Board debates smartphone and internet‑device policy, delays final rule pending state guidance

Board members spent significant time on July 1 discussing a proposed district policy to restrict Internet‑enabled devices during the school day and require on‑site storage options. The board did not adopt the draft policy at the meeting and asked administration to return in August with clarified regulations after anticipated state guidance.

The draft policy defines “Internet‑enabled devices” with examples such as smartphones, tablets and smartwatches. Several board members urged broader or clearer language. One member suggested leaving a short definition and using examples only as “not limited to” items so the policy will remain current as technology evolves. Others said items listed in the draft, such as earbuds and headphones, are not currently Internet‑enabled and should be removed from a definition intended to cover devices that connect to the Internet.

A recurring concern was enforcement: teachers and staff would face judgment calls about whether a particular device is Internet enabled, and members warned that allowing non‑Internet cellular phones could prompt students to substitute devices and work around the restriction. “If you're able to text on it, you're distracted,” one board member said during the discussion.

The state law that prompted the district work requires that schools provide “one or more storage devices” (for example, a locker) as an option. The administration told the board that building‑level lockers could technically satisfy that requirement but said relying on lockers alone is not the district’s recommended implementation: prior experience shows students do not always use lockers and that a required locker‑only approach would be a large operational shift. The administration noted that building‑level plans and the exact implementation mechanics remain subject to further guidance from the state and legal counsel.

Board members agreed to delay final adoption and asked staff to return with clarified regulatory language, counsel review and recommendations on whether to treat cellular‑only devices equivalently to Internet‑enabled devices. Administration said it will review the state and governor’s guidance expected in coming weeks and present a regulation for board consideration in August.

The discussion also referenced the district code of conduct as a backstop: the code can address inappropriate use of devices whether or not those devices have Internet access. Board members asked that proposed language be vetted by counsel and that the board decide whether it wants a more expansive restriction than the state law strictly requires.