Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Device Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Regional school boards advance device ban debate after weeks of public testimony
Summary
Parents, teachers and board members debated a draft "bell-to-bell" policy that would bar personal cell phones and limit passive screen use during the school day; the draft moved forward for additional review after boards accepted it for further readings with conditions to gather administration and student input.
A proposed districtwide "bell-to-bell" restriction on students' personal devices dominated public comment and board discussion at the joint meeting of Regional School District 09 on May 26.
Dozens of parents and teachers urged the three boards to restrict phones and noninstructional screen use. "If they're worn, they're used," said Michelle Van Steinberg of Reading, who described smartwatches and phones as sources of distraction and social pressure that undermine early social development. Several others who spoke or submitted written testimony called for a K–8 prohibition and limited exceptions for medical and IEP needs.
The device rule under consideration (draft policy 5330) would extend restrictions from the classroom to the entire school day, add explicit exceptions for IEPs/504 plans and medical devices, and preserve a BYOD laptop allowance at the high school level. Laura, who helped draft the policy, told the boards the language was written to allow administrators flexibility in enforcement — for example, pouches, lockers or backpack storage — and to leave details for regulations developed by building leadership.
Board members engaged in sustained debate over evidence, legal exposure and grade-level differentiation. Kristen Felzone said she had not seen firm local data tying a bell-to-bell ban to improved academic or mental-health outcomes and urged caution about disciplinary language in the draft that she feared could be read to authorize harsh penalties. "Expulsion is far too severe if we are going to adopt this bell-to-bell policy," she said, urging the boards to remove expulsion as a potential consequence for device possession alone.
Proponents cited research and district experience showing behavior improvements in schools that restrict phones. Several members said enforcement should be administrative rather than a classroom burden on teachers. A number of board members urged a phased approach: K–8 as a near-consensus step and more study, including student, teacher and building-administrator input, before applying a blanket high-school ban.
After debate and requests for more data, the three boards took procedural votes. Region 9 and Reading voted to accept the draft for further review and a second reading. Easton initially failed to advance the joint draft, prompting a motion for reconsideration; after further discussion the Easton board voted to move the draft toward a second reading with the understanding that administration and stakeholders — including students and building leaders — would be brought forward for additional input and legal review.
Next steps: the policy will be refined by the joint policy committee and administration, with clearer regulatory language on enforcement, carveouts for IEPs and medical needs, and a plan to present local Joel Barlo High School data and a student/staff panel before adoption.
The boards emphasized that accepting the draft for a second reading is not final approval and that legal counsel will review any tightened disciplinary and search provisions before a final vote.
