Board hears first reading of new state‑driven phone policy; debate centers on whether 'instructional day' means bell‑to‑bell

Iredell‑Statesville Schools presented a first reading of a revised policy to comply with a 2025 state law that requires personal wireless communication devices to be off during the instructional day. The draft largely mirrors a model from the North Carolina School Boards Association but leaves one key term — "instructional day" — undefined, delegating that definition either to schools or to the district.

Assistant superintendent and legal counsel explained the law includes exceptions — for health‑related devices, IEP or 504 accommodations, and teacher‑directed instructional use — and the draft reflected those exceptions. "Ultimately, right now, it would leave the definition of instructional day up to individual schools," the board attorney said, noting an elementary school could treat bell‑to‑bell as instructional day while a high school might exclude lunch.

Board members split on the preferable approach. Several members, including Brian Kubenik, argued for a district‑wide definition of the instructional day tied to school bell times listed on the district website, noting enforcement is easier if schools apply a single, clear standard: "If we can all agree on the serious impact to learning and student physical and mental health by having these communication devices in the classroom, wouldn't we want to implement the most restrictive classroom cell phone ban possible?" Kubenik asked.

Others, including members who said they had already solicited building‑level input, favored allowing principals to set times most appropriate for their school populations. Superintendent Eric James and staff urged implementation practicality and said principals had tightened enforcement in preparation for the law; they also warned enforcement will require direction from the central office and backing for school administrators. "We should require our administrators and teachers to enforce it," staff counsel said.

Several board members asked staff to survey principals and assistant principals and return at the second reading with recommended language that balances district consistency and building‑level practicality. A number of speakers requested the board consider bell‑to‑bell implementation for simplicity, while acknowledging exceptions for medical needs and other accommodations.

Public commenter Helen McDonald — who identified herself as a parent and alumna — asked the board to allow high school students to use phones during lunch to handle work or family logistics. Trustees asked that any implementation include clear guidance on where exceptions apply and how enforcement will work in practice. The policy remained at first reading; staff been asked to compile principal feedback and draft options for the board’s second reading.

Separately, board members asked that legal citations to the specific state statute be included in the final version; Counsel confirmed the draft will incorporate legislative citations for the second reading.