Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Devices Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
School board hears PTA feedback and debate on personal-device policy
Summary
District staff reviewed Policy 3740 after PTA input. The board discussed removing an exception allowing device use "directed by an educator for approved educational purposes," enforcement for K–5 watches, medical/504 exceptions, and next steps for revision and community feedback.
At the Washington County School District working session on April 28, staff presented proposed revisions and community feedback on Policy 3740 (personal device use).
Stephen White, who led the presentation, said the policy text currently allows device use when “directed by an educator for approved educational purposes” and that feedback from a PTA meeting produced divergent views: some parents wanted no classroom phone use at all, others asked the policy not be so restrictive. The PTA also suggested designated device-use areas, keeping K–5 separated from older grades to reduce theft risk, and stationing watches taken from K–5 students in the office rather than leaving them with teachers.
Board members asked clarifying questions about several practical and legal points. Staff and board discussed 504 plan and IEP medical exceptions for items such as glucose monitors and implanted devices; a parent at the meeting noted her child uses a phone to monitor diabetes. Several board members argued that schools already provide Chromebooks and other devices sufficient for instructional needs and raised concerns about students bypassing content filters by using phones as hotspots.
Discussion included enforcement trade-offs: one board member said routing K–5 watches to the office could overwhelm office staff and that teachers could initially manage misconduct. Another asked whether high-school passing time should allow brief phone use; some board members feared allowing phones in passing could incentivize tardiness. The presenters noted the district’s policy aligns with state legislation but that the board must decide how tightly to restrict devices.
Staff said they had received mostly positive emails and encouraged community members to provide additional feedback. White said staff would take input and return a revised draft for board review; no vote was taken. Board members asked staff to collect written feedback and to consider implementation logistics, including how exceptions for medical needs would be handled.
No ordinance or vote was adopted on the policy at the meeting. Staff indicated the draft will be revised and returned to the board for formal consideration.
