Phone Ban Headline Under Pressure
Since September, a school in Groningen has banned smartphones during the entire school day. The rule covers 900 pupils and was introduced for a six-week trial. According to the school's own survey, 23% of pupils reported feeling more focused in lessons after the trial. Teachers say they spend less time asking students to put phones away. However, pupil representative Daan (16) says: 'At first it was strange, but now I talk to people I never spoke to before. Still, I miss using my phone to check the timetable.' The school's newsletter headline reads: 'Phone ban transforms school life.' A HAVO student must answer questions on fact and opinion, the function of the quotation, and whether the headline is justified. The student tends to treat any statement printed in the newsletter as equally reliable.
1. Is the headline 'Phone ban transforms school life' fully supported by the text? Answer yes or no, and justify with two pieces of evidence.
Read the worked answer
No. 'Transforms' suggests a broad, dramatic change, but the evidence is narrower. First, the 23% figure comes from the school's own survey and only reports feeling 'more focused'; 77% are not included in that positive figure, and the text gives no information about grades or behaviour. Second, the pupil quotation is mixed: Daan now talks to new people, but still misses using the phone for the timetable. One pupil's experience cannot support a whole-school transformation. The headline overstates the evidence.
2. What is the function of Daan's quotation in the text?
Read the worked answer
It introduces a pupil's perspective and qualifies the positive claims made by the school and teachers. It gives a concrete social benefit ('I talk to people I never spoke to before') but also a practical drawback (missing the phone for the timetable). This makes the report more balanced and prevents readers from treating the ban as simply successful. The quotation does not prove the headline; it complicates it.
3. The text reports that '23% of pupils reported feeling more focused'. What should a careful reader not conclude from this figure?
Read the worked answer
A careful reader should not conclude that the ban caused better concentration in all pupils, or that 23% is a large majority. The figure is self-reported, comes from the school's own survey, and follows only a six-week trial. There is no comparison group and no measure of actual learning. It also does not show that the other 77% felt worse or unchanged; their views are simply not given. The figure is evidence of a reported feeling, not proof of transformation.