Executive summary

This brief examines Governor Gavin Newsom’s push for California school districts to restrict student cell phone use. It provides historical precedents where governors utilized their powers over school policies, and evaluates potential methods for implementing cell phone restrictions in schools moving forward.

‍

Overview

Pointed Summary

• In a letter to California schools, Governor Newsom urges the implementation of cell phone usage policies, citing mental health issues
• Potential solutions range from teaching digital and media literacy to creating a comprehensive handbook surrounding cell phone usage in school

Relevance

In this digital era, there are more students than ever using cell phones in the classroom, with Common Sense Media finding that 97% of students use their cell phones during school hours. Teachers across the United States have found that cell phone usage during class negatively affects students' focus and consequently, their academic performance. Rutgers found that 55% of students using cell phones scored lower on exams. As such, most schools have pre-existing policies that limit cell phone use, however those policies are often not enforced, allowing students to bypass them. Cell phone usage in schools has become a bi-partisan issue, with a record high number of legislation coming across the country to fix this issue, it is not a surprise that Governor Newsom has followed suit. 

History

The banning of phones has become a relatively recent issue. The first ban on phones in school appeared shortly after the modern phone was introduced into society at large, with the first ban occurring in the 1980’s and early ‘90s. At that time, phones were far more intrusive, both larger in scale and louder, prone to noises that disturbed classroom environments. These bans continued into the 2000’s, until the September 11 attacks on the Twin Towers. These attacks pressured many administrators to reevaluate their prior bans on phones in school due to necessity in an emergency, with a Board of Education representative from New York City corroborating this message by stating that "[w]e want students to be able to reach their parents in the event of an emergency." 

9/11 marked a turning point in the debate surrounding phones, bringing safety and necessary communication into the conversation. Concerned parents wanted to contact their children in the case of emergency, and to many, that outweighed the academic risks associated with phones. The debate stagnated for the next decade, with little progress being made on either side. A strong majority of districts had phone policies in place, varying between state, region, and political ideology. Districts would typically have a school board or superintendent setting cell phone policy, with statewide rules rare. The numbers of bans began to decrease in the 2010’s, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, around 76% of schools banned the non-academic use of cell phones or smartphones during school hours during the 2021-22 school year, down from 91% in 2010.

The pandemic altered the discussion of in-school cell phone use dramatically. It became impossible to police cell phone usage with remote schooling, and usage skyrocketed, bringing a cascade of mental health problems and dependance with it. The return to school post-pandemic had no clear picture of what the new normal would look like. With cell phone usage normalized during the pandemic, usage during school was at an all time high in the years following. The increased usage prompted teachers, staff, and administrators to look harder for a solution, as phones increasingly hampered learning in the classroom. Districts began implementing harsher policies, with banning phones entirely or checking them into phone pouches becoming normalized. The first statewide policies began to emerge, with Ron DeSantis (R Florida) signing into law the first statewide bill on phone usage, approved unanimously in the Florida state legislature in 2023. Since then, other states followed suit rapidly, with states such as South Carolina adding clauses to their budget requiring cell phone bans to access state funding. States from both the Republican and Democratic parties have moved towards harsher restrictions on phone usage in school, with California governor Gavin Newsom’s recent announcement of a push to ban phones in school marking the 9th state to move in that direction. Proponents of banning phones cite issues with learning, distraction, and mental health issues, while those opposed argue the necessity of contacting their children in an emergency.

In many ways, the debate around cell phones has not evolved significantly since its creation in the 1980’s, yet the various controversies, laws, and policies have shifted markedly, reacting to notable events such as September 11th, 2001 and the Covid-19 Pandemic. 

3. Policy Options

In order to address governor Gavin Newsom’s concerns about “the distractions on the phones and pressures of social media” in schools, there are several broad policy options. One is to strengthen pre-existing technology regulations, another to establish comprehensive technology regulations, and yet another to focus on digital/media literacy rather than restricting technology usage.

To start, strengthening pre-existing regulations takes little work or funding and is flexible for each school’s needs. A California bill that took effect in 2020, AB 272, allows school districts discretion to regulate smartphones during school hours. They are currently allowed to limit phone usage as much as they want, with the sole exceptions of 1) potential danger to a student, 2) permission from a teacher, 3) medical necessity as assessed by a doctor, or 4) as required by an IEP. AB 272 provides room for the phone regulation which Newsom views as necessary to student health and effective learning. Many teachers and schools already require students to put their cell phones into phone pockets or boxes at the start of class, entirely removing the chance of usage. Others simply encourage students to keep their phones inside their backpacks during lessons. This first option simply requires schools/school districts to be more aware of this legislation and clearly outline their individual policies, including consequences for students who use their phones at inappropriate times. This is beneficial due to the fact that different schools have different needs and abilities based on student demographics, funding, location, and type (i.e. public vs. private). They can determine what works best for them. However, this policy also means that students at different schools may have drastically different experiences, some of which are more or less effective.

An alternative that ensures all schools follow similar rules is to establish a comprehensive handbook. This would include when phones can be used (during some classes, during passing periods and breaks, solely during breaks, or not at all?), how this is enforced (phone pockets, phone boxes, backpacks, content blocks?), and what the consequences for student disobeyal are (detention, lunch duty, simply a warning?). If the California Board of Education designed such a handbook and then mandated all schools follow it, with potential minor differences for public vs. private schools or certain students within schools (such as students with IEPs, as mentioned earlier), the unified policy would hopefully help all California students be as attentive and safe at school as possible. However, it still has drawbacks, such as not being flexible enough. This means that it may be harder to change after it has been deployed if any issues are observed, and it may not account for schools’ differing needs. Additionally, students may have trouble with harsher restrictions. While it is important to regulate technology usage, there are many factors toward it becoming an issue, so simply creating policy to address technology usage and not what leads students to use technology at all (pre-existing mental health struggles, loneliness, a need for safety, productivity needs, etc.) may cause students to continue being unsafe or become more unsafe and distracted.

The final option to respond to Newsom’s letter is not harshly restricting phones, but instead teaching digital/media literacy so that students learn to self-regulate. No matter what, phones are sure to remain a part of students’ lives into adulthood, so it could benefit them to learn healthy habits while in a controlled environment. Additionally, phones can be very useful learning aids when used well. Digital literacy courses can focus on differentiating and combating misinformation, having healthy interactions (avoiding cyberbullying, catfishing, doxxing, and predators; maintaining self-image; appropriate posting and digital footprint), and overall appropriate ways to use technology. In addition to this, as mentioned earlier, there are often reasons that students fall into excessive technology use. While promoting digital literacy, schools could invest more in other mental health and social initiatives around campus, such as wellness centers and school clubs, in order to address these reasons and overall improve student health.

While there are several policy options regarding California students’ cell phone usage, each has evident benefits and drawbacks and may work better being implemented together at different levels.

Conclusions

Cell phone use for teenagers continues to be a controversial issue as technology has become more advanced. Historically, cell phone regulation in schools has mostly been configured on a classroom to classroom basis – teachers decide their rules and level of enforcement. However, Gavin Newsom has deemed cell phone usage in schools to be a pressing issue, pushing California school districts to institute widespread policies that help with regulation. It is unclear how exactly this will transpire, but options include handbooks and increased digital media literacy.

Acknowledgment

The Institute for Youth in Policy wishes to acknowledge Eli Solomon, Anagha Nagesh, Nolan Ezzet and other contributors for developing and maintaining the Policy Department within the Institute.

References

1. Ballotpedia. 2024. “State policies on cellphone use in K-12 public schools.” Ballotpedia. https://ballotpedia.org/State_policies_on_cellphone_use_in_K-12_public_schools#cite_note-4.
2. California, State of. “Governor Newsom Urges Schools to Immediately Restrict Cell Phones in the Classroom Ahead of the New School Year.” Governor of California, August 13, 2024. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/08/13/governor-newsom-urges-schools-to-immediately-restrict-cell-phones-in-the-classroom-ahead-of-the-new-school-year/#:~:text=Sacramento%2520%E2%80%94%2520In%2520a%2520letter%2520to,the%2520new%2520academic%2520year%2520begins. 
3. Press, Associated. “US Schools Wrestle with Cellphones in Classrooms.” Voice of America, February 29, 2024. https://www.voanews.com/a/us-schools-wrestle-with-cellphones-in-classrooms/7507321.html#. 
4. “Smartphones Are Lowering Students’ Grades, Study Finds.” Rutgers University. Accessed August 20, 2024. https://www.rutgers.edu/news/smartphones-are-lowering-students-grades-study-finds. 
5. Hubler, Shawn. 2024. “Newsom Calls for Ban on Smartphone Use in California Schools.” The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/18/us/california-newsom-smartphone-ban.html.
6. Ingram, David. 2023. “Yondr brought in millions with phone pouch school contracts.” NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/gadgets/yondr-phone-pouch-lock-school-rcna128247.
7. Lamb, Anna. 2023. “Experts see pros and cons to allowing cellphones in class.” Harvard Gazette. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/03/experts-see-pros-and-cons-to-allowing-cellphones-in-class/.
8. NCES. 2023. “Table 233.50. Percentage of public schools with various safety and security measures: Selected school years, 1999-2000 through 2021-22.” IES NCES. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_233.50.asp.
9. “Schools, States Review Cell Phone Bans.” n.d. Education World. Accessed August 23, 2024. https://www.educationworld.com/a_issues/issues270.shtml.
10. “Schools, States Review Cell Phone Bans.” n.d. Education World. Accessed August 23, 2024. https://www.educationworld.com/a_issues/issues270.shtml.
11. “Smartphone overuse: A hidden crisis in COVID-19.” 2021. NCBI. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7825859/.

‍