San Ramon Valley Unified presents first reading of phone-free policy: staff propose K–8 restrictions and high school limits during instructional time

San Ramon Valley Unified staff presented a first reading of a proposed mobile communication device (MCD) policy that would sharply limit student phone and wearable use during the school day and seek broad community input before formal adoption. The policy is intended to meet requirements of AB 3216 (the Phone Free Schools Act) and would be considered for implementation in the 2025–26 school year.

Director of Technology Kelly Hilton and Executive Director of Secondary Education John Campo Piano said the policy aims to reduce classroom distractions, support student mental health and foster in-person engagement. They reported outreach that included a districtwide survey (6,18 respondents), student forums, PTA meetings and principal and teacher feedback. The survey found strong support for restricting phones during instructional time: among middle school student respondents about 93% favored restrictions or prohibitions in class; among high school students about 85% supported restricting phones during class.

The proposal calls for preschool through grade 5 students to keep MCDs off and stored (backpacks or designated storage) throughout the school day, with exceptions for emergencies, physician recommendations, and individualized education program (IEP) needs. For grades 6–8, staff proposed allowing devices for instructional use only when explicitly directed by a teacher. For high school, the draft would require devices to be off and out of sight during instructional time unless a teacher authorizes instructional use; devices would be allowed before school, during passing time, at lunch and after school. "During instructional time, devices shall be turned off and stored out of sight," the draft states.

Trustees and members of the public raised implementation questions. Melinda Daly, a teacher and union leader speaking as a parent, supported the approach but asked that emergency access be explicit so students can contact families during a crisis. Staff agreed to clarify exceptions and to add 504-plan accommodations alongside IEP and medical exceptions. Trustees also suggested a shorter review timeline than the proposed five years; staff said they were open to more frequent checks (trustees mentioned a two-year review). Several trustees and administrators urged emphasizing parent education and site-level planning to address enforcement logistics, especially given some sites face reductions in assistant principal and counselor staffing.

No vote was taken; the item was informational and will return for future board action after staff refine language and gather further site and community input.