Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Coos Bay SD 9 board begins state-required personal electronic device policy process amid calls for stricter limits
Summary
At a first reading, the Coos Bay SD 9 board considered a new state-driven personal electronic device policy. Trustees agreed to advance the draft to meet the state timeline while some members urged moving toward lockers or tamper‑proof storage to reduce distractions and address student mental health.
At its Oct. 13 meeting, the Coos Bay School District 9 board held a lengthy first reading of a new personal electronic device (PED) policy required by recent state action and the Oregon School Boards Association (OSBA) guidance.
A board member urged a far stricter approach than the draft, arguing that phones should be kept out of students’ immediate reach during the school day. "If you put your cell phone here, on silent, don't touch it... but if you put it in another room... it's still a distraction," the board member said, calling for lockers or a tamper‑proof storage system. They cited local clinical experience and national research connecting early social media use with increased anxiety and suicidal thoughts among adolescents.
District staff and other trustees favored adopting the OSBA‑recommended policy now to meet statutory timelines while forming a policy work group to pursue stronger measures. “We should pass this policy in regards to the timeline and being in compliance,” a trustee said, recommending the district use a student survey and consultations with building administrators to shape future changes.
Administrators explained practical options and tradeoffs. Staff noted some districts purchase magnetic “pouch” systems but warned about durability, replacement costs and documented hacks; an example price cited was about $30 per pouch and tens of thousands of dollars to equip a large high school. Trustees proposed a tiered approach for future discussion, ranging from 'do nothing' to fully locked storage, and suggested the policy committee evaluate low‑tech locker solutions as well as communication strategies for families.
The board scheduled the PED policy for adoption at an upcoming meeting to comply with state timing; trustees also asked staff to run a student and family survey and to consult building leaders on implementation logistics before final adoption. No final policy change beyond the first reading was adopted at the Oct. 13 meeting.
