On Wednesday, January 22, 2025 the Board of Education hosted a Community Engagement Session on cell phones in school. 33 people were in attendance - 14 parents, 13 employees, and 6 board members. Participants overwhelmingly supported the distraction-free learning proposal, with many sharing that it is long overdue.
In her opening remarks, Board of Education President Tracy Young shared that the District does not currently have a policy about personal electronic device use in schools like the one that is proposed in the governor’s budget. Currently, it’s up to the individual classrooms if they allow the devices. In areas like the lunch room, study hall, and transition times, personal devices are currently permitted. She went on to share that the goal of the session was to collect feedback that would be used by the Board to develop a plan for distraction-free learning at Greenville.
Superintendent Michael Bennett shared an update on the guidance from the governor. He reminded attendees that the guidance is still considered a “proposal” until the State budget is voted on and approved, which the state Constitution mandates must happen by April 1. Below is the key information from the proposal, paraphrased:
Each District must adopt a written policy prohibiting the use of personal electronic devices by students during the school day, anywhere on school grounds. This does not apply to school-owned devices, like Chromebooks and iPads. It applies to all personal, internet-enabled devices, for example, smartphones, smart watches, personal iPads, personal computers, and so on.
The policy must include one or more methods for parents/guardians to contact students during the school day.
The policy must include one or more methods for on-site storage of student devices. This can include student lockers.
Exceptions to the policy must include: the use of personal internet-enabled devices for educational purposes, for management of student healthcare, in the event of an emergency, for translation services, individualized education programs, where required by law, etc.
The policy must be adopted no later than August 1, 2025.
The District must electronically publish a report annually by September 1, beginning in 2026 that outlines the effectiveness of the policy within the District.
Based on the number of people in attendance, the session shifted to open forum style, where the Superintendent led the discussion and participants raised their hands to speak. Below are a list of questions asked, and some of the responses. Please note: comments below are not listed in chronological order, but have been reordered by category for ease of reading.
How would a personal technology ban work at Greenville?
The Superintendent shared that there will undoubtedly be growing pains in the implementation phase.
A community member suggested that no matter what is done, it must be done in a manner that is least “shocking” to students - noting that some may even face withdrawal or emotional hurdles being away from their devices.
An employee noted that no matter what, students will likely still use their school issued device to message other students and play games, like during lunch or study hall. A board member responded that the goal is not to prohibit students from communicating with each other, but to provide a distraction-free learning environment.
A community member asked if the governor’s proposal is approved, if the District could choose not to follow the directive. The Superintendent shared that if the proposal is approved, it becomes law and there is no choice in the matter - the District must comply. A few people, both community members and employees, shared that even if the proposal is not approved, the District should still move forward with the ban based on data and anecdotal evidence.
An employee shared that texting is not the issue in school, it’s apps like Snapchat and TikTok, as well as games like “Block.”
The Superintendent shared that the District would look toward other schools to see what strategies have been successful in implementing a distraction-free learning program.
An employee, who is also an athletic coach, shared that students should be allowed to store their phones at school, so they are accessible for after school activities.
A community member shared they were in attendance because their daughter asked for her to attend. Her daughter is in 9th grade and supports the ban on phones because it’s incredibly difficult to concentrate during class. While she does not want to lose access to her device at lunch, she understands that it would help her concentrate.
An employee shared that for teachers, there’s a lot of frustration while trying to educate students. She said it has made her sad to watch, over the course of her career, as person to person communication has fallen off the radar. She is excited to see students begin to start interacting with each other in a way they will be expected to when they leave Greenville.
A board member shared that it’s important to be flexible and assess what’s working and what’s not. It is not the intention to put a policy in place and walk away from it without follow up.
Where should devices be stored?
A community member suggested Yonder pouches - magnetic pouches that students can put their phone in at the beginning of the day and keep on their person, but does not allow them to physically use the phone in school. At the end of the day, they use a magnet to access the phone again. Someone shared that the downside to these pouches is that they are not foolproof, and there are ways to “break in” to them.
An employee suggested converting unused locker space into small “tech” lockers, where students are assigned a locker to store their technology during the day. Another employee shared that allowing students to store their phones in their own lockers would result in more frequent “bathroom trips” to use their devices.
A community member suggested students drop their phone in a “charging cart” at the beginning of the day that gets locked away. They would collect their phones at the end of the school day.
An employee asked if the process of collecting and distributing phones takes too long. A community member who works in another district and has experience with the procedure shared that it’s a matter of seconds, and does not add time onto the day.
One community member shared that they are in favor of the devices not being allowed in school, to prevent mix-ups during the storage of the devices and to take the liability off of the school.
What disciplinary measures should be in place for those who do not comply?
The Superintendent shared that determining disciplinary actions would ultimately fall on the Code of Conduct Committee which is comprised of students, board members, employees, and community members.
An employee suggested that the degree of disciplinary action should increase with the number of infractions. A board member suggested having five levels of disciplinary actions, based on a program successfully implemented by another school in New York.
An employee suggested one of the disciplinary actions be that if a student is caught with a device, the device be confiscated and the parent/guardian be required to pick up the device (it would not be given back to the student). They shared that this could lead to parents/guardians encouraging students to follow the school rules and prevent future incidents.
A community member shared that teachers must be supported by the Board and Administrators in order to make this work.
A community member suggested that behavior is not changed by discipline, it’s a punishment. Instead, the District should look toward using Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports to encourage and reward students for following the rules.
How can parents/guardians contact students during the school day?
An employee suggested the school set up designated phone areas, and make landlines available for student use. Similar to a payphone, but it would be free for students to make calls.
An employee suggested the student can always go to the office to make a call, and the parent/guardian can call the office to leave the student a message.
A parent suggested that they can email with the student throughout the day on their school-issued device.
An employee suggested using Google Chat.
What supports will teachers need to make this happen?
A community member shared that teachers have enough on their plates, and that the disciplinary action and facilitation of this ban should fall on school administrators.
Participants were in agreement and moved to the next question.
What would be the best course of action in Greenville if the governor’s proposal is not passed? A complete ban (devices not allowed during school, a partial ban (devices allowed during non-instructional time), or to leave as is (up to teacher discretion).
An employee shared that option three, leaving things as is, should not even be considered and that something should have changed already.
A community member shared that option two, partially banning cell phones, introduces more problems than solutions and is too easy to manipulate.
An employee suggested that option two would make it hard to stay consistent across the board, and students need consistency to make a change like this successful.
A board member asked the group if they believe something needs to change, regardless of what the governor mandates. Before the question was finished, multiple people strongly agreed.
An employee shared that currently, every classroom has their own cell phone rules yet in every class, they are still a huge distraction among all kids. They shared that there is no age group or demographic that has more of a problem - it’s a distraction for everyone and a ban would fix the problem.
An employee shared that the amount of time they spend asking students to remove headphones, put their phones away, etc. is severely taking away from instructional time and therefore, something must be done.
Although no one at the session spoke up to oppose the ban on personal internet-enabled devices, a board member shared that she has been approached by parents who say they will not support the ban. Another board member encouraged her to reach out to the parents and ask them to share their specific concerns, so the board can better understand the hesitation. The board member mentioned some parents felt strongly that their students should have phones in case of an emergency and that she would try to gather more information.
A third board member shared that although he was appreciative to everyone who came out, he wished the people who opposed the ban were in attendance to offer their perspectives. He shared that the board has been discussing the issue for a while, and when they get to the point of hosting a community engagement session it’s because they want to hear feedback from all sides
The session ended on time and the Superintendent thanked the community for braving the cold to offer their thoughts and feedback. He shared that throughout the process of making this decision, they will keep the community informed.