USD 383 hears Manhattan High proposal to keep personal devices out of class; no vote

Manhattan-Ogden USD 383 Board of Education members on May 7 heard a detailed proposal from Manhattan High School principal Mister Dorst to restrict studentsuse of personal electronic devices during instructional time and to enforce the rule through secure storage "carriers," a locked pouch system for repeat offenses and a centralized teacher reporting process.

The proposal, presented at the boardmeeting, would allow students to use phones and other devices before school, after school, during passing periods and at lunch but requires devices to be stored in school-provided carriers for the full class period. Dorst said the intent is to "keep our instructional time and honor the need to have a distraction free instructional time at Manhattan High School." The board did not vote on the proposal; administrators said it would be piloted and refined before any district policy change.

Why it matters: Administrators and teachers told the board that pervasive device use is disrupting instruction and contributing to teacher burnout. The school proposes a layered approach combining equipment, teacher reporting and administrative follow-up rather than an immediate, campuswide ban; students, teachers and parents asked the board to weigh student safety, classroom logistics and equity as the district considers any final policy.

What the proposal would require and how it would work

- Secure storage: Students would place phones and other personal devices (including wearable devices and laptops when used as personal devices) into a carrier at the start of the day or class period. For second and subsequent violations teachers would place the device in a numbered, lockable pouch kept in the classroom. Dorst said the district would pilot several pouches per classroom and provide a safe, magnet-locked option for repeat offenders.

- Reporting and tracking: Teachers would use a Microsoft Forms report with a short set of questions (student name, grade, first/second offense and whether a ParentSquare message was sent). Office professionals would monitor the consolidated spreadsheet so administrators could identify repeat offenders across periods and classrooms.

- Discipline progression: Dorst described a staged enforcement plan that begins with a teacher warning and a ParentSquare notification for a first offense; second and third offenses would involve an orange locked pouch and administrative penalties; fourth and subsequent offenses could include a semester-long device ban and at least one day in AES (alternative education setting), with insubordination consequences if the student continues to resist.

- Exceptions and instructional control: The plan allows for teacher-requested exceptions (for short, planned uses such as instrument tuning) and medical-device exceptions (for example, continuous glucose monitors). Dorst also pointed to Apple Classroom and Google Classroom tools that would let teachers control student tablets when instruction requires it.

Costs and equipment

Dorst told the board the school estimates purchasing multiple pouches per classroom. He described an estimate of about five pouches per classroom; at roughly $20 per pouch the districtwould face a one-time equipment cost in the low five figures (Dorst cited an estimate of about $16,000). He also noted a proprietary magnet used on some locking pouches that costs about $200 and said the district would pilot devices and ordering in bulk.

Questions from board members and community input

Board members asked how teachers would verify first vs. subsequent offenses in the moment, how the plan would affect passing period circulation and whether students in AP or advanced courses might lose needed access to sites blocked on district-issued iPads.

Board member Kurt said he supported the general approach: "I like the plan. I think overall, it's pretty solid." He and others pressed for clarity on who would staff the monitoring spreadsheet and how the school would handle students who need a device for an approved course.

Teachers, students and parents who addressed the board during and after the presentation offered a mix of support and practical concerns. Jackson Allen, a Manhattan High world history teacher who served on the committee, told the board that device use has reached a point he cannot manage in class: "When you lose the good kids, that really is difficult for your school culture," Allen said, arguing that removing devices during instruction would allow teachers to teach more effectively.

Student speakers urged a nuanced approach rather than a strict full-day ban. Risa, a Manhattan High student, said the proposed approach "takes a nuanced approach where the students don't feel like they're being punished" and argued that preserving some personal device access at lunch and passing periods would ease student resistance.

Parent Courtney Hockman told the board the policy should not be framed as punishment: "teachers will be able to teach differently when they're not having to fight the phone," she said, adding that measurement should include teacher effectiveness and broader student outcomes.

Technology and safety concerns

Board members asked district staff about multi-factor authentication (MFA) and other technical dependencies. Information technology staff said options exist to let students use district iPads for MFA without relying on a personal phone, but IT work would need to continue if the plan is adopted. Administrators also emphasized that the plan is not intended to prevent access in emergencies; the school would continue protocols to assure families can contact their students through the grade-level office.

Next steps and oversight

Administrators described the plan as a pilot and said they would collect data, run parent and staff communications, expand professional development for teachers on classroom management and instructional engagement tools, and return to the board with implementation details and results. Board members asked administrators to define the metrics of success before a full roll-out so the community can judge whether the pilot met its aims.

No policy or ordinance change was adopted at the May 7 meeting. Dorst and district staff said they will continue site-level meetings, pilots and community outreach and will provide updates to the board during the coming months.

Sources and attributions: Reporting in this article is drawn from the May 7 USD 383 Board of Education meeting, including the presentation and Q&A led by Manhattan High School principal Mister Dorst and public comments from teachers, students and parents.