State education panel hears that phone-free school policy could block some college coursework without tech fixes

Community College of Vermont officials and a State College System technology lead told the Vermont House Committee on Education that a statewide bell-to-bell phone‑free schools policy could prevent some high school students from accessing college courses taught for credit unless districts or the bill include exceptions or adopt new technical workarounds.

Kate Mobley, dean of enrollment and community relations at CCV, told the committee that dual and concurrent enrollment programs — which let high school students earn college credit — rely on the campus learning management system, Canvas, and on multifactor authentication that typically requires a code or app on a personal device.

"Because these classes are for both high school but also college credit, it's our accreditation that holds the standard of that class," Mobley said. "We have students utilizing our learning management system. . . . Unfortunately, we are now in a world where multifactor authentication is a requirement for our learning management system."

Mobley provided the committee with the scale of the issue at CCV this year: about 1,400 Vermont high school students enrolled in dual‑enrollment courses that may meet on college campuses or online, and nearly 1,100 students participating in concurrent enrollment taught in high schools or technical centers.

Wilson Garland, representing the State College System's information/technology side, told the committee that Vermont institutions use multifactor authentication tools such as Cisco Duo and that email‑based authentication is increasingly viewed as insufficient by cybersecurity experts.

"Most multifactor authentication tools require you to get a code to your phone or do some sort of app on the phone or device that allows you to get the code that you need," Garland said. He added that Duo's Android app can be downloaded on some Chromebooks but that technical limitations and device/configuration differences mean it is "not easily supported" in every school environment.

Committee members asked whether students could authenticate at home, use a parent phone for the 30‑second authentication window, or rely on district devices. Mobley said some districts have adopted workarounds: one district requires students to authenticate when they arrive and then store phones for class; another uses classroom‑level pouches. The authentication typically grants access for about 24 hours in the Canvas portal, she said, but students sometimes fail to authenticate at home and then cannot complete class work.

Officials emphasized that federal Perkins funding for career and technical education (CTE) creates an obligation to provide concurrent enrollment in CTE programs; that funding and accreditation expectations make the problem more urgent for CTE pathways than for other courses. Mobley told the committee that CCV and other Vermont colleges offering dual/concurrent enrollment (UVM, Saint Michael's, Norwich) have tried to handle the issue school by school but that a statewide policy would change the scale of necessary technical and operational solutions.

Committee members suggested potential legislative approaches: a medical or programmatic exemption for dual/concurrent enrollment, statutory language empowering districts to adopt exception procedures, or funding/technical assistance to districts to implement compatible multifactor tools. Garland and Mobley said they and their IT teams have evaluated alternatives but that no universal, low‑cost solution exists that works across all devices, districts and configurations.

The committee did not take a formal vote. Members directed staff and stakeholders to develop draft language that would either (a) preserve a bell‑to‑bell phone restriction while explicitly allowing district‑level exceptions for authenticated access to college systems, or (b) identify technical funding or configuration assistance that would let districts comply without undermining the phone restriction.

The committee heard that the operational burden of any exemption would fall mainly on K‑12 staff and districts — for example, scheduling time before school or providing supervised authentication stations for students in concurrent and dual enrollment classes. Officials urged lawmakers to consider district capacity and the diversity of devices in use when drafting exceptions or technical requirements.

What’s next: Committee staff will draft and circulate proposed statutory language and may consult further with CCV, the Vermont State Colleges, school technology directors, and district leaders about technical options, costs, and the feasibility of district‑level exception policies.