Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Devices topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cheltenham policy committee advances discussion of ‘bell‑to‑bell’ cell‑phone ban; forms subcommittee and drafts timeline
Summary
The policy committee opened a substantive review of policy 2.37 (student use of personal devices), heard a literature summary supporting bell‑to‑bell bans, received public testimony from parents and a student, and agreed to draft language and convene a subcommittee to map implementation (possible fall start).
The Cheltenham School District policy committee spent its March 24 meeting debating whether to adopt a district‑level “bell‑to‑bell” ban on student cell phones and other personal devices.
Committee members and staff framed the question as a policy decision about goals (reduce distraction, improve school culture) with operational details to be handled in administrative regulations. A literature review presented by Dr. Whiting summarized research showing “mild to moderate” academic gains from bell‑to‑bell bans that are strongest for lower‑income students and noted broader social‑emotional benefits, while warning the committee to account for students who need devices for accommodations.
Board members repeatedly raised enforcement and definition questions — what counts as a personal electronic device, whether the ban should be limited to cell phones, and how to accommodate medical or special‑education needs. One board member suggested a phased approach: bell‑to‑bell at elementary and middle levels and classroom‑time restrictions at the high school. Staff said principals already have authority under current administrative regulations to restrict device use and that a district‑level policy could set minimum expectations.
Public commenters urged prompt action. Tom Peterson, speaking on behalf of Cheltenham Immigration Response, and several parents said they support a bell‑to‑bell approach; 12‑year‑old Emily Lazard told the committee, “Bell to bell — it’s time,” and urged the board to move quickly. Staff and members agreed community engagement would be essential; Dr. Whiting recommended building teacher and parent collaboration into implementation to reduce short‑term anxiety as the community adjusts.
Next steps: the committee directed staff to draft policy language and several members recommended forming a small subcommittee to develop a detailed implementation plan and timeline. The committee discussed aiming for a fall start for at least elementary/middle grades but left the final schedule to the subcommittee and administration.
