A bold move by a secondary school student has sparked a heated debate: Is banning smartwatches in schools a step forward or a leap backward? In a detailed eight-point report, this student challenges the Ministry of Education’s (MOE) upcoming ban on smartwatches and smartphones, set to take place in January 2026. But here’s where it gets controversial—while the ban aims to reduce screen time and distractions, the student argues it’s a one-size-fits-all approach that overlooks the benefits of wearables as health and fitness tools. And this is the part most people miss: Many students use these devices not for social media, but to track their steps, heart rate, and sleep—essential tools in a world grappling with rising obesity rates, even in health-conscious Singapore.
The student’s critique, shared on Stomping Ground (https://www.stomp.sg/tag/stomping-ground), echoes earlier concerns raised in a Stomp article (https://www.stomp.sg/trending-now/draconian-and-backward-new-secondary-school-smartphone-ban-draws-scepticism-students), where the policy was labeled “draconian” and “backward.” He points out that wearables like Apple Watches can encourage physical activity, a critical need in today’s sedentary lifestyle. Here’s the kicker: Instead of a blanket ban, he proposes a tiered governance model. This would allow health and fitness features while restricting messaging and social media, ensuring students can still benefit from these tools without the distractions.
The student’s report, submitted to his vice-principal, highlights global adolescent obesity trends and Singapore’s health trajectory, arguing that education policies should prioritize movement over screen elimination. He also notes that wearables are becoming integral to modern workplaces, and controlled use could help students develop digital health literacy and responsible tech habits. But here’s the controversial part: He suggests smartphones should remain stored away, making smartwatches primarily health-focused rather than communication devices. His stance? “The goal should not be zero technology—but better technology use.”
This student’s efforts didn’t stop at the report. After two unanswered emails to MOE, he took matters into his own hands, crafting a comprehensive argument that blends health, education, and technology. His question to us all: Are we addressing the right problems, or are we throwing the baby out with the bathwater?
What do you think? Is the MOE’s ban a necessary step to curb distractions, or does it overlook the potential of wearables to improve student health and tech literacy? Share your thoughts on Stomping Ground! Write to us at stomp@sph.com.sg or WhatsApp 9384 3761. Want to share your story? Send it to us via email or WhatsApp (https://api.whatsapp.com/send?phone=6593843761).
Stay updated with Stomp’s latest by following us on social media. Join the conversation and let’s debate: Is this ban a missed opportunity, or a necessary measure?
