Is the phone policy good or bad? LC has mixed opinions

by Sofia Hessler

Students and teachers voice their perspectives on the new phone policy.

This school year, Lewis and Clark students and teachers alike have been adjusting to the new cellphone policy, which prohibits the use of cellphones in classrooms. As the policy nears its three-month mark, opinions across the school are mixed, with both praise and criticism regarding its impact.

For many students, the phone policy has brought benefits but also frustrations.

Samantha Kernie, a freshman, found the policy beneficial for her overall productivity, but certain methods of enforcing it to be annoying.

“Three of my classes require me to keep my phone in a pouch. I do not like it and wish the teachers would just let me keep it in my bag,” Kernie said.

For Sabrina Wang, a sophomore, the use of pouches in classrooms has caused an additional nuisance.

“I think it’s annoying because sometimes I forget my phone,” Wang said.

Camille Cortis, a senior who transferred from Belgium, finds the policy to be an improvement over the restrictions she was used to.

“In my previous high school, we weren’t allowed to use our phones at all. Whenever we would be caught using our phone, they would take it for a week, and the parents had to come to take the phone back,” Cortis said.

Gemma Ritchie, a tenth grader, also feels that the effects of phone ban have been positive overall.

“I’ve noticed a decrease in missing and lost assignments because I’ve had to lock in during class,” Ritchie said.

However, Ritchie pointed out that the policy has its faults.

“I’m a little annoyed by it because our phones work so much better than the school computers,” Ritchie said.

Greg Goeller, teacher of freshman honors English and junior AP Language and Composition, also sees the setbacks in students having to rely on school-provided technology.

“There are times when they could probably get the assignment done better or be able to dig deeper into some research if they could use their phones,” Goeller said.

Maegan Gomes, an AP History teacher, listed several ways students can no longer use their phones productively, including FaceTiming absent students, using phones for Kahoots, and accessing SMS verification codes.

Overall, Gomes feels the policy is effective in increasing student engagement. However, she noted that not everyone will follow it.

“I think there’s still people that are gonna skirt the policy regardless,” Gomes said.

Jimmy Rudders, a senior, expressed a similar sentiment.

“People who don’t have the proclivity for working hard aren’t going to suddenly start working hard because they don’t have access to their phone. They’re gonna find some other way to not do work,” Rudders said.

Sarah Jess, who teaches first- and second-year Spanish, has prohibited the use of phones in her classroom since before the policy was put in place.

“I noticed a dramatic change in engagement in the classroom. Students’ phones were removed from the equation, giving them the freedom to jump into our class activities without the constant lure of their phones,” Jess said.

Writing on Film teacher Blaine Denton echoed these observations.

“Students are definitely more engaged than last year, and more social too. It’s fun to see students interacting more with people they wouldn’t normally chat with,” Denton said.

However, he also noted that the policy may not be effectively solving the root issue.

“The main con is that banning phones doesn’t teach students to use their technology responsibly. I think there's an argument that some students are unable to control their phone usage, but the ones that can end up being punished as a result,” Denton said.

Gomes noted that students’ reliance on their phones varies from person to person, and in relation to the classes students are taking.

“It’s very individual. Most of the students, especially the ones in really high-intensity, fast-paced AP classes, don’t really have an issue with it [using their phones] because it’s such a high pace, there’s really not time,” Gomes said.

Jack Brigham, a junior, is enrolled in five AP classes and feels negatively about the policy.

“The higher up we go in education, the more we’re treated like four-year-olds,” Brigham said.

Ian Fallis, a senior, is also against the cellphone policy.

“I think it sucks, I hate it, it’s really annoying. I think it’s super degrading too. A lot of us are 18-year-old kids that have to put their phone away,” Fallis said.

The question of whether it is ethical for teachers to have authority over students’ usage of their own property is one without an easily defined answer.

Goeller feels it is just like any other policy, with a rule and a consequence.

“And I know it’s personal property, but I think the research is showing us that this is an addiction that is leading them down some potentially harmful avenues,” Goeller said.

Mark Robbins, a librarian who also teaches English and Native Literature classes, noted that having an official policy makes it easier to prevent students from relying on their phones in an addictive manner.

“It is a literal, constant struggle to keep some kids from looking at their phones — or it was. And I just don’t have that struggle anymore,” Robbins said.

Regarding whether the policy will continue to be strongly enforced through the end of the year, both teachers and students have a variety of opinions.

“I think that it’ll calm down a little bit because I feel like it already feels a little bit more calmed down from the start of the year. So, I think it’ll just continue to relax,” Perry Cassel, a senior, said.

Neel Clark, a senior, expects the same.

“I think it’ll just kind of dissolve,” Clark said. “But it’ll still technically be an enforced rule.”

Fallis feels that the policy will continue to be strongly enforced.

“I think Theresa Meyer is a powerhouse that can’t be stopped. Yeah, I don’t think it’s changing anytime soon,” Fallis said.

Goeller agrees that the policy will continue to be carried out through the end of the school year.

“It’s one of the few policies I think the majority of the staff is on board with… It’s not meant to punish kids; it’s meant to help kids. So hopefully it’s doing that,” Goeller said.