By: Tianyou Lee, Staff Writer

NOTE: This article was drafted before Gov. Newsom signed the Phone-Free Schools Act on Sep. 23, 2024.

At the end of last August, the Phone-Free Schools Act—which would require school districts to limit at-school phone usage—passed the California State Legislature and is now waiting to be signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom. In accordance with the act, the San Mateo Union High School District is planning to use student feedback to develop a district phone policy for implementation this spring semester.

More formally known as Assembly Bill 3216, the act seeks to amend Section 48901.7 of the California Education Code, which previously allowed school districts to control phone usage if they desired. Under the bill, that would change to a requirement. The act states that school districts “shall, no later than July 1, 2026, develop and adopt, and shall update every five years, a policy to limit or prohibit the use by its pupils of smartphones while the pupils are at a schoolsite or while the pupils are under the supervision and control of an employee or employees of that school district.” Following its passage on Aug. 28, the bill was enrolled and sent to Gov. Newsom on Sep. 6, who is expected to sign it into law given his pro-phone control public stance on phones in schools. 

“Building on legislation I signed in 2019, I look forward to working with the Legislature to restrict the use of smartphones during the school day,” he had said in a statement in June. In mid-August, he also sent a letter to schools across the state urging them to minimize phone usage on campus. 

His opinion on this issue reflects a larger trend of politicians and educators growing concerned over younger generations’ phone usage. Teachers at Mills are already expressing their worries. “I think we’re getting to the point now where it’s beyond just a distraction in the class,” history teacher Barbara Campbell said, commenting on phones’ mental health effects on students. “It’s like any other addiction.”

As a response to the Phone-Free Schools Act being passed, and more generally due to increasing worry over phones in school, the SMUHSD Board of Trustees decided to incorporate a discussion on district phone policies into their Sep. 11 board meeting. According to the action plan included in the board’s presentation, the Panorama survey this fall will include four new phone-centric questions; a focus group with parent and staff organizations and student representatives will also be made to further involve the community. The policy would likely be drafted in early 2025 and adopted that spring, Superintendent Randall Booker said.

After the presentation, Principals Yvonne Shiu from San Mateo High School and Ron Campana from Peninsula High School gave statements on their schools’ Yondr policies and answered questions from the trustees. With Yondr, students lock their phones in a magnetic pouch for the whole school day.

“It works for San Mateo,” Principal Shiu shared in the meeting. “I realize it’s probably not for everyone. Students hate it but at the same time realize that it is important to be aware in the moment, being able to talk to one another without everything being on the phone.” Both San Mateo and Peninsula wish to continue using Yondr with the new policy.

Principal Pamela Duszynski, however, is unsure about how well it would work for Mills.  “My main worry with Yondr is the amount of the time we would put into managing Yondr,” Principal Duzynski emphasized. From having to make students lock up phones during first period to dealing with students who circumvent the pouches, she believes Yondr enforcement would take away time better focused on helping students learn. 

On the potential of Yondr being enforced at Mills, Principal Duszynski thinks it’s one possible direction of many. “… what I gathered from what Dr. Kempkey said last night is that all schools are actually, you know, doing already what the state is asking us to do. So it may not change at all,” she said. “There may be an interest in having a uniform policy across the school sites where cell phones are locked up with a Yondr device. It may be [that] every site is going to decide what their policy is, even if it’s just the existing policy.”

In the meantime, teachers at Mills have their own opinions as to what a district-wide phone policy should look like. Anjali Abraham, who teaches physics, would like for SMUHSD’s phone policy to reflect what she used in Santa Barbara High School, where she used to teach before Mills. Currently, Abraham does not allow students to use phones in her class aside for educational purposes but lets students keep their phones on them. 

“So the way it [Santa Barbara’s policy] worked is that during a semester, if a kid had their phone out in class, a teacher would give a warning, and then the next time it would get logged as an intervention, and then the teacher would keep the phone for the rest of the class period,” Abraham explained. She went on to explain that by the fourth strike, the phone would be kept for the entire semester. “That was really, really effective, and I didn’t have many phone problems in that school.”

Similar to Principal Duszynski, Abraham also expressed concerns over stricter enforcement methods like Yondr. “I think that students need to be able to access their phones if there is an emergency. I think if there’s a shooter on campus or something like that, that kids need to be able to communicate with their parents, and so I would rather have an enforcement policy similar to what I’ve done before.”

Among the student body, Ann Zhou (11) believes the best course of action would be for Mills teachers to continue using phone pockets. “I feel like, for the most part, it’s good at striking that balance between regulating but not being too controlling,” Zhou said. “I can understand the sentiment that people are annoyed by them, because I’m also a little annoyed … but honestly, at the same time, I still feel overall it’s been for the better, just because it is kind of depressing when everyone’s on their phones and not doing work.”

But Zhou also thinks increased regulation of phones is a little misguided. While they do think phones have had a negative effect on attention spans, they don’t believe it’s a problem school phone bans alone can fix. “I think it’s good that administrators are thinking of policies to regulate these things, but also they’re gonna happen anyways. Like, you can’t stop kids from using AI. You can’t stop kids from using their phones. Just find a way to work with them, rather than just putting a lid over it, because no one’s happy because of that.”

Principal Duszynski also wonders if increasing phone limitations really addresses the root of the problem. “Should the question be, for our students, about mental health, or should it be about cell phones? … You know, I would like to see maybe more time devoted to really talking with students about their mental health and the causes for the mental health issues we see in teens right now from their perspective,” she said. “I think we just have a lot to learn.”