Students, Parents and Elected Officials Tackle In-School Cellphone Use

Word in Black is a collaboration of 10 of the nation’s leading Black publishers that frames the narrative and fosters solutions for racial inequities in America.

As locally elected officials get to work on resolutions and legislation about student cellphone use, one of the state board’s youngest representatives said he wants to ensure that the devices don’t become a scapegoat for low academic achievement.    

D.C. State Board of Education (SBOE) Student Representative Calique Barnes currently counts among those who are organizing against an outright cellphone ban, much like what legislation by D.C. Councilmember Brooke Pinto (D-Ward 2) proposes. Amid teachers and parents’ complaints about cyberbullying and distracted students, Calique warned against policies he said overlook underlying problems.  

“We, as a District, must address deeper issues like mental health, safety concerns, and the lack of adequate resources for our youth,” said Calique, a senior at Thurgood Marshall Academy Public Charter School in Southeast. “Bullying, for example, existed long before social media; it’s not just about the devices but about how we educate and guide students, parents, and educators in accountability and usage.”

Weeks before Pinto introduced her bill, SBOE conducted a panel featuring public witnesses who spoke in support of a cellphone ban. Experts also weighed in on the mental health drawbacks of prolonged cellphone use while providing a picture about a movement that’s gaining national traction. While on the dais in the Old Council Chambers of the Marion S. Barry Building in Northeast, Calique, one of four SBOE student representatives, expressed his apprehension about totally removing cellphones from the classroom. He instead attempted to explore a middle ground with a cadre of public witnesses that included parent advocates and nonprofit leaders. 

With SBOE scheduled to adopt a resolution as early as Feb. 19, Calique said he’s continuing to engage his peers to gather their feedback that will help SBOE draft a document that doesn’t prevent young people from navigating modern society. 

“It’s not just about the devices but about how we educate and guide students, parents, and educators in accountability and usage,” Calique told The Informer. “A blanket ban overlooks these complexities and could lead to missed opportunities for engagement and support in today’s tech-driven world.”

Pinto Eyes Another Piece to Public Safety Strategy

If the D.C. Council approves Pinto’s legislation, titled the Heads Up! Distraction-Free Learning Amendment Act of 2025, D.C. Public Schools (DCPS) and District public charter schools too will be required to adopt and implement policy prohibiting students’ use of cellphones, gaming devices, and smartwatches. 

The bill, which outlines requirements for notifying students about the cellphone policy, funds the installation of on-campus cellphone storage lockers. It also includes a provision allowing in-class cellphone use for students who have such accommodations outlined in their Individualized Education Program (IEP). Educators would be allowed to let students use tablets and laptops during the instructional day for educational purposes, while providing wireless communication devices in case of an emergency or health-related matter.  

Pinto, who introduced the Heads Up! Distraction-Free Learning Amendment Act of 2025 with D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), and Councilmembers Anita Bonds (D-At large), Matt Frumin (D-Ward 3), Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), and Charles Allen (D-Ward 6) as co-sponsors, said she wants to secure the bill’s passage by the spring. She called her legislation, which follows the funding of a literacy outcomes task force and movement of the District’s safe passage program to the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice, an important step in keeping students safe. 

“Schools with these [cellphone] policies have seen… an increase in school safety,” Pinto told The Informer as she identified some District public middle schools as a model for what a cellphone ban could achieve. “Staff collect the phones in homeroom and the teacher keeps them,” Pinto told The Informer. “The biggest feedback from teachers is that they don’t want to be enforcing this, so the legislation requires that someone be assigned for collection and enforcement of the policy so we’re not asking teachers to do another thing.” 

The Heads Up! Distraction-Free Learning Amendment Act of 2025, introduced on Jan. 28, elicited varying reactions among state board members. In a statement, SBOE Representative Allister Chang (Ward 2) said that data supports the need to help students and teachers “make the most of their time in the classroom.” Meanwhile, SBOE Representative Brandon Best (Ward 6), a proponent of tech-based classroom instruction, cautioned against a “one-size-fits-all approach” that doesn’t take into account students’ inequitable access to academic technology. 

In a letter he sent to Pinto last week, Best implored the Ward 2 council member to think about a solution that doesn’t disadvantage District students entering the professional realm, nor jeopardize the groundwork teachers have laid to use cellphones as a tool of engagement.   

“Cellphones are not just text messages, TikTok dances and social media — they are gateways. In fact, they are the small computers that students will rely on to navigate higher education, careers, and a world increasingly built on mobile technology,” Best said in his Jan. 29 letter. “Instead of eliminating them, I encourage you to pass legislation ensuring that we teach our students how to use them appropriately. Let’s mandate digital citizenship, self-discipline, and model the kind of responsible use they will need for their future jobs and lives.” 

Exploring Both Sides of the Issue

In the post-pandemic world, in-school cellphone bans have amassed bipartisan support; at least a dozen states — including California, Florida, Minnesota and Virginia — have approved legislation that imposes a system wide ban or encourages schools to develop their own policies. Eight state-level education departments have also issued policy recommendations and pilot programs that, according to Kaiser Family Foundation, have highlighted concerns about school emergency protocol, students suffering medical emergencies and challenges that overworked teachers face while enforcing policy. 

Even so, teachers and other proponents continue to cite research that connects in-school cellphone use with increased stress, anxiety and depression and a reduction in cognitive abilities. A slew of public witnesses who appeared before SBOE on Dec. 11 relied on that information as they expressed support for a cellphone ban. 

Ana Rodriguez, a mother of a student who attends McKinley Technology High School in Northeast, spoke not only in support of a cellphone ban, but on-campus safety protocols that, in the absence of mobile devices, could put community members’ minds at ease. 

In making her point, Rodriguez told state board members about an incident last Halloween when a peer punched her daughter in the stomach while another student recorded. As she recounted, her daughter, who suffers from epileptic seizures, didn’t even appear concerned about her physical health when she spoke to her mother about the incident later that day.

“She was more worried about the video circulating on social media,” Rodriguez, a member of Parents Amplifying Voices in Education, said on Dec. 11. “It’s just one example of how the proliferation of phones leads to distractions, cyberbullying and safety concerns. By limiting cellphones, we can create an environment focused on learning and not what’s posted on social media.” 

Scott Goldstein, a former D.C. public school teacher who organizes teachers around the improvement of classroom conditions, said he solidified his position on in-class cellphone use after engaging teachers who cite the phenomenon as a significant impediment to students’ critical thinking.   

“Teaching is about taking students on a learning journey,” said Goldstein, executive director of EmpowerEd. “That process takes time, not instant gratification trying to compete with phones. We need to prepare students to read and write. Phones in schools undermine all other goals.” 

On Dec. 11, Goldstein continued to insist that students, parents, teachers and other involved parties unite around what he described as a pressing mental health matter. 

“Cellphones rob students of a space where they should be free from [anxiety, depression]. No other single factor made such a difference in educator morale and focus on student learning,” he told state board members. “We need to talk about technological equity and students being able to do research and community trauma, and how we connect that policy, but I hope our leaders will talk to students and family and educate them. It’s time for D.C. to follow suit and… protect the safe space of schools.” 

When it comes to technological equity, some students, like Perry Pixley Chamberlain, say that ongoing issue provides as much of a reason to question the utility of a system-wide cellphone use policy. 

Perry, a junior at School Without Walls (SWW) in Northwest, submitted a letter to SBOE about hurdles she and fellow scholars had to overcome in the aftermath of a cellphone ban that administrators implemented. In the letter, she explained that SWW’s cellphone policy currently allows student cellphone use only during transition to classes and lunchtime. However, she noted that teachers allow students to turn their phones as hotspots to access search engines and other research tools that are blocked on DCPS’ wi-fi network. 

Though Perry expressed gratitude for those who allow students to use their hotspots, she asked what would become of that flexibility afforded to her and others with the passage of an on-campus cellphone ban.  

“News stories, YouTube videos, email and other resources are used to engage classrooms at my school and others,” Perry wrote in her testimony. “[I]f access to… phone ‘hotspots’ is taken away with a highly restrictive phone policy, it will consequently remove access to those sites as well. I hope that in the board’s search for solutions on cellphones, it considers the consequences of removing classroom access to valuable resources. Without change to the DCPS network, this issue will continue with a restrictive phone policy.”