At the time of this writing, at least 19 states have laws, policies, or district recommendations to ban or restrict cellphones in classrooms (and more are deliberating taking action). Should we prohibit the devices in classrooms universally? Based on research on the negative effects of social media on student mental health, learning outcomes, and my own experience, I would have to say yes.
I also want to acknowledge that such a ban is a controversial topic in our restorative community where we generally believe in agency for all parties.
Arguing for agency, some restorative school communities have made the case that we should not ban cellphones. It is my position that, like many addictive substances or behaviors, schools need to be proactive and offer clear boundaries around cellphone use to increase students’ education outcomes.
Cellphones have a great deal of value in and out of school. But it has become apparent to me, and many school leaders, that the downsides of phone use in the classroom greatly outweigh the upsides. In light of this, many schools, districts, and some states have adopted the “ban phones” approach.
Based on my experience working with schools facing challenging student behavior, here’s how educators can enact cellphone bans in school policy and in the classroom in a restorative way.
School leaders: Don’t make your teachers enforce the ban.
First and foremost, school leaders should outline in their building policies that cellphone-ban enforcement should not rely on teachers. Leaders should not create classrooms that become cellphone-policy battlegrounds.
The relationship between students and teachers is far too pivotal to be wasted on a power struggle over phones. Teachers should not spend their social capital on getting students to put away their devices. Rather, teachers can spend it on building deeper relationships, academic instruction, and other drivers of student success.
As schools roll out “enforcement,” I would encourage both school and district administrators to communicate clearly with parents, students, and teachers that the administration is going to do 90 percent of the work. That means communicating early and often with families, students, and teachers prior to the policy change when possible, including over school breaks. This will ideally result in minimizing in-class conflict over phone use.
Schools that receive state or district mandates during the school year may need to find a natural break to begin implementation, such as after spring break or even the first Monday of the next month, to give the school community time to adjust.
School leaders should also consider a soft start to launching a new cellphone policy, if possible. Most students will follow directions, but, for students who struggle, track any incidents in the first week or two. After that, have a follow-up meeting with those students to announce the date when the ban takes full effect and clearly explain the consequences for those who violate it.
Teachers: Relax your approach. This isn’t a fire, nor is it personal.
Students are absolutely going to challenge and are even likely to ignore this policy. They will try tactics such as having multiple phones, buying pouch openers, or using smartwatches. Of course, they will.
It is teachers’ job to relax, take a deep breath, and engage when this happens. The first step of many restorative approaches is to remember to take a moment and engage calmly. Teachers must remind themselves that it’s not personal and it’s not because students think that they don’t deserve respect or they are a bad educator. It’s because they want to connect with friends and check social media. This desire is totally developmentally appropriate. Phones are also incredibly engaging, to the point of addiction, which is why the policy is being implemented in the first place.
Teachers: Notice and ask.
What should teachers do as a restorative approach? Upon seeing that a student has their phone out, teachers should ask the student about the school’s cellphone expectations. In the classroom, this might sound like, “Hey, Nicholas, I noticed your phone is out (not in pouch).” Then follow up with a question, for example, “What are the expectations about phones?”
If the principal has made the phone policy clear, students should have no trouble responding. Giving students agency to answer empowers them to reflect and make decisions and allows them to think about their behavior before an incident occurs.
Most of the time, students will just walk the phone to the office. Sometimes, a student might try to negotiate because they don’t want to get in trouble. What should the teacher do in this instance?
- Validate their feelings: “I also love my phone. It makes sense that you don’t want to bring it to the office.”
- Reassure them: “You’re not in trouble. We/you just need to do this and then we can get back to work.”
- Ask: “What needs to be done now?” Or “What’s happening next?”
And then, disengage. If the student is uncooperative, refrain from making threats, even if the next step is to call an administrator. Ask the question, “What happens if you refuse to take your phone to the office?” Asking rather than telling the next steps will again empower students and, it’s hoped, preserve the teacher-student relationship. Remember that you are working together to deal with this situation, not in opposition.
If the student continues to refuse, call the office for support, write a referral, or enter it into an infraction-tracking program—the policy should be clear. Patience is key in this regard. Physically moving away from students allows them to comply without feeling pressured.
Restorative justice functions well with clear and consistent expectations, compassion, and space for student agency. If we’ve made a policy choice and clearly explained it, it’s how we engage with students disregarding that policy that matters most.
My best definition of restorative justice is a “relational approach to conflict,” and this should guide school leaders when creating any policy and its implementation or enforcement.
