Sequoia Union High School District Board of Trustees discuss cellphone policy: Trustees interested in making policy uniform districtwide, majority not inclined to ban ‘bell to bell’

The district’s Board of Trustees considered the degree it wishes to restrict cellphone use, in compliance with state legislation that requires districts adopt a policy regulating devices during the school day ahead of the upcoming school year. 

While it needs to adopt a policy before July, trustees are also inclined to address concerns of social emotional well-being, mental health, screen addiction and educational distraction. 

“I feel that addiction and making sure that our kids are not addicted is my primary focus,” board President Amy Koo said. “If it’s all out there and up to each student to self regulate, sometimes it’s overwhelming.”

The majority of trustees expressed favor to establish a districtwide policy to ban phones during class time, rather than a bell-to-bell ban. The latter was the preference made by trustees in the San Mateo Union High School District who just recently addressed the same topic. 

Some trustees want to eventually reach a bell-to-bell ban, and it was the preference of some community members including nearly 60% of surveyed staff. 

Dr. Liz Nadiv, a pediatrician at Kaiser Permanente in Daly City, shared a joint statement of clinicians in favor of a bell-to-bell policy during public comment. 

“We are witnessing an unprecedented rise in pediatric mental health crises, chronic sleep deprivation and social emotional delays,” Nadiv said. “It is our professional opinion that the constant presence of smartphones in the school environment is a significant contributing factor to these public health challenges.” 

Unsure that going the length is necessary, Trustee Rich Ginn questioned if banning phones altogether may result in students not becoming technologically savvy adults.

“If we don’t have students learning to use electronic devices as valuable tools, are we preparing them to be successful contributors in a global society where technology is key?” Ginn said. 

A similar sentiment was shared by Trustee Sathvik Nori, who said teaching students to regulate themselves is an important skill as they enter adulthood. 

“It’s important for us to be able to teach students to develop their own form of discipline and self control,” Nori said. “When you got to college, when you go to the real world, no one’s gonna ban your cellphone.”

Students appear to feel similarly and oppose a bell-to-bell ban, according to a survey conducted by district staff. Surveyed parents were split relatively evenly between the two options. 

Developing mature and responsible habits to combat external influences and addictive devices should be the focus, Nori said. 

“I’m more interested in focusing on ways to help students develop that self control, which I think is a hundred times harder of a problem, but would actually address some of the root causes of the issue here,” Nori said. 

While Trustee Mary Beth Thompson agreed self-regulation is an important skill, it is still necessary to provide scaffolding for students to learn these qualities. 

“Until we start really focusing our time on digital literacy classes, I’m not sure that we are ready to just hand students this tool, or continue letting students use a tool that we know research has said causes real harm,” Thompson said. 

Implementing any restrictive policy will be difficult, trustees and staff agreed. Assistant Superintendent Bonnie Hansen said enforcing any level of a ban may mean students may feel policed, but the long-term social benefit would be worthwhile. 

“It’s going to be hard to enforce it and it is going to change relationships and it is going to be more work, but maybe it’ll change relationships for the better in the long run, because kids finally are talking more to each other, or they go to work through this hard scenario with an administrator and go full circle,” Hansen said. 

Trustees agreed moving too quickly on a restrictive policy would not phase out well. Koo said while a policy must be established before the beginning of the next school year, the district needs to take its time to ensure implementation goes smoothly, and more importantly everyone is clear about expectations, their roles and responsibilities. 

“I want it to be done well, not doing it while flying the plane,” Koo said. 

Currently, school sites have the option of enforcing a ban on cellphones during class, but it’s implemented differently in each classroom. 

While trustees Thompson and Koo expressed a desire to eventually broaden the restriction to a full bell-to-bell ban, others felt an instructional time ban was sufficient. 

Either way, making sure the policy is enforced consistently in each classroom will be key. Now, discretion is up to teachers making the effectiveness of restricting cell phones diminish, trustees said. 

“I love teachers, but all you need is one teacher who refuses to take those phones and it sabotages the whole thing,” Thompson said. 

A proposed policy will be drafted and returned to the Board of Trustees for consideration at an upcoming board meeting. The majority of the board said they want to further examine how implementing an enforced instructional period ban on cellphones and personal devices would look. 

As trustees study the topic more and prepare to make a decision, Thompson — who would prefer a bell-to-bell ban — said the focus needs to be on what will result in the best outcome for students. 

“What’s best for students? We have to ground ourselves in that,” Thompson said. “A [bell-to-bell] ban could be operationally harder, but whatever we decide, just ground ourselves with what’s best for students.”