The recent article by Young Futures and Digital Wellness Lab on LinkedIn sparked renewed attention to the growing debate around school phone policies. With millions of dollars being invested in enforcement and infrastructure to restrict student phone use, the conversation often centers on adult perspectives—educators, policymakers, and technologists. But what about the students themselves? At curaJOY, we believe that wellness and technology are not opposing forces, and the debate over school phone policies is not just about devices—it’s about culture, respect, trust, and the environments we foster for learning and connection.
In this response, curaJOY amplifies the voices of youth from diverse backgrounds—across continents, neurotypes, and lived experiences—to explore the nuanced realities of phone use in schools. Their insights reveal that the issue is not simply about banning or allowing phones, but about fostering environments of trust, safety, and meaningful connection.
Phones as Distraction: The Case for Limits During Class Time
Many students agree that phones can be a major distraction during instructional time. Precious Ojo, a student and budding researcher from Nigeria, shared that even when she doesn’t actively use her phone, the mere presence of it creates a persistent urge to check social media or message friends. “On days I don’t bring my phone, I feel more focused,” she said. “But once that phone is in my pocket? I’m tempted to scroll.”
Bianca Shen, a neurodivergent teen, echoed this sentiment, noting that phones not only disrupt individual focus but also derail entire classrooms. “I’ve experienced multiple hiccups where the teacher had to stop the lesson because one student was playing Clash of Clans,” she said. Despite knowing the consequences, many teens continue to use their phones compulsively, highlighting the addictive nature of these devices and the developmental challenges of self-regulation.
Julian Byron, an Asian American high schooler, acknowledged occasional phone use during free time but supported restrictions during active learning. “My temptation to use my phone during instructional time has never been a problem,” he said, “but I understand why limits are necessary.”
Phones as Lifelines: Safety, Medical Needs, and Infrastructure
While students recognize the need for boundaries, they also emphasize the importance of access during emergencies. Bianca and Julian both pointed to scenarios like school shootings or medical crises where phones can be life-saving tools. “In certain situations,” Bianca noted, “it might be better for the student to call the parent straight away.”
Caitlyn Wang, a parent and nonprofit founder, added that school infrastructure increasingly relies on phones for basic functions like student IDs and communication. “Students couldn’t really lead ASBs and other key activities when the infrastructure doesn’t adequately support IRL,” she said. “Families have to spend extra time and money to get physical IDs and miss out on school spirit activities.”
Clarissa Shen, a high school senior and mental health advocate, questioned the $13 million investment in phone bans, arguing that enforcement depends more on relationships and understanding than on infrastructure. “Kids seek to understand,” she said. “If they don’t believe in the rules, they won’t follow them.”
Social and Emotional Impacts
Beyond academics and safety, students highlighted the emotional toll of phone use on peer relationships. Bianca described how phones interfere with face-to-face conversations, making her feel undervalued. “It’s sad I have to compete with a handheld object for my friend’s attention,” she said.
Caitlyn Wang emphasized that this isn’t just a student issue—it’s a human one. “Do you like talking to your kid, boss, or friend and see them looking at their phone rather than you?” she asked. “Teachers can’t teach effectively if students are distracted. Students can’t learn from each other if they don’t treasure the precious face-to-face time they have.”
Equity, Autonomy, and Implementation Challenges
Julian and Caitlyn both advocated for teaching self-regulation rather than enforcing blanket bans. “Restricting cell phone usage from an external power would only temporarily stop the problem,” Julian said. “Students need to learn how to manage their own screen time.”
Clarissa pointed out that enforcement varies widely by teacher and school culture. “Most teachers don’t enforce the cellphone policy,” she said. “And kids won’t follow rules they think are stupid.”
Caitlyn raised broader questions about accountability and infrastructure. “How will policies be enforced, and who will be accountable?” she asked. “We need coordinated collective action to enable schools and families to adopt a balanced approach.”
Toward a Balanced, Student-Centered Policy
Across all voices, a shared vision emerges: phones should be restricted during class time but accessible in emergencies. Students proposed practical solutions like phone sleeves stored in visible but secure locations, exceptions for medical needs, and non-punitive responses to misuse.
Rather than suspensions or detentions, students advocated for education and support. “Phones are designed to be addictive,” Bianca said. “The teenage brain isn’t fully developed, so there should be some grace.”
Conclusion
The debate over school phone policies is not just about technology—it’s about trust, respect, and the kind of learning environments we want to build. By centering student voices, we move closer to policies that are not only effective but also empathetic and empowering.
curaJOY invites educators, families, technologists, and youth organizations to collaborate on solutions that reflect lived realities and foster whole-family wellness. Let’s move beyond control and toward connection.
Leave a Reply