The Massachusetts Senate passed Senate Bill 2561, a measure to ban student use of personal electronic devices during the school day “bell to bell,” advancing the measure to engrossment.

Supporters said the rule is intended to improve academic focus, mental health and social interaction in classrooms. Senator Creighton, Third Essex District, said she filed the legislation after reading Jonathan Haidt’s Anxious Generation and from personal experience, and argued the bill’s “bell to bell component” will reduce constant distraction for students. "This legislation strikes the right balance in being bold and going bell to bell, providing exceptions where necessary," Creighton said on the Senate floor.

The bill drew examples from districts that have already limited phones. Senator Patrick O'Connor, First Plymouth and Norfolk District, cited a recently opened middle school in Weymouth and said administrators there reported students were "being kids" after a local ban. O'Connor referenced a Johns Hopkins study linking social media to increased depressive symptoms and said the state should adopt a consistent standard.

Senators emphasized that the measure preserves local flexibility and exceptions for students with special needs. Senator Nick Collins, First Suffolk District, noted the bill’s language allows districts to choose how to implement device removal and to accommodate students who depend on devices for learning. Senator Lewis, Fifth Middlesex District, described a range of local implementation options, from leaving phones at home to locked pouches, lockers or geofencing technology, and said the bill deliberately does not prescribe a single enforcement mechanism.

During floor debate the Senate adopted a package of amendments that shaped how the policy will be implemented. The chamber approved an amendment calling for consistent and necessary exemptions across the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) model policy and local policies and adopted a provision requiring DESE to hold at least one public hearing during rule development and for local governing bodies to solicit public input when implementing local device policies. Several other proposed amendments were withdrawn or rejected.

The Senate recorded 38 votes in favor and 2 opposed on final passage to be engrossed. The bill will proceed through the legislative process toward enrollment; no signature by the governor was recorded in the Senate debate transcript.

Proponents and opponents repeatedly separated discussion from formal action in the debate: senators described policy goals and local implementation options (discussion), won approval for the amendments directing public hearings and local notice (direction), and the chamber then voted to pass the bill to engrossment (formal action).

The measure’s supporters urged districts to use the flexibility in the bill to protect students who need devices for educational or medical reasons while enforcing a broad ‘‘bell to bell’’ restriction to reduce distractions and encourage in-person socializing and classroom engagement.

The Senate debate included multiple references to classroom testimony, teacher reports and studies; where the transcript recorded specific statements, the article quotes them directly and attributes them to the named senators who spoke on the floor.

The Senate action does not itself change local school rules until districts adopt policies consistent with the state law and DESE rulemaking; the adopted amendments require DESE to solicit public comment as it develops guidance and require local boards to hold hearings or otherwise solicit local input.

The Senate’s passage sends the bill to the next legislative steps toward final enactment.