Groveport Madison Schools principals told the school board that the district’s new no‑cell‑phone policy has had noticeable effects in buildings but depends on consistent enforcement and administrative follow‑up.

At the high school, Principal Jeff Altman reported that in the first 17 school days the building recorded 408 instances of device violations (including cell phones, smartwatches and wireless earbuds). ‘‘When you break down our student population, which is roughly 2,100 students … we’re breaking that down to 24 occurrences per day,’’ Altman said, and added that his administrative team of six typically divides up those incidents so each administrator handles only a few per day.

Why it matters: Principals linked reduced device access to fewer social‑media‑fueled confrontations and a calmer cafeteria. Altman said the change has freed teachers to teach and has allowed administrators to spend more time in classrooms observing instruction.

How enforcement is working: The district’s high school asks teachers to address a device violation briefly and then log the incident in an online Google form. The entry populates a shared spreadsheet administrators monitor during the day so staff can respond quickly. ‘‘We have a running spreadsheet … once they submit that information, it populates on a spreadsheet that all six of us work on throughout the day,’’ Altman said. The school uses a four‑step progressive discipline process; Altman said just one student had reached the fourth tier after nearly a month.

Middle schools reported similar outcomes. Chris Mojo, principal at Middle School North, said some days his building collects zero devices. ‘‘We had grade‑level meetings at the beginning of the school year and gave the students a copy of our electronics policy,’’ Mojo said, adding that teachers use a PBIS‑Rewards tracking tool to note infractions and that administrators collect devices so teachers do not have to.

Principals from Middle School Central and Middle School South described comparable systems; Central uses a Google Sheet tracker and South uses a central hub for discipline and device tracking. Across buildings principals highlighted three enforcement elements: clear, repeated communication to families and students; a short, teacher‑initiated correction during class; and an administrative team that responds promptly to logged infractions so teachers are not drawn into confrontations.

Board questions and next steps: Board members asked about who retrieves devices and whether the tracking tools are interrupting instruction; principals said their processes were designed to limit instructional loss and that administration or security personnel retrieve devices. The board did not take a formal vote during the presentation but asked administrators to monitor discipline trends and return with any recommended policy refinements.

Ending: Principals asked the board to sustain the policy’s consistent enforcement and said early indicators show improved classroom focus and fewer incidents in common areas.