Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
KUSD committee weighs stricter cell-phone rules as state deadline looms
Loading...
Summary
A proposed district policy on student wireless communication devices prompted heated debate on enforcement, bell-to-bell bans, school-level flexibility, and accommodations for health/IEP needs; staff warned a policy must be submitted to the state by July 1.
Kenosha Unified School District staff presented proposed revisions to a student wireless-communication and acceptable-use policy that the state requires districts to adopt by July 1, and committee members spent more than an hour debating enforcement and scope.
The recommended revisions fold a new wireless-device policy into the existing student technology acceptable-use policy (Policy 66.33) and add language about recordings, privacy and voluntary student searches. Staff presenter (Speaker 20) told members the state provided a sample policy and that the district’s approach aims to balance instructional integration, privacy and safety while preserving exceptions for medical devices and IEP accommodations.
“Basically, the nature of technology and other things that come into play… the statutory conditions that are placed in by the state,” the presenter said, noting the policy allows local decisions about instructional integration. Several teachers and parents argued that without clear enforcement mechanisms teachers will be left to police cell phones, which would undermine instruction and morale. A parent who had tried a “downtime” approach said removing phones had led to acute anxiety for her child.
Board and staff exchanges covered several options: strict traditional three-strike rules enforced at school level, districtwide bell-to-bell bans adopted by some districts, and increased administrative support for teachers so behavior managers handle escalations rather than classroom teachers. Teachers reported mixed experiences: some schools had near-zero phones after sustained enforcement and parent communication; others said the three-strike approach and boxes/bags for phones were necessary to make the policy work. Staff noted the policy must include exceptions (emergency, health devices) and that defining classroom-instructional uses is a local decision.
No formal vote was taken in the committee; staff will take feedback to the full board as part of the first-and-second-reading process.
What’s next: Staff plans to present the policy to the board for first and second reading, incorporate committee feedback about clearer teacher supports and enforcement language, and coordinate messaging with principals and communications teams before any implementation date.
