As the Massachusetts legislature moves towards passing a mandatory cell phone ban for kindergarten to seniors in high school, RMHS still seeks to find a solution on how to navigate this challenge while funding to support the ban has not been appropriated for each school.
The proposed bill would require students to follow a “bell to bell” cell phone restriction. This means students at RMHS would have to put their phones away for the duration of the school day, including all classes, studies, flexes, passing periods, and lunches, in addition to school-sponsored field trips.
The Reading Public School district has until September 1st, 2026, to submit a district-wide plan to manage and enforce cell phone use to the Massachusetts Department of Education. Though the bill has not been fully approved yet, it is more than likely to be passed, pending the additional approval of a social media restriction for individuals under 16. With this device ban, the legislature seeks to eliminate cell phone use in schools to improve focus, boost student mental health, and reduce cyberbullying.
At RMHS, many classrooms already employ individual cell phone policies, leaving it up to the teacher’s discretion on whether to take them away during the class period. Currently, the only grade-wide restrictions on cell phones at RMHS are for the freshman class. However, the uneven enforcement of this policy foreshadows how challenging it will be to implement a school-wide ban next school year.
Principal Callanan noted that while the goal of reducing distractions is noble, the lack of guidance and uncertain funding from the state leaves RMHS in a difficult spot. “Schools just don’t have that money in our budget,” she said.
Phones a Teacher’s Nightmare
For many teachers, the battle for students’ attention has become the most exhausting part of the job. English teachers Mrs. Richardson and Mrs.Williams describe the current environment as a “sea of disengagement” driven by what they describe as total addiction.
“It’s a totally different landscape teaching than five years ago,” Mrs. Williams noted, citing the “dopamine hits” students receive when they scroll through Instagram or TikTok reels. Previously, she tried to educate students on social media algorithms and their negative effects, in an attempt to encourage self-regulation. She had students read articles, watch documentaries, and participate in Socratic seminars about the drawbacks of cellphones.
While students were in agreement that cell phones should be away during class, her efforts to educate students and reduce individual cell phone use in her classroom only lasted one month.
Mrs. Williams said, “They’re built to keep us addicted, and it’s hard to fight that.” Now, Mrs. Williams and Mrs. Richarson are in agreement, there needs to be a clear consistent policy that is mandated throughout the school.
Other teachers agree that consistency is key. The individual teacher-by-teacher enforcement already in place here has been problematic, as math teacher Mrs. Wells has seen first-hand the emotional reaction students have when deprived of their device by one teacher but not another. She recalled a recent incident where a student had a “temper tantrum,” over a teacher collecting her phone, claiming that giving up her phone was “like giving away her arm.”
Mrs. Wells also notes that the “dependency” some students have on their phones is “a little crazy,” so she advocates for “cutting the cord a little bit.”
However, despite this controversy surrounding phones, Mrs. Wells sees the benefits to students using their phones in the classroom, particularly for independent work. She said that music apps on phones can be useful to help students better focus on independent work.
Furthermore, she thinks the current cell phone policy, which leaves phone regulation up to individual teachers, actually better prepares students for their future, such as college, where there are no measures to stop students from using them. Mrs.Wells said, “I feel like you guys need to learn how to [manage cell phones] before you become a real adult.”
Navigating the New Ban at RMHS
As RMHS begins to plan its approach, the question on many people’s minds is: how will this actually work?
Principal Callanan has already begun to look toward other schools for guidance on this. She pointed out Watertown High School as an example. At Watertown, they installed a “Doorman” VPN system that restricts phones to only making voice calls upon tapping into the classroom.
She said, “I know the Principal quite well, and he said that it works pretty well, but they also [installed that system] in correlation with building a new building. And there’s also a fee, they have to pay to have those systems and to keep them working.”
Principal Callanan has also voiced her frustration with how the legislation was crafted without input from those affected by it.
“Recently, we had a meeting of the 12 principals in the Middlesex League, and we met with a state rep and asked why they didn’t ask for more input from high school principals, because it impacts, obviously, high school students the most,” she said.
Beyond the cellphone policy itself, Principal Callanan expressed her concern over the challenge of enforcing it at RMHS next year, especially considering that many students have a wide range of responsibilities outside of the classroom.
“I think the implementation is going to be extremely challenging for high schools, and also a little bit unrealistic, considering all of the responsibilities that you guys have outside of school…whether it’s work or practice or watching younger siblings,” Ms. Callanan said.
For Ms. Callanan, perhaps the most pressing question around this incoming ban at RMHS would be its day-to-day enforcement and the effort it would take to do so.
“Is it going to become a time-consuming thing that we’re dealing with all day, every day?” Ms. Callanan questioned, highlighting the difficult task ahead for staff and administrators as they try to plan the school’s enforcement this summer.
The Cost of the Unfunded Mandate
A bigger question surrounding the phone ban is going to be who will pay for it: the state or the school?
Principal Callanan has been vocal about the potential financial cost the legislation could have on RMHS. The provisions of the bill do not outline any funding that is necessary for RMHS to actually implement this ban. As Callanan mentioned, RMHS may have to hire additional staff, such as IT, or purchase software (geofencing) or equipment (like pouches or cabinets) capable of enforcing this ban.
Watertown High School piloted the geofencing software this past school year, Ms.Callanan shared.
“ [Watertown] purchased geofencing where it shuts down people’s phones when they’re inside the school. Some schools have invested in things when you walk into a classroom, there’s a thing where you tap your phone, and it disables the phone for the duration of the class through a VPN [only allowing educational apps & voice calls, disabling Snapchat, Instagram and more].”
However, one challenge to this is the cost as Mrs. Callanan stated that it could cost upwards of “$4 to $8 a student,” and with roughly 1100 students at RMHS, the math adds up quickly, totaling upwards of $10,000 per school year.
At the same Middlesex League Principals’ meeting, some administrators asked their state representative whether schools would receive funding to cover these costs, and the answer was discouraging.
Ms. Callanan stated, “It sounds like it will be unfunded.”
The reality of this prompted a question from Ms.Callanan, “Is that really where we should be spending our money, or should we be spending the tax dollars on things that actually apply to your education?”
After the interview with Ms. Callanan, on May 8th, Massachusetts Attorney General AJ Campbell Launched a $500,000 Phone Free School Support Grant, aiming to help schools across the state implement the cell phone policies. The grant could reach up to $50,000 per year for 2 years depending on the size of each school. Funding can go towards, phone storage system, staff training, and community engagement efforts, the exact problems Mrs. Callanan has been worried about.
However, with far more schools in need than funds available, it is not guaranteed RMHS will see any of this funding.
Student Pushback on the coming reality
While some students have acknowledged that the statewide cell phone ban could improve focus in the classroom, many have expressed concerns about how realistic and effective the policy would be next year at RMHS.
Junior Sebastian Orsini, said he understands both sides of the issue, recognizing that phones can be distracting in the classroom while also serving as an important tool for communication with family and friends throughout the day.
“I think that, although it can be beneficial, it also has its cons because I think having a phone is a really good resource, not only in classrooms, but as a tool for communication with the outside world,” he said.
Orsini questioned whether students would even follow the new policy unless RMHS created a strict enforcement system.
“I think however it’s enforced, it’s going to be how it’s followed,” Orsini said. “If it’s just a school-wide ban, I don’t really think people will listen.”
Overall, Orsini said the new cell phone policy taking effect next year will be more “negative than positive.”
Other students were far more vocal and in opposition to the upcoming changes.
Sophomore Kingston Lewis strongly criticized and openly admitted he does not plan to follow it if the policy is implemented next year, foreshadowing the difficulties teachers and administration will face.
“I don’t think that [the school] really needs to take our phones,” Lewis said, “Cause it doesn’t really distract us from our learning, I’m not gonna lie.”
Lewis argued that students should be able to have their cellphones as long as they complete all of their school work.
Lewis also admitted that students already try to work around the enforcement measures already in place here at RMHS by placing fake or trap phones in teachers’ collection bins, echoing Mrs. Wells’ concerns that “kids are going to give us fake cell phones, iPods, everything under the sun to say that they are giving us a phone.”
Students, teachers, and administrators all see one thing in common: how will this policy be enforced?
Principal Callanan isn’t terribly excited to figure it out.
“I didn’t get into education to become the phone police,” Principal Callanan remarked.
