About 10,250 high schoolers across the Boulder Valley School District are set to be affected by an update to the district’s cell phone policy, likely starting in January 2025.
The new draft policy, which encompasses not only smartphones but also watches and headphones, would restrict the use of these devices on campus at all times, unless allowed by a 504 plan or in emergencies, after an all-clear is given and parents are anxious to know if their child is safe. Some refer to the policy as a “bell-to-bell” ban, but it would not apply to high school students who leave campus for lunch.
As national education systems have been experimenting for years with approaches to address the issue of distracted students, BVSD first discussed updating its cell phone policy at a Board of Education meeting in August. At the start of the school year, board members reviewed the existing policy and considered options to create a more uniform approach across grade levels. Next steps include drafting the policy and scheduling a final vote by the end of the year.
According to Superintendent Rob Anderson, the district waited until now partly because other issues — namely, addressing racial disparities in discipline — have taken priority recently.
“It hasn’t been a top-of-mind, front-page issue for us,” Anderson said of changing the cell phone policy in an interview earlier this year. “Disproportionate discipline has really been at the forefront.”
Some state governments see the issue as serious enough to consider statewide bans across schools. Gov. Jared Polis, however, will not be using his office to ban cell phones in schools, according to his team — a position Anderson agrees with.
“I think at least here in Colorado, for sure this is a decision that should be made at the local level,” he said. “Local communities elect their boards of education to deal with local issues. I wouldn’t support a governor’s mandate.”
But BVSD board president Nicole Rajpal, who has been more skeptical of a strict ban, noted that addressing mental health issues, exacerbated by social media, should happen at the state or federal level. Last year, the board supported House Bill 1136, which requires in-app warnings, research and education for youth on the potential effects of social media.
Rajpal’s background working with youth who had eating disorders taught her that behavioral change comes from education and requires shifting entire systems. She said taking phones away is going to help students focus in the classroom, but more needs to be done to address mental health.
“A ban in the school is really a drop in the bucket in terms of how change really works,” she said.
Anderson said the board generally reevaluates policies about every five years, which is also why this is being addressed now. The current policy was established in 2019, and it could change again in another five years. Nothing is set in stone.
Currently, elementary and middle schools are no-phone spaces, while high schools allow phones outside of class. The new policy would create consistency across all grade levels, bringing high schools in line with the rest by requiring students to keep their phones off at all times on campus. How the policy will be instituted is yet to be determined. Locked Yondr pouches, phone lockers or simply keeping phones in backpacks are all on the table.
Board members who visited high school campuses before the August meeting, where the policy discussion began, said halls and lunchrooms were nearly silent because students were all looking at their phones.
“I have watched kids on social media during class, I’ve watched them play games on their cellphones during class, and when I walk down the hall at Fairview, I see everybody on their cellphone — I don’t see them talking to their neighbor,” board member Lalenia Quinlan Aweida said at the August meeting.
The board decided to proceed with the total ban, but Rajpal seemed to be the main voice of hesitation. She raised potential issues including how to handle personal laptops and the need for some students to use timers for medication reminders. Those details remain unclear.
“Even the Surgeon General speaks to that, like, 100% bans in school are not gonna solve it,” she added. “We really need to advocate government-wide on limiting tech companies, limiting social media platforms, because they are, they are part of the problem too.”
Elizabeth Stahl, a mom and licensed therapist, though not specializing in teens, is worried about the new policy.
“Emotionally it is taking away a privilege that’s already been given,” said Stahl. “With adolescents unless there is clear reason why it will feel like an insult to their independence and sets up power struggles. It is a way of saying adults don’t trust teens and know what’s best for them.”
A survey of BVSD high school students, staff and parents showed support for the ban, along with concerns. About 14% of people sent the survey responded, and according to Anderson, typically they get closer to 2 or 3%, indicating this is a hot-button issue for the community. Specific numbers on negative versus positive responses were not made public.
Board member Jorge Chåvez supports the ban but is cautious about enforcement.
“I think it’s in the details of the implementation where we have to be careful,” Chåvez said.
In the August meeting, Chåvez raised concerns about equitable enforcement, noting that students of color have been disproportionately disciplined for cell phone use, according to data he saw as a member of the district’s LatinX Parent Advisory Committee.
“The types of incidents for which Latino students were being suspended were more subjective and the cell phone policy violation suspensions caught my eye,” he said in an email to Boulder Reporting Lab.
How the ban will be enforced is still up in the air.
“We haven’t even really engaged with our teachers on this,” Anderson, the superintendent, said. “I bet they’d have some really good ideas around what it is we can potentially do because the benefits and the challenges almost overlap around enforcement.”
Research published in August 2024 by the National Education Association showed that teachers believe phones create an atmosphere of distraction. A survey across the association’s members found that educators at schools where students are allowed to use their phones between classes, or where teachers set their own rules, are much more likely to report that devices are disruptive during instruction (73 to 79% disruptive) than educators at schools where students must store their phones out of reach (28% disruptive) or are not allowed to use them at any time during the school day (47% disruptive).
The majority of the board is eager to move forward, reporting strong parent support for the change.
“The vast majority of parents who have interacted with me — it’s running 99 to one — are in favor of making the change,” said board member Alex Medler.
Stahl may be in the minority of parents who disagree. As the new policy takes effect, the board will continue looking at its impact. Mental health will continue to be an area of great interest for the community.
“While I support some regulation around phone use at schools, particularly elementary schools, I do not no think phones are the source of most students’ anxiety,” she said in an email to Boulder Reporting Lab. “The research backing that idea is full of problems. Most kids I have seen in my therapy practice have anxiety that stems from their family systems and the culture around them. While their phone use may be a symptom, it is not the cause.”
