How PUSD should tackle the use of cell phones on school campuses has been an ongoing debate for months, as the district has worked to comply with a new California law that requires school districts and charter schools to develop a policy limiting the use of smartphones by July 1, 2026. The issue has highlighted the differences between the “digital native” generation of high school students who favor a more permissive structure and some parents and board members — many of whom have younger students — who want to significantly restrict mobile devices on school campuses.
That generational divide was on display at Wednesday’s Board of Education meeting, where the school board considered a new proposal that will affect the high school starting next fall by forbidding cell phone use on campus at all times except for lunch. This was a first reading of the policy; final approval will come before the end of the year.
The “no cell phones except at lunch plus a few exceptions” policy (see full text below) is viewed as a compromise and transitional proposal by the school board, which has at previous meetings signaled a desire to implement a more restrictive bell-to-bell ban on the devices in the future.
Proposed policy is inconvenient and impractical, say high schoolers and their parents
Alissa Welch, a parent of high schoolers and a member of the Cell Phone Task Force that convened earlier this spring, said the policy under consideration was both inconvenient and impractical. The Task Force researched policies from more than 20 school districts, she said, and only one had as strict a policy as PUSD was considering. She said the Task Force arrived at only two consensus positions: that instructional time should be cell-phone free, and the district should expand education on balanced cell phone use as kids transition to adulthood. “Banning phones during passing periods and brunch won’t stop social media,” she said.
Six high school seniors who spoke at the meeting agreed.
Student journalists and seniors Megan Foster and Sophie Hess thanked the board for taking student perspective under consideration, and said they supported the compromise proposal, even if they preferred a less restrictive version. “It’s easy for adults to discount student opinion … but a ban does not adequately prepare students for post-high school life or equip them with self-regulatory skills,” said Foster. Hess said they appreciated the attempt to have different policies for high school and younger students.
“I appreciate that this policy is not as restrictive as it could be,” said senior Dylan Hickman. “But I don’t see a lot of students using phones during brunch and passing periods — not sure what the district hopes to accomplish.”
“At school, students are supposed to learn — that includes how technology plays a role in their lives,” said senior Ella Hughes. “Phones can be used socially and asocially — for many of us, it’s to connect.” Hughes also noted that having access to a phone during a free period was essential for students who have jobs.
Two seniors, Peter Ichimaru and Max Goldfarb, had no quarrel with a ban during instructional time, but maintained that students should have the option to use their phones during lunch and other free times on campus.
For high school parent Karna Sacchi, texting was an important communication tool throughout the day, especially around sports. “The high school does not have adequate staffing to answer the phones,” she said. Furthermore, she applauded the positive school climate the current administrators have created and said that would be at risk if the school principals were now forced to police student phone use.
Drew Hess, parent of a senior and middle-schooler, said he was supportive of the current plan, especially because it recognized the differences between the younger grades and the needs of high schoolers. He suggested Piedmont could benefit from the “Wait Until 8th” movement — a community commitment to hold off on giving students smartphones until at least eighth grade.
Smartphones both distracting and harmful to mental health, student achievement say those favoring a ban
Allison Gans a parent ambassador for Piedmont Unplugged and a therapist with young children, said she sees the harmful effects of smartphones on student mental health in her practice. “I strongly support Piedmont becoming a bell-to-bell learning environment.” Change is coming, she said, citing New York City’s recently passed statewide “bell-to-bell” student cellphone ban.
Parent Amanda Straub said she hoped this proposal was a step toward a complete ban and advocated for phone pouches — saying this approach was easier for staff to enforce and effective at mitigating distractions. “The presence of a device is distracting,” she said, and impulse control is an issue for students.
Parent Ben Worthen also spoke in favor of a full ban. “Lunch in particular is the one time students have time to socialize in an unstructured way,” Worthen said. “Attentiveness is a skill that needs to be learned; being present is a community value that needs to be learned. School is a unique place where there is so much social interaction.”
Board looks to learn from next year
“Next year will be critical to involve students, to learn what’s working and what’s not,” said School Board President Lindsay Thomasson.
The research is pretty clear, said Trustee Max Roman, that cell phone bans improve grades, especially for students at risk for falling behind.
“Next year will be a transitional year — enforcement is still a question,” said Trustee Michael Malione.
“Relationship with a phone is different for you,” Trustee Ruchi Medhekar told the students in the chambers, noting that the COVID years may have accelerated the use of technology to connect with others. But she said that “attention is the most valuable thing you have… I think it’s ok to have time carved out for face-to-face interactions.”
“This is a big culture change,” acknowledged Trustee Susy Struble. She said it would be very important to keep the student perspective front and center as the district tries out the policy next year. Nevertheless, “creating a school environment without digital distraction is an enormous benefit,” she said.