The debate about banning cell phones in schools flares up again at regular intervals - especially when pushed by conservative and right-wing parties. It is suggested that simply switching off smartphones will solve all the problems of digital media use. However, this attitude is reminiscent of the famous bird's nest policy: bury your head in the sand and hope that reality will take care of itself. The truth is that it masks deeper problems: The failure to regulate the power of the tech giants and the political will to deliberately disempower and depoliticize young people.

A ban on cell phones is not only out of touch with reality, it is also an expression of educational capitulation. It replaces active engagement with digital media with a reactive lockdown. Instead of teaching pupils media skills, critical thinking and the confident use of technology, they are being denied access to it across the board. The goal seems clear: young people should not network, organize or get involved, especially not in socio-political issues such as climate justice, anti-fascism or social rights. The "well-behaved specialist" ideal type is at the heart of this education policy: conformist, inconspicuous and politically tame.

Yet it has long been obvious that the constructive and critical use of digital media is one of the fundamental skills of the 21st century. Media skills must be taught as early as possible. Ideally from the first grade. However, this requires the comprehensive qualification of teachers, who today are often barely prepared for the everyday digital lives of their pupils.

The alternative to media education in schools is frightening: we are leaving the "education" of young people to the interests of tech billionaires such as Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos. In other words, people who are primarily interested in monetizing attention and controlling data. Anyone who seriously believes that parents alone can fill this gap is ignoring social reality and the basic requirements of education. We demand professional qualifications for teaching math or practicing medicine. Why should media literacy and digital education be exempt from this?

The call for parents to take on this task is therefore doubly absurd. How are working parents supposed to find the necessary time and energy after work, household chores and shopping to acquire digital education themselves and then pass it on to their children at the weekend? This idea is evidence of an unrealistic ideal of middle-class parenthood, which further increases the social pressure on families and declares education to be a private task.

A final aspect shows how hypocritical the political discourse on this topic is: Politicians who eat kebabs on TikTok or chat ironically about their leather bags like to sell this as media literacy. But they get advice from professional agencies and produce content for a fee. This is not an expression of their own competence, it is a sign of economic opportunity. Media literacy is not just about using platforms, it is about understanding them, questioning them critically and using them responsibly.

The blanket ban on cell phones in schools is therefore nothing more than a smokescreen; it is a sham debate that distracts from the real challenges. Instead of ignoring technological realities, we need a modern, courageous and inclusive education policy that takes young people seriously, strengthens their potential and empowers them to actively participate in a digital and democratic society.

Thoughts from Niko Fostiropoulos, Managing Director of the education company alfatraining.

19.06.2025

More articles by the author:

Verbieten oder befähigen? Der falsche Weg im Umgang mit Social Media und Jugendlichen

21.07.2025

Die Dummheit der Hilflosen: Warum ein Handyverbot an Schulen falsch ist.

25.03.2025