How Schools Can Help the ‘Anxious Generation’ of Students

With every new generation, adults claim that children are different. Commenting on the youth in his time, Socrates opined, “If the whole world depends on today’s youth, I can’t see the world lasting another 100 years.”

In our conversations with teachers, especially those teaching teens, we hear a similar refrain: “Something’s changed in students.” Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, in The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness, presents a compelling explanation: the unprecedented challenges of present-day childhood. Thoroughly researched and very readable, the book chronicles a cultural earthquake that has resulted in a restructuring of children’s brains and a precipitous rise in rates of childhood depression, anxiety, and suicide. The book can serve as a catalyst for critical thinking about the design of our schools and the somewhat contradictory roles of technology and play. 

the anxious generation

Haidt attributes the crisis to a transformation from “play-centered to phone-centered childhood.” First, there is a loss of free play, brought on by helicopter parenting and the erosion of recess in schools. Free play has myriad benefits. When children are in “discover mode,” characterized by child-governed (versus adult-supervised) face-to-face interactions typical on a playground, they learn how to cooperate; senses of empathy and agency rise; and there is a growth-inducing tendency to step outside one’s comfort zone. The opposite phenomenon, “defend mode,” which is brought on by an overprotective approach to child-rearing, impinges on a child’s attachment system and the ability to take reasonable risks.

The second determinative factor is the invention of the smartphone in 2007. Within a decade, 79 percent of American teens had smartphones in hand. Haidt delineates four “foundational harms” from having a phone, and while he doesn’t connect these to school performance, the relationship will be apparent to educators. There’s sleep deprivation (impacting readiness to learn), social deprivation (stunting socialization), attention fragmentation (inability to focus), and addiction (social media and video games engineered to be habit-forming).

What can schools do? Targeting the prevalence of smartphones and the loss of play, the author recommends that schools adopt two strategies, to which we’ll add a third.

Ban Smartphones

Some state legislatures and local school districts have become wise to the perils of smartphones in schools. Fifteen states, most recently California, have outright banned or restricted cell phones. Haidt recommends banning cell phones altogether (no exceptions for passing time or recess), enforced by mandatory use of phone pouches and phone lockers.

In our experience, two-way communication with parents is critical when launching policies banning cell phones. Parents have become accustomed to instantaneous access to their children; they fear losing contact, especially in a school shooting or other emergency; and they may need to get in touch with their child if after-school care arrangements change. We’ve used the following address to explain and reassure:

“School is a precious opportunity for children to become comfortable interacting face-to-face and acquire lifelong social skills. Our experience shows cell phones distract students from these critical learning opportunities. If you have an urgent message for your child, call the school office; secretaries will reach your child. Police advise us that student cell phones are hazardous in an emergency if they ring or buzz or if children talk. Our staff regularly drills lockdown procedures in conjunction with the police—we’re trained to keep children as safe as possible and will keep you informed as much as we can without compromising safety.”

Expand the quantity and quality of recess

Haidt makes a compelling case for “generous” free time in kindergarten through eighth grade, citing research-validated academic, social, and health and wellness benefits.

The value of playtime and recess was once generally accepted in education circles. Then A Nation at Risk, school report cards, standards-based instruction, and the accountability movement became a veritable tsunami resulting in schools maximizing academic time-on-task in order to raise reading and math scores. In countless districts, career and technical education and arts programs fell victim too. You could consider it a perfect storm: less play time and creative outlets during the school day; screen-based interactions predominating after-school hours. 

Haidt’s book shows a flattering photograph of a playground merry-go-round from the Mad Men era. You might remember the apparatus. A big kid spun the metallic monster at breakneck speed until the occupants flew off, half giggling and half terrified, into a sand and dirt pit. They’re dinosaurs today, decommissioned at the insistence of risk-averse school lawyers and insurance underwriters. In a talk last month, Haidt mentioned that as a result of today’s “safetyism” movement, adult males have replaced boys as the demographic cohort most prone to broken arms—a trend, perhaps, of dubious distinction.

Maybe schools cannot achieve the laissez-faire, child-centered paradise that Haidt envisions. Perhaps there’s a happier medium between never-never land and playgrounds governed by adults. We suggest that schools form committees consisting of educators, parents, and students to reimagine how schools can create a more play-based environment.

Questions to be considered include these: To what extent can our playgrounds prompt children to step outside their physical and social comfort zones without taking excessive risks? Can we offer loose parts play options—hands-on objects such as milk crates, car tires, carpentry tools, and twigs—that encourage children to build structures and otherwise stimulate their imaginations while promoting group play? What is the role of staff in giving children a sense of independence and ownership on playgrounds? What do we do about children who feel uncomfortable in a playground setting or are socially excluded? How might we provide training to recess staff that will help them teach children the mediation skills necessary to work out disputes themselves, embrace inclusivity, and adopt a sense of fair play?     

New York City public schools, under recent Open Streets for Schools legislation, closed surrounding streets during recess and before and after school, leading to a resurgence of double Dutch, stickball, and other traditional city games.   

Educate Parents

Our last Edutopia article suggested that schools assume a role educating parents beyond the traditional annual orientation programs. We recommend that schools play an active role in helping parents navigate the “rewired” landscape. This past summer, the Surgeon General issued an advisory on parental stress, ranking its severity with the health threat posed by cigarettes and AIDS. 

One way to help parents think about transitioning back to a play-centered approach to childhood is to start with a schoolwide read of Haidt’s book. Plan an evening book discussion for parents, moderated by the school psychologist or a child psychologist from the community. (We like starting these evenings with a potluck dinner, establishing a cohesive tone as parents break bread together.) It’s not the school’s job to dictate whether parents enforce minimum age restrictions on social media, limit screen time, etc., but schools can educate parents about research-validated risks and help them define alternatives.

Parent education programs also create an opportunity to follow Haidt’s final advice to parents: Link up. Teens are likely to respond to restrictions with the accusation, “But you’re the only parents who...” When parents act in concert, perhaps signing a community-wide pledge, they have significantly more power. If there was ever a time to exercise the principle of “It takes a village,” it would be when trying to improve the fraught condition of childhood today.