Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Device Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board adopts strict student cellphone policy after extended debate over third-offense penalties
Summary
After more than an hour of discussion about enforcement and exceptions for after-school activities, the Preston County Schools board adopted revisions to Policy 11‑45 (student use of personal electronic devices) and asked staff to return with school-level protocols and a potential parental appeal option for third‑offense restrictions.
The Preston County Schools Board of Education on Aug. 11 voted unanimously to adopt revisions to Policy 11‑45, governing student possession and use of personal electronic devices, after extended discussion about how the rule will be enforced and whether parents should be able to appeal a third‑offense restriction.
The policy adopted on its second and final read requires that devices be powered off during the school day and allows disciplinary progression that, after a third documented infraction, removes the student’s ability to have the device at school for the remainder of the term. Board members debated whether that third‑offense penalty should be absolute, or whether principals should be permitted to accept agreements to check devices into the main office or whether parents should be able to appeal exceptions for activities that occur after the instructional day.
Mrs. Nos, a board member and parent of student athletes, pressed for an explicit recourse for athletic students who may need access to phones for after‑school practices that do not immediately follow dismissal. “There should be an option to be able to bring something to us to ask if the administrator wants to take that on to check it in as they walk through the door,” she said, asking the board to consider a formal appeal pathway after a third offense.
Superintendent Martin summarized that principals had provided school‑level implementation plans and that some schools’ existing protocols (for example, accepting a phone in silent mode) conflicted with the new countywide requirement that devices be powered off. He said staff would work with individual schools to align their protocols with the board‑approved policy.
Board members acknowledged enforcement challenges but said a consistent district standard is the goal. One board member recommended moving forward with the policy as written and allowing the board to consider targeted adjustments once the district has experience implementing the rule.
The board directed the superintendent to bring back revised school‑level protocol language in line with the power‑off requirement and asked staff to prepare optional verbiage to specify a parental appeal route after a third offense for future consideration. The motion to adopt Policy 11‑45 passed on a voice vote recorded as 5‑0.
The board’s adoption closes the policy approval process for this cycle; staff will distribute updated guidance to principals and follow up with the board about any recommended minor changes to implementation language.
