Technology has been around for centuries, but only in the past few decades has it become as advanced as we know it to be today. With its advancement, it has found its way into our everyday lives. From how we get to work to something as basic as waking up in the morning, technology has infiltrated our lives. One place where this is highly noticeable is in our own schools. As a student myself, this is one change I’ve noticed, especially in how it has affected our learning and how assignments are distributed.

The lack of separation between the two, and its effects, can be seen throughout our schools, from elementary students to high schoolers. For younger children, increased screen time at home and at school means that many students spend a large portion of their day looking at a device. For older students, nearly every assignment, project, and discussion is completed online. While technology provides convenience and access to information, it also raises questions about attention spans, focus, and the value of traditional handwritten work. As schools continue to adopt more digital tools, finding a balance between technology and hands-on learning may become one of the most important challenges educators face.

While some students argue that digital work is better than handwritten assignments, it can create major problems when it comes to learning and developing important skills. The lack of handwritten assignments can cause students, including myself, to lose certain motor skills in their hands, making them cramp more easily. It also gives students constant access to tools that may weaken their critical thinking and problem-solving abilities.

Technology itself is not the problem. In many ways, it has improved education and made learning more accessible for students. However, relying too heavily on screens may take away some of the skills that traditional learning helped build. Moving forward, schools should aim for a healthier balance between digital learning and hands-on experiences so students can benefit from both without losing important skills along the way.

 On the other hand, we use our phones for a reason. We stay connected, and we have the ability to communicate with our peers and parents at any time, anywhere. They also serve as something to do during downtime, such as the lunch period if you don’t eat lunch. Phones are key conveniences throughout the day.

Now, to judge the phone ban, we first need to see both sides in their entirety. Phones have pros and cons; both children and adults know and accept that. Phones can be the cause of fights, but also friendships. If you see someone playing a game you like on their phone, you may be more prone to speaking to them now that you have something in common. However, phones also cause conflicts. People taking pictures of others or recording others is something unavoidable, repercussions or not. It’ll still happen.

That brings me to my main point: the phone ban affects all students. Yes, some students pay more attention to their phones than their teachers. But what about the percentage of students who don’t? Not every student uses their phone to goof off; some may require their phones.

That brings me to my next point. What will students who require their phones do? Some students have to contact their parents, and how will they do that without their phones? What about students who stay after school for clubs? How will they contact their parents to come pick them up? Walking is possible, yes, but what about students who live extraordinarily far away?

So many unanswered questions. However, there’s still some good within the decision. Many people will have no choice but to grow more social and make friends rather than going on their phones. They’ll also grow less dependent on their phones and start searching for hobbies that’ll cure boredom during idle time.

Perhaps more students will pick up art and writing. That would be the case, except for one glaring issue: why ban phones when students still have Chromebooks? It’s not like banning phones will stop students from going online. Little will change with the phone ban besides making students agitated.

With the rule, they’d only be provoking the students. The desired effects of the ban, in all honesty, will likely be ineffective. No matter how you look at it, there are positives and negatives on both sides of the coin. People will be angry no matter what they decide to do.

I personally believe that this rule is unnecessary; however, I can see why they wish to implement it. It’s an answer to some problems, albeit the cause of further problems, and it doesn’t truly solve everything. Still, the problems it does solve are understandable concerns for the school. However, the ban itself may create even deeper frustrations among students in the long run.

Picture this: You’re on your phone, scrolling on social media. You come across this ridiculous take -- maybe an outrageous political statement, maybe a lie under the guise of a “hot take,” maybe someone claiming reading is overrated. You open the comments and get immediately hit left and right with paragraphs, arguments, and people defending and attacking -- all over what? A statement online? It feels real. People are truly fighting with everything they have. But most times, it’s not real at all. It’s ragebait.

Algorithms don’t care whether you’re agreeing or arguing because once you respond, it pushes the content more. A comment is a comment. A share is a share. This influences a lot of the videos we see online -- from ridiculous game ads messing up on purpose to anger-provoking posts. All of it stems from us falling for it. This causes the wrong media to be pushed, making us think that online everyone is always arguing over something trivial.

Ragebaiting isn’t always obvious, and that’s why it spreads so easily. With how big and vast social media is nowadays, ragebait blends in perfectly with real opinions and discussions, which makes it harder to tell what’s serious and what isn’t. It becomes another part of our online experience -- ragebait ultimately becomes something forcing people to interact, react, and argue about, often without realising it was designed that way from the beginning.

The best way to avoid falling for ragebait is to pause before reacting. Not every post deserves a response, and sometimes ignoring it is exactly what stops it from spreading further. Learning when something is trying to provoke anger instead of start a real discussion can help make social media a less toxic place for everyone.

Let’s all be realistic here: no one is pleased with the state of the world right now. Protests are happening everywhere in our country, calling for change. Politics are all over the place. As Americans, it is important that we stay involved in what’s going on in the world. But we also must pay attention to who we listen to, because chances are we could be looking up to propaganda spreaders or, worse, performative activists. Beware of performative activism.

The same can be said for large corporations. Many corporations show support for causes such as racial or gender equality but make little effort to follow through with real activism. This practice is often called “woke-washing.” One example is how corporations approach LGBTQ+ rights. Every June, many companies turn their marketing rainbow-colored for Pride Month. But when was the last time those same corporations showed visible support for the LGBTQ+ community before or after June?

This may be a controversial statement, but I think some of us everyday people practice performative activism as well, especially online. Many people care so much about gaining the moral high ground rather than advocating for the greater good that their activism becomes performative. You can spread awareness, boycott businesses, attend protests, or even organize them, but your activism will never be genuine if your main goal is to make yourself look good. Many people online also try so hard to fit their aesthetic into their activism, even when they are discussing serious issues, but that is a conversation for another day.

Performative activism is a growing problem. As we become more involved in advocacy and social issues, it is important to focus on meaningful action rather than appearances. Real activism requires consistency, education, and a genuine desire to help others, not just the desire to be seen helping. If we want to create real change, we must look beyond social media posts and public image and support causes through our actions, even when no one is watching.