The Jordan School District is the latest Utah school system to restrict the use of cell phones by its students during the school day.
The new policy is the result of months of work, surveys and focus groups of students, parents and faculty. And almost all of the community and school board members who spoke at a Sept. 24 meeting about the policy were not satisfied with it. They either felt it went too far or didn’t go far enough.
“It's a difficult decision,” said board member Darrell Robinson, who voted for the policy. “It's even splitting the board, I think it's splitting the state, splitting our community, and we need to unite behind some kind of a policy.”
The district will enforce a “bell to bell” ban in its elementary schools during the day. That means no phones or smart watches can be used even during lunch and recess. The policy is more lenient for middle and high school students. In those grade levels, electronic devices can be used in between classes. Individual schools are allowed to implement additional restrictions and consequences as they see fit.
Like other districts, some community and board members wanted Jordan to pass a “bell to bell” ban at all grade levels. Some parents wanted their child to have their phones so they could communicate with them. Others say the ban infringes on personal rights.
Still, Jordan is doing things differently.
Unlike Granger High School in the Granite School District, Jordan students won’t have to lock away their phones in pouches to ensure they’re not using them. Instead, enforcement will be up to teachers.
If a teacher sees a secondary school student using their phone it is taken and stored in the main office until the end of the day. If it happens a second time, the device has to be picked up by a parent or guardian. In elementary schools, students will get a verbal warning first.
Amanda Thomas, a teacher at Copper Hills High School, supports phone bans and backs the policy. But, she told the board, “I think an important weak point of this policy is relying on teacher enforcement.”
Copper Hills, Thomas said, implemented a similar policy at the start of the school year. After that, she didn’t see students using phones in her class for about a week, but now they’re back to their old habits.
“It’s my job to confiscate phones as I see them.”
She worries about teachers losing social capital with their students when they confiscate their phones and said taking away a student’s property would be an even bigger distraction.
“And then now I am responsible for holding that phone until the end of class time, and I really don’t want that responsibility and liability,” Thomas said.
She is also concerned about teachers enforcing the policy in different ways. Some might be more lenient to gain the trust of their students and others could be overly strict.
Board members Brian W. Barnett and Niki George voted for the policy. But they also believed they were putting teachers in a tough position with students.
“I think [it’s] a necessary evil,” George said. “I can’t see a way around it.”
“It is our desire to help teachers to be as effective as possible and to keep those relationships strong with your students, and I'm sorry that some of this policing falls to your shoulders,” she added.
The policy takes effect on Oct. 29. Robinson called it a starting point and anticipated changes to it would be made in the future.
“I think this is a good step to show our due diligence that we are concerned with this issue, and it's not the end.”
Utah lawmakers have also proposed a bill ahead of the 2025 legislative session that would require all schools to have a “bell to bell” cell phone ban unless they opt out of it with a different policy of their own.
“Ultimately, I do believe that this decision will be made by lawmakers,” Robinson said.
