Last school year, the high school implemented a new phone policy, sparking ongoing student conversations about its effectiveness and potential revisions.
The policy requires students to store their cell phones in a designated area during class, excluding lunch, passing periods, and study halls.
Many students and teachers find that the policy has led to better classroom engagement.
“When you have a vibrating device in your pocket, it’s really hard to stay focused,” junior Colby Hughes said. “[The policy] should stay because I’m more focused and productive in class.”
“Students generally seem more focused, or at least on task,” chemistry teacher Bridget Neely said.
However, more than a year after its introduction, many students have grown frustrated with the rule’s limitations.
Hughes noted that, despite teachers’ efforts, many students don’t consistently follow the rule.
“Honestly, I don’t always follow the policy,” junior Colin Fairneny said.
Neely notes that this disagreement poses a separate issue, as students’ compliance and teacher enforcement is key to the policy’s effectiveness.
“When a school is consistent in all the classes, there isn’t a good cop, bad cop dynamic,” Neely said.
While many are on board that the phone policy is effective for the most part, it can’t completely limit technological distraction.
“Students can do most of the same things on a computer,” Neely said. “Computers are the new phones,” Neely said.
Additionally, the rule prompts debate about discipline in the school.
“It’s unfair that they can take something that’s our property,” Fairneny said.
Several students feel that the rule itself is unnecessary, as their level of engagement could hurt them if they’re not focused.
Fairneny feels that it should be the students’ choice whether to distract themselves on their phones, because ultimately being distracted will likely affect their grades.
However, Neely believes that, as students grow up, they will learn self-control. If the school can implement a rule to help students stay focused and limit what was a problem in the past, they should do so, so long as it is reasonable.
“When it gets super restrictive, there are workarounds,” Neely said.
