Opinion editor's note: Editorials represent the opinions of the Star Tribune Editorial Board, which operates independently from the newsroom.
Schools should turn off the phones
Students should be more restricted in using cellphones in class, not less.
•••
There's no question smartphones are everywhere in our society. They wake us up, keep our calendars, give us directions, keep us in touch and informed. Yet for all their usefulness, there are good reasons to ban cellphone use in some situations, such as driving. They can be a deadly distraction, undermining focus when one's head is crouched over a small screen, or one's mind is occupied by what's coming through one's earbuds.
Just as cellphone use distracts drivers, using the devices surely interferes with in-person learning. That's why school districts should enforce uniform policies to keep personal cellphones out of the classroom.
Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS) leaders are considering cellphone use rules that would move the district in the wrong direction. They expect to vote in August on a new policy that would leave it up to individual teachers to work with students to decide on classroom cell use protocol and give students more flexibility, not less, to use their phones during class.
But classroom-by-classroom rules would be more confusing to students and place more responsibility than needed on individual educators. Teachers and students alike should be clear about school or district-wide policies on cellphone use.
Current MPS policy allows use of "personal electronic devices" only before and after school, during breaks and when the teacher permits use. And the rules list consequences if kids refuse to put their phones away — including a warning, confiscation of the phone or loss of phone privileges at school. The current rules are more sensible than the plan under consideration.
Limiting cellphone use among teens has become increasingly challenging, as most educators would admit. According to a Pew Research Center poll, more than 95% of teenagers have access to smartphones. And today's teens used their phones even more while learning remotely during the pandemic.
Even so, in an April survey, the research group Common Sense Media found that 80% of schools implement some kind of cellphone policy.
Some parents and students say phones are needed to stay in touch with family. Yet in our view, contacting the school is still an effective way to reach kids in case of emergencies.
In commentaries for the Star Tribune, two individual local educators — one six years ago and another just last month — have written that cellphone usage caused them to leave the school district. Joe Henry and Laura Kimball, who had both taught in Minneapolis schools, expressed their frustration over feeling helpless to get their students' attention in class due to widespread cellphone use.
And as substitute teacher and MPS parent Amy Gustafson recently told the Star Tribune, when some of her students asked to be excused to use the bathroom, they were really going to monitor social media in the hallway.
"Parents tend to think schools just have to set a policy," she said. "But these kids are addicted. It's like you've given your kid crack cocaine and then you are telling the school to make sure they don't take it."
Removing technology from classrooms altogether isn't necessary or realistic; school-issued tablets, laptops and desktop computers are integral to student learning. When tech is needed as part of the curriculum, those options should be available. But those devices aren't the same as students' personal cellphones, which are often used to message friends or keep up with TikTok or Instagram.
Educators have enough difficulties getting across to students these days. Cellphone use in class shouldn't be among the barriers to learning they already face.
Editorial Board members are David Banks, Jill Burcum, Scott Gillespie, Denise Johnson, Patricia Lopez, John Rash and D.J. Tice. Star Tribune Opinion staff members Maggie Kelly and Elena Neuzil also contribute, and Star Tribune CEO and Publisher Steve Grove serves as an adviser to the board.
While tech levies did well enough, general operating levies were rejected at historical highs