Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Phone Free Schools topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Student testimony: phones distract in class; supports middle-school ban in H.54
Summary
A Burlington student told the House Education Committee that cell phones are a major distraction and supported banning phone use during the middle-school day while allowing phones for safety and limited use in high school. The remarks were given as testimony on bill H.54.
Alexia Springer, a Burlington student and House page, told the House Education Committee on May 1 that cell phones are a significant distraction in public schools and said she supports a statewide ban for younger students while allowing limited access for safety in older students.
Springer testified in the committee’s continuing discussion of H.54, a bill that would impose restrictions on cell-phone use in public schools. "School should never be a place where it is appropriate to film videos for social media and should be a place for a focused learning," she said, describing instances at her school where students used phones to film social-media challenges.
Springer said students should be allowed to keep phones in lockers so they can contact parents while walking home. She described the typical practice at her school as requiring phones to remain put away during school; if a student is found using a phone it may be taken and repeated violations prompt contact with parents. She criticized uneven enforcement: "the schools' policy of a cell phone being found ... is not enforced enough to make it effective," she said, adding that students often use phones during the day "without much worry."
On whether a statewide ban should apply to high schools as well as middle schools, Springer said she "partially" supports a no-phone policy: she favors a ban in middle school but said high-school students may need phones for study and safety, and that repeated misuse in high school should prompt parent notification and loss of phone privileges.
The committee’s exchange with Springer showed the testimony was part of an extended review of H.54; no committee vote or formal action on the bill was recorded in this portion of the hearing. The remarks were presented as testimony and questions from committee members and did not represent final committee direction or an enacted rule.
Springer's comments about enforcement, locker use, and parental notification were presented as observations about current school practice and policy preferences rather than descriptions of specific statutory language or enacted policy.
