THE ANTI-ANTI-PHONE PETITION (TAAPP)

  Since January 1st, 2025, due to Glenn Youngkin’s 33rd Executive Order, cellular devices have been banned from school buildings statewide. On the surface level, this doesn’t seem like a bad idea, but it is not the solution. This rule is starting to hurt students more than help them. Cell phones are a great invention and should be integrated into education, rather than treated as a knowledge weapon.

  Cell phones should not be treated as distractions, but instead as powerful tools for learning. Teachers and administrators should find ways to integrate devices, such as phones, into the school day. Cell phones provide easy access to learning resources and accommodations that students need, which can also reduce costs for schools if students bring their own devices.

  Moreover, the policy was implemented without giving students accessible resources to help with the dopamine addiction caused by phones. Students are also subconsciously turning to worse addictions—like vaping and drugs—in order to cope with the genuine withdrawals that they experience. History has shown us that prohibition without support is destined to fail. For example, the 18th Amendment intended to decrease the consumption of alcohol, but in reality, it worsened the alcohol problem by creating a hidden market and increasing crime. While reported cyberbullying and sexual harassment may have decreased since the implementation of the new law, this does not indicate that the incidents are less frequent; similar to those harmed during prohibition, students may be afraid to report them due to fear of being punished for using their phones.

  The law is more restrictive than it needs to be in order to serve its purpose. Many students have free time in a study block or after a test and are forced to sit idly. Some students feel isolated during lunch without their devices. The current restrictions affect students with IEPs and 504 plans, who may need accommodations that the law does not allow. These students would benefit from additional support, such as using a device as portable and universal as a phone.

  Additionally, the law prohibits students from using headphones during class, which can actually disrupt learning, especially for those with sensory issues or challenges with focusing. Some students work better with music or use noise-cancelling headphones to drown out distracting noise. Some teachers have begun playing music in class in order to compensate, creating a dilemma, as it may benefit some students while hindering others. A better approach that allows students the freedom to manage their own learning environment, considering the needs of all learners, including those with IEPs and 504 plans, can lead to better educational outcomes for everyone.

  Another concern with the cellphone ban is the language used when students are caught with devices. Staff members commonly label phones as “illegal” or “contraband,” which conditions students to associate a tool that they use in their everyday lives with criminality. Rather than discouraging phone use, this is starting to cause students to disregard the law entirely. A common response to “It’s illegal to have your phone out” is, “Okay? You can’t arrest me for it!” Over time, this could desensitize students to rule-breaking and lead to law violations.

  Furthermore, confiscating devices for several days is no longer a practical solution. Many students, especially high schoolers, actually need their devices because they are nearing adulthood and may have responsibilities like running a business or having a job. Some students depend on their phones for safety, using location services so their loved ones can watch over them from afar.

  This petition isn’t just a “please let me doomscroll in the back of the class again” type of thing; this is a true, well-thought-out execution of student activism, so, of course, a set of solutions has been brainstormed:

• Narrow phone restrictions down to instructional time
  • Prohibit phone use during instruction or work time
  • Allow assignments that use phones intentionally
• Allow phone use during lunch and non-instructional time
• Discourage excessive phone use during hallway transitions
  • “Excessive” means scrolling the entire time and not paying attention to your surroundings. It does not include scanning a QR code on a poster, checking a quick text, or changing a song.
• Provide accessible resources for students struggling with phone addiction
  • Students who get in trouble for excessive use should be reminded that help exists
• End multi-day phone confiscation
  • Replace it with interventions, education, and more effective consequences that do not compromise student safety

  This generation of students was raised on phones. For a lot of us, our first moments were documented on a phone camera. Some of us were handed a phone at four years old, and it’s been an important part of our lives since. Completely and broadly banning phones is not an appropriate way to solve any issues. The policy on phones in schools should bring out the good in phones, while minimizing the bad. Additionally, banning phone use does not improve the mental health effects of social media. Instead, there should be policies and resources set in place to bring more good out of social media than bad.