Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Auburn committee weighs student, family and staff views after cell-phone pilot surveys
Summary
Committee reviewed three-wave pilot survey results showing strong staff support for a no-phone policy, mixed family responses, and student opposition at the high‑school level; members asked principals and a student committee member to return with context before any handbook change.
Auburn — School officials on Wednesday reviewed a year‑long pilot and comparative survey data on cell‑phone use in district schools and debated how to balance student safety, family communication and classroom focus.
District staff presented results from two survey waves (October and March) at Auburn High School and Auburn Middle School, explaining the comparative layout and response counts. Families, staff and students were surveyed: family responses were small (43 HS, 119 MS), staff responses numbered 63 at the high school and 40 at the middle school, and 501 high‑school students and 511 middle‑school students responded.
The surveys showed clear differences by stakeholder group. "Largely and vastly" staff supported the no‑phone policy for reducing distractions and easing classroom management, the business manager said. Families likewise reported perceived benefits — improved focus and reduced cyberbullying — but some families flagged communication and emergency‑contact concerns.
Students' answers diverged by level: high‑school students expressed significant opposition and asked for limited phone access during lunch, passing periods and activities. Middle‑school students, who store phones in lockers under the pilot, generally reported improved focus but continued to raise safety and access concerns.
Educators described enforcement challenges and the policy’s classroom effects. Several teachers testified that having phones on a student’s person often escalates disciplinary incidents and that removal to an office increases workload. At the same time, committee members and students said lockers are scarce at the high school and that some students and families rely on phones for end‑of‑day logistics and emergencies.
Committee members did not change policy Wednesday. They agreed to invite building principals and at least one student who served on the pilot committee to a future meeting for deeper discussion and asked staff to consider whether a third survey is worthwhile given apparent survey fatigue among students. Any handbook amendments would need to be adopted before the end of the school year, creating a tight timetable for changes.
What’s next: Principals will be asked to come to a future meeting prepared to answer questions on safety and logistics; the committee expects to consider whether additional surveying or targeted policy adjustments are appropriate before a handbook update.
