Magnolia ISD board adopts stricter student code of conduct with ban on personal communication devices

Magnolia — The Montgomery Independent School District Board of Trustees voted 6–1 to adopt the district’s 2025–26 student code of conduct, which prohibits personal communication devices on campus and establishes a graduated discipline schedule that can lead to in-school suspension, out-of-school suspension and, for repeated offenses, placement in the district’s DAEP program.

Board members approved the code during the board’s regular meeting after a staff presentation that said the changes reflect recent legislative updates and district policy review. The board’s recorded motion to approve the code of conduct was made by Trustee Stacy and seconded by Trustee David; the motion passed with one trustee opposed.

The new code specifies that students may possess personal communication devices only if they are stored away; devices that are used or visible will trigger disciplinary steps. For elementary students the documented sequence described in the presentation was: first offense — verbal correction and parent contact; third offense — confiscation, parent contact and referral; fourth offense — confiscation, parent contact and conference and three days of DAEP access. For intermediate schools the presenter described progressive steps up to a possible 15-day DAEP placement after repeated offenses. For junior high and high school the sequence begins with verbal correction, parent contact and end-of-day return of confiscated devices, escalating through ISS and OSS and culminating after multiple offenses in DAEP placement (the presenter cited a six-offense pathway that could result in a 15-day DAEP placement and longer if violations continued).

District staff told trustees that referrals are entered into a tracking system by school office staff and assistant principals so the district can tally offenses by school year. The presenter said consequences are cumulative for the school year. The presentation also said the code now explicitly covers “personal communication devices,” which the district indicated includes smartwatches and similar wearables.

Trustees asked how the district will track repeated offenses and whether sanctions are cumulative across grade levels; staff said the system records incidents for the school year and that assistant principals input teacher referrals into the system. A trustee asked whether the law requires DAEP placement; staff responded that state law does not mandate DAEP for personal communication device violations. Another trustee said the punishments were excessive and stated they would vote no.

Supporters on the board argued that multiple warnings and progressive steps are necessary to change behavior and cited anecdotal reports from high school staff that removing devices increased student socializing during class transitions.

The presenter said the code updates also include items required by recent legislation: identification of campus behavior coordinators, changes to grievance timelines and a mechanism for electronic submission of parent grievances, and updates to parental review of instructional materials. The presenter noted the student code of conduct requires a formal board vote and follows review by campus administrators and legal counsel.

Trustee Stacy moved to approve the student code of conduct for 2025–26; Trustee David seconded. The motion passed 6–1.

Board members and staff said they will monitor the first weeks of implementation and return to the board with follow-up if enforcement challenges arise.