Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Electronic Devices Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Danbury committee backs first read of electronic devices policy after debate on board modeling phone use
Summary
The Danbury Board of Education policy committee voted to recommend a first read of Policy P5131.81 (electronic devices), adopting language that applies to K–12 with emphasis on middle and high schools and adding a district-wide statement that adults should model responsible personal device use.
The Danbury Board of Education Policy Committee voted to recommend a first read of Policy P5131.81 on electronic devices after more than an hour of discussion about scope and who should model device use.
Committee members approved a version of the policy that applies to students at all grade levels but emphasizes more stringent rules for middle and high school settings. The committee also agreed to add a district-level statement that “every adult working with students within the Danbury School District has the responsibility to promote digital citizenship and model responsible personal use.”
Kelly (staff member) told the committee the policy "primarily applies to our secondary age students" and that it is intended to limit classroom distractions while allowing devices when they support instruction. The draft directs students to keep phones stored (in lockers or backpacks) during class time and leaves school administrators authority to set school-level rules such as limited access at lunch or during transitions.
Members debated whether the board itself should be named in the policy’s definition of “collective action.” Some members—citing the policy series organization and the document’s focus on students—argued board-specific conduct belongs in board bylaws rather than in a student policy. Others and staff urged retaining wording that signals the board’s role in endorsing and advancing the policy. The committee ultimately kept the spelled-out list of groups in the policy’s explanatory paragraph but agreed the board would not use this student policy to micromanage board members’ personal conduct.
Committee discussion also addressed where to place language about adults modeling behavior. Several members recommended inserting a clear sentence in the policy’s opening framing to capture the commitment across adults without reworking the policy’s legal organization. One compromise the committee accepted was moving the modeling language into the introductory section and leaving the school-level responsibility headings in place.
After revisions were proposed on screen, Al moved and Theresa seconded a motion to recommend the policy for first read with the committee’s adjustments. The motion carried by voice vote.
The committee noted that, if adopted by the full board, administrators will need to write implementing regulations spelling out enforcement steps and any school-level variations. Staff also emphasized the rules are framed to be device-agnostic so future personal technologies (smart glasses, wearables) are covered.
The committee sent Policy P5131.81 to the full Board of Education for a first reading and asked staff to prepare regulations and communications for families and staff.
