In May 2023, Florida became the first state to have its Governor, Ron DeSantis, sign a House bill that declared a state-wide phone ban in classrooms. The rationale was based on the expectation that removing cell phone distractions would lead to better student socialization.
At the start of the 2024-25 school year, Wilton Public Schools announced a new district policy, the Cell Phone Free Initiative, with the intent that it would be in the best interest of our schools to establish that same phone ban; however, after receiving student and faculty feedback, the proposed ban is now under review by the Board of Education (as of the first week of October).
Good Morning Wilton informed the public that Superintendent Smith, “argued that the four main reasons for implementing the ban, including enhancing academic focus, promoting face-to-face interaction, improving mental health, and supporting positive behavior separate from online issues, made it worthwhile.” To put it in simpler words, this initiative aims to reduce learning distractions and enhance in-person student interaction.
Wanting to limit phone use in classrooms is understandable, but prohibiting phone use throughout school hours raises concerns.
Forbidding students from using cell phones throughout the day is an easy way for the administration to stop phone usage in the classroom, which is considered a deterrent to the student body’s education experience; however, a total ban may not be the correct way to approach a beneficial solution. This decision can be compared to when a parent needs to teach their child to limit their consumption of candies. Although simply taking it away is easier, one must teach their child to prioritize their nutritional needs. In doing so, they teach discipline and self-control.
Many WPS staff believe that the current cell phone policy needs to be fixed. Superintendent Smith mentioned how “a fair number of our staff do not consider the current cell phone policy effective.” The phone caddy policy states that students must put their phones in the caddies from the start to the end of class. Most students put their phones in the phone caddies or backpacks if the classroom system does not sufficiently enforce the caddy use. Some classrooms include staff who chose not to enforce the rule or students oblivious to the policy.
The controversy regarding caddy use is that a few students do not like this policy and rebel against putting their devices in the caddies. These few students’ actions affect the student body’s obedient portion. Those in favor of the phone ban believe this initiative will alleviate student dependency on their devices. Some of those opposed to the phone ban, however, believe the ban is made to punish the student body by limiting access to devices during times of leisure.
The belief that cell phone use disrupts student learning is not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is the unrealistic standards held in this school toward students. WHS expects students to act responsibly as they are prepared to graduate and mature in the world outside of high school; therefore, they should be given the right to use their phones responsibly between classes, during breaks, or at lunch. Moreover, plans sometimes change, and the students who have responsibilities after school require access to their phones to manage these alterations in their schedules. This form of communication also reduces the confusion when tracking down a friend in the hallways.
Allowing access to cell phones during passing periods or classroom breaks has become controversial. The administration argues that students should continue their face-to-face interactions. Still after long classes of forced social interaction, most students find their technology a haven for calm and de-stressing.
In-person socialization isn’t the issue at hand; in actuality, the administrations’ need for student interaction lessens their inclination to do so.
Sophia Gordon, a sophomore, said, “You can’t force people to be friends. It has to be natural.”
As someone who has studied in this district since 2012, she has learned that “In the real world, you don’t need to like everybody.” She understands that one has to learn to live with and communicate with those in your community, but she questioned the rationale behind the CFI: enforcing student interaction. She proposed, “Even though we are young right now and we don’t get to make this decision, it could be in our favor to start letting people make their own decision on who to hang out with.”
What if instead of banning phones, we are taught how to live with them? We were taught how to live with candy by learning to manage sugar intake. We could be taught how to benefit from the proper use of apps. Technology will not decline in use. It will increase; technology will continue to thrive.
Technology is a tool to make future success effortless; it helps us improve efficiency and effectiveness. As a community, we should now have an open discussion so the student body, faculty, and administration can collaborate to create a more practical solution to the problem of cell phones in the classroom.
