Phone-Lock-Screen
The SFPS Board of Education approved the first draft of an updated phone use policy, which has not been amended since 2013.
For Mandela International Magnet School senior Lucas Robbins, banning cell phones from school entirely would “not be realistic.”
Robbins, who serves as Mandela’s student board member representative, spoke to the Santa Fe Public Schools Board of Education at its July 25 meeting in support of placing clearer guidelines for phone use in the classroom in district policy. He also noted that he had reached out to his fellow students for input on the policy.
At the meeting, the SFPS school board reviewed and unanimously approved the first draft of a
proposed rewritten policy, the first time the policy has seen any changes since 2013. The original policy prohibits the possession and use of phones and other devices from elementary, middle and high school students during the school day (with an exception at lunch for middle and high school students).
“I honestly was struck by our original policy, because from what I hear from teachers, students and parents, we haven’t been following it at all,” board member Kate Noble said at the meeting.
The rewritten policy, in contrast, permits students to bring phones and other devices on school property, while clarifying that phones must be turned off and be kept out of sight for the entire school day at the elementary level, but only turned off and out of sight for middle and high school students during instructional class periods. Additionally, the policy states that use of phones is not allowed during emergencies or emergency drills “for reasons of safety and security.”
“It’s been 11 years since we really looked at our policy…we’re looking at really defining what our personal devices include, because now we have students with smart watches and ear buds and all kinds of devices, and it’s changing all the time,” said Kathy Casaus, the district’s assistant superintendent for elementary school support.
School districts across the nation have responded to the issue of phone use in the classroom in a variety of ways. In Flint, Michigan, phones are confiscated from any student caught using them, and in Rockingham County, Virginia, students in middle and high school are allowed to use phones during certain parts of the day, such as lunch or free periods.
Regardless of a school district’s policy, phone use among students is high: a 2023 study from Common Sense Media showed that 97% of students surveyed from ages 11-17 used their phones at school, and policies are often not followed consistently in the classroom. Another study from 11 years prior estimated that around 51% of high school students brought their phones to school, for comparison.
“If my phone dinged and I looked at it subconsciously, that’s an infraction, and that’s really easy to do as a student. I’ve done that before in class,” Robbins said. “I think knowing when to step in when it’s a chronic problem rather than accidental, ‘My mom texted me, what did she say?’ was important to myself and a lot of the students I spoke with as well.”
Robbins added that administrators should communicate any changes in the policy to students to ensure they’re aware of the consequences, saying “Otherwise, it’s just sprung on students in a way that will feel unfair.”
The rewrite has some exemptions allowing phone use in the classroom, such as in cases where a student uses their device for an educational purpose with a teacher’s permission; or if the device is necessary for the “health and/or safety of a child when included in an IEP, 504 or health plan.”
Robbins described it as “a very fair policy.”
“I think rather than creating new rules to follow, it sort of codifies what we’re already doing in schools,” Robbins said. “For us [at Mandela], it seems to be working pretty well…it’s a good step for the student body.”
Noble, however, had one major concern with the rewritten policy: How would it be enforced?
“I like the new policy very much, but how do we make it a reality?” Noble asked. “We’re seeing lots of conversations about this, and frankly, it doesn’t feel great to put it on the teachers, to make them enforcers of kids being attached to their cell phones. We know these things are addictive, and there’s lots of ways to do it with earbuds and have music playing in your bag…ultimately, I would love to hear how we see this rolling out in reality for our students and school staff.”
Superintendent Hilario “Larry” Chavez responded that he believes educating administrators “fairly consistently across the board” would be the best way to ensure the policy is enforced. Kasaus added that the student Code of Conduct would also provide support for students and staff when issues regarding phone use arise.
“Those include asking the student to put the device away…following up with the principal…following up with the family. It falls in the same lines as some of the other behaviors that we have in classrooms,” Kasaus explained. “Using that Code of Conduct helps support teachers with what to do next if they have those violations in their classrooms.”
Kasaus and Chavez both mentioned the possibility of piloting the use of Yondr Pouches: a magnetic locked pouch in which students would place their phones in at the start of the day that allows them to keep their phone on their person without having access to the phone. A separate “unlocking base” would be kept in the office, where students could unlock their phones at the end of the day. Robbins said he felt Yondr Pouches would be “a good solution for repeated infractions.”
Noble asked whether there would be any plans to help students develop the skills to manage their own phone use, noting that “those are hard skills to develop on your own.” Chavez said he agreed with Noble’s thought that students should be better educated on phone use, in addition to staff. Kasaus read aloud quotes from two students surveyed about that policy that said, “We want to be able to exercise our personal responsibility and learn that now” and “knowledge of the policy and consequences will make it successful.”
Noble said she would like for the board to continue revisiting the policy in the future, particularly in regard to handling emergency situations. “We can’t compromise safety and key functions of families by taking away phones, and we hope that dialogue can happen robustly between students and school staff.” Chavez clarified that the district is not asking staff members to confiscate phones due to legal liability concerns.
Board member Sarah Boses said she felt that in some ways, the new policy is “not enough,” citing concerns with the ways phone possession and use at school could impact students. She suggested that families should also be educated on phone use at school, as she has heard from staff that students often deal with their parents calling them in class.
“It’s not just the impact it has on learning, but the impact it has on mental health and social interactions and social isolation,” Boses said. “I worry about the impacts of that on our students in this day and age.”
Board member Carmen Gonzales agreed with Boses, adding that she feels parents calling their children during the school day is “unnecessary” and should instead default to calling the school’s front office.
“A lot of school districts have made it so that phones are not available during the day, and they have found that students are engaging more with each other, they’re talking to each other at lunch instead of looking at their phones,” Gonzales said. “That really is something I think we need to look at.”
Despite the concerns, all four board members voted in favor of passing the first reading of the policy. The second reading of the policy will be reviewed for edits and voted on in a subsequent board meeting.
