House Republicans and Senate Democrats have introduced competing plans to limit smartphone use in Michigan’s K-12 public schools.
Both plans seek to limit cellphone distractions in classrooms but go about it differently.
The plan offered by state Rep. Mark Tisdel, R-Rochester Hills, would require school boards to prohibit smartphone use during class time for all ages and implement additional cellphone restrictions for grades below high school.
The plan from state Sen. Dayna Polehanki, D-Livonia, would require school boards adopt a smartphone use policy, but doesn’t prescribe what that includes.
Instead, school boards would be required to craft a policy that somehow limits cellphone use during school hours and distractions in classroom settings. This could include a ban on cellphone use during class.
The bills had separate committee hearings in their respective chambers last week but neither received a vote.
The competing bills come after Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in her State of the State address earlier this year called on lawmakers to pass a bipartisan plan limiting the use of cellphones in class.
Whitmer said data has shown restrictions on cellphone use during class leads to more learning and less bullying.
Tisdel introduced a similar bill last year, but it never received a committee hearing in the then-Democratic-controlled House.
School districts around the state have been grappling with how to best keep smartphones out of the classroom so kids can stay focused on learning. Constant access to social media on smartphones can also lead to increased mental health issues and bullying, according to experts.
A number of districts around the state have adopted some form of cellphone use policy, though the exact number isn’t known, according to the Michigan Department of Education.
The Michigan Department of Education helped craft Polehanki’s bill, with department officials testifying Wednesday in the Senate that it gives school districts flexibility to meet their different needs.
“… A one-size-fits-all approach would not work in Michigan. What works in a large, urban district may not work in a small, rural one,” Olivia Ponte , the department’s legislative liaison, testified. “To that point, while some teachers may incorporate technology in every lesson that they plan, others may not even have access to reliable Internet connectivity or cellular service for all their students. That’s why local flexibility is essential.”
Jennifer Smith, director of government relations for Michigan Association of School Boards, said her organization, too, favors Polehanki’s plan for the flexibility it gives each school district.
Smith said a state mandate to implement a smartphone policy would help some school districts balance pressure from parents with the need to tackle smartphone distractions.
“I do know there are districts out there that are worried that parents are going to push back, that they want their kids to have a phone at all times,” Smith said, “and so by the state saying, ‘You have to have a policy,’ that sets them on the road of creating something, but what they don’t want is the state to say you have to have a policy that says ‘X,’ so to still have that flexibility.”
Under Polehanki’s bill, school districts would be required to make exceptions in their cellphone policy for emergency situations, devices necessary for medical use and individualized education programs.
Bob Kefgen, associate director of government relations for the Michigan Association of Secondary School Principals, said his organization supports Tisdel’s approach.
“If we have consistent rules that don’t vary building to building, district to district, classroom to classroom, it’s much easier to get parents, students and communities on board with common expectations,” Kefgen testified.
Several school administrators and officials also spoke in support of Tisdel’s bill Thursday.
Tisdel said his bill creates a baseline restriction for school districts. How they implement those and whether they want to be more strict is up to each district, he said.
“We’re trying to create an environment that eliminates the distraction of cellphones, specifically during instruction time, but others would tell you bell-to-bell,” he testified Thursday in the House. “It’s just plain, old mental hygiene. While the brain is developing, as (licensed counselor) Jennifer Wilson talked about, you don’t need that as an attention suck away from reading and math proficiency, which we have a problem with here in the state.”
Tisdel’s bill takes a tiered approach to smartphone restrictions.
Students in kindergarten through fifth grade would be prohibited from having a smartphone on school grounds entirely.
Middle schoolers in grades six through eight could have smartphones on school property but would only be able to use them before and after school.
High schoolers grades nine through 12 would have the least usage restrictions. They would be able to have their smartphones on school property and could use them any time except during class.
Tisdel said a substitute for his bill will allow medically necessary devices to be exempt from school policies. However, his bill doesn’t make an exception for emergency situations like Polehanki’s does.
While Tisdel said he understands parents want to communicate with their child during an emergency, that can create a host of problems.
These range from parents impeding first responders by showing up to the school to students tying up the 911 emergency system, like with what happened during the 2021 Oxford High School shooting, Tisdel said.
“The last thing you want is for your kids to be fumbling, reaching, trying to get in connection with their parents or anyone else, 911, in the event of an actual emergency,” Tisdel said. “You want them solely focused on the trained professional that’s at the head of the classroom.”
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.