue with – lots of racist sexist and ableist notions that ignore certain voices. As Haidt notes: conformity has value… and when everyone else is on a social media platform… that’s where you need to go to find them. But as for conformity? Social Media also has enabled – for both good and bad – like minded people to find each other – fabulous for LGBTQ2IA+, not so good because of flat earthers… and ‘prestige-based social media’ are not much different than the magazines and tv shows of my generation – not everyone could be on 21 Jump Street, but many wanted to emulate what we saw… 

Brains and Sensitive Periods: Fully agree with ‘key times for learning’ – as noted by Piaget… the age ranges still feel accurate… and the pressure to get the new tools/toys is real… What’s the right age? Even I don’t have a good answer for that beyond ‘it depends’ – depends on the guidelines and supports provided by parents… what the tool/toy will be used for… and what sort of check-ins are provided (again, if only there were some place where we could gather all the kids together to learn stuff like this….) Cuz the problem is people will latch onto people like Andrew Tate/the good problem is that people will discover other positive influences… 

When Haidt links the lack of free play to anxiety, I agree wth him. Deprived of childhood? That depends so much more on context… and bias… and privilege… I am not a fan of screen time for the very young – but love screen time when it is introduced and used effectively… affectively… and with a mindset of it as a tool. More Play? Absolutely!!

Chapter 3 – Discover mode and the need for risky play 

Loving this because I love my Gever Tully influence – and again (pre-phone) adults are to blame for being too worried about injuries… this is not post-phone. Th either consideration – while there is a boom in online photos and videos of children being sexually abused… it’s also creating a trail of evidence to find these people and deal with them – much easier when it’s where it can be found than the ‘good old days’ when this exploitation happened in the basements and we didn’t need to see/think about it…

Porn and Violence way too easy to access for young brains? Yep! New problem? Nope – knew many who I grew up with… and many who I taught who would share their favourite (movie/tv/book) and it was very explicit – didn’t like that a grade 2 boy was looking forward to his birthday because they were going to rewatching the SAW franchise… only up to about five movies at that point…

I like the mindset he shares of: Discover mode vs Defend mode – we have anxiety for a reason – it keeps us safe.. but when these go overboard… we get things like chronic anxiety. Discover mode: learning and growth / Defensive mode: obstacle to learning and growth

Again – my experience: adults aren’t helping their kids with this… but I like this for thinking purposes:

Discover Mode:

• scan for opportunities
• Be a ‘kid in a candy shop’ (with a black card – otherwise this is a very privileged metaphor thinking all families can afford candy)
• Think for yourself
• Let me grow!

Defend Mode:

• Scan for dangers
• Scarcity mindset
• Cling to your team
• Keep me safe

But here Haidt shifts towards ‘cancel culture’ – looking at how 2015, unlike 2010, books, words, speakers and ideas shifted from not being controversial to being said to be harmful, dangerous, or traumatic. Sorry that equity scans are inconvenient… and to agree with Haidt that America’s residential universities are among the safest – I agree – safe enough for students to share their lived experiences and pointing out systemic discrimination and bias that have been placed in plain sight.

Again, I like his work on helping: Kids Are Antifragile – stress wood is important – resiliency is vital; and I agree with “Parents who try to raise their children in a bubble of perfect hygiene are harming their children by blocking the development of their antifragile immune systems’ 

And yes – we can still have controversial books, ideas, speakers, etc but there’s nothing wrong with preparing people for the ‘triggers’ – trust me, my dad had a good, important talk with me before I was allowed/given Huckleberry Finn. But for some of our community who are bombarded by systemic bias and discrimination – they need to be heard, and their voices need to be valued. 

And we can discuss phobias – especially the ones that do/don’t harm people – as Jerry Seinfeld once said, based on fears, if you are at a funeral, you would likely prefer to be the one in the coffin than the one giving the eulogy. And yet, especially in the US, gun violence and the use of AK15s et al are downplayed despite them having actual consequences that do kill modern people – especially students. 

And if we want to take on dangerism and why playgrounds (as an example) were so dangerous in the past (great photo of one that would not be built today) and much safer now… again, we can look to the litigious US and how it has influenced other countries… kids fall down, and parents look to sue – is it any wonder why schools don’t want to provide/take such risks? But again – an adult, not screen issue.  I love it when my own kids/young adults still take risks from time to time (their anxieties usually thwart such plans) – and our emphasis on taking away things that even have ‘some risk’… I agree with Haidt – probably not a good idea, but I have many parent/friends who disagree with me on this mindset. Put your tongue on a 9 volt battery. It’s a good starting point.

Point of view – Haidt writes regarding physical development that ‘friends do things together, and as children they touch, hug and wrestle’ – once again, less and less because of the adults, so where do they go to find similarities? Online world… definitely not as good/great, but being sought when there is no other opportunity… 

I like his thread looking into childhoods and the two main parenting philosophies: concerted cultivation (kids require an extraordinary degree of care and training by adults) with full calendars – mainly from middle and upper socioeconomic classes; and natural growth parenting – kids being kids – mainly from working class and poor —> but many shifting towards concerted cultivation… I wonder why… pressure to do what the rich are doing? It’s why I assume when people claim they want schools to do more teaching on things like how to do taxes, that we should emulate the rich and focus on ways to avoid paying taxes…

Fearful Parenting – Haidt says he can’t see why parents in Canada and Britain made the same changes where college admissions are far less fraught. This is (pardon me) dumb. We read same/similar books; view same videos; and university application is stressful no matter where we are… trust me… two of three had very stressful application/entrance procedures. And yes, the 24 hour news cycle has not been good for parental anxiety. 

Turning the spotlight onto some of our cultures nastier components show how bad things could get – abuse scandals as an example… but they didn’t start int he 80s/90s, that’s just when they were finally talked about – because talking about trauma is tough – it’s why residential schools in canada are vexing; nobody wants to talk to the public about abuses they suffered… hard enough to talk to a trained expert… but create mixed messages – we can talk about ‘stranger danger’ but it has always been ‘close relationships’ that have been the most dangerous… the ones that Haidt (and I) have been saying is missed a bit… I like the term “Concept Creep” when it comes to this focus on ‘safety’.

But, to counter Haidt as an example – while he says “no sane person objects to the use of seat belts and smoke alarms” … I know many who do… many. And when he talks about people saying they (on campus as an eg) should not have to experience negative emotions because of what someone else said or did… it’s partly because they’ve had to cope with it long enough… and for some (with privilege and power) uncomfortable because for them it’s the first time and they don’t know how to cope with it. <— two mindsets can be true at the same time

Trust me – I am the first to promote the idea of no-adult recesses to see what happens… I just get voted down/directed differently very quickly…  which is why we have more “don’t rules” than guidelines -great photo by Haidt on ‘restrictions on free play’ (Tag rules). I hate tag. Always leads to a fight (very unscientific principal perspective)

Chapter 4

Puberty and the blocked transition to adulthood

I like his concrete metaphor (ties in with Piaget and Vygotsky) – If you try to draw your name in very wet cement, it will disappear quickly. If you wait until the cement is dry, you’ll leave no mark. But if you catch it while it’s in the transition between wet and dry, your name will last forever. 

Nice point between chronic stress (lasting days/weeks/years) vs acute stress (comes quick but does not last long); and not easy to practice with the promotion of safety is… 

And cell phones do not easily teach youth how to understand facial expressions, vocal tones, direct eye contact (cultural bias with this one, admittedly) and body language (again, different cultures = different languages). 

Interesting that Haidt looks at the ‘rites of passage’ very quickly (the Blackfoot vision quest seems quite vague and very unique to one of the thousand nations…) and interesting that while he talks about ‘societies not preparing boys for war had very different rites… right into Judaism… at a time with Israel in a significant war… not a new one… so some bias showing here.. but also could go into a bit more of a share that schools became en vogue in part because of the rites of passage that they enabled to prepare students for war… or prison… but those anxieties aren’t worth a chapter (at least not yet…)

His concerns for online unsupported exploration…? Definitely a cause for concern – lots of stuff to see that the brain likely hasn’t developed to be ready for yet… like watching Saw movies as an 8 year old before the ‘great rewiring’… 

Building a ladder from childhood to adulthood – a good metaphor, especially with tools as powerful as portable screens… if only there were a place kids gathered to learn things like this… but I disagree with determining freedoms at certain ages – so much depends on schema and what they’ve previously experienced/done… not ‘age of manufacture’.  But i don’t mind them as guidelines…  and I appreciate him acknowledging ‘different speeds may be applicable’. 

Part 3

The Great Rewirirng

The rise of the phone -based childhood

Harm? Getting feedback/answers too quickly? Not disagreeing. Definitely creating different pathways/expectations of the brain. But damaging? Again, I’m not arguing when he lays the case when they are introduced ‘too young’ – but again, they are powerful tools… in no small part because of the modelling  of parents – I was drawn to books because my dad was a voracious reader… 1/3 of my kids has followed the same pathway… when kids see people using these tools, of course they want to see what the big deal is. 

And much like books – the introduction is making many jealous and concerned because it is different information accessibility than it was when ‘we’ were kids. 

“Opportunity costs” are important to consider. 

And agree with Haidt that the screen time estimates are (as they always have been) underestimates… back in the old days, I laughed when I saw how low the ‘average tv viewing’ was for kids my age – and we were in a rural community (not so many channels and more outside street hockey games). 

Harms:

1. Social deprivation; for me – depends on age and depends on the socialness – 8 hours of feeling bullied and not connected isnt healthy… and while we can claim and say (and I agree with) “children need face-to-face, synchronous, embodied, physical play” – we have to provide those opportunities. Doomscrolling bad. Fully support. And again – if only there were places where kids gathered and could practice in-person vs text-to-device communication and chats… and glad Haidt points out that kids notice that parents are also ‘often distracted’ by devices. Modelling matters
2. Sleep Deprivation; agree that it is easy for yellow light/blue light frustrations to continue – likewise it can be when waves of anxiety strike and a quick check can resolve a panic in the brain. But always been an issue for some families/communities that we aren’t going to talk about at this point – now that it’s impacting privileged families, sleep deprivation is worth focusing on. Sigh. 
3. Attention Fragmentation; do phones distract productivity? Consider phantom vibrations. Fully agree – again, learning strategies to set dampeners and limit notification is important. Imagine (if you haven’t worked with anyone with neurodiversity) thousands of thoughts/voices/images bombarding you at once.. it’s hard – it’s also why this tool can be useful – my tinnitus is better managed when I have some tech to distract me from time to time – different stimuli can be helpful – or as I say: Sometimes you need a distraction to get focused. Takes time and practice…
4. Addiction; So many things cause it – and I am glad Haidt talks about slot machines and gambling wins. Habit forming actions do create a self perpetuating loop (Like this visual!) trigger – action – variable reward – investment back to trigger… Easy to be manipulated into doing ‘more’. Reward systems are powerful – which is why they work… except for neurodiversity for which it does not work… And I don’t argue that kids are seeking the dopamine hits (as mentioned referencing the book Dopamine Nation) I just encourage the harder exploration – digging into ‘why’ the dopamine rush is being chased…

I do like the share of the Surgeon General’s report on benefits of social media, and Haidt saying they sound plausible, but digs deeper into this research than some of the others… 

Research bias is a real thing and others have written better than me on it: https://www.alfiekohn.org/blogs/evidence-based/

I appreciate him sharing his bias of being skeptical of claims about benefits of social media as many confuse social media with the larger internet. 

Chapter 6

Why social media harms girls more than boys

Great share on some of the ways it is pretty easy to circumvent rules (as it always has been…)  And harmful? It sure can be without a guide showing some of the ins and outs – again, I’m glad that my kids were willing to work with me on their own exploration of social 

Haidt does a good look at how studies can/have been conducted, convincing him that the rapid movement of social media’s was a cause, not a correlation, of the increase in depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts, and other mental health problems that began in the early 2010s… still some problems with this one as I could do similar results looking at how my involvement in a keeper league hockey pool has influence my (and my colleagues) world… though we know this is in jest as we have the ability to not always be over analyzing every trade offer… even though we do. But we have practiced this and monitor each other to ensure that it’s not debilitating – much as the problem with social media – without practice and monitoring/coaching… it’s a lot to take in and process. Especially when things are new and exciting – fidget spinners were a bane and pain for awhile – everyone was using them for good and bad reasons – then over time things cooled down and those who found ways to have the fidgets be helpful kept using them, while others found the next distraction… similar with things like tech and socials ~ introductions can be very engaging and take up a lot of time (like the release of a new video game)… what happens next is more important. And I don’t like the bias to ‘girls vs boys’ when there are a number of teens who do not fit nicely into these categories:

1. Girls are more affected by visual social comparisons and perfectionism – as a stereotype, sure – always have been; cursing magazines and movies in the before times.
   1. Plus – this is all old information with the emergence of Generative AI for even more +s and -s… 
   2. Having two daughters who have used social medias as this target generation… family connections are pretty important to balance this out.
2. Girls Aggreation is More Relational – again, not new – as the cast of Friends clarified: girls tease the other until they develop an eating disorder.
   1. Queen Bees is another good brook; and again I do wonder if a benefit of this tech is that it is forcing transparency and making us all see what’s been going on (such as Spotlight and abuse in the church)
   2. I’ll buy into the idea that now it is easier and more public to shame via media platforms; also gives avenues for police.
3. Girls more Easily Share Emotions and Disorders – good ponder to see if sharing of things (like depression) spread as easily via screen as they traditionally have in in-person groupings.
   1. Finally – a look at the COVID pandemic. 
   2. Walking a fine line with some opinions about gender dysmorphia… again, openness and safe spaces is allowing more people to be more transparent about who they are – and not locking it away for decades. 
4. Girls are More Subject to Predation and harassment – just encountered a creepy story via the Howard Stern show on the number of Liam Neeson fake accounts there are. Too many predators – but not necessarily ‘more’ ~ just easier to go online and see who they may be able to prey on… again, if only there were a place where we could teach kids some of these skills and hope they translate back at home to help their parents.

Quality over quantity – this is my terminology when it comes to teaching and classroom experiences… I fully support this when it comes to social media’s and connections. But in schools as in social words – sometimes quantity matters…

Danger (agreed) it ‘lures’ people in with the promise of connection and communion.<— why are they seeking this online… 

Chapter 7 

What is happening to the boys

Love the shoutout to Johann Hari – giving me more trust in this book regarding the connections. Boys pull away from engagement quicker – data shows it happened even before the 2010s (though this was an ‘accelerator’ – or progression… whichever😜)

Oooh – looking forward to seeing his analysis of how the ‘real world has changed… leading it to be less hospitable to boys and young men’.  Physical strength being less valuable as one item… intelligence being more valuable – and skills such as communication and sit still and focus – things that (as seen in schools) girls tend to do better than boys… 

Could it link to:

• rise of safetyism and the removal/reduction of recess times?
• Playing more video games? By 2015 a staggering number said they had no close friends; were lonely; no meaning or direction to their lives. 

Seeing how Japanese society has shifted with boys being of greater and greater concern, shows how ‘pulling inward’ can have a negative overall life experience. Not just a uniquely Japanese condition anymore… (again, a curiosity until it starts hitting closer to home?)

Is the draw to the bedroom that used to equal ‘boredom’ (though books games and toys have always been available for the more privileged) and now everyone has better/easier access to the web and video games – an online community that exists in a way better than the real world is treating them?

Research does show that around 2010, boys started to shift towards the internalizing disorders that had been mainly the girls domain… 

• drinking less alcohol
• Fewer accidents/tickets
• Less fights
• Unplanned pregnancies

Are these due to wisdom or withdrawal? People are taking fewer risks…

The virtual world also welcomes boys – browsers, games, porn – all very attractive. Cell phones only make that even more convenient. 

And I do like his assertion that printed magazines for pornography could not be sold to minors… though they were…

And video games admittedly complex – but gaming sites are troubling – this I fully agree with. And video games at least create intellectual stimulation for collaboration, competition, communication, working memory, response time, etc – but again, quality vs quantity discussions. But much like other sports – there is a professional aspect that is enticing. 

By doing esports in school, we are able to do some coaching around many of the concerns (hygiene… socialization… collaboration…) but his bias shows when he looks at how video games are disembodied and can’t activate white fear, thrill, and pounding heart beat of a roller coaster etc… but the joy in watching a good video game performance is similar to watching your favourite sports team… 

One correlation that keeps popping up is how ‘life feels meaningless’ – one avenue not explored is that once upon a time we dealt with that teen angst on our own (for the most part) and now we get to bounce it off more and more people so that it stays alive more than a little bit longer. 

Chapter 8

Spiritual Elevation and Degradation

Very Christian biased focused start to the chapter… though as he states for this chapter he’l ’draw on the wisdom from ancient traditions and modern psychology… I’m looking forward to his use of local traditions from the nations that have been in the regions he is writing for thousands of years…

Or not… I’m not going to comment on this chapter because there isn’t much depth when looking at the religions he does focus on (eg broadly “Christians” and “Muslims”, “Jews” and “Sufis”… and then how screens broke down rituals (or maybe allowed a grand rethink of why many do what they do…?)

Jumps around a bit too much for me to get any depth… ‘too many tabs open’. 

Takeaway to agree with: getting outside is important. Trees are helpful – but if in urban areas, even outside for walks, sunlight, and looking at architecture can be good. 

American Gods (novel) has a very neat look at this analysis of an evolution of gods based on technology. Worth a read with a twisted mindset. 

Unpopular takeaway: while Haidt claims ‘most religions urge us to be less judgemental’ – my historical view on this wouldn’t agree – there is lots of judgement that goes on; especially against those who don’t practice a faith…

Oh, and nothing looking at local spiritual connections about ancient wisdom.

Part 4

Collective Action for healthier childhood

Chapter 9

Preparing for Collective Action

I don’t mind with a rethink on when and how to introduce smartphones to youth. Challenges: families will do their own thing. Opportunities: there is a place where kids tend to gather to learn new things. 

While there are worries that Haidt reinforces, there are powerful positives to the tools as well. For communication, creation, and connection. And stop making it a school problem – if its a problem, keep phones at home – it’s not like locking them during the day means there is no negative behaviour, it just further pushes it to the times where there is less guidance, modelling and support. 

Free Range Kids is a great read.  

 Chapter 10

Whaat governments and tech companies can do no

One of my observations – governments are always way behind the times when it comes to good rulings when it comes to tech. 

Computers used to be for few; now they are for all – I still believe this scares many as it is a great equalizer… 

Tech companies have done some good things – trying to support schools with geoblocking products… but it is hard when there are so many workarounds… 

this could be a good realm for AI to get involved…

Recommendations:

1. Assert a “Duty of Care” – which in current formats is so hard to enforce for real life situations – but if it can target advertisers and go to strongly safe defaults when apps start up – that could be very helpful
2. Raise the age of internet adulthood to 16 – I still have doubts whenever we start “by age __ kids/people can: ___. It’s not as easy as that there were a class students needed to attend and take in order to learn key skills and strategies and then go into the broader tech world with more understanding of what is so they can transfer that to the unknown future. 13 still makes more sense to me… but again, when we put morality on focus – it is always interesting to see how some nations with strong restrictions get great rebellion – consider alcohol use in the US vs France. When normalized and talked about, it is less about age than experience.
3. Facilitate Age Verification – huge information risk. Huge. Though family accounts corroborating age/skill readiness with broad accounts (like Apple One) could work in the background…
4. Phone Free Schools. Pshaw. The assumption that a ban from 9-3 will mean good choices and good health from 3-9…

Community:

1. Stop punishing parents for giving children real world freedoms. Absolutely – my mom was still terrified when I took the sky train back to my grandparents place on my own when I was 13, but we were always on our own in our rural community for most of the day… takes trust (and not the blaming by others)
2. Encourage more play in school – Absolutely. Playbased learning is great
3. Design and Zone public space with Children in mind. Rules rules rules. 
4. More vocational education, apprenticeships and youth development programs. Or clubs. Finnish model – incorporate more club mindsets. – support gap year during the secondary year experience. Think different!

Chapter 12

What Parents Can Do Now

Great shoutout to The Gardener and the Carpenter – great read. 

Would’ve liked a closer connection to Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development but close enough

Piaget’s

1. Birth to 18 months; 2) 2-7years; 3) 7-11 years; 4) Adolescence to adulthood

Haidt’s:

1. Ages 0 to 5; agree – more real world explorations, less (none for 0-18months imo) screens *love the acknowledgement that some screen time ‘may be valuable’ – FaceTime. And then ‘educational programming’ – and admitting that if he could do it over again, there’d be less teletubbies… I wish he would’ve shared the behaviour challenges and distractions his kids have experienced since…
2. Ages 6-11; agree – let kids play out of sight; have sleepovers; walk to school; free play (then he goes more elite and privileged with ‘go camping’ and ‘find a sleep away camp with no devices and no safetyism’); child friendly playborhoods. All good – and read Free Range Kids – great ideas there.
   1. Then he goes to give good ideas for schools as well as parents for screen use – good for the kids but also us older folks:
      1. Use parental controls and content filters
      2. Maximize in person activity (make it meaningful) and sleep
      3. Provide structure to day/week
      4. Monitor for over use (aka “addiction”) and problematic use
      5. Delay opening social media accounts
      6. Talk to preteens about the risks AND listen to their thoughts.
3. Ages 13-18; find ways to be mobile (geography dependent); rely on them doing tasks (having purpose) at home; find a job; be a leader; consider a high school exchange program (elitism sneaking in); find bigger thrills in nature (again, some elitism assuming that people all know how to find and access the ‘number of free or subsidized programs’; take a gap year (again a bit elitism assuming everyone can afford to take such a break – if this is important – lets build the gap year into the 10-12 graduation pathway as well); track social media presence with the idea to gradually let go (though we have turned tracking back on for our elderly parents!!) 

Conclusion

Some good points and some broad assumptions. Better read than I anticipated but much like the previous attempt to ban/limit books, radio, and tv – all methodologies that have proven to be integral to most of humanities growth and how they acquire information. I kinda wish we’d evolve back to more oral/aural traditions – but even those are being archived on youtube…

I agree with Haidt that we can’t go back, but I disagree that we should ban and ignore… especially at school… I still believe (as I have seen) that these devices can be the disruption that has been anticipated for awhile, but hoped education as a system had evaded. “We” are Blockbuster, and the cell phones are Netflix. Right now we still have an opportunity to merge and do more. I worry that if we don’t make a pivot, we as educators may be left out of the next paradigm shift.

My encouragements continue to be (even as we currently exist on a hypocritical banning of cell phones in schools): model how you use your device for youth to see. That includes sharing what your thinking is. Explore the mindset of a gradual, guided release of responsibility with tech. When someone is hyperfocused on the dopamine rush of crushing candies, see that as an opportunity to take on the anxiety/depression/etc and not be distracted by the tool – the brain doesn’t like being talked about and often uses distractions (behaviours, violence, fleeing, fighting, etc) to distract from the root cause that starts some curiosity – don’t be distracted… dig deep.