Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Wellbeing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Students, parents and board propose task force as PVPUSD weighs high‑school cellphone rules
Summary
After reports from students, parents and staff, the Palos Verdes board agreed to form a task force to study high‑school mobile device policy, enforcement options (including phone pouches), parent education and equity considerations; no policy change was adopted May 8.
The Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District board on May 8 discussed whether and how to revise high‑school mobile‑device policy after a staff report and public testimony from students and parents.
Students, including junior Avery Dyldlaska, urged the district to address cell‑phone impacts on attention and mental health and recommended preventive programs such as the voluntary 'Wait Until 8' pledge for families. Parent commenters said phones reduce engagement and urged solutions ranging from parent education to locked pouches; one parent described the Yonder pouch system used at other campuses.
District staff summarized stakeholder feedback and implementation considerations: existing policy allows phone use before/after school, during passing periods and at lunch, and in class with teacher authorization. Staff noted enforcement burdens for site administrators, equity concerns where students lack devices, and the operational costs of pouch systems (estimates cited during the meeting ranged up to $150,000–$200,000 for district‑wide procurement and required professional development).
Board members expressed broad agreement about the goal—reducing distraction and supporting student mental health—while noting legal limits (state law preserves access to a phone in emergencies) and practical constraints (staff time, medical needs, and student rights). Several members recommended a task force including students, teachers, counselors, parents and site leaders to craft recommendations and to pursue parent education, potential grants for equipment, and technology‑infrastructure improvements.
The board did not adopt policy changes on May 8; staff was asked to return with more detailed options, data on device‑related incidents, and cost estimates for possible implementations.
