+
upworthy

Policy

A group of students staring at their phones.

The Norwegian government is spearheading a significant initiative to prohibit students from having smartphones in schools. This move comes in the wake of compelling studies demonstrating the positive impact of removing these devices from students’ hands and allowing them to focus more on their learning.

The effects have been particularly beneficial for girls.

Over the past few years, smartphone bans have cropped up in several school districts throughout Norway, allowing researchers to study how the bans affected students. Sara Abrahamsson, a postdoctoral fellow at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, analyzed students at 400 middle schools and found that the bans had psychological and academic benefits.

The Norwegian Institute of Public Health published the results.

1 Girls made fewer appointments for psychological help

The study found that there was a significant decrease in the number of visits that girls made to see a psychological specialist for mental health issues. “Relative to pretreatment this is a significant decline by almost 60% in the number of visits,” Abrahamsson wrote in the study.

2. Steep drop in bullying

The study shows that girls experienced a 46% reduction in bullying after smartphone bans were enacted and boys had a 43% reduction.

smartphone, smartphone ban, norway

Boys looking at memes on a smartphone.

via Max Fischer/Pexels

3. Improved grades for girls

The study revealed that introducing a smartphone ban at the beginning of middle school improved girls' GPAs and increased their chances of enrolling in an academic-oriented high school track versus a vocational study. On the other hand, the ban appeared to have no notable effect on boys’ GPA, teacher-assigned grades, or likelihood of pursuing an academic high school track.

4. The ban had a more significant effect on economically disadvantaged girls

The study found that the ban resulted in greater benefits for economically disadvantaged girls regarding academic performance, appointments for psychological symptoms and the probability of attending an academically focused high school.

The positive impact that the bans have on girls is significant, given the fact that studies show they’ve been the most deeply affected by the rise in mental health issues amongst young people that have coincided with smartphone adaptation.

One of the most disturbing trends is the dramatic rise in suicide rates among girls in developed nations.

smartphones in schools, norway, smartphone ban

Students taking a selfie in school.

via RDNE Stock Project

Jonathan Haidt, author of “The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness” and advocate for banning smartphones in schools, explained why smartphone use is more damaging for girls than boys.

“There is a special relationship between social media and girls,” Haidt told “The Reason Interview with Nick Gillespie” podcast. “When boys get together … they're likely to organize themselves into groups to compete [on multiplayer video games].”

“Girls are much more interested in talking about relationships. Who is on the outs with whom? Who's dating who? They have a more developmental map of the social space,” Haidt continued.

When there is conflict within peer groups, social media poses a much greater threat to girls.

“Boys' aggression is ultimately backed up by the threat of physical domination and punching or pain, " Haidt continued. “Girls' aggression is equal in magnitude, but it's aimed at relationships and reputation. It's called relational aggression. Video games, if anything, prevent boys from getting in fights. … The platform settles everything. But girls' relational aggression is amplified. The worst year of bullying is seventh grade. I'm really focused on middle school.”


Michel Janse shares how she was the victim of a scam.

After falling victim to a scam on Facebook Marketplace, Michel Janse (@michel.c.janse) hopped on TikTok to give everyone a heads-up so they don’t have to go through the same thing. “Be smarter than me!” she said in the video.

Janse posted some furniture on the marketplace and chatted with a woman who seemed interested in purchasing it. She even looked at her profile to get a “vibe check," and everything seemed legit.

The potential buyer seemed to be careful to protect themselves as well. “For my safety, I just want to confirm that you’re a real person,” the buyer messaged Janse. “Are you ok if I voice call you from Google?”


Even though the request seemed odd, Janse went through with it. She subsequently got a message containing a Google Voice code. When the buyer asked Jane to send her the code, she did, only to quickly discover she had been duped.

It seems that Janse had a gut feeling that the woman was a scammer but didn’t act on it til it was too late.

@michel.c.janse

oops dont fall for this scam like me

Janse fell victim to a common scam through online marketplaces. According to the Federal Trade Commission, the scammer could use the Google Voice number to rip off other people and conceal their identity. “Sometimes these scammers are after a Google Voice verification code and other information about you,” the FTC wrote. “If they get enough of your information, they could pretend to be you to access your accounts or open new accounts in your name.”





Author Mark Tyler Nobleman and Batman and Robin.

Over the past few years, "Don't Say Gay" bills have been introduced across the U.S., sparking widespread controversy about how LGBTQ issues should be addressed in schools. Supporters argue they protect children from inappropriate content by restricting discussions of sexual orientation and gender identity in educational settings.

Opponents believe these bills marginalize LGBTQ individuals by fostering stigma and potentially infringing on teachers' ability to openly address students' questions or experiences.

Currently, 11 states have banned LGBTQ discussion in public schools, and 5 require parental consent.

Author and comic book expert Marc Tyler Nobleman recently found himself at the center of the controversy, and his simple rationale for using the word “gay” in his school presentations presents an age-appropriate and inclusive way to approach at the issue.


Nobleman has spoken in schools in “about 30 states and almost 20 countries” to inspire children to write and do research. He’s the author of the book “Bill the Boy Wonder: The Secret Co-creator of Batman” about the fabled superhero’s unsung co-creator.

Artist Bob Kane is known as the creator of Batman; however, Bill Finger is believed to have refined the costume and given the character his secret identity as Bruce Wayne, amongst other contributions.

Nobleman notes in his speeches that one of the significant reasons why Finger lives in obscurity is that he died in 1974, and his son, Fred Finger, was gay and died of AIDS complications at 43 in 1992. Without an heir, the movement to get Finger the proper credit lost any hope.

However, the twist in Nobleman’s presentation is when he reveals that through his research, he discovered that Fred Finger had a daughter, Athena. This led to DC Comics officially recognizing her grandfather as Batman’s co-creator in 2015.

“It’s the biggest twist of the story, and it’s usually when I get the most gasps," Nobleman told the Associated Press. “It's just a totally record-scratch moment.”

After a presentation at Sharon Elementary in Forsyth County, Georgia, on Monday, August 21, where he mentioned Fred FInger's orientation, the principal handed Nobleman a note saying, “Please only share the appropriate parts of the story for our elementary students.” So, he removed any reference to Fred Finger’s sexuality over his next two days of presentations.

The school’s principal, Brian Nelson, sent a letter to parents after the initial presentation that read: “This is not subject matter that we were aware that he was including nor content that we have approved for our students,” Nelson wrote. “I apologize that this took place. Action was taken to ensure that this was not included in Mr. Nobleman's subsequent speeches and further measures will be taken to prevent situations like this in the future.”

But after some soul-searching, in a presentation two days later, Nobleman said the word “gay” once again. After discussing the situation with the school, the remaining assemblies were canceled.

Nobleman shared his reasoning for using “gay” on X, formally known as Twitter, and his rationale makes a lot of sense. “And as I've told Jennifer [Caracciolo, the school’s chief communications officer] and her colleagues, mentioning a sexual orientation is NOT the same as discussing sexuality.”

That’s a huge point missed in much of the debate surrounding LGBTQ visibility in education. There is a big difference between discussing sexual acts—whether heterosexual or otherwise—and someone’s orientation, especially when there’s a good chance that there are children of LGBTQ parents in the audience.

Further, in a world where same-sex marriage and heterosexual marriage are treated equally, why is mentioning one orientation any different than the other?

“If a child asks me if I am married, can I say I have a wife? This is discrimination. It is also extremely insulting and dangerous to our children," Nobleman told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "We have so much LGBTQ teen suicide because they are not welcome to speak up about their own lives in their own community.”'

Caracciolo likened saying “gay” in front of third graders to talking to kindergartners about one of the greatest atrocities in world history. “It would be almost like if someone was doing a speech to kindergartners and they talked about the Holocaust and the horrors of the Holocaust,” the district’s chief spokeswoman, Jennifer Caracciolo, said, according to The New York Times.

“I asked her not to compare a kind of love to mass murder,” Nobleman wrote in Newsweek.

After his remaining presentations were canceled, Nobleman emailed administrators involved in the controversy and asked them to take three specific actions:

-Apologize to their community for the principal's apology.

-Apologize to their community for censoring an established author who did what he was hired to do: Pump up their kids about reading, writing, and research.

-Challenge the standards that stigmatize any mention of LGBTQ people.

Photo by Spencer Davis on Unsplash

There's a reason you can't smile in passports and it's surprisingly practical.

Most of us have been trained since before we could talk to smile when someone is taking our picture. It's almost a Pavlovian response at this point, especially when that picture is going to be representative of you for years to come in an official capacity. Driver's license pictures usually involve people attempting to look their best, or at least as presentable as possible, complete with a smile.

Passport photos are no different, except when you get to the passport photo place with your freshly coifed hair, showing off that beautiful smile, you're told to cut it out. Well, maybe in nicer words, but the sentiment is still the same. Keep your teeth behind your lips; there's no smiling in passport photos. But why?

I've personally never understood why this was a thing for the government to be concerned about. You're likely getting your passport to go somewhere exciting or visit family in another country (which is also exciting), so why no smiles?


Technically, according to the State Department, you can smile, but only if you look like you don't want to. Kidding. In its Frequently Asked Questions, the State Department explains that smiling is allowed, "but make sure both your eyes are open and your mouth is closed in your photo." So essentially a closed-mouth smile rather than a big toothy grin. But it also can't be a smile that emits a lot of emotion since the website states also states that you must have a "neutral facial expression."

So it's not that you can't smile, it's that you can only do a very specific type of smile. In an interview with HuffPost, Karolina Turowska, a biometric photography and travel expert at Passport Photo.Online said, “The main reason for banning smiling is the introduction of facial recognition software at airports and other border control checkpoints.”

Seems the actual reason for the "ban" on smiling in passport photos doesn't have anything to do with postal service workers trying to keep you from living your best life. It's because of the robots...or at least the algorithms. Evidently, it's difficult for computer-based software programs to tell humans apart if our faces are contorted in a joyous way.

“Algorithms don’t work as we do. To compare a 3D face with a 2D passport photo, they need to pinpoint and measure the users’ facial features. It includes the distance between the pupils, ears, nose and mouth, the mouth’s and the eyes’ width, and many others. Smiling can make it harder, as it alters facial proportions,” Turowska told HuffPost.

Smiling isn't the only no-no in passport photos. According to US Passport Service Guide, you can get your passport rejected for a number of reasons and only one of them is smiling like The Joker. Wearing glasses, submitting an edited picture and using the wrong background are all reasons your passport photo can be denied.

If you're due to renew your passport or if you're going for your first one, it's best to review all the rules before submitting your photo or showing up at your nearest Walgreens. It's better to lead with caution on this one or it could delay you receiving your little book of world stamps. Happy traveling, folks.