Concerning the Cell Phone Ban and Restriction Movement

On October 22nd, 2024, a 16-year-old Akron (Ohio) Public Schools student was involved in a nationally publicized story after school surveillance cameras recorded him being struck several times in the head by a school resource officer.1 According to media reports, the student initially bypassed the school metal detectors and was redirected through the detectors. After what appeared to be a verbal confrontation, the video showed officers grabbing the student, with one officer seen hitting him as he was taken to the ground. In the aftermath, the student was initially charged with counts including resisting arrest and obstruction that were later dismissed, and the SRO was placed on administrative duty and ultimately not returned to a school setting.2The story brought to mind a similar incident in South Carolina from 2015, where a student recorded an SRO forcibly removing a classmate from her desk in a classroom, which ultimately resulted in the officer being terminated from employment.3 In 2017 following what the United States Justice Department stated was a comprehensive investigation, the DOJ determined there was insufficient evidence to pursue federal criminal civil rights charges, stating that the decision not to charge the officer was limited strictly to an application of the high legal standard necessary to prove that the officer willfully deprived the student of a constitutional right, but also noted that “Mistake, misperception, negligence or poor judgment are not sufficient to establish a federal criminal civil rights violation.4Aside from the common thread that these incidences involved a high school student and law enforcement, they also both centered around a general failure to comply with requests from staff members or law enforcement.The other common thread was that the incident involved the student possession of a cell phone. According to multiple Akron media reports, the student admitted that he attempted to bypass the school metal detectors in order to sneak his cell phone into the school. Understandably, the school police had no way of knowing it was a cell phone and not a weapon that the student was attempting to smuggle into the building. However, had a cell phone not been a prohibited contraband similar to a weapon, this incident would not have occurred.5 Video of the 2015 South Carolina incident shows a uniformed police officer violently throwing a student to the floor while she was still seated on her desk, then throwing the student and the desk several feet before finally extracting her from her seat. The incident began when the student refused to put away her cell phone at the request of the teacher, and then refused to leave the classroom. After school police were called, the student refused his requests as well, resulting in the physical altercation. As noted, the officer ultimately did not face charges, but lost his job due to failure to follow proper procedure.6The purpose of this commentary is to express my growing anxiety that we will be hearing more stories like these in the future as more schools respond to and attempt to address the problems associated with cell phone usage during school hours. The framework of this commentary centers on the tensions created by cell phone bans and restrictions placed on school administrators who must balance the rights of students as they enforce such bans. Current literature was reviewed related to problems associated with student cell phone use in schools, as well as caselaw involving challenges to actions of school officials and school resource officers responding to incidences involving cell phones (e.g., searching cell phone contents and student possession of a device in violation of school policy).In addition, the author relies on personal insights and experiences of nearly three decades as a school teacher and administrator as well as more than a decade of teaching and licensing aspiring administrators. The commentary will conclude with author perspectives on what might help school administrators navigate cell phone mandates to avoid becoming the next widely publicized story, and help their students at the same time.Furthermore, this commentary is not intended to argue against cell phone bans and restrictions, nor will it propose alternatives to bans and restrictions, especially how such technology may be better used in the classroom. Such technology alternatives are not my area of expertise. Instead, the commentary will emphasize points to keep in mind when considering adopting bans and restrictions, and once adopted, best practices to strike a balance between student and parental rights and enforcement of such bans.One of the major concerns is hoping that we do not return to the zero-tolerance environment that evolved in the responses to school violence, where students were required to be suspended for actions such as biting a Pop Tart to look like a gun7 or for crude drawings depicting weapons on a sketchpad that were stored in a bedroom closet for two years but later made it to school via a younger sibling.8 Even if new “zero-tolerance times” don't include those types of stories, there is little doubt that school officials, and ultimately the court system, will be grappling with the consequences of policies that limit or ban cell phone use or possession in public schools.Another concern is wondering if we will once again be applying prevention measures where the response results in consequences that are worse than the original problem. While I will later describe what some of those real problems are, and there are many, one should question whether a progressive step discipline policy that ultimately concludes with out of school suspension for possessing or using a cell phone indeed makes sense. If the motivation is to “protect” students from the harms of cell phones, how does suspending them from school for possessing a cell phone improve the life of that student? Educators, scholars, and advocates have for decades demonstrated the negative consequences for students who are suspended from school, and alternative to suspension programs exist in many school districts; yet it would appear that we are now on the verge of adding an entirely new way for a student to get suspended from school. In addition, once student discipline and suspensions are part of the conversation, concerns about exceptions and equity are immediately raised.Of course, most of those suspensions will likely be categorized as a failure to comply, and labeled as a non-serious offense. They will often be the result of a student going through the steps of a progressive discipline system, starting with warnings, detentions, and other steps short of suspension. But the bottom line, ultimately, will be students being suspended from school for possessing or using a device that they use continually in the hours they are not in school. A device that also happens to be the same device nearly all the educators use in a similar, or close to similar manner.As far back as ten years ago, a United States Supreme Court case involving law enforcement and the searching of cell phone contents noted the prevalence of cell phones in society. In Riley v. California, Chief Justice Roberts stated in the unanimous opinion “These cases require us to decide how the search incident to arrest doctrine applies to modern cell phones, which are now such a pervasive and insistent part of daily life that the proverbial visitor from Mars might conclude they were an important feature of human anatomy.”9 Ten years, later, cell phones have not only evolved with more advanced technology (and with more to come with the advancement of AI), cell phones are even more common. Researchers estimated that around the time of that decision, some 35% of people owned a cell phone, but the number in 2024 approaches 98%.10 Nearly all of us use our phones several times per day, often for hours, with some even sleeping alongside their phone—and for many much of that time could be labeled as entertainment and non-productive time. But the point is almost all of us are connected to our devices, with school age students among the most connected.Unfortunately, just because cell phones are an integral part of our daily lives does not mean there are not significant downsides to the use and overuse of the devices. Research has demonstrated a relationship exists between cell phone usage, particularly social media usage and student/youth physical, mental, and social well-being.11 Some studies conclude that social media usage has been shown to increase levels of anxiety and depression, low self-esteem, sleep deprivation, body dysmorphia, and loss of social skills, among other problems.12 It should be noted that there is no universal agreement with these conclusions; for example, there is evidence to suggest that children suffering from depression may turn more frequently to social media, and it's not proven that social media was the primary cause of the depression.13Youth in particular are vulnerable to manipulation, grooming and predatory behaviors, bullying and harassment, security risks, and peer pressure.14 These are all serious problems on their own, but from a school perspective, can also lead to decreased academic performance.15 The problems are so pervasive and school districts must spend so much time and resources during the school day to deal with the problems, multiple school districts have felt compelled to sue the major social media companies for relief.16While some of the problems associated with cell phone overuse will not be resolved only through limitations and bans during school hours, teachers clearly identify problems cell phones create during instructional time in the classroom.17 Although cell phone bans during school hours may not significantly impact the mental health risks overall, banning cell phones during instructional time has been shown to have positive effects on student engagement and attention during classes.18 These limits are not merely arbitrary actions taken by those opposed to technology, opposed to innovation, or even by those who at any given time wish to curb modern teenage behavior; there is in fact valid rationale to put limitations on cell phone usage during school hours. If anything, teachers have reported that cell phone bans during instructional time reduce the distractions created by parents texting their children throughout the day, or even from remotely monitoring their classes.19These problems exist even in school districts with 1 to 1 school supplied devices.20 There are multiple ways to access the social media and other applications that students wish to continually access, and teachers report that in many circumstances such initiatives make no difference in student compliance or distraction elimination.21 Students are ingenious how they circumvent restrictions, by using messaging or other apps on their school supplied devices, placing a burner phone into a school supplied pouch, using their smartwatches, or even keeping their phones on their bodies in ways that create uncomfortable confrontations that teachers do not want to deal with.22 Even though teaching pedagogy, curriculum, and one to one initiatives focus on increasing the use of technology in schools, the integration of student cell phones into those practices has not been as widely accepted or easily accomplished.23School personnel have valid reasons to place reasonable restrictions on many items and behaviors. Some of the items frequently considered contraband include rubber bands, squirt guns, chewing gum, balloons, noise making devices, and a host of others that could be considered nuisances. Depending on your age you may remember some banned or restricted items because you either possessed them yourself or you had to deal with them as a school employee—Gigapets (virtual toy pets), clacking balls on a string, laser pointers, vaping devices, beepers, pagers, and more.But there is a between cell phones and the of other items that time teachers and have taken Nearly all of the noted items have no or positive in the classroom. phones, on the other when used can be a used they can create significant or is the of the educators because while it is necessary to enforce restrictions on or other it's not necessary to ban cell While no one out on when items are because of the for positive use of cell phones, clearly it can be that banning them from of there is growing by policy and school to usage or even student possession of cell phones during school hours. is not just in the United as studies have shown it has been a A the Schools has which a and the best of a school as one that has a to policy all personal phones, smartwatches, and connected are away and for the school that banning could be a policy to improve student to by the of 2024 there were that banned or restricted use of cell phones or districts their The from those categorized these policies as those that school districts to that school districts required school districts to or bans on cell phone usage in some or in public of policies include the of programs to for or other to cell phone policies in some These appear to how to or limit cell phones than how to practices that of cell phones and limit their those that have have not bans or restrictions, but are school districts to in some policies that or limit the use of cell phones in the are other that have that school districts cell phone example, the that all public schools to and a policy by a law school to policies students from using cell phones during instructional three and South have restrictions and in some the use of such as cell phones during instructional In South Carolina the a in the that districts to a cell phone policy to The policy must be by and districts have the to as well as the consequences for the the of 2024, in my of the Department of a to and make cell phones in While their report has not be as of this it will with the of to school However, it's not at this time if the will get involved when they in and policy for school to address the serious related to social media and cell phone usage that school age has problems be through or or cell phone use in schools will many, if of those there be from a cell phone for a hours school there would But just the hours in a the public school student in school will put a on those major of the most to ban or cell phones during school hours is the of that teachers in report is in their then back to my if the problems related to cell phones are because they are in a how will such bans or restrictions be and what problems will be created as educators enforce those there is that some restrictions are this commentary is not that bans are and the practices are not intended to be alternatives to but about what policies that or ban cell phones should include and how practices such policies should strike a balance student and parental The commentary on some lost due to bans and restrictions, but is not intended to be an against but what to be of as bans and restrictions are and noted in the fact that cell phone usage by students can often be used particularly when being used against school in place may be to Nearly who has with students should be to to the by one student on their parental restrictions I do and out a way to do also that to ban or cell phone use are but time such policies may limit the of time the they suggest that in my opinion would help to a phone into a more serious they suggest that school districts public and for bans and restrictions, and while they adopting a policy should not be on whether the public it or if is time would be well and before a ban is They also including of including in the of the should be in and on school and and once parents should that they have the that could be the most important of a cell phone policy to reduce the of a cell phone violation into a more serious offense. The policy should be how it to both possession and with of and should exceptions must be from the how the policy will be and it must be out in the There should be and of what a and what will when a violation including who might enforce the The of of should also be clearly and if of a device is the policy should what of could result in who may and how a device is Such policies should have progressive discipline including time and how to and clearly due rights should a student face discipline for a and they that is necessary to help the proper enforcement of the and not only should the policy be reviewed there should be a to to the of do if the fact cell phone bans to be one in that has there is almost a of because that may on a school on the same While that might be a I my for similar when the next is banning student is low are and even by and there is some to the that overuse can be But where is the school violence, which is a far to student the to of course, but my is that the of to limit cell phones will ultimately turn out to create problems than what we have to the of cell of a by the noted and there is an that is and some at the have been when the use of cell phone during school among policy may be the for a against a that are not as about do not bans and restrictions at the teachers and it's to them because the primary given for their to bans is related to the and security of their Although the in student it's about the to which student is given much for the between some teachers and students that in some schools into serious school policy or the of law should be made to that when possession of a cell phone is a violation of school should be made to reasonable steps to deal with the as a student the response should not be your phone away or I for and teachers should and to a than some cell phone incident one that with a student in the and by school that may create a of compliance and a of discipline problems and and administrators should be that cell phone bans and restrictions don't away constitutional rights of especially related to student I educators that there is a difference between searching for a student device and searching the contents of a If you are this you are likely well of the necessary for student but it's likely a significant number of teachers for cell phone bans and restrictions do not at and in are not as the teacher so I can do A cell phone ban does not at and reasonable in to mean one can now search a student because one the student at his cell phone in of cell phone bans to rights as The cell phone does not but it is clearly a the to an for and a for times to it could be that students in general have not that but one could argue that school is the for that phone bans could be as just away of student the loss of which was noted by years while the of would to many cell phone violation it be that there are those who those rights as is no doubt that teachers and must spend an of time and resources responding to the of cell Some schools have had with the of their restrictions, while others have of the of such restrictions should include an of the time and resources required to enforce a ban and how that to what was required by teachers and administrators before enforcement was much time will be searching for a banned cell phone, attempting to the of a during or on to prove or a student was using their device during an must be taken to that the of time to with a cell phone is not more to the than the violation of possessing the cell phone in the course, teacher and administrator time is not the only for but because a by of bans is the of cell phones, it should be considered when the of a we are more bans and restrictions, my would be that the following would help avoid and legal or other for and no time starting to and which bans and restrictions and don't phone bans and restrictions be made into policy that is merely put in place and not or as and and the policies must as must create a than policy is in it is by all In schools where bans and restrictions are in if there are staff members who the ultimately the policy is and point is also by the enforcement which only the of some that can turn into more this also the zero-tolerance of stories we should to for staff related to and is for all not just related to cell related to the rights of phone bans and restrictions do not search and or due rights of students would that no cell phone violation would result in a civil rights violation or but it only one incident to a major case with or widely publicized v. or v. as job and of school administrators and any law enforcement in your school. administrators must not their duty and to enforce the school to their SRO or other law The reasons for this are and well and this but it's a in my when student discipline that may the student but not the of the time and resources to a of better how to cell phones in the classroom. to how to better use what should be the to be used in a is time better than the device and it some have phone can be and not student and with other in and and and just a of what the those be when the device is in a cell phone will conclude with a that ultimately in most cases our better judgment will and we a zero-tolerance environment to be I that it's that we will about court cases and ultimately have new student owned in But I also have that such will some and about of a I was with as a high school administrator around when I a student discipline by a who stated the student was on the at not related to the he was In order to use the students had to the in the they were and any from that resulted in the loss of to use the I if what the student was at was I was The stated that students should not look at other on a that they did not in because what they might be I then if a student they were in the for about but were later seen at about would they a discipline it to the advanced the point was and no other were the search policy It was a time.