Just as students were riding off the high from winter break, they went to their 1st-hour class and were met with a new rule: a phone rule.

Specifically, a revised, even more restrictive rule limiting the usage of phones during class time.

Administration and teachers viewed this idea, the overwhelming majority found this policy to be beneficial, labeling it as a step in the right direction regarding student technology.

Several teachers have emphasized the increases in grades, engagement, and participation.   

Students, on the other hand, have expressed concern and outrage but were expected to look at the “positive” effects and “helpful” secondary education skills.

This viewpoint doesn’t allow students to voice their opinions on the matter while enabling administrators to conduct whatever policies seem necessary.

This lack of student input can lead to a disconnect between the administration and students affected by the policy, fueling frustration rather than cooperation.

Yet, how can students view this new policy as constructive, when it seems more like punishment?

Assistant principal Amber Ripa explains that this policy is school board-issued. It allows the building principal to establish digital phone expectations, such as where phones can be used and stored during class time.

As the oldest students in the Millard Public School district, many high school kids view this policy as “irritating” and “unnecessary”.

Phones offer students a sliver of peace and reality. They allow students to contact friends and family, maintain a school-work-life balance, and put life on pause when the school day reaches chaos.

Students can access their phones to coordinate schedules and that access allows them to use their personal emails/gmails, which are important for those applying for jobs, scholarships, or even college.

Those who disagree with the stricter policy challenge that this idea categorizes all instances of phone usage as the same, without understanding that not all students are reaching for their phones for entertainment purposes.

Although extensive research has shown that phone usage can interfere with attention spans, social skills, and academic success, this policy undermines the real problem facing MN students.

Instead of reprimanding students for giving in to the temptation of phones, administrators across the district should focus on how to properly educate students on distractions and self-indulgence.

Working against distractions and staying focused is a life skill that should be acquired in high school.

Taking phones away destroys any chance for students to learn to use self-control and forcefully taking phones away and writing punishing slips is the wrong approach to facing the school’s phone and technology problem.

Students will continue to disobey this rule, even with these drastic measures in place.

They will look to online games, or even return to the old-fashioned distraction of talking during class.

Addressing the underlying issue is just the first step in the path to correctly handling technology.

However, by cracking down on cell phone usage, certain groups of students believe that this policy negatively affects them. Students who are focused and motivated to get their work done in class, already do so.

This policy pushes the narrative that all students must be punished to regain control over the students who don’t follow the rules. It doesn’t allow for students to receive a little bit of relaxation time on their phone, even when they have properly time managed and completed their tasks.

This will force students to look negatively on all future phone policy endeavors and will indirectly reduce any potential benefits that may come from these policies.

Whether this policy is considered positive or negative, any future phone-related policies are bound to spark debate and controversy.

Students, teachers, and even parents may have differing opinions on the fairness or effectiveness of such measures, leading to a variety of perspectives, but considering and respecting the viewpoints of all individuals provides a potential pathway to the area for compromise.

Yet, for the rest of the 2024-2025 school year, the administration will continue to use this policy as a stronghold and beneficial rule.

The best the student body can do is fight for what they believe is right; in the end, students must maintain the backbone.