Blog
Monday 22nd June 2022
Does the Under-16 Social Media Ban Mean Teachers Can’t Use YouTube in the Classroom?
Many teachers will have seen recent headlines about the proposed UK social media ban for under-16s and wondered what it might mean for everyday classroom practice.
One question that is likely to come up in English departments is simple: does this mean teachers will no longer be able to use YouTube clips in lessons?
At this stage, teachers should not panic. The main focus of the proposed restrictions appears to be children and young people using social media platforms themselves, particularly where they can scroll, post, interact, livestream or be contacted by strangers.
That is very different from a teacher selecting a short, appropriate video clip in advance and using it as part of a planned lesson.
For example, if you are teaching Macbeth and want to show a short performance clip of a key scene to help pupils understand character, staging or dramatic tension, that kind of controlled classroom use should still be possible, provided it fits your school’s safeguarding, filtering and copyright policies.
Online video can be a valuable teaching tool in English lessons. A carefully chosen clip can help pupils visualise a Shakespeare scene, hear a poem performed aloud, understand a writer’s context or see how language, tone and delivery shape meaning.
The issue is likely to be unsupervised pupil access rather than a teacher using a specific clip to support learning.
Sensible Steps for Teachers
Teachers using YouTube or other online video platforms in the classroom should continue to follow good practice.
The safest approach is to:
* choose the clip yourself in advance
* check the whole clip before using it
* use official or reputable sources where possible
* avoid letting pupils browse YouTube freely
* turn off autoplay where possible
* use full screen to avoid comments and recommendations
* make sure the content is age-appropriate
* follow your school’s filtering, safeguarding and copyright policies
It is also sensible to have a backup plan in case a video will not load, is blocked by the school filter or is removed from the platform.
What About English Lessons?
For English teachers, video clips can be especially useful when used with a clear teaching purpose.
A short clip might help pupils:
* understand a scene from a play
* compare different performances of a Shakespeare extract
* listen to a poem being read aloud
* explore tone, emphasis and delivery in a speech
* analyse how setting and atmosphere are created
* support understanding before tackling a difficult text
The key point is that the video should support the learning. Pupils should not be left to search, scroll or choose their own clips without supervision.
Should Schools Change Their Policies Now?
Schools will need to look carefully at the final details when the rules are confirmed. For now, the sensible approach is to continue following existing safeguarding, online safety, filtering and copyright procedures.
Departments may also want to remind staff of best practice when using online video in lessons, especially around checking clips in advance and avoiding adverts, comments and recommendations wherever possible.
The Bottom Line
Teachers should not assume that all classroom use of YouTube is about to be banned.
The proposed under-16 social media restrictions are mainly concerned with children using social media platforms themselves. A teacher showing a carefully selected, age-appropriate clip as part of a lesson is a different kind of use.
As always, schools will need to check the final rules when they are confirmed. However, teachers using short, purposeful video clips to support learning should be able to continue doing so, provided they follow school policy and use online video carefully.
Thursday 18th June 2026
Is Teaching Still Financially Attractive to Graduates?
There was a time when teaching looked like a secure, respectable and financially attractive graduate career. It offered a clear professional route, a decent salary, long-term stability, a good pension and the chance to do meaningful work.
Much of that is still true. Teaching remains one of the most important jobs in the country. It still offers structure, progression and purpose. But financially, the picture has changed.
In 1999, a starting teacher salary was roughly double what someone would earn in a full-time adult minimum wage job. That comparison matters because it shows how teaching once sat clearly above the lower end of the labour market. A graduate entering the classroom could expect a salary that felt significantly higher than minimum wage work.
In 2026, the gap is much narrower.
A new teacher in England outside London starts on around £32,916. A full-time adult minimum wage worker earns roughly £24,785 to £26,437 a year, depending on working hours. That means a starting teacher salary is now only around 25% to 33% higher than full-time minimum wage pay.
That is a very different financial proposition from the one graduates faced at the turn of the millennium.
On paper, £32,916 may still sound like a reasonable starting salary. But the comparison with minimum wage earnings shows how much the relative advantage of teaching has been reduced. For graduates weighing up their options, teaching no longer necessarily looks like the financially secure professional career it once did.
And then workload has to be factored in.
Teaching is rarely a standard nine-to-three job. The working day does not end when pupils leave the classroom. Planning, marking, assessment, data, emails, meetings, duties, clubs, parents’ evenings and pastoral work all extend the week well beyond directed classroom time.
Many teachers also work at home in the evenings, at weekends and during school holidays. For new teachers, this can be particularly demanding. They are often building resources from scratch, learning behaviour systems, adapting to school policies, developing subject knowledge, managing assessment expectations and trying to find their feet professionally.
This matters because the real value of a salary depends partly on the hours required to earn it. A headline salary of £32,916 looks very different if the job regularly involves 50-hour weeks during term time plus additional work during holidays.
Of course, teaching still has major strengths as a career. It offers job security, progression, a good pension and the chance to make a difference to young people’s lives. For many teachers, that sense of purpose is a huge part of why they enter the profession and why they stay.
But purpose alone cannot solve a recruitment problem.
Graduates today are making career choices in a very different labour market. Many can compare teaching with jobs that offer higher starting salaries, faster pay progression, hybrid working, flexible hours, lower emotional pressure or fewer unpaid hours. For graduates in subjects such as physics, computing, maths or design and technology, the private sector can offer a far more attractive financial package.
That makes recruitment harder.
The issue is not simply that teaching salaries have failed to rise. They have risen in cash terms. The issue is that the relative financial attractiveness of teaching appears to have weakened. When a starting teacher salary was roughly double full-time minimum wage, the financial case was much clearer. When it is only around a quarter to a third higher, the calculation changes.
This does not mean graduates are no longer entering teaching. Many still do. Recruitment has improved in some areas and primary teaching remains attractive to many applicants. But the system continues to struggle in key shortage subjects, and schools still face vacancies, supply cover, non-specialist teaching and pressure on existing staff.
Those pressures eventually affect pupils.
When schools cannot recruit and retain enough teachers, the consequences are felt in classrooms. Classes may be covered by supply staff. Subject specialists may be harder to find. Existing teachers may carry heavier workloads. Departments become stretched. Pupils lose continuity.
That is why teacher pay and workload need to be discussed together. A pay rise alone may not solve recruitment. A workload strategy without competitive pay may not be enough either. The profession needs to feel both professionally rewarding and financially worthwhile.
Teaching should be a career that talented graduates actively want to join. It should feel like a strong professional choice, not a vocation that relies on goodwill, unpaid hours and personal sacrifice.
The question is not whether teaching matters. It clearly does.
The question is whether the current pay and workload balance makes teaching attractive enough to recruit and retain the graduates schools need.
At the moment, the answer is far from certain.
What do you think? Does teaching still look like an attractive graduate career?
Wednesday 10th June 2026
Should Schools Rethink How Boys Are Taught?
Sir Gareth Southgate has sparked debate after arguing that schools need to think more carefully about how boys are taught and supported.
Speaking ahead of his BBC documentary Gareth Southgate: Changing the Game for Young Men, the former England manager suggested that many boys and young men are struggling with education, employment, confidence and purpose. His comments have attracted plenty of attention because they touch on a difficult but important question: are schools doing enough to engage boys?
For teachers, this is not a new issue. Concerns about boys’ achievement, motivation, behaviour and reading have been discussed in education for decades. However, Southgate’s intervention has brought the topic back into the national conversation at a time when many schools are already dealing with attendance issues, low literacy levels, behaviour pressures and a growing need for pastoral support.
The challenge is to talk about boys’ education without falling into lazy stereotypes. Boys are not all the same. Some are highly motivated, thoughtful, organised and academically successful. Some girls are disengaged, anxious, disruptive or lacking confidence. Gender is only one part of a much bigger picture that includes poverty, SEND, family background, school culture, peer pressure, mental health and access to good role models.
Even so, many teachers will recognise some of the issues being discussed. In English lessons, for example, some boys can be reluctant readers. Others struggle with extended writing, avoid contributing to discussion or mask insecurity with low-level disruption. Some pupils who appear uninterested may actually be afraid of failure, embarrassed by weaker literacy skills or unsure how school connects to their future.
This is where English departments can play an important role. Reading, writing, speaking and listening are not just exam skills. They are tools for confidence, self-expression and social mobility. A pupil who can read with stamina, write clearly, explain an opinion and understand another person’s viewpoint has a stronger chance of succeeding beyond school.
The solution is not to make lessons gimmicky or to assume that boys only respond to action, competition or sport. Good teaching still matters most: clear explanations, high expectations, structured practice, meaningful feedback and carefully chosen texts. However, schools may need to think more deliberately about how they build confidence in pupils who have already decided that English is not for them.
That might mean using more accessible routes into challenging texts, giving pupils more opportunities to talk before they write, teaching vocabulary explicitly and helping students understand exactly what successful work looks like. It might also mean making space for texts that explore ambition, friendship, failure, identity, family, conflict and resilience in ways that feel relevant without lowering academic expectations.
Southgate’s wider point about role models is also significant. Many young people benefit from adults who take an interest in them, set boundaries and show them that success can take different forms. For some boys, school may be the main place where they encounter that kind of guidance. This does not mean teachers should be expected to solve every social problem, but it does show how important relationships, consistency and encouragement can be.
There is also a bigger debate here about the curriculum, vocational routes and the value society places on different kinds of achievement. Not every young person will follow the same academic path. Schools need to prepare pupils for exams, but they also need to help them see a future beyond them.
Southgate’s comments will not settle the debate, but they do raise a useful question for schools: how can we make sure that boys who are drifting, disengaged or underachieving are noticed early enough to be helped?
The answer is unlikely to be simple. It will not come from treating boys and girls as fixed types of learners. It will come from strong teaching, better literacy support, careful pastoral work, positive role models and a school culture where every pupil is expected to succeed.
For English teachers, that mission starts in the classroom - one lesson, one text, one conversation and one piece of writing at a time.
Source: BBC News
Thursday 28th May 2026
What the Rise in Young People Not in Education or Work Means for Schools
New figures showing that more than one million young people in the UK are not in education, employment or training should concern everyone involved in schools.
The term often used for this group is NEET - young people who are not currently learning, training or working. Behind that label are young people who, in many cases, have become disconnected from school, college, training and the world of work.
This is not simply a jobs issue. It is an education issue too.
That does not mean schools are to blame. Teachers and school leaders are already dealing with rising absence, increasing SEND need, mental health difficulties, stretched budgets and post-pandemic learning gaps. However, schools are often the first place where the warning signs of later disengagement appear.
Disengagement starts early
Young people rarely become disconnected from education and work overnight.
For many, the process begins much earlier. Persistent absence, low confidence, weak literacy, poor attainment, repeated suspensions, unmet SEND needs and a lack of belonging can all make it harder for pupils to imagine a positive future.
By the time a young person reaches 16 or 17, the pattern may already be well established. If they have struggled to attend school, access the curriculum or see a clear route into further study or work, the transition after Year 11 becomes much more fragile.
This is why early intervention matters.
Attendance and belonging
Schools are under intense pressure to improve attendance, and regular attendance is vital. Pupils need to be in school to build knowledge, develop confidence and gain qualifications.
However, attendance is closely linked to belonging.
If pupils feel that school is not for them, attendance becomes harder to sustain. Strong pastoral care, effective SEND support, positive relationships and a broad curriculum all help pupils feel known, valued and supported.
Careers education matters
The rise in young people not in education or work also highlights the importance of careers education.
Pupils need regular, meaningful guidance about apprenticeships, college courses, vocational routes, university and local employment opportunities. Work experience and employer contact can also make the world beyond school feel less daunting.
Schools cannot do this alone. Employers, colleges, training providers and local authorities all need to work with schools to help pupils understand the options available to them.
The role of English and literacy
For English teachers, this issue is especially relevant.
Literacy is about much more than passing GCSE English Language. Young people need to read information accurately, write clearly, speak confidently and adapt their communication for different audiences and purposes.
These are the skills needed for college applications, CVs, interviews, workplace communication and everyday independence.
English lessons can help pupils express who they are, what they can do and what they hope to become. When pupils see communication as a real-world skill, the subject becomes more meaningful.
Schools need support
The latest figures should be treated as a warning. Reducing the number of young people outside education, employment and training cannot be left to schools alone.
Schools need proper support from health services, local authorities, employers and government. The pupils most at risk often face complex barriers, including poor mental health, difficult home circumstances, unmet SEND needs or low confidence.
If the country is serious about avoiding a lost generation, it must invest in the places where young people’s futures first begin to take shape: schools.
Tuesday 19th May 2026
SEND Reform: Will Every Teacher Become a SEND Teacher?
The government’s latest schools white paper proposes a major overhaul of SEND support in England, with mainstream classroom teachers placed at the centre of the new system.
The reforms are expected to include Individual Support Plans, earlier intervention and a stronger legal expectation that teachers adapt their teaching to meet the needs of pupils with SEND. A £200 million training programme has also been announced to support schools as they prepare for the changes.
On paper, the aim is clear: more pupils with SEND should receive timely, effective support in mainstream schools without waiting until problems escalate. For many families, teachers and school leaders, that ambition will be welcome. Early support is nearly always better than late intervention, and too many children currently wait far too long for help.
But the reforms also raise a serious question: what will this mean in practice for classroom teachers?
For years, schools have been told that SEND is everyone’s responsibility. These proposals appear to make that expectation even more explicit. Rather than SEND support being seen mainly as the responsibility of the SENDCO, teaching assistants or specialist staff, the focus shifts more firmly towards everyday classroom practice.
That may be the right principle, but it comes with obvious challenges.
Teachers are already working in classrooms where pupils have a wide range of needs, abilities, emotional pressures and barriers to learning. In one lesson, a teacher may be supporting pupils with dyslexia, autism, ADHD, speech and language needs, anxiety, trauma, low prior attainment and gaps in basic literacy — all while managing behaviour, delivering the curriculum and preparing pupils for assessment.
So when policy says teachers should adapt teaching for pupils with SEND, many will ask: with what time, training and support?
The promised training programme is therefore crucial. If the reforms are to work, professional development must be practical, subject-specific and realistic. Teachers need more than broad statements about inclusion. They need clear strategies they can use in busy classrooms, with real pupils and limited time.
There is also the question of workload. Individual Support Plans may help clarify what pupils need, but if they create another layer of paperwork, teachers and SENDCOs may find themselves under even greater pressure. The success of the reforms will depend partly on whether these plans simplify support or become another administrative burden.
Staffing is another concern. Inclusive practice cannot rely on goodwill alone. Many schools are already struggling with reduced support staff, limited specialist input and stretched SENDCO capacity. If more pupils with complex needs are to be supported successfully in mainstream classrooms, schools will need the resources to make that possible.
There is a risk that the reforms could raise expectations without changing the conditions in which teachers work.
However, there is also an opportunity here. Done well, the reforms could lead to earlier identification, better classroom support and a more consistent approach to helping pupils with SEND. They could strengthen teacher confidence and reduce the sense that support only begins once a pupil has reached crisis point.
The key phrase is done well.
SEND reform will not succeed because of policy documents alone. It will succeed or fail in ordinary classrooms: during phonics lessons, maths interventions, GCSE revision sessions, group work, transitions, behaviour incidents and conversations with parents.
Teachers will need training. SENDCOs will need time. Schools will need funding. Pupils will need support that is meaningful, not just promised.
The ambition to make mainstream schools more inclusive is important. But inclusion cannot simply mean asking teachers to do more with the same resources.
If SEND really is to become everyone’s responsibility, then support for SEND must become everyone’s priority too.
Wednesday 13th May 2026
Why Are So Many New Teachers Not Entering the Profession?
A new report has raised serious questions about teacher recruitment and retention in England, after research found that nearly a quarter of newly qualified teachers do not immediately enter the profession.
According to research from the UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, reported by Tes, 22% of newly qualified teachers in England were not teaching in the autumn after completing their training. That is roughly double the one-year attrition rate for first-year teachers, which stands at 11%.
The findings are worrying because they suggest the teacher supply problem is not only about getting people into training. It is also about what happens after they qualify.
The study surveyed 409 trainee teachers towards the end of their training year, then followed up with them in the autumn. By that point, 78% were teaching, while 22% were not.
One of the key issues identified was the gap between expectation and reality. Trainees reported being negatively surprised by the volume of administration, the workload involved in lesson planning and the length of the working day.
For many experienced teachers, this will sound familiar. Teaching is often presented as a classroom-facing profession, built around relationships, subject knowledge and helping pupils make progress. All of that is true. But the reality also includes data entry, emails, meetings, behaviour follow-up, marking, safeguarding concerns, SEND paperwork and constant preparation.
That administrative load can be a shock, especially for new teachers still trying to build confidence in front of a class.
The research also found some more positive experiences. Trainees were pleasantly surprised by the support they received from mentors and by the relationships they built with pupils. That matters. It reminds us that the core of teaching — working with young people and making a difference — remains powerful and rewarding.
However, the broader question remains: why are so many qualified teachers not making the move into the classroom?
Researchers suggest there is no single explanation. Some may decide that teaching is not the right fit. Others may be affected by personal circumstances beyond the control of schools, training providers or policymakers. But the findings point clearly to a vulnerable transition point between qualifying as a teacher and actually entering the profession.
That should concern everyone in education.
Schools need new teachers, but new teachers also need a sustainable job. If the first encounter with full-time teaching is dominated by workload, admin and long hours, it is hardly surprising that some decide not to continue.
This is not about lowering standards or pretending teaching will ever be easy. It is a demanding profession. But it should not be so demanding that people who have trained, qualified and shown commitment are lost before they properly begin.
The challenge is to make the early stages of teaching more manageable. That means realistic timetables, strong mentoring, sensible marking policies, reduced unnecessary admin and a school culture that helps new teachers develop rather than simply survive.
Recruitment campaigns can encourage people into teacher training. But if nearly a quarter are not entering the profession after qualifying, recruitment is only part of the answer.
The bigger question is whether the job new teachers step into is one they can realistically sustain.
At a time when schools are already under pressure from workload, funding challenges and rising pupil need, keeping new teachers in the profession has never mattered more.
Monday 11th May 2026
Are Teachers Working an Invisible Extra Day Every Week?
A recent Tes report has highlighted what many teachers will already know from experience: workload remains one of the biggest pressures facing the profession.
According to a global survey of almost 3,000 educators across 196 countries, nearly two-thirds of teachers say they are working almost an extra day each week because of increasing workload. The survey found that 38% of staff estimate they do more than nine additional hours per week, while only 4% said they are able to work within their contracted hours.
For anyone working in schools, these figures are unlikely to come as a surprise. Teaching has never been a job that ends neatly when the bell goes. Planning, marking, assessment, behaviour follow-up, emails, meetings, SEND paperwork, safeguarding concerns and parent communication all stretch far beyond classroom hours.
The Tes survey identified lesson planning as the most common cause of additional working time, cited by 73% of respondents. Administration and marking were each mentioned by 60% of those surveyed.
This matters because workload is not just a personal wellbeing issue. It affects teacher retention, recruitment, classroom energy and the quality of education pupils receive. When teachers are regularly working evenings and weekends, it becomes harder to sustain the enthusiasm, patience and creativity that good teaching requires.
The report also found that 42% of staff described themselves as very or extremely overwhelmed. Stress and workload were identified as the two biggest reasons people leave the profession, cited by 55% and 54% of respondents respectively.
There is, of course, no simple solution. Some tasks are unavoidable. Pupils need lessons planned, work assessed and support put in place. But the key question is whether schools and policymakers are doing enough to reduce unnecessary workload.
Could marking policies be simplified? Could data collection be cut back? Could meetings be shorter and more purposeful? Could technology genuinely save time rather than add another layer of expectation? Could teachers be trusted to focus more on what directly improves learning?
The survey also points to growing interest in flexible working. More than three-quarters of respondents said access to flexible or hybrid working was important or extremely important, yet 68% said they had no access to either.
That raises a difficult but important question for schools. Teaching is, by its nature, a face-to-face profession. Pupils need adults in classrooms. But there may still be room for more imaginative thinking around planning time, leadership roles, part-time working, remote meetings or flexible approaches to non-teaching tasks.
Perhaps the most telling finding is that, despite these pressures, most teachers still reported moderate to favourable job satisfaction. That says a great deal about the commitment of the profession. Teachers are not complaining because they do not care. In many cases, they are overwhelmed precisely because they care so much.
The challenge is to make teaching sustainable.
If schools want to keep experienced teachers, support new staff and protect the quality of education, workload cannot be treated as an unavoidable part of the job. It needs to be treated as a serious issue affecting the whole education system.
An invisible extra day of work each week may not appear on a timetable, but for many teachers, it is very real.
Wednesday 6th May 2026
Are Inclusive Schools Being Unfairly Penalised by Ofsted?
A new analysis from school leaders’ union NAHT has raised serious concerns about the way Ofsted’s new inspection framework affects schools serving disadvantaged communities and pupils with SEND.
The union reviewed more than 650 Ofsted inspection reports and found that schools with higher levels of deprivation or higher numbers of pupils with special educational needs were more likely to receive a ‘needs attention’ judgement in key areas such as achievement, attendance and behaviour.
According to the analysis, one third of schools with above-average pupil eligibility for free school meals received a ‘needs attention’ judgement for achievement. By contrast, fewer than one in five schools with below-average free school meal eligibility received the same judgement.
There was a similar pattern in attendance and behaviour. Almost a quarter of schools with above-average free school meal eligibility were judged as needing attention in this area, compared with one in ten schools with below-average eligibility. Schools with higher numbers of pupils with SEND were also more likely to be marked down for attendance and behaviour.
The findings have prompted concern because the government has repeatedly spoken about wanting more children with SEND to be educated successfully in mainstream schools. However, school leaders argue that if inspection judgements rely too heavily on national averages, schools taking an inclusive approach may be placed at a disadvantage.
This is the central issue. A school may be working extremely hard to support pupils facing poverty, complex needs, poor attendance, difficult home circumstances or significant barriers to learning. Yet if overall outcomes are still below national averages, that work may not be fully recognised in the final judgement.
NAHT general secretary Paul Whiteman has argued that expecting every school to meet or exceed national averages creates an impossible demand, particularly for schools working in the most challenging circumstances. Schools Week also reported that Ofsted has said it will publish official data on inspections carried out under the revised framework, along with its own analysis.
The Local Government Association has also responded to the issue, saying that Ofsted’s framework should place greater emphasis on inclusive practice and on whether schools are meeting the needs of the communities they serve. It also warned that schools which do not play a meaningful role in supporting vulnerable children should be held to account.
For teachers and school leaders, this raises an important question: how should inspection balance outcomes with context?
No one would argue that disadvantaged pupils or pupils with SEND should be expected to achieve less. High expectations matter. But schools also need an accountability system that recognises starting points, barriers to learning and the complexity of inclusion.
If schools feel that being inclusive increases the risk of being marked down, the system may unintentionally discourage exactly the kind of practice it claims to value.
At a time when many mainstream schools are already under pressure from rising SEND need, attendance challenges, behaviour concerns and limited funding, this debate is likely to become increasingly important.
The key question is not whether schools should be accountable. They should. The question is whether the current system fairly recognises the work schools do with the pupils who need them most.
Tuesday 5th May 2026
Schools to Go Smartphone-Free for Year 7 Pupils
All 10 secondary schools in Brighton and Hove are set to introduce a smartphone-free approach for Year 7 pupils from September 2026.
Under the new arrangement, pupils entering secondary school will not be allowed to bring smartphones into school if the devices can access the internet, use social media or take photos and videos. The move will initially apply to Year 7 students, who are usually aged 11 to 12, with schools reviewing the impact during the 2026–2027 academic year.
The decision has been made collectively by the city’s secondary headteachers, who have written to parents explaining the reasons behind the change. School leaders say the aim is to support pupils’ learning, safety, wellbeing and social development as they make the transition from primary to secondary school.
The policy reflects a growing national debate about children’s smartphone use and the impact of mobile phones on school life. The government has already strengthened its position on phone-free schools, with ministers encouraging schools in England to keep pupils off mobile phones throughout the school day. Reports in April 2026 also said the government planned to introduce a legal ban on mobile phones in schools in England.
Supporters of smartphone-free schools argue that removing phones can help pupils concentrate more fully in lessons, reduce online distractions and encourage better face-to-face interaction during breaks and lunchtimes. Concerns around online safety, social media pressure, cyberbullying and inappropriate content have also been central to the discussion.
For Year 7 pupils, the issue is particularly important. The move from primary to secondary school is a major step, and many schools are increasingly looking for ways to help pupils build friendships, develop confidence and feel part of their new school community without the constant pull of a smartphone.
The Brighton and Hove schools have said that each school will apply the approach through its own mobile phone policy. Reviews will take place during the academic year, with the possibility that the smartphone-free model could later be extended to older year groups.
The move comes as campaigns such as Smartphone Free Childhood continue to call for children to have later access to smartphones and social media. A national petition linked to the campaign has attracted significant public support, reflecting the strength of feeling among many parents, teachers and school leaders.
For schools, parents and pupils, the debate is unlikely to disappear soon. The key challenge will be finding the right balance: helping young people develop healthy digital habits while also protecting learning time, wellbeing and real-world social interaction.
Follow us on Facebook