School's cell phone ban builds bridges

Alexis Barker
NLJ News Editor
 
At the beginning of the 2019 school year, Newcastle Middle School adopted a no cell phone policy, with the support of Superintendent Brad LaCroix and the Weston County School District No. 1 board of trustees. According to Principal Tyler Bartlett, the positives that resulted from the new policy have been immense. 
“I am hard pressed to find any negatives,” Bartlett said.
Since the beginning of the year, only 25 students out of the 182 students in the school have had to have their phones confiscated and most of those, Bartlett said, occurred in the first two months of school. None of the phones confiscated have belonged sixth grade students, who are new to the school this year, he said. Most issues with phones have been with eighth grade students, who have been allowed to use their phone at school the past two years. 
“There is a learning curve with any new policy, and during the first week of school, there were some adjustments that needed to be made,” Bartlett said. Only five students have had issues on more than one occasion, he said. 
Bartlett and some of the teachers believe the positives coming from this new policy are great in various ways.
According to Bartlett, the biggest positive impact has been that students are more focused and paying better attention in class. The school has also seen fewer conflicts and issues among students. 
“The issues coming into the office, there was a pattern and that was so and so said this on Snapchat or in a text message. That thing then becomes something bigger,” Bartlett said. “It is hard to monitor what is happening on cell phones.” 
Another benefit to taking away the phones, he said, is that the students have to be more open and direct with their peers, and the teachers and administrators are able to monitor what the students are doing while at school. 
While Bartlett doesn’t believe the middle school had a bullying issue, if bullying was happening, he said, 99% of the time it occurred via the students’ cell phones. 
“We have conflicts, but any repeated, unwanted, harassment behavior was happening on the phones,” Bartlett said.
The impact of those behaviors on the target is high, he said.
“The best fix is for everyone to treat everyone with respect and care, but that isn’t realistic,” Bartlett said. “But, one thing we could do is from 8:10 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., you don’t have to worry about what is being said on social media. You get to focus on your schoolwork and be happier and healthier. That is what we have seen so far.” 
And teachers appear to agree. Science instructor Jody McCormack and English instructor Carrie Manders said that the new policy has cut down on class distractions and has helped students to be more socially active. 
“They have to talk to each other, which is fantastic,” Manders said. 
“My favorite part is seeing kids interact during lunch without their face in their phones,” McCormack added. 
Bartlett credits some of the success of the policy to clearly addressing the issue from the beginning. The school informed parents and students about the policy in several ways, including in person on back-to-school night and in mailed letters. 
“We were very open with this. We didn’t want to sneak it by, and I think that helped a ton,” Bartlett said. “With the kids we covered the policy on the first day. We don’t want to be the phone police. The goal is to get them to be responsible enough to turn them off and put them in their locker until 3:30.” 
The push-back from parents on the policy has also been small, Bartlett said. 
“I was expecting more push-back, but the parents I have spoke with are in favor of the change,” Bartlett said. “They are seeing the same issues and the anxiety and stress the phones cause in the kids’ lives.” 
Parents are still able to access their children during the school day, by calling the school office just as they did before cell phones. 
“It is actually good for us. It is helpful that things like family emergencies have to come through the office because we know what is going on and are better equipped to help the child,” Bartlett said.
And the same goes for the student who needs to reach a parent. 
“If a student has to come to the office because something is wrong, and they need to contact a parent, we can let them do that but also encourage them to talk to us,” Bartlett said. “It has opened up some communication between parents, students and the school. That is an extra benefit we didn’t anticipate.” 
Overall, Bartlett said, he is a really a big fan of this policy, which he hopes alleviates some of the stress on students. 
“This policy was an interesting decision for me. Five years ago I would have never done this. I would have said to empower the kids to make better choices,” Bartlett said. “There is a case for that, but at this age and where their brains are along with what we are trying to accomplish here, I have a hard time seeing a place for cell phones.” 
The phones also made it hard to provide a safe environment for students.
“We have a legal responsibility to protect these students, and when they are on their laptops, we have the tools to protect them. They are built that way,” Bartlett said. “With the cell phones, we have nothing. We have no control of where they go and what they send. It may sound controlling, but it is for their safety and their well-being. With the educational value, it was an easy decision to make.”